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



## Dioltach

Amazon has posted a teaser trailer for the new television series. Not much info, but the title gives me hope.


----------



## payn

Meh.


----------



## Dioltach

Just saw the description accompanying the video:

"Amazon Studios’ forthcoming series brings to screens for the very first time the heroic legends of the fabled Second Age of Middle-earth's history. This epic drama is set thousands of years before the events of J.R.R. Tolkien’s The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings, and will take viewers back to an era in which great powers were forged, kingdoms rose to glory and fell to ruin, unlikely heroes were tested, hope hung by the finest of threads, and the greatest villain that ever flowed from Tolkien’s pen threatened to cover all the world in darkness. Beginning in a time of relative peace, the series follows an ensemble cast of characters, both familiar and new, as they confront the long-feared re-emergence of evil to Middle-earth. From the darkest depths of the Misty Mountains, to the majestic forests of the elf-capital of Lindon, to the breathtaking island kingdom of Númenor, to the furthest reaches of the map, these kingdoms and characters will carve out legacies that live on long after they are gone."

Sounds like it will cover the Fall of Númenor and the War of the Last Alliance.


----------



## Wolfram stout

[STAMPS FOOT] We wants to watch it now, precious!!

But then again I really want my hard copy of TOR 2nd edition to be here already.


----------



## Ralif Redhammer

Neat. I'm pretty sure that the voiceover is done by the actress playing younger Galadriel, Morfydd Clark.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

Here is a longer thread from earlier in 2021 with more discussion.









						Lord of the Rings TV series synopsis
					

There's a synopsis been released for the show. No launch date announced yet.  Amazon Studios’ forthcoming series brings to screens for the very first time the heroic legends of the fabled Second Age of Middle-earth’s history. This epic drama is set thousands of years before the events of J.R.R...




					www.enworld.org


----------



## Morrus

I can't wait. My most anticipated new show right now.

(Though it has strong competition with House of the Dragon and Strange New Worlds).


----------



## Snarf Zagyg

Morrus said:


> I can't wait. My most anticipated new show right now.
> 
> (Though it has strong competition with House of the Dragon and Strange New Worlds).




I'll be honest- I am ... uncertain. If this was on HBO, I would be so incredibly excited. If it was on AppleTV, I would be really excited (under the radar, they have been making some good TV). If it was on Netflix, I would expect two great seasons, one mediocre season, and then having it unceremoniously cancelled (you know it to be true). 

But Amazon has been really hit or miss with their shows. Having just finished Wheel of Time, I was not overly impressed. Heck- while I am happy they finished the Expanse, the last season was underwhelming.

Of course, I will watch it! With the amount of money they are shoveling into it, it's going to look good ... right?


----------



## Dire Bare

The "Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power" is a bit unwieldy as a title. Needs tightening.

How about "The Lord of the Rings of Power" . . . or, "The Lord of the Power Rings"!

I kid, I'm really excited for this show!


----------



## GreyLord

Dire Bare said:


> The "Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power" is a bit unwieldy as a title. Needs tightening.
> 
> How about "The Lord of the Rings of Power" . . . or, "The Lord of the Power Rings"!
> 
> I kid, I'm really excited for this show!




Rings of the Power Ranger Lord?

(You know it...all the Rangers stem from this source.......)


----------



## Warpiglet-7

I will watch just to see how it all turn out.


----------



## Sepulchrave II

I'm actually quite optimistic that the show will be good.

I'm not optimistic about toxic elements within the fandom looking to sink it before it's even given a chance.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

Sepulchrave II said:


> I'm not optimistic about toxic elements within the fandom looking to sink it before it's even given a chance.




Yep, every property that has a long term, hardcore, fandom, will have that extremely toxic element that wants no changes ever. Whether it is this or Ghostbusters or the early days of the MCU when Nick Fury was first played by Samuel L Jackson, or the changes made between editions, or half editions, of D&D. We can see plenty of that in various D&D threads here.


----------



## Olgar Shiverstone

Enevhar Aldarion said:


> Yep, every property that has a long term, hardcore, fandom, will have that extremely toxic element that wants no changes ever.



Man, Christopher Tolkien is dead; it's uncool to speak of him this way.

//

(Only 50% tongue in cheek; CT was pretty narrow-minded in access to the material even as he pumped up the publishing of unfinished works.)


----------



## billd91

Olgar Shiverstone said:


> Man, Christopher Tolkien is dead; it's uncool to speak of him this way.
> 
> //
> 
> (Only 50% tongue in cheek; CT was pretty narrow-minded in access to the material even as he pumped up the publishing of unfinished works.)



The difference here is he actually *was *entitled to exercise control over the IP as his father's literary executor and chair of Tolkien Estate, Ltd.


----------



## Gadget

I'm uncertain.  Given Amazon's track record of adaptations with _The Wheel of Time_ and the fact that there is not really much of a narrative story to adapt, my expectations are very low.  I'm expecting a CW-esque, Shannara Chronicles level of show.  I hope to be pleasantly surprised.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

Gadget said:


> I'm expecting a CW-esque, Shannara Chronicles level of show.



It might be bad, but I very much doubt is will be bad in anything like _that_ way. Shannara was low budget and juvenile, this show is big budget and (probably) ponderous.


----------



## Gadget

Paul Farquhar said:


> It might be bad, but I very much doubt is will be bad in anything like _that_ way. Shannara was low budget and juvenile, this show is big budget and (probably) ponderous.



Perhaps, but _The Wheel of Time_ was supposedly Big Budget as well, though I'm sure this one has an even larger budget.  In retrospect, I think that show's problems where more in the writing, direction and acting than the budget, though that aspect didn't exactly shine.  

On another note, this is a whole different set of people making this show, so its probably best not to read too much into it.  I don't really have a problem with the trailer, though I think this actress's voice over does not compare favorably with Cate Blanchett's opening narration for the movies.  That is perhaps unfair, but I can't see how the producers weren't inviting (or trying to evoke that opening narration) the inevitable comparison.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

Well, this got a ton of character posters released today, none of which show any faces, but still interesting. What is sad though is one of them shows a sword with a horse head pommel and the ignorant masses are all screaming Rohan, without knowing that Rohan did not exist until the 3rd Age.


----------



## Ralif Redhammer

The other thing is that some of the hands, based on the sizes of the things they're holding, are decidedly hobbity. When hobbits, likewise, didn't play that much of a part of things during the Second Age, if at all. 

All that being said, I get that Amazon would want to make the world more closely resemble the world of the movies. Hopefully they don't wander too far astray.



Enevhar Aldarion said:


> Well, this got a ton of character posters released today, none of which show any faces, but still interesting. What is sad though is one of them shows a sword with a horse head pommel and the ignorant masses are all screaming Rohan, without knowing that Rohan did not exist until the 3rd Age.


----------



## Rabulias

Ralif Redhammer said:


> The other thing is that some of the hands, based on the sizes of the things they're holding, are decidedly hobbity.



If you are talking about the one with the acorns, I wonder if they are special/magical/larger-than-normal acorns?


----------



## Benjamin Olson

Gadget said:


> Perhaps, but _The Wheel of Time_ was supposedly Big Budget as well, though I'm sure this one has an even larger budget.  In retrospect, I think that show's problems where more in the writing, direction and acting than the budget, though that aspect didn't exactly shine.
> 
> On another note, this is a whole different set of people making this show, so its probably best not to read too much into it.  I don't really have a problem with the trailer, though I think this actress's voice over does not compare favorably with Cate Blanchett's opening narration for the movies.  That is perhaps unfair, but I can't see how the producers weren't inviting (or trying to evoke that opening narration) the inevitable comparison.




On the first point it seems adapting for Covid killed a lot of the budget of _Wheel of Time_ season 1 and made for a money crunch to finish some episodes, which explains why it seems to have inconsistent production values, especially in the special effects department.

On the other note, I agree. That initially struck me as a really flat and lifeless reading of the "Ring Verse" to base a teaser trailer around. I liked it a bit better upon rewatching, so maybe I just have to get used to that actress' voice, but still... it's really not hard to get me excited about Middle Earth anything, and this teaser trailer didn't manage that low bar.


----------



## Benjamin Olson

Enevhar Aldarion said:


> Well, this got a ton of character posters released today, none of which show any faces, but still interesting. What is sad though is one of them shows a sword with a horse head pommel and the ignorant masses are all screaming Rohan, without knowing that Rohan did not exist until the 3rd Age.



I suspect the guesses of the average movie fan are as good or better about what Amazon Middle Earth will look like as those of the dedicated Tolkien buff.


----------



## Stalker0

Gadget said:


> Perhaps, but _The Wheel of Time_ was supposedly Big Budget as well



Wheel of Time was on a "stupidly high budget" from what I could tell.

I enjoyed the show, but it cost *$10 million dollars per episode. *That is just nuts, it has one decent named actor for salary, everyone else is fairly no name. The effects are ok, the shots are okay, but nothing has the expanse of GoT (which only cost 6 million in its early seasons, before the battle scenes, rendering dragons, and actor salaries began to increase, and it had a lot more named actors to start off with).

I enjoy the show until I'm reminded of that budget number, as it just baffles me what they spent it on.


----------



## Dioltach

Stalker0 said:


> I enjoy the show until I'm reminded of that budget number, as it just baffles me what they spent it on.



Location scouts and wardrobe, if I were to hazard a guess.


----------



## Parmandur

Stalker0 said:


> Wheel of Time was on a "stupidly high budget" from what I could tell.
> 
> I enjoyed the show, but it cost *$10 million dollars per episode. *That is just nuts, it has one decent named actor for salary, everyone else is fairly no name. The effects are ok, the shots are okay, but nothing has the expanse of GoT (which only cost 6 million in its early seasons, before the battle scenes, rendering dragons, and actor salaries began to increase, and it had a lot more named actors to start off with).
> 
> I enjoy the show until I'm reminded of that budget number, as it just baffles me what they spent it on.



$10 million only goes so far with production values. Avengers: Endgame had approximately ten times the budget per hour of screentime.


----------



## Ralif Redhammer

Entirely possible that it's a giant produce thing. That it's both the acorns and berries, though, makes me think that it's the hands that are smaller. The apple, also, appears to be somewhat normal-sized.



Rabulias said:


> If you are talking about the one with the acorns, I wonder if they are special/magical/larger-than-normal acorns?


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Ralif Redhammer said:


> Neat. I'm pretty sure that the voiceover is done by the actress playing younger Galadriel, Morfydd Clark.



And they did the full quote, rather than the abbreviate rhyme they used in the movies IIRC.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Olgar Shiverstone said:


> Man, Christopher Tolkien is dead; it's uncool to speak of him this way.
> 
> //
> 
> (Only 50% tongue in cheek; CT was pretty narrow-minded in access to the material even as he pumped up the publishing of unfinished works.)



It was his to be narrow with, and to edit and publish unfinished works.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

It’s worth remembering that Christopher’s work began while his father was still alive, and he and his father spent a lot of time writing back and forth and talking about Middle-Earth.


----------



## Benjamin Olson

doctorbadwolf said:


> It was his to be narrow with, and to edit and publish unfinished works.



Also I feel the narrow-mindedness was very much in line with his father's views towards adaptations of it.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Benjamin Olson said:


> Also I feel the narrow-mindedness was very much in line with his father's views towards adaptations of it.



Absolutely. It’s a very precise work, with such a wealth of background and worldbuilding that needless deviation is…more significant than it would be if rebooting the Die Hard franchise.


----------



## Ralif Redhammer

But for Christopher Tolkien, we could very well have seen TSR publish new Middle-Earth fiction in the 90s. Sometimes being over-protective is the right choice. 



doctorbadwolf said:


> Absolutely. It’s a very precise work, with such a wealth of background and worldbuilding that needless deviation is…more significant than it would be if rebooting the Die Hard franchise.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Oofta said:


> That's one heck of an epic boon you're handing out especially since a 20th level fighter isn't even epic levels yet.



In 5e, the last couple levels are basically epic, and true epic play is represented by gaining Epic Boons.


----------



## Zaukrie

I want a good show. Don't care at all if it is completely faithful. 

I also disagree with you all on WoT. I liked it.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

Alright, for everyone who does not want to troll through Twitter or Facebook to see the posters, this article has all 23 of them. Most are human, with a few elves and dwarves, plus a couple that could be children or a sad attempt to somehow shove Hobbits into the series, when they were not around for the 2nd Age.









						Amazon Releases ‘Lord of the Rings’ TV Show Character Photos With One Thing Missing
					

You gotta hand it to Amazon Studios, they know how to tease a TV show. The company released the first character photos from its highly anticipated The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power TV series. There’s just one catch: There are no heads. The photos (below) show the hands and midsections of...




					www.yahoo.com


----------



## Zaukrie

Enevhar Aldarion said:


> Alright, for everyone who does not want to troll through Twitter or Facebook to see the posters, this article has all 23 of them. Most are human, with a few elves and dwarves, plus a couple that could be children or a sad attempt to somehow shove Hobbits into the series, when they were not around for the 2nd Age.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Amazon Releases ‘Lord of the Rings’ TV Show Character Photos With One Thing Missing
> 
> 
> You gotta hand it to Amazon Studios, they know how to tease a TV show. The company released the first character photos from its highly anticipated The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power TV series. There’s just one catch: There are no heads. The photos (below) show the hands and midsections of...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com



Can anyone explain why it matters if there are hobbits? Like, to your enjoyment of the show?


----------



## Benjamin Olson

Ralif Redhammer said:


> But for Christopher Tolkien, we could very well have seen TSR publish new Middle-Earth fiction in the 90s. Sometimes being over-protective is the right choice.




And but for his father there (bafflingly) would have been a Beatles Lord of the Rings movie, which would certainly have been terrible as an adaptation, but which I also really wish existed.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

Zaukrie said:


> Can anyone explain why it matters if there are hobbits? Like, to your enjoyment of the show?




Because this is set in the 2nd Age, before Numenor was even sunk, and there were no Hobbits in any of the lands that Gondor will eventually control, just like there is no Rohirrim until about the middle of the 3rd Age. They do not belong and would ruin the entertainment factor for anyone who knows Middle-Earth. Having them show up there would be like having Crusaders or Nazis show up when the Great Wall is being built or showing up with the Wise Men to visit the baby Jesus. Plus I do not think the Tolkien Estate would let any company contradict the writings like that.


----------



## Zaukrie

Enevhar Aldarion said:


> Because this is set in the 2nd Age, before Numenor was even sunk, and there were no Hobbits in any of the lands that Gondor will eventually control, just like there is no Rohirrim until about the middle of the 3rd Age. They do not belong and would ruin the entertainment factor for anyone who knows Middle-Earth. Having them show up there would be like having Crusaders or Nazis show up when the Great Wall is being built or showing up with the Wise Men to visit the baby Jesus. Plus I do not think the Tolkien Estate would let any company contradict the writings like that.



That has nothing to do with the show. Why would it hurt the show for them to be there? And, no, it would not be like that, but even if it was, it could still be a good show. 

Maybe adding them would be great, but saying they can't be there because a fictional history would be different? Not sure how that necessarily makes it a bad show.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

Zaukrie said:


> That has nothing to do with the show. Why would it hurt the show for them to be there? And, no, it would not be like that, but even if it was, it could still be a good show.
> 
> Maybe adding them would be great, but saying they can't be there because a fictional history would be different? Not sure how that necessarily makes it a bad show.




I am guessing you are not a fan of the books or you would not be asking this question.


----------



## Rune

Ralif Redhammer said:


> The other thing is that some of the hands, based on the sizes of the things they're holding, are decidedly hobbity. When hobbits, likewise, didn't play that much of a part of things during the Second Age, if at all.



The difference is that we _know_ Rohan didn’t exist yet. But all we know about the hobbits during the second age is that no one knew about hobbits. At least no one writing histories, anyway.


----------



## Rune

Enevhar Aldarion said:


> Because this is set in the 2nd Age, before Numenor was even sunk, and there were no Hobbits in any of the lands that Gondor will eventually control, just like there is no Rohirrim until about the middle of the 3rd Age. They do not belong and would ruin the entertainment factor for anyone who knows Middle-Earth. Having them show up there would be like having Crusaders or Nazis show up when the Great Wall is being built or showing up with the Wise Men to visit the baby Jesus. Plus I do not think the Tolkien Estate would let any company contradict the writings like that.



If it is your assertion that hobbits did not _exist_ at all during the second age, I find that extrordinarily unlikely, as all of the other peoples of Middle Earth came along in the first age or earlier. Even the spiders.

What we _can_ probably assume from their absence in the texts is that the _elves_ didn’t know about them (since all of the histories we have are elvish in origin). What the dwarves might have known about them, or the Men who came out of the East, we can only guess.

And frankly, I’m not even sure we _can_ conclude that the elves didn’t know about them, after all, since the elvish histories pretty much only highlight notable events and figures.

And one of the defining characteristics of hobbits is that they are _not_ notable.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

Rune said:


> If it is your assertion that hobbits did not _exist_ at all during the second age, I find that extrordinarily unlikely, as all of the other peoples of Middle Earth came along in the first age or earlier. Even the spiders.
> 
> What we _can_ probably assume from their absence in the texts is that the _elves_ didn’t know about them (since all of the histories we have are elvish in origin). What the dwarves might have known about them, or the Men who came out of the East, we can only guess.
> 
> And frankly, I’m not even sure we _can_ conclude that the elves didn’t know about them, after all, since the elvish histories pretty much only highlight notable events and figures.
> 
> And one of the defining characteristics of hobbits is that they are _not_ notable.




The Shire was founded in about TA 1600 and the hobbits traveled out of the east to get there. So no, no hobbits in any of the lands Numenor would have explored/colonized/conquered in the Second Age. A little of their pre-Shire history is in The One Ring books and probably should be considered canon, as none of those books were released without first getting Tolkien Estate approval.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Enevhar Aldarion said:


> Alright, for everyone who does not want to troll through Twitter or Facebook to see the posters, this article has all 23 of them. Most are human, with a few elves and dwarves, plus a couple that could be children or a sad attempt to somehow shove Hobbits into the series, when they were not around for the 2nd Age.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Amazon Releases ‘Lord of the Rings’ TV Show Character Photos With One Thing Missing
> 
> 
> You gotta hand it to Amazon Studios, they know how to tease a TV show. The company released the first character photos from its highly anticipated The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power TV series. There’s just one catch: There are no heads. The photos (below) show the hands and midsections of...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com



Hobbits as such, no. But the river folk were possibly around and building a culture that would someday become hobbit culture by the time Isildur fell. 

Rohirrim would be a bigger deal, since even the founder of that culture wouldn’t be born until long after the end of the second age.  

We don’t even know how much time will be covered here. It could well go all the way to the first downfall of Sauron.


Enevhar Aldarion said:


> I am guessing you are not a fan of the books or you would not be asking this question.



This is a very inappropriate thing to say to someone who simply seems to have different priorities than you.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

One thing all books fans are going to have to square in order to enjoy this is, there will be additions and changes. This is not up for debate. It _will_ occur.


----------



## Rune

Enevhar Aldarion said:


> The Shire was founded in about TA 1600 and the hobbits traveled out of the east to get there. So no, no hobbits in any of the lands Numenor would have explored/colonized/conquered in the Second Age.



I don’t think I can agree with your assessment of these facts as conclussively excluding the presence of hobbits during the Second Age.

In the first place, I think it’s reasonable to conclude that “the east” in this context means the Anduin Valley, whence came Sméagle. That was in the Third Age. It tells us nothing about hobbits (or the lack thereof) in the Second Age.

In the second place, some of the lands explored/colonized/conquered in the Second Age _were_ in the east (relative to the eventual location of The Shire). Notably, Gondor.


Enevhar Aldarion said:


> A little of their pre-Shire history is in The One Ring books and probably should be considered canon, as none of those books were released without first getting Tolkien Estate approval.



If that is your bar, then everything in the Amazon show will be canon, because the Tolkien Estate is who they have forged their new license with. Thus, if they decide to put hobbits on boats and sail them to Valinor, that, too, would be canon.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

Rune said:


> In the first place, I think it’s reasonable to conclude that “the east” in this context means the Anduin Valley, whence came Sméagle. That was in the Third Age. It tells us nothing about hobbits (or the lack thereof) in the Second Age.
> 
> In the second place, some of the lands explored/colonized/conquered in the Second Age _were_ in the east (relative to the eventual location of The Shire). Notably, Gondor.




Everything west of Mordor is the West. And Smeagol found the Ring around TA 2463, or almost 900 years after the Shire was founded.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Enevhar Aldarion said:


> Everything west of Mordor is the West. And Smeagol found the Ring around TA 2463, or almost 900 years after the Shire was founded.



Hobbits began wandering and crossed over the Misty Mountains in the beginning of the Third Age. Before that we know only that they dwelt along Anduin in Wilderland before their wandering days.  

To think that they just couldn’t possibly be in a story set in the Second Age is silly.


----------



## Zaukrie

Enevhar Aldarion said:


> I am guessing you are not a fan of the books or you would not be asking this question.



Sure I am. But so what? The books are separate things. Again, how does changing the story make it bad automatically?


----------



## Benjamin Olson

Zaukrie said:


> Sure I am. But so what? The books are separate things. Again, how does changing the story make it bad automatically?



It absolutely doesn't. But when dealing with an intricate fantasy setting it's a dangerous game. 

For example, my major issue with the Wheel of Time series is not that they changed things, but that every change they made, including some that had a lot of positive potential or were at least eminently sensible for the format, caused all sorts of aspects of the worldbuilding and plot to unravel and then be patched together haphazardly by television writers on a deadline. In that instance I think they'd have done better to adhere closer to the books, not because they are perfect, but because they were carefully thought through by a creator with a coherent vision taking his time, and that was better circumstances to nourish good fantasy than a tv show's writers room.

But that does not mean an unfaithful Tolkien adaptation couldn't be great, it just means that faithful adaptation is less likely to come apart at the seams.


----------



## Sepulchrave II

I don't have any problem with Hobbits being around in the 1st or 2nd Age, for reasons already described,

What _might_ be problematic, would be Hobbits interacting with the Great, and somehow being pivotal to events, as their canonical status - as only being noticed much later in the histories - would be on shaky ground.

A separate storyline or sub-plot - say a group of Hobbits living in the Vales of Anduin, having to deal with the Dark Years - might be kind of fun, if it's handled thoughtfully. 

Battalions of Hobbit archers marching on Dagorlad or acting as heralds for Gil-Galad - not so much.

That said, I don't really care _that_ much - just like I don't care about the Elves at Helm's Deep.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

At least we will not have to deal with a baby Legolas running around, since he is not born until just after the beginning of the Third Age.  lol

And maybe we will finally get Tom Bombadil and Goldberry on film, since the side plot between them and the hobbits in LotR was left out.

We might also get to see the Entwives, as at the time of the crafting of the Rings, they were still out and about and interacting with humans.


----------



## Sepulchrave II

Vanity Fair article here

Images:


----------



## darjr

This is how Morkoth and Sauron distort the truth and disrupt the powers of good. Disinformation spread by Hollywood.

For a series they have to fill in a ton. I hope they don’t change too much, considering they have a ton of room to play around in.

But if it’s good ima gunna be OK.


----------



## Zaukrie

darjr said:


> This is how Morkoth and Sauron distort the truth and disrupt the powers of good. Disinformation spread by Hollywood.
> 
> For a series they have to fill in a ton. I hope they don’t change too much, considering they have a ton of room to play around in.
> 
> But if it’s good ima gunna be OK.



I hope they give people of color roles that aren't all evil, and more women actual roles....

I don't care if they change things, but I get others do.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

Zaukrie said:


> I hope they give people of color roles that aren't all evil, and more women actual roles....
> 
> I don't care if they change things, but I get others do.




There is a lot of info, and more pictures, in that Vanity Fair article. The black actor pictured above is a female Dwarf princess. And there is a black actor playing a Sylvan Elf, who is apparently in a forbidden relationship with a human woman. And a lot more.


----------



## Zaukrie

Enevhar Aldarion said:


> There is a lot of info, and more pictures, in that Vanity Fair article. The black actor pictured above is a female Dwarf princess. And there is a black actor playing a Sylvan Elf, who is apparently in a forbidden relationship with a human woman. And a lot more.



Good deal. I can only imagine certain elements of LotR fandom hating that so much.....

I'm not convinced Amazon will do this well, but I think they will. I'm looking forward to it very much.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

Zaukrie said:


> Good deal. I can only imagine certain elements of LotR fandom hating that so much.....




Yeah, just showing a female Dwarf, let alone with no beard, will give some purists heart attacks.   lol

The young(er) Elrond and Galadriel will bug some people too because they are not using the same actors for the roles. Yes, Elves are immortal, but they still "age" and this show is happening somewhere around 5000 years before LotR.

Also, at least the article mentions there not being any Hobbits or Wizards in the show.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

Boo on time compression, even though it may be necessary when many centuries would otherwise pass:



> The series, set to begin streaming on Amazon Prime Video in September, is set in the Second Age of J.R.R. Tolkien's Middle-earth world and will differ from the film adaptations by compressing events that would have spanned hundreds of years in the books to a shorter time frame. Payne explained that otherwise "human characters are dying off every season because you’re jumping 200 years in time, and then you’re not meeting really big, important canon characters until season four", adding that viewers should not expect "a documentary of Middle-earth".












						'Lord of the Rings' TV series to be family friendly as writers shrug off 'Game of Thrones' comparisons
					

The new TV adaptation of Tolkien's work is said to be 'for everyone'.




					www.yahoo.com


----------



## Rabulias

Enevhar Aldarion said:


> Also, at least the article mentions there not being any Hobbits or Wizards in the show.



The Yahoo! article I saw said (emphasis mine):


			
				Yahoo! said:
			
		

> Two types of beloved characters have been restricted from the series, however: Wizards and hobbits, “who weren’t major players in the Second Age.” The production will still have hobbits, of a sort, *by* *including hobbit ancestors called harfoots*, but they will have a peripheral story “in the margins of the bigger quests.”


----------



## Ralif Redhammer

These new images are very exciting! Princess Disa looks awesome. Self-proclaimed "Tolkien purists" might nitpick about the character not being in the books, or not having a beard (balderdash; Tolkien explicitly only says all _male _dwarves have beards - emphasis Tolkien's), but if I'm feeling uncharitable, I think many of them are just mad about the other thing. The increased diversity of the cast is very welcome. If you go back and watch the LOTR and Hobbit trilogies, they are very noticeably white. 



Enevhar Aldarion said:


> Yeah, just showing a female Dwarf, let alone with no beard, will give some purists heart attacks.   lol





The Nature of Middle-Earth is filled with charts of elvish rates of aging. Like, a lot of charts as he worked through it in his head. 



Enevhar Aldarion said:


> The young(er) Elrond and Galadriel will bug some people too because they are not using the same actors for the roles. Yes, Elves are immortal, but they still "age" and this show is happening somewhere around 5000 years before LotR.




I read an article that compared young Elrond's look to Steve Harrington, and that's going to stick with me.


----------



## ART!

Sepulchrave II said:


> Vanity Fair article here
> 
> Images:
> 
> View attachment 151675
> 
> View attachment 151676
> 
> View attachment 151677



Thanks for the link! Something about reading a Vanity Fair article about this series, with photos, made it very real and exciting for me. I have to say, I got a little choked up. One point they raise about any complaints about diversity in the cast  is that _The Hobbit_ and _LOTR_ are explicitly about (among other things) people from _very_ different backgrounds coming together.


Enevhar Aldarion said:


> Boo on time compression, even though it may be necessary when many centuries would otherwise pass:



I kind of figured this would happen, because doing it accurately would really strain the expectations of viewers.


Ralif Redhammer said:


> I read an article that compared young Elrond's look to Steve Harrington, and that's going to stick with me.



You mean Steve "Hair"ington?


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

Ralif Redhammer said:


> I read an article that compared young Elrond's look to Steve Harrington, and that's going to stick with me.




The Vanity Fair article includes a picture of young Elrond, as well as another pic of young Elrond and young Galadriel staring into each other's eyes.


----------



## Greggy C

Dioltach said:


> Amazon has posted a teaser trailer for the new television series. Not much info, but the title gives me hope.



This looks like a Fan made trailer tbh.   But it shows why Peter Jackson paid Cate Blanchett top dollar to do that voice over.  Huge difference.


----------



## ART!

Greggy C said:


> This looks like a Fan made trailer tbh.   But it shows why Peter Jackson paid Cate Blanchett top dollar to do that voice over.  Huge difference.



No, that's the actual teaser trailer, from Amazon Prime. Mostly done with practical effects, not cgi.


----------



## Ralif Redhammer

Honestly, now I kinda wish they had cast Joe Keery as young Elrond. In all honesty, I bet he could pull it off. Maybe when they get to the First Age series...



Enevhar Aldarion said:


> The Vanity Fair article includes a picture of young Elrond, as well as another pic of young Elrond and young Galadriel staring into each other's eyes.


----------



## Lidgar

That article and pics makes me feel much better about the series. Fingers crossed they pull this off.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

When to watch the trailer during the Super Bowl on Sunday:


----------



## ART!

Wow!


----------



## Benjamin Olson

ART! said:


> Wow!



That looks awesome! Why did they even bother with the lame Ring Verse trailer if they had all that great looking footage ready?


----------



## Older Beholder

The series of posters for the show look cool...


----------



## Maxperson

Benjamin Olson said:


> That looks awesome! Why did they even bother with the lame Ring Verse trailer if they had all that great looking footage ready?



I was actually pretty disappointed with the look of it.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

I was disappointed that it was barely a minute long, when most every other first trailer is around 2 minutes. It just did not show me enough to make any judgement, good or bad.

Also, wow am I sorry that I read the comments on the Twitter thread for the trailer. The amount of hate from purists was horrible. It was so bad I could not tell the ones who hate any change to Tolkien's work from the ones who are actually bigots complaining about it being inclusive.


----------



## Akrasia

I'm really disappointed about the "time compression."
If one is going to make a series with _five _seasons during the Second Age, that series could easily be broken into two parts covering the following two pivotal periods:

The forging of the rings of power, followed by the War of Elves and Sauron (SA 1500-1700).
The capture of Sauron by Ar-Pharazôn, the downfall of Númenor, and the War of the Last Alliance (SA 3261-3441).
While no mortal characters (dwarf or human) could carry over from A to B, there are mortal characters who could persist for two centuries throughout both periods (given the long lifespans of Númenoreans and dwarves [just over two centuries, conveniently enough!]). And the persistence of Elrond, Galadriel, Gil-Galad, and Sauron would provide the narrative connection between the two periods.


----------



## Akrasia

Having watched it a few times, I have mixed feelings about the trailer.

The opening scene of Númenor looks amazing. The scene of Lindon (I assume it's Lindon) also looks great. The battle of the elves versus orcs (presumably during the War of the Elves and Sauron) also gets a "thumbs up." And I'm curious to know what it was that the dwarves were breaking (the meteorite?).

But I'm worried about the treatment of Galadriel as a kind of "action hero." That wouldn't be true to her character at all.

And that meteorite -- um, what? It's clearly meant to be something significant given its presence in the trailer (and Gil-Galad [?] looking at it with concern). But it's certainly something that the writers have invented for the series. 

Most of the other scenes -- and the voice-over -- seemed a bit "generic high fantasy" in nature.


----------



## Sepulchrave II

Enevhar Aldarion said:


> Also, wow am I sorry that I read the comments on the Twitter thread for the trailer. The amount of hate from purists was horrible. It was so bad I could not tell the ones who hate any change to Tolkien's work from the ones who are actually bigots complaining about it being inclusive.



I think you can filter them by their reaction to the PJ movies. The bigots-dressed-as-purists that I've seen seem to be using "fidelity to lore" as their main schtick; a lot of them - I won't tout their channels here, as all they want is clicks - have preemptively tried to address accusations of misogyny or racism. They are citing how "faithful" PJ's movies are to the source material, and how the Amazon series is lore-breaking. They are seemingly content to overlook, for example:

1) The Elves at Helm's deep
2) Aragorn decapitating the mouth of Sauron (Aragorn would never violate a truce. He has _integrity_)
3) Legolas-surfing
4) Gimli-tossing and humour
5) Saruman's untimely death, Arwen-As Glorfindel, Faramir's reaction to Frodo and Sam, the Dead at Pelennor
6) Sauron as a literal giant eyeball etc. etc. etc.

Whereas real Tolkien purists will bitch about this stuff no end, and seem less concerned that there's a black dude playing an Elf or Hobbit.

I enjoyed the PJ movies immensely, but I actually found Aragorn's betrayal of the truce the most egregious of all offenses. I mean, remind me _why_ this guy is supposed to be king again?


----------



## Sepulchrave II

Akrasia said:


> But I'm worried about the treatment of Galadriel as a kind of "action hero." That wouldn't be true to her character at all.



But wouldn't it?

She crossed the Helcaraxë, at least according to one version of the myth. She led troops against the Noldor and in support of the Teleri at Alqualondë.

And:


			
				Unfinished Tales said:
			
		

> Her mother-name was Nerwen ('man-maiden'), and she grew to be tall beyond the measure even of the women of the Noldor; she was strong of body, mind, and will, a match for both the loremasters and the athletes of the Eldar in the days of their youth.




And:


			
				Letters said:
			
		

> In her early youth, she was very willful and of an "Amazon" disposition; and bound up her hair as a crown when taking part in athletic feats.




I don't think that any of the characters in Tolkien's legendarium can really be called "action heroes," but I think that 100% fidelity to lore would be regarded as rather _boring_ by a lot of people.


----------



## Crimson Longinus

It indeed is pretty hard to say much. What visuals we've seen look great. The time compression worries me. I had wished they would mostly just add to the stories from the books, and not so much change them, but the time comprehension indicates that they're doing rather massive rewrites. Also the differing time perspectives of elves and men is rather important aspect, and this is downplaying it. But I remain cautiously optimistic.


----------



## Morrus

Looks pretty good to me. I'd have preferred some more LotR-sinspired music, as that score helped shape the feel of Middle Earth in the movies. I'm not a Tolkien purist, so I don't mind if they make changes (and wouldn't know if they had -- I've never read anything other than The Hobbit and LotR).


----------



## wicked cool

the trailer for a superbowl was subpar. I will tune and watch but it didnt scream lord of the rings to me (other than the harbor scene). Its was a step below the trailer we got for Game of Thrones back then, Moon Knight trailer looks very exciting , House of the Dragon, Jack Ryan etc. 

Was the monster at the end of the trailer a troll?


----------



## Mezuka

It's unreasonable to expect blockbuster levels of budget (CGI, etc) for a streaming TV series. 

Seems to me like we lost the art of judging things as per their own media segments. I recall a time when we had B-Movies at the theatre before the main event. No one in their right minds judged them with the same criteria as the main film. Death Race 2000 (1975) was feaking awesome, for a B-movie.

I'll judge it when I see it.


----------



## payn

Didnt they drop 100 million+ on this series? I'm not sure the lowered expectations should be expected.


----------



## Morrus

payn said:


> Didnt they drop 100 million+ on this series? I'm not sure the lowered expectations should be expected.



$100M for a 10-hour series as opposed to $200M for a 2 hour film. It sounds crazy numbers, but $10M per hour of footage vs $100M per hour of footage isn't comparable.


----------



## Parmandur

At any rate, it's not the size if the budget, but what you do with it.

I'm cautiously optimistic, precisely because they are making this show out if a 12 and a half page Appendix: other than broad strokes, this will all be original, which is much better potential than the weird half and half muddle of the Hobbit trilogy.

And the Dwarf princess is the best thing ever, the haters gonna hate.


----------



## Parmandur

Ralif Redhammer said:


> These new images are very exciting! Princess Disa looks awesome. Self-proclaimed "Tolkien purists" might nitpick about the character not being in the books, or not having a beard (balderdash; Tolkien explicitly only says all _male _dwarves have beards - emphasis Tolkien's), but if I'm feeling uncharitable, I think many of them are just mad about the other thing. The increased diversity of the cast is very welcome. If you go back and watch the LOTR and Hobbit trilogies, they are very noticeably white.



I have to say, I love the design of the character,  she looks great, and the diverse casting is thrilling, and I don't mind about the beards.

That being said...Tolkien's female Dwarves had beards and dressed like the male Dwarves. That's pretty clearly established: apparently male and female Dwarves are born with beards. Buy fir the show, it's no biggie as long as the design is good, which it is


----------



## Olgar Shiverstone

Neither optimistic nor pessimistic at this point.

It needs an "inspired by Tolkien" label since there isn't really enough to tell detailed stories in this era that are actually Tolkien's writing ... so from a "canon" standpoint this is fan fiction.

But hey, if its good fan fiction, I'll watch it. I don't expect visual or thematic continuity with the Jackson films -- different creators, different story, different vision. It would be like expecting continuity with the best Hobbit adaptation (that would be the Bakshi one).


----------



## Zaukrie

I was not in love with the trailer, but I didn't hate it either. but man, the racists sure hate it.....at least on Twitter.


----------



## payn

Morrus said:


> $100M for a 10-hour series as opposed to $200M for a 2 hour film. It sounds crazy numbers, but $10M per hour of footage vs $100M per hour of footage isn't comparable.



Good points, 100mill+ is still a heftier budget than many TV series get. I did think the trailer was a bit underwhelming and didnt look like the budget. Wheel of Time looked better (via trailer)to me.


----------



## Parmandur

payn said:


> Good points, 100mill+ is still a heftier budget than many TV series get. I did think the trailer was a bit underwhelming and didnt look like the budget. Wheel of Time looked better (via trailer)to me.



Substitute "all" for "most": this is the highest budget TV show of all time, by my understanding.


----------



## payn

Parmandur said:


> Substitute "all" for "most": this is the highest budget TV show of all time, by my understanding.



Oh, wow, then ever more underwhelming. (I realize this is just a trailer and the show could be much better than first impression)


----------



## Morrus

payn said:


> Oh, wow, then ever more underwhelming. (I realize this is just a trailer and the show could be much better than first impression)



I think the trailer looks great. Goes to show that these things are all relative!


----------



## Parmandur

payn said:


> Oh, wow, then ever more underwhelming. (I realize this is just a trailer and the show could be much better than first impression)



Imagine a trailer for a 90's Star Trek show that focused on the Matte paintings used for establishing shots on alien planets:  ot impressive, but the shows actual budget was mostly in sets, props, and actors.

Look at the costume, set, and makeup design we have already seen: that's where the money is, along with the large cast of actors.

As a result, yeah, the CGI is not revolutionary, midrange Switch game I'd say.  But that should serve the show.


----------



## wicked cool

agreed for the budget and todays technology i expected to be wowed. its a Superbowl commercial!! 

arent all the disney marvel stuff well over 100 million a series. Moon Knight so far looks way more interesting and i know much more about this universe than his origins   

GOT cost was 60 million per season

I know its early but this has the initial wheel of time look to it. Where is the grit/dirt. it feels like everyone dressed in costume/makeup room  and stepped on the green screen and nobody is saying wheres the grime (even compared to the original movies in case some are saying different universe)


----------



## Zaukrie

People sure have strong thoughts about a one minute montage.........I'm not judging anything until I actually see it. Plenty of trailers have looked great or awful......and didn't indicate anything about the final product.


----------



## Morrus

wicked cool said:


> agreed for the budget and todays technology i expected to be wowed. its a Superbowl commercial!!
> 
> arent all the disney marvel stuff well over 100 million a series. Moon Knight so far looks way more interesting and i know much more about this universe than his origins
> 
> GOT cost was 60 million per season
> 
> I know its early but this has the initial wheel of time look to it. Where is the grit/dirt. it feels like everyone dressed in costume/makeup room  and stepped on the green screen and nobody is saying wheres the grime (even compared to the original movies in case some are saying different universe)



I feel like I watched a different teaser to you, but OK.


----------



## Crimson Longinus

Yeah, I really don't get the complaints about the effects. The trailer was brief and we only saw small snippets, but what I saw looked movie quality effects-wise.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

payn said:


> Didnt they drop 100 million+ on this series? I'm not sure the lowered expectations should be expected.




No, the starting bid for the rights to make the show was $250 million, with a requirement of making 5 seasons. Estimates put overall costs for the show and all five seasons at One Billion Dollars.   _cue Doctor Evil voice and laugh_


----------



## Mezuka

I looked up the Vanity Fair article. Here is an interesting bit:

_"Amazon won’t confirm the show’s budget, but on top of the money for the rights, the government of New Zealand has placed production expenditures at $462 million for the first season alone. That figure includes building infrastructure that will be used in later seasons—and it’s been offset by a $108 million tax rebate."_

The 462 million is in fact minus 108 million = (edit) 354 million. Of those 354 million, an unknown amount should be spread over the 5 seasons.

That would be about (edit) 300 for ten hours against 93 million for 3 hours.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Parmandur said:


> At any rate, it's not the size if the budget, but what you do with it.
> 
> I'm cautiously optimistic, precisely because they are making this show out if a 12 and a half page Appendix: other than broad strokes, this will all be original, which is much better potential than the weird half and half muddle of the Hobbit trilogy.
> 
> And the Dwarf princess is the best thing ever, the haters gonna hate.



Yeah I wish they had the Silmarrilion to work with, but this is a good point.


----------



## ART!

Yeah, let's remember this is just a _teaser_ trailer, and one for something 7 months off - the digital stuff in the trailer may well be unfinished, i.e. not as fully rendered as it will be in the final product.


Olgar Shiverstone said:


> But hey, if its good fan fiction, I'll watch it. I don't expect visual or thematic continuity with the Jackson films -- different creators, different story, different vision. It would be like expecting continuity with the best Hobbit adaptation (that would be the Bakshi one).



I'm at work so I don't have the time to look it up, but I remember there being a deal worked out with Weta or whoever, for this show to be able to use designs from Jackson's movies.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

Crimson Longinus said:


> Yeah, I really don't get the complaints about the effects. The trailer was brief and we only saw small snippets, but what I saw looked movie quality effects-wise.




We saw a shot of the proto-Hobbit ancestor in the trailer and that got a frown from me.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

Mezuka said:


> The 462 million is in fact minus 108 million = 282 million. Of those 282 million, an unknown amount should be spread over the 5 seasons.
> 
> That would be about 200 for ten hours against 93 million for 3 hours.




Unless some changes have been announced, season one is still slated for eight episodes, not ten. And all these "hour-long" shows are never an actual hour. They all have to be in the 40-50 minute range, so that in the future, they can be repeated on regular TV and have time built in for all the commercials. So more like 6 1/2 hours of actual show for an 8-episode season.


----------



## Mezuka

Enevhar Aldarion said:


> Unless some changes have been announced, season one is still slated for eight episodes, not ten. And all these "hour-long" shows are never an actual hour. They all have to be in the 40-50 minute range, so that in the future, they can be repeated on regular TV and have time built in for all the commercials. So more like 6 1/2 hours of actual show for an 8-episode season.



Actualy I made a computation error. Its 354 millions.


----------



## Parmandur

doctorbadwolf said:


> Yeah I wish they had the Silmarrilion to work with, but this is a good point.



I would love a Turin movie, or a Tuor and the fall of Gondolon movie, or especially a Beren & Luthien movie.


----------



## Ralif Redhammer

Likewise, I am hopeful that it will be good. It's got such a high bar to clear, but I want them to manage it.



Parmandur said:


> I'm cautiously optimistic, precisely because they are making this show out if a 12 and a half page Appendix: other than broad strokes, this will all be original, which is much better potential than the weird half and half muddle of the Hobbit trilogy.




Cosigned. If LOTR had been made today, I guarantee it would've had a more diverse casting.



Parmandur said:


> And the Dwarf princess is the best thing ever, the haters gonna hate.




This gets tricky. In the Nature of Middle-Earth, Tolkien explicitly says that all _male _dwarves have beards. Elsewhere, if I recall correctly, he says that dwarven women disguise themselves as men when they travel abroad. Which would imply that they either grow beards or wear fake ones (possibly evoking the Langobards of Norse legends), unless there are also cleanshaven dwarven men, which the original sentence contradicts.

Now, he does not say that dwarven women cannot or do not have beards. In the same section he specifically calls out that characters of Numenorean or Elven descent cannot grow beards, unless very old (see Cirdan the Shipwright). Which means we cannot assume that by not explicitly saying dwarven women can't grow beards, they weren't bearded.

Ultimately, that's all Tolkien lore noodling on my part, and the decision to not have a bearded dwarven woman for the TV show is likely an aesthetic one.



Parmandur said:


> That being said...Tolkien's female Dwarves had beards and dressed like the male Dwarves. That's pretty clearly established: apparently male and female Dwarves are born with beards. Buy fir the show, it's no biggie as long as the design is good, which it is


----------



## Parmandur

Ralif Redhammer said:


> Likewise, I am hopeful that it will be good. It's got such a high bar to clear, but I want them to manage it.
> 
> 
> 
> Cosigned. If LOTR had been made today, I guarantee it would've had a more diverse casting.
> 
> 
> 
> This gets tricky. In the Nature of Middle-Earth, Tolkien explicitly says that all _male _dwarves have beards. Elsewhere, if I recall correctly, he says that dwarven women disguise themselves as men when they travel abroad. Which would imply that they either grow beards or wear fake ones (possibly evoking the Langobards of Norse legends), unless there are also cleanshaven dwarven men, which the original sentence contradicts.
> 
> Now, he does not say that dwarven women cannot or do not have beards. In the same section he specifically calls out that characters of Numenorean or Elven descent cannot grow beards, unless very old (see Cirdan the Shipwright). Which means we cannot assume that by not explicitly saying dwarven women can't grow beards, they weren't bearded.
> 
> Ultimately, that's all Tolkien lore noodling on my part, and the decision to not have a bearded dwarven woman for the TV show is likely an aesthetic one.



From the Return of the King:

"They are in voice and appearance, and in garb if they must go on a journey, so like to the dwarf-men that the eyes and ears of other peoples cannot tell them apart."

From the War of the Jewels:

"For the Naugrim have beards from the beginning of their lives, male and female alike; nor indeed can their womenkind be discerned by those of other race..."

But, yeah, it doesn't matter.


----------



## Maxperson

Akrasia said:


> And that meteorite -- um, what? It's clearly meant to be something significant given its presence in the trailer (and Gil-Galad [?] looking at it with concern). But it's certainly something that the writers have invented for the series.



Could be some sort of flashback dealing with Anglachel and Anguirel.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

Ralif Redhammer said:


> Likewise, I am hopeful that it will be good. It's got such a high bar to clear, but I want them to manage it.
> 
> 
> 
> Cosigned. If LOTR had been made today, I guarantee it would've had a more diverse casting.
> 
> 
> 
> This gets tricky. In the Nature of Middle-Earth, Tolkien explicitly says that all _male _dwarves have beards. Elsewhere, if I recall correctly, he says that dwarven women disguise themselves as men when they travel abroad. Which would imply that they either grow beards or wear fake ones (possibly evoking the Langobards of Norse legends), unless there are also cleanshaven dwarven men, which the original sentence contradicts.
> 
> Now, he does not say that dwarven women cannot or do not have beards. In the same section he specifically calls out that characters of Numenorean or Elven descent cannot grow beards, unless very old (see Cirdan the Shipwright). Which means we cannot assume that by not explicitly saying dwarven women can't grow beards, they weren't bearded.
> 
> Ultimately, that's all Tolkien lore noodling on my part, and the decision to not have a bearded dwarven woman for the TV show is likely an aesthetic one.




There were Dwarf women fleeing Smaug in The Hobbit movie and some of them did not have beards, so this will not be the first time on film for that, just the first time a female will be interacted with at all.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Parmandur said:


> I would love a Turin movie, or a Tuor and the fall of Gondolon movie, or especially a Beren & Luthien movie.



Big fan of crying at the movies, then?  

But yeah, same.


----------



## Parmandur

doctorbadwolf said:


> Big fan of crying at the movies, then?
> 
> But yeah, same.



Absolutely.

Because I'm a weirdo, the finalized "Children of Hurin" is maybe my favorite Tolkien work.


----------



## Mercurius

I really dislike the degree to which criticism is considered "toxic," no matter the reasons for that criticism, as if any change is good and new is always better, and if you dislike an adaptation or new version, you're inherently being "toxic" or, worse yet, "racist." 

This is not to say that there aren't voices that are toxic and/or racist, but what I'm taking issue is the broad-brush depiction of any and all--or at least most--complaints as being toxic/racist. It is an all-too easy ad hominem way of writing off legit criticism.

Most of the protests I read have to do with the degree to which an adaptation diverges from the source material and/or the spirit of the source material. This is particularly touchy with something like Tolkien, because it is so beloved. The potential is there for a sense of disrespect and exploitation of an artist's vision.

This is not to say that any alterations and updates are inherently bad or disrespectful of Tolkien, but I think the key is staying true to the spirit of his vision and specific creations. 

As for the teaser, my take: Too little to go on. It looks pretty good visually, but on first blush it doesn't feel quite as "authentic Tolkien" as Jackson's initial trilogy. My expectations are tepid. I agree with what someone said up-thread that it should say "inspired by the works of JRR Tolkien." That's how I'm going to approach it, and thus my enjoyment will be based mostly on how good it is as a fantasy story. I'm not looking for it to actualize Tolkien's world on the screen - that's where I think a lot of "Tolkienistas" go wrong.


----------



## Ralif Redhammer

Considering the contradictions, like so much around the edges of Middle-Earth, I suspect Tolkien went back and forth on it over the years.



Parmandur said:


> From the Return of the King:
> 
> "They are in voice and appearance, and in garb if they must go on a journey, so like to the dwarf-men that the eyes and ears of other peoples cannot tell them apart."
> 
> From the War of the Jewels:
> 
> "For the Naugrim have beards from the beginning of their lives, male and female alike; nor indeed can their womenkind be discerned by those of other race..."
> 
> But, yeah, it doesn't matter.




They did not have full beards, but the dwarven women had varying degrees of facial hair in it. As an aside, apparently Cate Blanchett tried to convince them to let her cameo a bearded dwarven woman in one of the scenes:

“I loved it so much and I did say to Peter and Fran, they were doing a banquet scene with a whole lot of dwarves. I always wanted to play the bearded lady, so I asked them, could I be your hairy wife woman when you pan across the banquet table of dwarves?”



Enevhar Aldarion said:


> There were Dwarf women fleeing Smaug in The Hobbit movie and some of them did not have beards, so this will not be the first time on film for that, just the first time a female will be interacted with at all.


----------



## Zaukrie

Mercurius said:


> I really dislike the degree to which criticism is considered "toxic," no matter the reasons for that criticism, as if any change is good and new is always better, and if you dislike an adaptation or new version, you're inherently being "toxic" or, worse yet, "racist."
> 
> This is not to say that there aren't voices that are toxic and/or racist, but what I'm taking issue is the broad-brush depiction of any and all--or at least most--complaints as being toxic/racist. It is an all-too easy ad hominem way of writing off legit criticism.
> 
> Most of the protests I read have to do with the degree to which an adaptation diverges from the source material and/or the spirit of the source material. This is particularly touchy with something like Tolkien, because it is so beloved. The potential is there for a sense of disrespect and exploitation of an artist's vision.
> 
> This is not to say that any alterations and updates are inherently bad or disrespectful of Tolkien, but I think the key is staying true to the spirit of his vision and specific creations.
> 
> As for the teaser, my take: Too little to go on. It looks pretty good visually, but on first blush it doesn't feel quite as "authentic Tolkien" as Jackson's initial trilogy. My expectations are tepid. I agree with what someone said up-thread that it should say "inspired by the works of JRR Tolkien." That's how I'm going to approach it, and thus my enjoyment will be based mostly on how good it is as a fantasy story. I'm not looking for it to actualize Tolkien's world on the screen - that's where I think a lot of "Tolkienistas" go wrong.



You must not be looking at Twitter or other places, because, trust me, there is plenty of racism.


----------



## ART!

Parmandur said:


> Absolutely.
> 
> Because I'm a weirdo, the finalized "Children of Hurin" is maybe my favorite Tolkien work.



_Children of Hurin_ is lovely. It reads more like _LotR_ than any of the other Middle-earth writings of his I've read. It's sweeping and epic, but also very grounded and personal.


----------



## Akrasia

Maxperson said:


> Could be some sort of flashback dealing with Anglachel and Anguirel.



That would be very cool were it the case but I'm pretty sure that Amazon doesn't have any rights to anything in the _Silmarillion_.


----------



## Maxperson

Akrasia said:


> That would be very cool were it the case but I'm pretty sure that Amazon doesn't have any rights to anything in the _Silmarillion_.



Like the forging of the rings of power?


----------



## Parmandur

Maxperson said:


> Like the forging of the rings of power?



The Vanity Fair article cleared up that the source material for the show is very specifically Appendix B of Return of the King. Nothing more, nothing less, other than what they make up. So, it's mostly going to be fan fiction, which can go either way.

Which effectively means that they can reference events from the Silmarillion...if they are in Return of the King.


----------



## Maxperson

Parmandur said:


> The Vanity Fair article cleared up that the source material for the show is very specifically Appendix B of Return of the King. Nothing more, nothing less, other than what they make up. So, it's mostly going to be fan fiction, which can go either way.
> 
> Which effectively means that they can reference events from the Silmarillion...if they are in Return of the King.



Gotcha.  Oh, well.  That's really too bad.  There's a lot of good stuff in the Silmarillion.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

Maxperson said:


> Like the forging of the rings of power?




Yes, because it looks like the Amazon deal is for anything in the Silmarillion and Unfinished Tales that directly connects to what is in the Appendices in the back of Return of the King.









						Amazon's Lord of the Rings Reportedly Has Rights to The Silmarillion
					

Amazon's Lord of the Rings series has reportedly obtained the rights to J.R.R. Tolkiens's The [...]




					comicbook.com


----------



## Maxperson

Enevhar Aldarion said:


> Yes, because it looks like the Amazon deal is for anything in the Silmarillion and Unfinished Tales that directly connects to what is in the Appendices in the back of Return of the King.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Amazon's Lord of the Rings Reportedly Has Rights to The Silmarillion
> 
> 
> Amazon's Lord of the Rings series has reportedly obtained the rights to J.R.R. Tolkiens's The [...]
> 
> 
> 
> 
> comicbook.com



Thanks.  Then I'm going to suggest that the meteor might be what some or all of the rings are forged from.


----------



## Parmandur

Maxperson said:


> Gotcha.  Oh, well.  That's really too bad.  There's a lot of good stuff in the Silmarillion.



The Tolkien Estate become much more amenable to getting paid for further film rights after Christopher Tolkien retired and stepped down as executor, but the family is still protective of the brand. Amazon was able to get more rights than were available before, but the family didn't want to sell the Silmarillion.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

Maxperson said:


> Thanks.  Then I'm going to suggest that the meteor might be what some or all of the rings are forged from.




I would not be surprised at all if they go that angle, seeing as how meteor metal is used other places as a mystical, magic, special material. It could be used to explain how Sauron could connect all the rings together and know when they are active and being used, aside from just all of his power that he invested into making the One Ring.


----------



## Rabulias

And now there is a report that _The Lord of the Rings: The War of the Rohirrim_, an animated film from New Line and Warner Brothers, is coming out in April 2024. It is supposed to deal with the history of Rohan and Helm's Deep.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

Rabulias said:


> And now there is a report that _The Lord of the Rings: The War of the Rohirrim_, an animated film from New Line and Warner Brothers, is coming out in April 2024. It is supposed to deal with the history of Rohan and Helm's Deep.




Yep, that was first announced back in June 2021, but it was just today that more info was finally released.









						“The War of the Rohirrim” anime film in development
					

New Line Cinema and Warner Bros. Animation have announced they are developing an anime feature film called The War of the Rohirrim. Directed by Kenji Kamiyama, it will be set over 250 years before the…




					www.tolkiensociety.org


----------



## Parmandur

Rabulias said:


> And now there is a report that _The Lord of the Rings: The War of the Rohirrim_, an animated film from New Line and Warner Brothers, is coming out in April 2024. It is supposed to deal with the history of Rohan and Helm's Deep.



It's from q Japanese animation studio in an Anime style, IIRC. That has potential.

Heck, Tolkien's material by and large might be a better fit for that sort of high animation style.


----------



## reelo

Parmandur said:


> Absolutely.
> 
> Because I'm a weirdo, the finalized "Children of Hurin" is maybe my favorite Tolkien work.



It is mine as well. I would absolutely love to see the "Narn i Hîn Húrin" on screen (as a big-budget series) done in a tragic, epic way, totally earnest and sober.
Granted, it's depressing stuff, but it's spun from the same cloth as the ancient Greek tragedies.


Also, concerning the dwarf princess, Dísa: if you crank up the luminosity/contrast ij Photoshop, you can clearly make out some facial hair, in the form of sideburns. I was gonna post a picture, but somehow the upload fails.


----------



## Dioltach

Regardless of whether or not female dwarves in Middle-Earth should have beards, it's quite possible that fashions and preferences change. In the real world, fashion rarely stays the same for long, or from one culture to another.

There should be dwarves laughing about how silly they all looked a century before, when the female dwarves had full beards and the males were clean-shaven.


----------



## MarkB

Dioltach said:


> Regardless of whether or not female dwarves in Middle-Earth should have beards, it's quite possible that fashions and preferences change. In the real world, fashion rarely stays the same for long, or from one culture to another.
> 
> There should be dwarves laughing about how silly they all looked a century before, when the female dwarves had full beards and the males were clean-shaven.



That, and they're not all one homogenous society where absolutely everyone toes the line in terms of looks or fashion. There will be people who don't follow the conventions.


----------



## Ixal

To quote a poster from another board. "Nice looking Narnia trailer"

But it looks and feels nothing like LotR and considering how Amazons Wheel of Time series turned out I have very low expectations for it.
Or rather, I fully expect them to screw up.


----------



## wicked cool

i have changed my mind based on watching some videos on lore.  im still watching no matter what but im hopeful based on what i know of the quick shots and the lore associated.


----------



## Ibrandul

Maxperson said:


> Thanks.  Then I'm going to suggest that the meteor might be what some or all of the rings are forged from.



The meteor is:

(actual spoiler, revealed in the latest Vanity Fair article, whose writers, remember, have had the first three episodes screened for them. No really, this is probably a big spoiler for the first episode, maybe even the episode’s final scene. Frankly I wish I hadn’t read it. Don’t ask why I’m spreading it around. I guess spoilage loves company):

The meteor is the character seen holding the harfoot Nori’s hand in the final shot of the teaser. Probably this is (my guess) a Maia, either one of the Istari crash-landing upon arrival from Valinor (yes, I know they aren’t supposed to be sent til TA 1110, but that’s not going to stop Amazon, since it’s confirmed they’re going to compress and scramble the canonical timeline in several other major ways), or just possibly Sauron himself in a form that will gain the trust of the ones to whom he is appearing (“benevolent” old man to gain the young harfoot’s trust for some reason). There’s a very brief shot in the trailer of this man being helped out of a burning crater.


----------



## Sepulchrave II

Purportedly, this vignette from the trailer is of Finrod at the Battle of Sudden Flame surrounded on the Fen of Serech. He's a blondie, so it figures. Could be a balrog in the background:






Article here


----------



## Sepulchrave II

jeremypowell said:


> The meteor is:
> 
> The meteor is the character seen holding the harfoot Nori’s hand in the final shot of the teaser. Probably this is (my guess) a Maia, either one of the Istari crash-landing upon arrival from Valinor (yes, I know they aren’t supposed to be sent til TA 1110, but that’s not going to stop Amazon, since it’s confirmed they’re going to compress and scramble the canonical timeline in several other major ways), or just possibly Sauron himself in a form that will gain the trust of the ones to whom he is appearing (“benevolent” old man to gain the young harfoot’s trust for some reason). There’s a very brief shot in the trailer of this man being helped out of a burning crater.



I'd thought as much - everyone likes a Wizard, right?

Lore faithful? - Sure. In Tolkien's later writings, he changed the name of the Blue Wizards from "Alatar and Pallando" to "Rómestámo and Morinehtar," and moved them from the Third Age to the Second.


----------



## Thunderfoot

I hope this does very well and that eventually it all works out.  I won't be able to watch it, because streaming.  So once it airs, a spoiler post would be appreciated.  

Also the dwarf is hot, I'd mine that. lol


----------



## wicked cool

Sepulchrave II said:


> Purportedly, this vignette from the trailer is of Finrod at the Battle of Sudden Flame surrounded on the Fen of Serech. He's a blondie, so it figures. Could be a balrog in the background:
> 
> View attachment 151891
> 
> Article here



do the balrogs show up before kazadum (spelling) . ill admit my pre hobbit lore is weak


----------



## Maxperson

wicked cool said:


> do the balrogs show up before kazadum (spelling) . ill admit my pre hobbit lore is weak



Waaaaaay before.  The one there just ran and hid at some point, then fell asleep until it was awakened by the dwarves.  I don't recall any others during the second age, though.


----------



## Mannahnin

Yeah, there's something like an army of them at one point back in the old epic First Age days.


----------



## MarkB

Mannahnin said:


> Yeah, there's something like an army of them at one point back in the old epic First Age days.



One of those classic monsters that was dropped for 2e, and brought back late in 3.5e.


----------



## Maxperson

MarkB said:


> One of those classic monsters that was dropped for 2e, and brought back late in 3.5e.



The Balor was in 2e, complete with flaming body, sword and whip.


----------



## Thunderfoot

The Balrog's of Morgoth were a special army of creatures in the First Age.  They were terrible creatures that went in the down low when Melkor got his tushy voided.  Those that escaped, hid. The one in the mines of Moria was woken up when the dwarves kept digging and opened up his hidey hole.


----------



## trappedslider

‘The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power’ EP reveals which Tolkien books they can use

Basically

“We have the rights solely to The Fellowship of the Ring, The Two Towers, The Return of the King, the appendices, and The Hobbit,” He said. “And that is it. We do not have the rights to The Silmarillion, Unfinished Tales, The History of Middle-earth, or any of those other books.”

“There’s a version of everything we need for the Second Age in the books we have the rights to,” McKay noted. “As long as we’re painting within those lines and not egregiously contradicting something we don’t have the rights to, there’s a lot of leeway and room to dramatize and tell some of the best stories that [Tolkien] ever came up with.”


----------



## JEB

trappedslider said:


> ‘The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power’ EP reveals which Tolkien books they can use
> 
> Basically
> 
> “We have the rights solely to The Fellowship of the Ring, The Two Towers, The Return of the King, the appendices, and The Hobbit,” He said. “And that is it. We do not have the rights to The Silmarillion, Unfinished Tales, The History of Middle-earth, or any of those other books.”
> 
> “There’s a version of everything we need for the Second Age in the books we have the rights to,” McKay noted. “As long as we’re painting within those lines and not egregiously contradicting something we don’t have the rights to, there’s a lot of leeway and room to dramatize and tell some of the best stories that [Tolkien] ever came up with.”



Kind of strange to do a series set in the Second Age, but opt not to spring for the rights to the most substantive source material for that era. It's not like Amazon couldn't afford it...


----------



## Parmandur

JEB said:


> Kind of strange to do a series set in the Second Age, but opt not to spring for the rights to the most substantive source material for that era. It's not like Amazon couldn't afford it...



The Tolkien Estate is not selling, is the issue. They aren't waiting for an offer, there is no purchase option on the table.


----------



## JEB

Parmandur said:


> The Tolkien Estate is not selling, is the issue. They aren't waiting for an offer, there is no purchase option on the table.



Huh. I did not know that. (More information here, fellow readers in ignorance.)

I have to say, though, that if he thought the LOTR and Hobbit films did a hack job on his father's work, I really doubt he'll enjoy a semi-Silmarillion without anything actually from The Silmarillion...


----------



## Parmandur

JEB said:


> Huh. I did not know that. (More information here, fellow readers in ignorance.)
> 
> I have to say, though, that if he thought the LOTR and Hobbit films did a hack job on his father's work, I really doubt he'll enjoy a semi-Silmarillion without anything actually from The Silmarillion...



Christopher Tolkien passed away a couple years ago, so he's not the decision maker here. The issue is that the Appendix rights were already sold with the Lord of the Rings.


----------



## JEB

Parmandur said:


> Christopher Tolkien passed away a couple years ago, so he's not the decision maker here. The issue is that the Appendix rights were already sold with the Lord of the Rings.



I looked into this a little more. According to this article (which quotes Vanity Fair):


> “We have the rights solely to _The Fellowship of the Ring, The Two Towers, The Return of the King_, the appendices, and _The Hobbit_. And that is it. We do not have the rights to _The Silmarillion, Unfinished Tales_, _The History of Middle-Earth_, or any of those other books…We worked in conjunction with world-renowned Tolkien scholars and the Tolkien estate to make sure that the ways we connected the dots were Tolkien-ian and gelled with the experts’ and the estate’s understanding of the material.”



So the Tolkien estate is working with them on the show... but is refusing to open up the rights to the rest of the Tolkien lore? If they were taking Christopher Tolkien's "no thanks" position that'd be consistent, but if they are actively working with Amazon on the show, that makes the denial of access rather odd.


----------



## Parmandur

JEB said:


> I looked into this a little more. According to this article (which quotes Vanity Fair):
> 
> So the Tolkien estate is working with them on the show... but is refusing to open up the rights to the rest of the Tolkien lore? If they were taking Christopher Tolkien's "no thanks" position that'd be consistent, but if they are actively working with Amazon on the show, that makes the denial of access rather odd.



Yeah, it's a change. Maybe theybare willing to sell now, but even Bezos money isn't white up to it. Or Amazon is waiting to see if the show is a hit before biting the bullet.


----------



## JEB

Parmandur said:


> Or Amazon is waiting to see if the show is a hit before biting the bullet.



Eh, I think Amazon has pretty definitely decided not to bother with The Silmarillion rights at this point, now that they're completing production on the first season. Success means they don't need the rights, and can work with what they have; failure means they're more likely to end things there, rather than spend more money on the additional rights.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

JEB said:


> Eh, I think Amazon has pretty definitely decided not to bother with The Silmarillion rights at this point, now that they're completing production on the first season. Success means they don't need the rights, and can work with what they have; failure means they're more likely to end things there, rather than spend more money on the additional rights.




They can't "end things there", as from what I remember reading, their deal for the rights requires them to do a certain number of seasons. So Amazon cannot cancel after just one season.


----------



## JEB

Enevhar Aldarion said:


> They can't "end things there", as from what I remember reading, their deal for the rights requires them to do a certain number of seasons. So Amazon cannot cancel after just one season.



Interesting, but I still doubt their response to a failure would be to shell out more cash to get the additional rights. Especially since there's no guarantee a more authentically Silmarillion-y approach would be any more successful.


----------



## Ralif Redhammer

That they can't use stuff in the Silmarillion gives me a squirmy feeling of nervousness about this series that wasn't there before. That being said, the appendices of The Return of the King does have a lot of the basic details, so maybe I'm worrying for no good reason.



trappedslider said:


> “We have the rights solely to The Fellowship of the Ring, The Two Towers, The Return of the King, the appendices, and The Hobbit,” He said. “And that is it. We do not have the rights to The Silmarillion, Unfinished Tales, The History of Middle-earth, or any of those other books.”
> 
> “There’s a version of everything we need for the Second Age in the books we have the rights to,” McKay noted. “As long as we’re painting within those lines and not egregiously contradicting something we don’t have the rights to, there’s a lot of leeway and room to dramatize and tell some of the best stories that [Tolkien] ever came up with.”


----------



## Zaukrie

Ralif Redhammer said:


> That they can't use stuff in the Silmarillion gives me a squirmy feeling of nervousness about this series that wasn't there before. That being said, the appendices of The Return of the King does have a lot of the basic details, so maybe I'm worrying for no good reason.



Why? I mean, it is a fictional story in a made up land. There is A LOT of space to do interesting things. 

I'm 100% certain a huge subset of fans will hate this and be verbal like crazy. There will be another set that takes it as a story that takes place in a made up world and doesn't care how it meshes. I'm hoping the second group is massive, and we get years of good content.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

Ralif Redhammer said:


> That they can't use stuff in the Silmarillion gives me a squirmy feeling of nervousness about this series that wasn't there before. That being said, the appendices of The Return of the King does have a lot of the basic details, so maybe I'm worrying for no good reason.




I am more bothered that they will be doing serious time compression for the 2nd Age. Stuff that happened hundreds or thousands of years apart will now happen within the lifespan of the main human characters. Oh, and I still greatly dislike the "not Hobbits" that will be in it, just so the show can have that connection to the movies.


----------



## Dire Bare

Zaukrie said:


> Why? I mean, it is a fictional story in a made up land. There is A LOT of space to do interesting things.
> 
> I'm 100% certain a huge subset of fans will hate this and be verbal like crazy. There will be another set that takes it as a story that takes place in a made up world and doesn't care how it meshes. I'm hoping the second group is massive, and we get years of good content.



This.

I find it irritating that the complete rights are separated between the original novels and the supporting books like the Silmarillion and massive volumes (_oops, edit -- "The History of Middle-Earth"_). But the reason behind that are both complicated and silly at the same time, IMO.

But regardless, all I want is a good story from Amazon. I don't need it to religiously adhere to the entire canon. Most book-to-movie adaptations change details anyway, this won't be different.


----------



## ART!

Dire Bare said:


> But regardless, all I want is a good story from Amazon. I don't need it to religiously adhere to the entire canon. Most book-to-movie adaptations change details anyway, this won't be different.



Same - and honestly, if it did adhere strictly to canon, then it would contradict itself, just like Tolkien's writings. Example: do dwarven women have beards? Yes, no, and there are no dwarf women - Tolkien said all those things.)


----------



## Parmandur

JEB said:


> Interesting, but I still doubt their response to a failure would be to shell out more cash to get the additional rights. Especially since there's no guarantee a more authentically Silmarillion-y approach would be any more successful.



No, no, I meant their response to a runaway success would be to expand the rights.


----------



## Ralif Redhammer

Why? Simply because the largest and most detailed concentration of lore about the Second Age is off limits to them.

That being said, I'm still rooting for the show to be awesome.



Zaukrie said:


> Why? I mean, it is a fictional story in a made up land. There is A LOT of space to do interesting things.
> 
> I'm 100% certain a huge subset of fans will hate this and be verbal like crazy. There will be another set that takes it as a story that takes place in a made up world and doesn't care how it meshes. I'm hoping the second group is massive, and we get years of good content.




The time compression is fine by me - I can understand why they wouldn't want to have to churn through the human cast in the course of the series. Adding hobbits, likewise I understand why they're doing it, though I'm inclined to think of it less kindly than the former. But I get it, people think of hobbits when they think of Lord of the Rings.



Enevhar Aldarion said:


> I am more bothered that they will be doing serious time compression for the 2nd Age. Stuff that happened hundreds or thousands of years apart will now happen within the lifespan of the main human characters. Oh, and I still greatly dislike the "not Hobbits" that will be in it, just so the show can have that connection to the movies.


----------



## MoonSong

I'm in wait and see mode. Though I need to question why is this a thing again? It's like somebody got the rights to Lion King 1/2 without the rights to the Lion King and is filling in the blanks while compressing years/months of plot into a single afternoon. And is it in continuity with the PJ trilogy or not? Because  if it is intended to be, then the PJ movies just got way darker/creepy...

I need to see when it drops.


----------



## Dire Bare

MoonSong said:


> I'm in wait and see mode. Though I need to question why is this a thing again? It's like somebody got the rights to Lion King 1/2 without the rights to the Lion King and is filling in the blanks while compressing years/months of plot into a single afternoon. And is it in continuity with the PJ trilogy or not? Because  if it is intended to be, then the PJ movies just got way darker/creepy...
> 
> I need to see when it drops.



There will likely be a similar visual style to the Peter Jackson films, but there is no connection between the two productions. It is unlikely the new series will be in continuity with the Jackson films . . . . but it's also likely only super Tolkien nerds will notice any discrepancies. Stephen Colbert will notice!


----------



## Benjamin Olson

JEB said:


> I have to say, though, that if he thought the LOTR and Hobbit films did a hack job on his father's work, I really doubt he'll enjoy a semi-Silmarillion without anything actually from The Silmarillion...



It sort of reminds me of author Michael Ende getting so upset and litigious over the on the whole fairly faithful adaptation of the first half of the Neverending Story book into a now classic children's fantasy movie that when the sequel was finally made it not only had an almost entirely separate set of talent but only followed the second half of the book in the loosest sense possible and is basically a train-wreck.

I'm sure those in control of the Tolkien estate think they can just wash their hands of this thing, but the simple fact is the ponderous _Silmarillion_ is known about by far more people than actually read it and remember it. Most people who don't know the details of Tolkien licensing but know the basics about Tolkien's work will assume this Amazon prequel series is derived from the _Silmarillion_. Heck, as someone who has had the _Silmarillion_ wash over me a couple of times now I'm fairly sure I could have watched the series and still not been sure that whatever matter it covers wasn't somewhere in there (to be clear I think there are lots of great ideas for heroic fantasy _stories_ in the non-novel works of Tolkien and would love to see them adapted, but they are not particularly enjoyable reads to me in their current forms, which were never really intended for public consumption).

The reputation of the IP being protected will only suffer from not playing ball, and we the viewing public will only get a series with compromised lore, replacing worldbuilding elements the most famous worldbuilder in the history of the genre obsessed over for a lifetime with whatever a writers room can slap together on a time crunch on advise of legal counsel. The series might be great in spite of this, but in terms of richness of lore, everybody loses but the lawyers.


----------



## ART!

MoonSong said:


> ...is it in continuity with the PJ trilogy or not?



I remember hearing that Amazon had bought the rights to use the designs of the Jackson et al films, so for example the elven architecture can look like it did in those movies, the Numenorean armor could look like golden-age versions of Gondorian armor, etc.


----------



## wicked cool

new trailer. visually looks great and  and the music sounds great

however watching the cast and listening to their lines i get the feeling this could be awful. it feels like they are on stage reading their lines with no emotion 

i went back and watched the season 1 GOT official trailer which is 11 years old . Clearly the music at that moment isnt as good and theres  real special effects but the voice lines are just better 

now GOT obviously  had a lot of very good actors/some great that were cast . who in this cast is the very good/great prior to this show?


----------



## Mannahnin

Reasonable question.  Let's note that GoT had the advantage of being able to draw on Martin's books for some of the best dialogue, at least until the end of the series.

I do think this trailer looks pretty good.


----------



## Lidgar

Tough to get a great read on acting and scripts from a teaser. Visually looks pretty darn stunning.


----------



## Zaukrie

Great looking trailer. Still excited for this.


----------



## Morrus

Dang that looks good. I can’t wait!


----------



## John R Davis

Looks amazing.


----------



## ART!

I'm not _in love_ with any of the teasers or trailers thus far. They look great, and there's a good sense of wonder and ominousness, but little sense of actual story. I know my wife and daughter are frustrated because nothing yet has given them a sense of what the show is _about_. I've told them a few basic things based on what I know of Tolkien's 2nd Age writings, but I think they need to see that laid out a bit more in a trailer.

Regardless, I'm very excited!


----------



## Zaukrie

ART! said:


> I'm not _in love_ with any of the teasers or trailers thus far. They look great, and there's a good sense of wonder and ominousness, but little sense of actual story. I know my wife and daughter are frustrated because nothing yet has given them a sense of what the show is _about_. I've told them a few basic things based on what I know of Tolkien's 2nd Age writings, but I think they need to see that laid out a bit more in a trailer.
> 
> Regardless, I'm very excited!



I'm the opposite. I hate trailers that tell the story. to each their own!


----------



## niklinna

I find any given 5 seconds of that trailer exhausting, let alone the whole thing.


----------



## Morrus

Zaukrie said:


> I'm the opposite. I hate trailers that tell the story.



Me too.


----------



## ART!

Zaukrie said:


> I'm the opposite. I hate trailers that tell the story. to each their own!



I don't want to be told the story either - I hate trailers that make me feel like I don't need to see the movie now. 

What I was trying to say is that I want a trailer that lays out who some of the major players are _and_ what they're up against. The trailers and teasers this far have shown us snippets of some important characters, and make it clear that Galadriel is a main character, but only that they're up against...evil. 

The dialogue in this new trailer sounds like it could have been lifted from the LOTR movies, with the lines about the evil they face sounding like a rehash of LOTR. I know it won't be that but, again, the people I've watched the trailers with who aren't big Tolkien fans are underwhelmed, to the point that I haven't recommended the teasers or trailers yet to anyone. 

Obviously YMMV. That's cool.


----------



## Morrus

ART! said:


> but only that they're up against...evil.



It's Sauron. The show is about him way back when before he was an eye in the sky and when he was forging the rings of power (thus the title). At least that's the impression I've gotten from the marketing.

But when it comes down to it, an early teaser doesn't need to tell you any more because (a) there will be lots more (tons more, so much you'll be sick of it) marketing as we get closer to the show in September and (b) when it launches _everybody_ will be talking about it. Everybody. This teaser is just a reminder it's coming, nothing more.

Don't worry, you won't be left in the dark wondering whether you should watch this show or not. You won't be able to escape info about it. It's the most expensive show ever made. They'll be on every chat show. There will be ads and teasers and trailers everywhere. Every podcast and website will have breakdowns and rumours and summaries and previews. The _news_ will talk about it!

I imagine we'll get to the point where we'll be avoiding previews and stuff due to spoilers. Luckily right now we're just at the early 'bookmark' stage of the marketing.


----------



## payn

Oh man, maybe we should have the when its ok to spoil or not talk again before September?


----------



## ART!

Morrus said:


> It's Sauron. The show is about him way back when before he was an eye in the sky and when he was forging the rings of power (thus the title). At least that's the impression I've gotten from the marketing.
> 
> But when it comes down to it, an early teaser doesn't need to tell you any more because (a) there will be lots more (tons more, so much you'll be sick of it) marketing as we get closer to the show in September and (b) when it launches _everybody_ will be talking about it. Everybody. This teaser is just a reminder it's coming, nothing more.
> 
> Don't worry, you won't be left in the dark wondering whether you should watch this show or not. You won't be able to escape info about it. It's the most expensive show ever made. They'll be on every chat show. There will be ads and teasers and trailers everywhere. Every podcast and website will have breakdowns and rumours and summaries and previews. The _news_ will talk about it!
> 
> I imagine we'll get to the point where we'll be avoiding previews and stuff due to spoilers. Luckily right now we're just at the early 'bookmark' stage of the marketing.



Good point: by the time this premieres, anyone confused by what it's about and if they want to watch it will have had ample information from which to figure that out.

Anyway, tere's no confusion in my mind about whether _I'll_ watch it!

I guess I'm just anxious for the hub-bub to reach a point where the people I'm most likely to watch it with and talk about it with will be excited to watch it.

Finally watched the new trailer with the family, and without any comment from me they unanimously said it was just as vague as the teasers and not very interesting.


----------



## Sepulchrave II

Zaukrie said:


> I'm the opposite. I hate trailers that tell the story. to each their own!



I'm with you.

There's nothing worse than sitting down with your partner to watch a trailer to a film you're both interested in, and three minutes later turning to them:

"Well, that was a good movie. What shall we do now?"


----------



## Zaukrie

I'm hoping to avoid both spoilers and the toxicity that this will surely bring from some segments.


----------



## ART!

Zaukrie said:


> I'm hoping to avoid both spoilers and the toxicity that this will surely bring from some segments.



The toxicity is already out there, in spades. It's sad and dumb, and aggravating.


----------



## John R Davis

Is that werewolf gonna be Sauron?


----------



## Hriston

John R Davis said:


> Is that werewolf gonna be Sauron?



I don't think fights with Wolf-Sauron are licensed.


----------



## ART!

Hriston said:


> I don't think Fights with Wolf-Sauron are licensed.



My understanding is there's the rights they've purchased to be able to make the show, and then things they've negotiated permission to use on a piecemeal basis.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

John R Davis said:


> Is that werewolf gonna be Sauron?




I have not watched the trailer yet, but there are werewolves in Middle-Earth. You can fight them in The One Ring RPG.

As for the whole concept, I am still disappointed they are pushing the proto-Hobbit thing so hard. I guess they just have to have something small and cute in the show?


----------



## ART!

Enevhar Aldarion said:


> As for the whole concept, I am still disappointed they are pushing the proto-Hobbit thing so hard. I guess they just have to have something small and cute in the show?



There could be lots of reasons to have the Harfoot in there, such as the advantage of having characters with an earthy, simple point-of-view, or that audiences might be disappointed if there aren't "hobbits" in their Middle-earth entertainment. That's just off the top of my head.


----------



## Hriston

ART! said:


> My understanding is there's the rights they've purchased to be able to make the show, and then things they've negotiated permission to use on a piecemeal basis.



Okay. Unrelated, I don't think that werewolf was impressive looking enough to be Sauron.


----------



## John R Davis

He does use that shape 
Maybe not then.


----------



## Horwath

Trailer looks mostly good, but horses and their plastic armor is terrible CGI.

Actors seem that they had vaccination against charisma not Covid


----------



## Akrasia

I like the way the Numenor looks in the trailers I've seen so far. The scenery in general is beautiful (and Middle-earthy). I like that ents were shown in the trailer.

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 don't like the inclusion of the proto-hobbits ("harfoots"). I think "meteorite man" is silly (I suspect that it's an attempt to dramatically introduce the Sauron/Annatar character).

But of course I'll watch the thing...


----------



## Horwath

I also have a dread of Game of thrones seasons 7&8.

GoT become trash when series director run out of released material and just had GRRM sidenotes and general guidelines.

These people don't have rights to Silmarillon, just some notes and comments about expanding LotR.

So, more or less, we are getting most expensive fan fiction project. 

Fingers crossed...


----------



## MoonSong

Horwath said:


> So, more or less, we are getting most expensive fan fiction project.



A lot of adaptations feel like that... fanficky. It is not necessarily a bad thing. There's a lot of good fanfic, a lot of which is actually better than the original, but it isn't inherently good, and many times all we want is a sincere adaptation, to see the book on screen. (Not necessarily beat by beat, I mean there's not pleasing some people, and many times extra detail needs to be removed by the constraints of the media)

This feels as if they were truing to remake the Star Wars prequels, but instead of havin rights to the whole plot, all they had access to was seven lines uttered in the Original trilogy and as a result the whole plot lasts a week instead of fifteen years. And the Clone Wars get reduced to a single scuffle... to be frank, that is kind of the reason I wasn't interested in Lightyear. All that it had was three names, and a moto. No other characters, no planets, not even the little green men. Something very similar is happening here. I was expecting the Silmarilion/StarCommand, TRoP/Lightyear instead went for a totally different thing which is reminiscent enough to remind me of the existing media, but different enough to feel off. This is not an indictment on the people doing it, traditionally the bar for adaptations has been pretty low to what we have grown to expect, and the industry is still adjusting to the expectations. 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.


----------



## Dausuul

Akrasia said:


> 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

Dausuul said:


> 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

Dausuul said:


> 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

trappedslider said:


> 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

trappedslider said:


> 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

MoonSong said:


> 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

Sepulchrave II said:


> 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


----------



## Morrus

So House of the Dragon, Andor, and Rings of Power will all be in at the same time. What a time to be alive!


----------



## Urriak

The last two trailers (especially the last one) look incredible. Very much looking more like the Lord of the Rings films in quality, instead of the Hobbit films over-usage of CGI. I'm pretty confident I will enjoy this.

I will say however, as I was YouTube-searching for footage of the panel, there are an absolute metric-ton of videos up of folks bashing the show as too "woke." Like, the same level of videos being posted for Captain Marvel/Brie Larson bashing.

Truly so silly how there are people willing to devote so much time to bash something that isn't even out yet....


----------



## Marc Radle

Urriak said:


> The last two trailers (especially the last one) look incredible. Very much looking more like the Lord of the Rings films in quality, instead of the Hobbit films over-usage of CGI. I'm pretty confident I will enjoy this.
> 
> I will say however, as I was YouTube-searching for footage of the panel, there are an absolute metric-ton of videos up of folks bashing the show as too "woke." Like, the same level of videos being posted for Captain Marvel/Brie Larson bashing.
> 
> Truly so silly how there are people willing to devote so much time to bash something that isn't even out yet....




I almost hate to ask, but what is the complaint? Simply that there is a female lead?


----------



## Urriak

Marc Radle said:


> I almost hate to ask, but what is the complaint? Simply that there is a female lead?




The big complaint seems to be that there are non-white actors playing elves, dwarves... really anyone. Essentially they are saying Tolkien wrote everyone to be white, so there shouldn't be anyone in the cast as non-white.

Which obviously can't fly in the 21st century for a big-budget product (or really any entertainment project). It's a pretty silly complaint because LOTR isn't real and I don't really think it changes anything if some elves have dark skin (I think the story remains the same), and it's important for everyone to see themselves in film/tv. But the folks making these hate vids are pretty awful honestly.


----------



## Rune

Urriak said:


> The big complaint seems to be that there are non-white actors playing elves, dwarves... really anyone. Essentially they are saying Tolkien wrote everyone to be white, so there shouldn't be anyone in the cast as non-white.
> 
> Which obviously can't fly in the 21st century for a big-budget product (or really any entertainment project). It's a pretty silly complaint because LOTR isn't real and I don't really think it changes anything if some elves have dark skin (I think the story remains the same), and it's important for everyone to see themselves in film/tv. But the folks making these hate vids are pretty awful honestly.



Maybe they should check out The Tolkien Professor’s Silmarillion Film (“Silm Film”) Project – the collaborative development of a hypothetical many-season Silmarillion TV adaptation that has been ongoing for years. They’ve “cast” plenty of non-white actors for such roles. 

I wonder how these self-appointed purity gatekeepers’ arguments would hold up against an _actual_ Tolkien scholar and educator.


----------



## John R Davis

Latest trailer looks suitably epic.


----------



## Henadic Theologian

Urriak said:


> The big complaint seems to be that there are non-white actors playing elves, dwarves... really anyone. Essentially they are saying Tolkien wrote everyone to be white, so there shouldn't be anyone in the cast as non-white.
> 
> Which obviously can't fly in the 21st century for a big-budget product (or really any entertainment project). It's a pretty silly complaint because LOTR isn't real and I don't really think it changes anything if some elves have dark skin (I think the story remains the same), and it's important for everyone to see themselves in film/tv. But the folks making these hate vids are pretty awful honestly.




 All that has been escipsed by the fact that Sauron looks like rapper Emmenim LMFAO. 

 I don't buy the idea this is about race or a female action hero,  because Honor Among Thieves has ALL those things in abundance,  and yet almost completely positive comments on YouTube to the trailer and it's getting plenty of likes, far more then dislikes,  while Rings of Power is getting Ratio'd into the dirt. 

 The truth is obvious,  D&D: HAT utterly respects the source material,  it looks and feel like Faerun, and the characters fit in. 

 The Rings of Power doesn't respect the Middle Earth lore apparently. 

  It's that simple. Plus when HAT is funny, its on purpose and folks laugh with cast & crew, when people Rings of Power is funny,  it's not on purpose, folks are laughing AT the show, not with it.


----------



## Zaukrie

Henadic Theologian said:


> All that has been escipsed by the fact that Sauron looks like rapper Emmenim LMFAO.
> 
> I don't buy the idea this is about race or a female action hero,  because Honor Among Thieves has ALL those things in abundance,  and yet almost completely positive comments on YouTube to the trailer and it's getting plenty of likes, far more then dislikes,  while Rings of Power is getting Ratio'd into the dirt.
> 
> The truth is obvious,  D&D: HAT utterly respects the source material,  it looks and feel like Faerun, and the characters fit in.
> 
> The Rings of Power doesn't respect the Middle Earth lore apparently.
> 
> It's that simple. Plus when HAT is funny, its on purpose and folks laugh with cast & crew, when people Rings of Power is funny,  it's not on purpose, folks are laughing AT the show, not with it.



They are laughing at a show that hasn't come out? Of course it's about racism. All over the internet, people whining about non white actors. I'm not sure what else that could be, frankly, than racism.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Henadic Theologian said:


> All that has been escipsed by the fact that Sauron looks like rapper Emmenim LMFAO.
> 
> I don't buy the idea this is about race or a female action hero,  because Honor Among Thieves has ALL those things in abundance,  and yet almost completely positive comments on YouTube to the trailer and it's getting plenty of likes, far more then dislikes,  while Rings of Power is getting Ratio'd into the dirt.
> 
> The truth is obvious,  D&D: HAT utterly respects the source material,  it looks and feel like Faerun, and the characters fit in.
> 
> The Rings of Power doesn't respect the Middle Earth lore apparently.
> 
> It's that simple. Plus when HAT is funny, its on purpose and folks laugh with cast & crew, when people Rings of Power is funny,  it's not on purpose, folks are laughing AT the show, not with it.



Whining that the elves are black is racism.


----------



## Sepulchrave II

Henadic Theologian said:


> All that has been escipsed by the fact that Sauron looks like rapper Emmenim LMFAO.
> 
> I don't buy the idea this is about race or a female action hero,  because Honor Among Thieves has ALL those things in abundance,  and yet almost completely positive comments on YouTube to the trailer and it's getting plenty of likes, far more then dislikes,  while Rings of Power is getting Ratio'd into the dirt.
> 
> The truth is obvious,  D&D: HAT utterly respects the source material,  it looks and feel like Faerun, and the characters fit in.
> 
> The Rings of Power doesn't respect the Middle Earth lore apparently.



I could list literally dozens of instances where the Jackson movies violate the tone, theme and plot of LotR, yet the people who are panning the - as yet unseen - upcoming series sing his praises, and are fuming because the casting choices and characterization in the Amazon show are so "egregiously lore breaking." There is a case of extremely selective criticism at work, and it is based on race and gender bias, because if:

1) There were no black elves,
2) There were no black hobbits and;
3) Galadriel was wearing a dress all of the time

I guarantee their messaging would be very different.

I also suspect that Nerdrotic, Geeks & Gamers, MauLer, Critical Drinker and their ilk are really just looking for clicks and are cynically playing that card.


----------



## Henadic Theologian

Sepulchrave II said:


> I could list literally dozens of instances where the Jackson movies violate the tone, theme and plot of LotR, yet the people who are panning the - as yet unseen - upcoming series sing his praises, and are fuming because the casting choices and characterization in the Amazon show are so "egregiously lore breaking." There is a case of extremely selective criticism at work, and it is based on race and gender bias, because if:
> 
> 1) There were no black elves,
> 2) There were no black hobbits and;
> 3) Galadriel was wearing a dress all of the time
> 
> I guarantee their messaging would be very different.
> 
> I also suspect that Nerdrotic, Geeks & Gamers, MauLer, Critical Drinker and their ilk are really just looking for clicks and are cynically playing that card.




 I've read the Lord of the Rings and The Hobbit,  and I've seen the movies, but I'm not a huge Tolkien expert,  I prefer the Forgotten Realms and other fantasy settings to Middle Earth. 

 I will say that the Forgotten Realms always had diversity baked in both in terms of humans, but also Dwarves and Elves some other races from the beginning, more then Middle Earth or any other D&D setting except maybe Planescape, so it really never had to worry about how to fit PoC in, they were always there. Same with female warriors and wizards and clerics, Ed had those in the setting from the beginning.

 But Tolkien and Ed were from  very dfferent parts of the world and different generations.


----------



## Hriston

Middle-earth has always had PoC just like it does now. If some people want to imagine a legendary time when there were no PoC, that's on them.


----------



## Zardnaar

Wonder how it will compare with the competition. There's 3 fantasy shows in atm. Subjective opinion best to worst. 

Witcher
Shadow and Bone
Wheel of Time
 I liked all if the above to some extent although WoT had issues.


----------



## Mercurius

I'm going to reserve judgement until I actually see it, but my general sense is that it looks less like an attempt to adapt Tolkien's Middle-earth to screen and more like fan-fiction. Meaning, sort of akin to the recent Star Wars movies. I do hope that they don't mangle certain aspects of Tolkien's creation like SW did, but on the other hand, unlike the SW movies, Tolkien's creation exists primarily (and only, really) in book form. Meaning, SW is a film franchise, so there's a sense that any film made is representative of the entire universe. With the Tolkien films and TV series, we can at least step back and say, "This is someone else's version of Tolkien's world, and thus more akin to fan fiction."

Or to put it another way, a bad SW film actually diminishes the franchise, whereas a bad Tolkien film or series can't touch the books. My only concern is that the vast majority of people know Tolkien only through the films, which is sort of like watching _Troy _but never reading The Iliad.


----------



## Morrus

“Fan fiction” is used as a pejorative so often now that it’s literally lost any meaning. Everything’s fan fiction.


----------



## ART!

Morrus said:


> “Fan fiction” is used as a pejorative so often now that it’s literally lost any meaning. Everything’s fan fiction.



Yeah, we live in a post-"fanfiction" era, where the traits of fanfiction have ingrained themselves into mainstream fiction. At this point, multiple generations of writers have grown up with fanfiction, so those traits are part of how mainstream writers think and write. It would be hard or even impossible to weed out these influences of fanfiction.


----------



## billd91

Mercurius said:


> I'm going to reserve judgement until I actually see it, but my general sense is that it looks less like an attempt to adapt Tolkien's Middle-earth to screen and more like fan-fiction.



That's some pretty elitist BS, there. It's an adapted screenplay (or, I guess since it's for a TV series, teleplay). It's like any other adapted teleplay.


----------



## Mercurius

billd91 said:


> That's some pretty elitist BS, there. It's an adapted screenplay (or, I guess since it's for a TV series, teleplay). It's like any other adapted teleplay.



LOL, elitist?

How is it an "adapted screenplay?" From what, the appendices? The Silmarillion? Have you read those? They aren't novels - more vignettes, notes, and summaries, so I'm not sure "adapted screenplay" is accurate.


----------



## Mercurius

Morrus said:


> “Fan fiction” is used as a pejorative so often now that it’s literally lost any meaning. Everything’s fan fiction.



You can see this an attack on the latest thing that everyone loves, or instead try to hear my actual point. 

Such terms have variable meanings. I'm using it to differentiate it from an attempt to adapt a work in a way that stays as true as possible to the source material, vs. a re-envisioning. It is a spectrum. So far this seems to veer more towards the latter than Peter Jackson's trilogy did.

But again, I'm going to reserve judgment until I actually see it.


----------



## billd91

Mercurius said:


> LOL, elitist?



Yeah, elitist. Would you be slinging that fanfic criticism at Blade Runner? At Dune? Lawrence of Arabia? Schindler's List?



Mercurius said:


> How is it an "adapted screenplay?" From what, the appendices? The Silmarillion? Have you read those?



Adapted from the materials they have the rights to adapt - the Hobbit, LotR and its appendices. 
And yes, I've read those, plus the Silmarillion, Unfinished Tales, Lost Tales, etc. Not that it matters that I've done so to take issue with criticizing the adaptation of any of them for this project as "fanfic".


----------



## Rune

Mercurius said:


> You can see this an attack on the latest thing that everyone loves, or instead try to hear my actual point.
> 
> Such terms have variable meanings. I'm using it to differentiate it from an attempt to adapt a work in a way that stays as true as possible to the source material, vs. a re-envisioning. It is a spectrum. So far this seems to veer more towards the latter than Peter Jackson's trilogy did.
> 
> But again, I'm going to reserve judgment until I actually see it.



I suspect Tolkien would view them both as disappointingly divergent, but at least the content of this series will presumably have to be approved by the Tolkien Estate, whereas Jackson’s films didn’t. 

We got lucky that the _Lord of the Rings_ movies were done with love and mostly explored the same themes as the books, even if they condensed the timeline (by decades!), re-envisioned characters, and often operated in a very different tone. _The Hobbit_…not so much.


----------



## Ryujin

Rune said:


> I suspect Tolkien would view them both as disappointingly divergent, but at least the content of this series will presumably have to be approved by the Tolkien Estate, whereas Jackson’s films didn’t.
> 
> We got lucky that the _Lord of the Rings_ movies were done with love and mostly explored the same themes as the books, even if they condensed the timeline (by decades!), re-envisioned characters, and often operated in a very different tone. _The Hobbit_…not so much.



Given the way that Tolkien meticulously built his world and the characters therein, I strongly suspect that he would view any divergence from the source to be on the verge of heresy.


----------



## Mercurius

billd91 said:


> Yeah, elitist. Would you be slinging that fanfic criticism at Blade Runner? At Dune? Lawrence of Arabia? Schindler's List?



Of those, I've only read Dune, so don't have an opinion on the others. But as was expressed above, certainly all film adaptations can be seen as "fan fiction," except for maybe rare situations like Game of Thrones in which the author had a significant voice in the adaptation.

Elitist is an easy way to make me sound like the latest bad guy who is yucking our yum. I'm not doing that, nor am I saying that fan fiction is bad. It just seems like there's more "filling the gaps" in this, and that it diverges from Tolkien more than Peter Jackson's films did. But again, I'll reserve judgment until I see it. 


billd91 said:


> Adapted from the materials they have the rights to adapt - the Hobbit, LotR and its appendices.
> And yes, I've read those, plus the Silmarillion, Unfinished Tales, Lost Tales, etc. Not that it matters that I've done so to take issue with criticizing the adaptation of any of them for this project as "fanfic".



Yeah, I get it.

My point wasn't to check your Tolkien cred, but to point out that the works this is drawn from aren't singular like the LotR, so "adapted screenplay" seems inaccurate, or at least an understatement. I see it more as "inspired by" and/or "drawn from the works of."


----------



## Mercurius

Rune said:


> I suspect Tolkien would view them both as disappointingly divergent, but at least the content of this series will presumably have to be approved by the Tolkien Estate, whereas Jackson’s films didn’t.
> 
> We got lucky that the _Lord of the Rings_ movies were done with love and mostly explored the same themes as the books, even if they condensed the timeline (by decades!), re-envisioned characters, and often operated in a very different tone. _The Hobbit_…not so much.



I think that's why even many Tolkien diehards liked the LotR films: Jackson's love of Tolkien's stories was evident, and there was no attempt to "correct" or "update" them in any way. I think basing it visually off of John Howe and Alan Lee's artwork was key, as well. The most common complaints I've seen from Tolkienistas are more related to omissions: e.g. the Barrow-downs, Tom Bombadil, Radagast, etc. But it also makes sense why Jackson didn't include them. 

If you're going to adapt a beloved and classic book series to the screen, I do think it is important to try to stay true to the actual themes and tone of the books as much as possible. Otherwise it runs the risk of getting into subversion. There's a time and place for that, but Tolkien? I think the best way to do that would be to do what Michael Moorcock did, when he subverted both Howard and Tolkien with his Elric character. Meaning, an entirely different story and world.

As far as specific "issues," I don't think it is "anti-Tolkien" to have non-white elves or hobbits. Casting is more diverse now than it was even 25 years ago, and films are explicitly made for a wider range of viewers than just "White people center, everyone else periphery." Obviously that's a good thing. And even though Tolkien created Middle-earth as a kind of mythological prehistoric Europe, there's no reason that elves and hobbits couldn't vary in skin color (not to mention, elves were originally from the east).

The one thing that seems to diverge from the spirit of Tolkien in a way that may end up feeling jarring, is the depiction of Galadriel as a young warrior. Without looking it up, I can't remember if she ever took up arms in the Silmarillion. Maybe? And no, this has nothing to do with Galadriel "belonging in a dress." It has more to do with who Galadriel was - including what her power was, which wasn't about physical combat, and her age and wisdom (she was already several thousand years old by the time of these stories). It seems somewhat diminishing of the character (On the other hand, while I really like Kate Blanchett, I found her depiction a bit stilted, like she was trying too hard to be "elfy" and just came across as a bit strange). 

I suppose making Galadriel younger and less ethereal makes her more relatable, as what seems to be her role as primary protagonist. So again, from a film perspective, it makes sense, even if I think it might have been wiser to just create a new character.


----------



## ART!

On a technical note, the Academy of Motion Picture Arts & Sciences defines an adapted screenplay as a one "adapted from previously established material". A lot of the time adapted screenplays have a novel as their source material, but the established material could be anything from journalism covering a legal case to an ancient epic poem.


----------



## trappedslider

Personally, I'm going to enjoy the freakout folks have when they react to the fact that nothing from the Silmarillion is going to be used.


----------



## ART!

trappedslider said:


> Personally, I'm going to enjoy the freakout folks have when they react to the fact that nothing from the Silmarillion is going to be used.



We have every reason to believe there will be bits and pieces from The Silmarrilion that Amazon has negotiated the specific rights to use for this series.


----------



## Urriak

Mercurius said:


> I'm going to reserve judgement until I actually see it, but my general sense is that it looks less like an attempt to adapt Tolkien's Middle-earth to screen and more like fan-fiction. Meaning, sort of akin to the recent Star Wars movies. I do hope that they don't mangle certain aspects of Tolkien's creation like SW did, but on the other hand, unlike the SW movies, Tolkien's creation exists primarily (and only, really) in book form. Meaning, SW is a film franchise, so there's a sense that any film made is representative of the entire universe. With the Tolkien films and TV series, we can at least step back and say, "This is someone else's version of Tolkien's world, and thus more akin to fan fiction."
> 
> Or to put it another way, a bad SW film actually diminishes the franchise, whereas a bad Tolkien film or series can't touch the books. My only concern is that the vast majority of people know Tolkien only through the films, which is sort of like watching _Troy _but never reading The Iliad.




Others have pointed out why the criticisms of "fan fiction" is bad, but if it IS fan fiction, it's fan fiction that's costing a billion dollars... I think that makes it a little bit more notable than something someone made in their backyard.

On a more serious note, it's not fan fiction. Pretty sure the definition of ff is it can't be made for profit, and this show clearly is designed to get lots of signups for Prime (I dunno if it'll actually make it's money back, but still).

It's the same reason you can't call House of the Dragon fan fiction, when it is adapting material that also hasn't been entirely written out (with dialogue).


----------



## Urriak

Henadic Theologian said:


> All that has been escipsed by the fact that Sauron looks like rapper Emmenim LMFAO.
> 
> I don't buy the idea this is about race or a female action hero,  because Honor Among Thieves has ALL those things in abundance,  and yet almost completely positive comments on YouTube to the trailer and it's getting plenty of likes, far more then dislikes,  while Rings of Power is getting Ratio'd into the dirt.
> 
> The truth is obvious,  D&D: HAT utterly respects the source material,  it looks and feel like Faerun, and the characters fit in.
> 
> The Rings of Power doesn't respect the Middle Earth lore apparently.
> 
> It's that simple. Plus when HAT is funny, its on purpose and folks laugh with cast & crew, when people Rings of Power is funny,  it's not on purpose, folks are laughing AT the show, not with it.




On the Sauron thing, I think it's already been said that Sauron is not actually the Eminem-lookin guy, that's someone else, probably a cultist. Some mistranslation or something, but the last character shown in the trailer is played by Bridie Sisson.


I want to point out that the stakes of Rings of Power vs. Honor Among Thieves are obviously completely different. And whenever someone says "The Rings of Power doesn't respect the lore," they usually cite the race stuff.

I listened to the Rings of Power SDCC panel, and the showrunners seem to know their lore pretty well, one of them knows how to speak Elvish for goodness sake. The critiques are using "lore" as a crutch when they are just upset about the race stuff.


----------



## Henadic Theologian

Urriak said:


> On the Sauron thing, I think it's already been said that Sauron is not actually the Eminem-lookin guy, that's someone else, probably a cultist. Some mistranslation or something, but the last character shown in the trailer is played by Bridie Sisson.
> 
> 
> I want to point out that the stakes of Rings of Power vs. Honor Among Thieves are obviously completely different. And whenever someone says "The Rings of Power doesn't respect the lore," they usually cite the race stuff.
> 
> I listened to the Rings of Power SDCC panel, and the showrunners seem to know their lore pretty well, one of them knows how to speak Elvish for goodness sake. The critiques are using "lore" as a crutch when they are just upset about the race stuff.




 I personally lack the expertise. Still looking at all three of them,  only the FR one interests me so far.


----------



## trappedslider

ART! said:


> We have every reason to believe there will be bits and pieces from The Silmarrilion that Amazon has negotiated the specific rights to use for this series.



As i pointed out up thread 

““We have the rights solely to _The Fellowship of the Ring, The Two Towers, The Return of the King_, the appendices, and _The Hobbit_. And that is it. We do not have the rights to _The Silmarillion, Unfinished Tales_, _The History of Middle-Earth_, or any of those other books…We worked in conjunction with world-renowned Tolkien scholars and the Tolkien estate to make sure that the ways we connected the dots were Tolkien-ian and gelled with the experts’ and the estate’s understanding of the material.”

If it's not in those then it's not in the show.


----------



## Zardnaar

Hot take. Never manged to even finish the first book as I found it's boring. 

 I liked the Jackson movies well enough but wouldn't exactly say they're the greatest movies ever. 

 If the shows fun for the casuals it will be right. If it's crap we know what's gonna get the blame.


----------



## Galandris

Dausuul said:


> 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.




You make a good point, but I think c) would make an extremely compelling story. It would be a very good way to explain the attitude of many elves toward the shorter-living races and certainly provide an inspiration on how to roleplay the attachement and relationship a creature living for thousands of year can form with century-long humans. "Why bother with them, they won't be in the next season, and in the next episode I'll be dealing with their son at best..." It would probably not sell a lot, though, with the human cast doing only cameos and introducing themselves as "X, grandson of Y that was your friend in, remember, last episode!"



Dausuul said:


> (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.)




This is true. "DM: You arrive at the ruins of XYZ, a giant citadel destroyed 12,000 years ago..." "Player 1 : That's Babylon, right?" "Player 2: no, Babylon was only 6,000ish, that's Gobekli Tepe material..." "DM: err, no actually it is still extremely fine, thanks to, mmm, well... extremely sturdy giant architecture. (frantically removes all reference to wooden doors from the notes and writing adamantium instead"

Unless the elves are extremely conservative and unchanging to the point of being inhuman as well.


----------



## Henadic Theologian

trappedslider said:


> As i pointed out up thread
> 
> ““We have the rights solely to _The Fellowship of the Ring, The Two Towers, The Return of the King_, the appendices, and _The Hobbit_. And that is it. We do not have the rights to _The Silmarillion, Unfinished Tales_, _The History of Middle-Earth_, or any of those other books…We worked in conjunction with world-renowned Tolkien scholars and the Tolkien estate to make sure that the ways we connected the dots were Tolkien-ian and gelled with the experts’ and the estate’s understanding of the material.”
> 
> If it's not in those then it's not in the show.




 Why would they just make a deal for the rest?


----------



## trappedslider

Henadic Theologian said:


> Why would they just make a deal for the rest?



Because the Tolkien estate isn't dealing?


----------



## Mercurius

Urriak said:


> Others have pointed out why the criticisms of "fan fiction" is bad, but if it IS fan fiction, it's fan fiction that's costing a billion dollars... I think that makes it a little bit more notable than something someone made in their backyard.
> 
> On a more serious note, it's not fan fiction. Pretty sure the definition of ff is it can't be made for profit, and this show clearly is designed to get lots of signups for Prime (I dunno if it'll actually make it's money back, but still).
> 
> It's the same reason you can't call House of the Dragon fan fiction, when it is adapting material that also hasn't been entirely written out (with dialogue).



But those are two very different things. House of the Dragon has the creator of the world and stories alive for consultation - and really, more than that (not sure if he's writing any of it, like he did GoT).

But sure, we can quibble technical definitions of the term "fan fiction." But whether or not I'm using the term correctly, my point was that Rings of Power feels _to me _a lot further away from Tolkien than Jackson's LotR. But only time will tell, and I'm sure people will have different views.


----------



## ART!

trappedslider said:


> As i pointed out up thread
> 
> ““We have the rights solely to _The Fellowship of the Ring, The Two Towers, The Return of the King_, the appendices, and _The Hobbit_. And that is it. We do not have the rights to _The Silmarillion, Unfinished Tales_, _The History of Middle-Earth_, or any of those other books…We worked in conjunction with world-renowned Tolkien scholars and the Tolkien estate to make sure that the ways we connected the dots were Tolkien-ian and gelled with the experts’ and the estate’s understanding of the material.”
> 
> If it's not in those then it's not in the show.



There's rights, which they have purchased, and then there's permissions, which they can (and - as I understand - have) negotiate.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

ART! said:


> There's rights, which they have purchased, and then there's permissions, which they can (and - as I understand - have) negotiate.




Yep, any rights to The Hobbit or LotR books are long gone and owned by Saul Zaentz/Middle-Earth Enterprises. The Tolkien Estate has zero say in what is done with them. It is all the rest of Tolkien's work that they will not sell, but as you say, will negotiate temporary use.


----------



## Mallus

I’m amused by all the people who seem to have forgotten that prior to the release of Jackson’s trilogy, he was best known for zombie gore comedies and a movie that ends with Kate Winslet helping her girlfriend bash her mom’s brains in with a rock. Not exactly the guy you’d trust with the Silver Flame of Anor, and yet...

My biggest problem with the trailer is it looks too much like Wheel of Time. Which of course it does. Which isn’t an aesthetic failure, rather a timing one (I really can’t fathom why Amazon decided to debut the Tolkien clone _first_).

On the other hand, the Black elf is causing the right people to suffer, which I admit I really enjoy!


----------



## trappedslider

ART! said:


> There's rights, which they have purchased, and then there's permissions, which they can (and - as I understand - have) negotiate.



don't mean to be condescending but citation please all I'm finding is the quote from Varerity's interview. This seems to be the most in-depth info I can find Lord of The Rings and the Complicated World of Tolkien's Posthumous Work

full quote







> _So what did Amazon buy? “We have the rights solely to The Fellowship of the Ring, The Two Towers, The Return of the King, the appendices, and The Hobbit,” Payne says. “And that is it. We do not have the rights to The Silmarillion, Unfinished Tales, The History of Middle-earth, or any of those other books.” That takes a huge chunk of lore off the table and has left Tolkien fans wondering how this duo plans to tell a Second Age story without access to those materials. “There’s a version of everything we need for the Second Age in the books we have the rights to,” McKay says. “As long as we’re painting within those lines and not egregiously contradicting something we don’t have the rights to, there’s a lot of leeway and room to dramatize and tell some of the best stories that [Tolkien] ever came up with.”
> 
> “We took all these little clues and thought of them as stars in the sky that we then connected to write the novel that Tolkien never wrote about the Second Age,” Payne says. The duo cites songs like “The Fall of Gil-galad” or “The Song of Eärendil” or Fellowship chapters like “The Council of Elrond” and “The Shadow of the Past” or the “Concerning Hobbits” section of the prologue as sources for significant lore dumps. Beyond the premiere, there aren’t, however, any significant time jumps or, thus far, episode-long journeys to the past. The rights to the First Age material from The Silmarillion are still owned by the Tolkien estate.
> 
> “We worked in conjunction with world-renowned Tolkien scholars and the Tolkien estate to make sure that the ways we connected the dots were Tolkienian and gelled with the experts’ and the estate’s understanding of the material,” Payne says._


----------



## ART!

trappedslider said:


> don't mean to be condescending but citation please all I'm finding is the quote from Varerity's interview. This seems to be the most in-depth info I can find Lord of The Rings and the Complicated World of Tolkien's Posthumous Work
> 
> full quote



I heard this on one of Corey Olsen's (aka "the Tolkien Professor") podcasts. He who was one of a select few social media Tolkien fandom people who Amazon flew to London to meet the showrunners. So, I don't have a text citation for you. 

My understanding is that if, for instance, they wanted to reference (or maybe even briefly include in a scene or more?) a character who is not part of the rights they purchased, they could theoretically work with the estate to gain  specific, limited use of that character.


----------



## HaroldTheHobbit

My only worry are the very strong teenage romance syndrome vibes from what we've seen. Or maybe the actors and play styles just looks that way because I'm old.

But if they can avoid that I will probably enjoy the show for what it hopefully will be - fun action and drama with a Tolkienesque framing, rather than an exercise in academically correct Tolkien interpretation.


----------



## Urriak

Mercurius said:


> But those are two very different things. House of the Dragon has the creator of the world and stories alive for consultation - and really, more than that (not sure if he's writing any of it, like he did GoT).
> 
> But sure, we can quibble technical definitions of the term "fan fiction." But whether or not I'm using the term correctly, my point was that Rings of Power feels _to me _a lot further away from Tolkien than Jackson's LotR. But only time will tell, and I'm sure people will have different views.




I'll use a different example then... The Two Towers, specifically the Battle for Helm's Deep. In the movie, the battle is about 40 minutes long, a significant chunk of the movie. In the book, I think the battle is 4 pages long?

Christopher Tolkien said the movie "Eviscerated the book by making it an action movie for young people 15 to 25." He's probably mostly right considering that the whole point of the books is describing how horrible war is, and the movies definitely _glorify _war.

Anyway, if the Jackson movies aren't fan-fiction, then I don't see why Rings of Power is either.


----------



## Ryujin

Urriak said:


> I'll use a different example then... The Two Towers, specifically the Battle for Helm's Deep. In the movie, the battle is about 40 minutes long, a significant chunk of the movie. In the book, I think the battle is 4 pages long?
> 
> Christopher Tolkien said the movie "Eviscerated the book by making it an action movie for young people 15 to 25." He's probably mostly right considering that the whole point of the books is describing how horrible war is, and the movies definitely _glorify _war.
> 
> Anyway, if the Jackson movies aren't fan-fiction, then I don't see why Rings of Power is either.



Do you know if he said anything about "The Taming of the Shire" being left out? To me that's more egregious than playing on the action, in a book that's largely about the battle between good and evil. Still enjoyed the movies, but I missed that epilogue.


----------



## Mercurius

Urriak said:


> I'll use a different example then... The Two Towers, specifically the Battle for Helm's Deep. In the movie, the battle is about 40 minutes long, a significant chunk of the movie. In the book, I think the battle is 4 pages long?
> 
> Christopher Tolkien said the movie "Eviscerated the book by making it an action movie for young people 15 to 25." He's probably mostly right considering that the whole point of the books is describing how horrible war is, and the movies definitely _glorify _war.
> 
> Anyway, if the Jackson movies aren't fan-fiction, then I don't see why Rings of Power is either.



It is a spectrum, not either/or. I _suspect _Rings of Power is further along towards fan fiction than the Jackson films, but obviously don't know yet. But sure, there were definitely "fan-fictiony" elements to the Jackson films, and certainly as CT said, it was "Hollywoodized." But the overall tone and themes were pretty close--or as close as could be reasonably expected--considering. 

I'm hoping CT never saw the Hobbit films! If he thought the LotR films "eviscerated" the book, I don't know what sort of gruesome torture he would have imagined for the Hobbit films that surpasses disembowelment.


----------



## Mercurius

Ryujin said:


> Do you know if he said anything about "The Taming of the Shire" being left out? To me that's more egregious than playing on the action, in a book that's largely about the battle between good and evil. Still enjoyed the movies, but I missed that epilogue.



Not to mention the Barrow-downs, Tom Bombadil, and Radagast. I think all of these--including Taming of the Shire--made sense from a film-making point of view (EDIT for clarification: it makes sense why Jackson _did not _include them). Certainly they are tangential, even if Taming of the Shire elaborated on his themes around evil and the fact that even the Shire wasn't safe from it. But that was at least implied by Frodo's visions of the Shire burning.

Tom Bombadil is interesting, because from a purely storytelling perspective--especially Hollywood-style and convention plotting--it is a completely unnecessary tangent. But there's also an argument that Bombadil is crucial to the identity of Middle-earth, and as about as "Tolkienish" as anything in the story.


----------



## Ryujin

Mercurius said:


> Not to mention the Barrow-downs, Tom Bombadil, and Radagast. I think all of these--including Taming of the Shire--made sense from a film-making point of view. Certainly they are tangential, even if Taming of the Shire elaborated on his themes around evil and the fact that even the Shire wasn't safe from it. But that was at least implied by Frodo's visions of the Shire burning.
> 
> Tom Bombadil is interesting, because from a purely storytelling perspective--especially Hollywood-style and convention plotting--it is a completely unnecessary tangent. But there's also an argument that Bombadil is crucial to the identity of Middle-earth, and as about as "Tolkienish" as anything in the story.



Given the stories were written for his children and that the final chapter is about the growth to maturity, I'd say it being missing is a heavier hit to the story than either The Barrow Downs or Bombadil. Certainly there is a lessong to be learnt about greed, in the Barrow Downs, a lesson that my players in my ICE campaign learnt the hard way.


----------



## Urriak

Ryujin said:


> Do you know if he said anything about "The Taming of the Shire" being left out? To me that's more egregious than playing on the action, in a book that's largely about the battle between good and evil. Still enjoyed the movies, but I missed that epilogue.




Not that I've seen, that CT quote isn't even specifically about Helm's Deep but more generally about the Jackson trilogy's action-film style.



Mercurius said:


> It is a spectrum, not either/or. I _suspect _Rings of Power is further along towards fan fiction than the Jackson films, but obviously don't know yet. But sure, there were definitely "fan-fictiony" elements to the Jackson films, and certainly as CT said, it was "Hollywoodized." But the overall tone and themes were pretty close--or as close as could be reasonably expected--considering.
> 
> I'm hoping CT never saw the Hobbit films! If he thought the LotR films "eviscerated" the book, I don't know what sort of gruesome torture he would have imagined for the Hobbit films that surpasses disembowelment.




I really do think it is an either/or. The definition of fan fiction is "is fictional writing written in an amateur capacity by fans, unauthorized by, but based on an existing work of fiction." By that metric, Rings of Power isn't fan-fiction; it's not written or created by amateurs, and it very much is authorized by the existing work of fiction (they have the license rights).

Anyway, the fan-fiction criticism seems to mostly be some justification for "I don't like it." Which is fine, but just say that. I doubt this show is going to please as many people as the Jackson trilogy, it's kind of iconic (and even Jackson couldn't replicate that with the Hobbit).


----------



## Mercurius

Ryujin said:


> Given the stories were written for his children and that the final chapter is about the growth to maturity, I'd say it being missing is a heavier hit to the story than either The Barrow Downs or Bombadil. Certainly there is a lessong to be learnt about greed, in the Barrow Downs, a lesson that my players in my ICE campaign learnt the hard way.



Not to nit-pick, but the LotR wasn't written for his children. The Hobbit was, and then word got around Oxford and people (the other Inklings) encouraged him to publish.

LotR was written by request from his publisher, originally Unwin, after the success of the Hobbit, and at first only because he wanted them to publish the Silmarillion, so it was a package deal ("we'll publish the Silmarillion, if you write a sequel to the Hobbit"). LotR took on a life of its own, and once Unwin saw the Silmarillion they balked.

That said, I do believe that Christopher Tolkien was his first reader of the LotR, and an important source of feedback.


----------



## Mercurius

Urriak said:


> Not that I've seen, that CT quote isn't even specifically about Helm's Deep but more generally about the Jackson trilogy's action-film style.
> 
> 
> 
> I really do think it is an either/or. The definition of fan fiction is "is fictional writing written in an amateur capacity by fans, unauthorized by, but based on an existing work of fiction." By that metric, Rings of Power isn't fan-fiction; it's not written or created by amateurs, and it very much is authorized by the existing work of fiction (they have the license rights).
> 
> Anyway, the fan-fiction criticism seems to mostly be some justification for "I don't like it." Which is fine, but just say that. I doubt this show is going to please as many people as the Jackson trilogy, it's kind of iconic (and even Jackson couldn't replicate that with the Hobbit).



It depends upon how you use the term. I'm using it as a spectrum, because that's how I see it. But I tend to dislike "either/orism" and find that most things exist on spectrums of one kind or another. But if you'd prefer, ignore the term "fan faction" and think more in terms of the degree to which it adheres to the spirit and themes of Tolkien as he intended them.

p.s. Please don't make assumptions as to why I see it as more fan-fictiony than LotR! That's just my impression. And more importantly, none of us know whether we're going to like it or not until we actually see it! All we have to go on is a few teasers/trailers.


----------



## trappedslider

ART! said:


> I heard this on one of Corey Olsen's (aka "the Tolkien Professor") podcasts. He who was one of a select few social media Tolkien fandom people who Amazon flew to London to meet the showrunners. So, I don't have a text citation for you.
> 
> My understanding is that if, for instance, they wanted to reference (or maybe even briefly include in a scene or more?) a character who is not part of the rights they purchased, they could theoretically work with the estate to gain  specific, limited use of that character.



Then it may just be a single line like Gandalf's mentioning of other wizards without naming them.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Mercurius said:


> Not to mention the Barrow-downs, Tom Bombadil, and Radagast. I think all of these--including Taming of the Shire--made sense from a film-making point of view. Certainly they are tangential, even if Taming of the Shire elaborated on his themes around evil and the fact that even the Shire wasn't safe from it. But that was at least implied by Frodo's visions of the Shire burning.
> 
> Tom Bombadil is interesting, because from a purely storytelling perspective--especially Hollywood-style and convention plotting--it is a completely unnecessary tangent. But there's also an argument that Bombadil is crucial to the identity of Middle-earth, and as about as "Tolkienish" as anything in the story.



Yeah Bombadil and the Barrow-Downs are the one element I’d have insisted on keeping. With the Shire epilogue a close second. 

It foreshadows the darkness ahead, and also the way that hope and light can see you through that darkness, it establishes the hobbits as understanding some of the danger they’re in, and it shows the world in a way that changes the shape and hue of the entire rest of the story.


----------



## Mercurius

doctorbadwolf said:


> Yeah Bombadil and the Barrow-Downs are the one element I’d have insisted on keeping. With the Shire epilogue a close second.
> 
> It foreshadows the darkness ahead, and also the way that hope and light can see you through that darkness, it establishes the hobbits as understanding some of the danger they’re in, and it shows the world in a way that changes the shape and hue of the entire rest of the story.



Imagine casting Bombadil! I remember someone suggesting Robin Williams (RIP) eons ago, which I think could have worked. Williams was very "twinkly-eyed" and warm, and I think he'd be able to tone down his wackiness to the right level.

I still wish David Bowie had been cast as Elrond. Hugo Weaving was good (except for _Isildur!!!! _and the weird expression he gets at the Hobbits' antics), but Bowie would have been tremendous.


----------



## Ryujin

Mercurius said:


> Imagine casting Bombadil! I remember someone suggesting Robin Williams (RIP) eons ago, which I think could have worked. Williams was very "twinkly-eyed" and warm, and I think he'd be able to tone down his wackiness to the right level.
> 
> I still wish David Bowie had been cast as Elrond. Hugo Weaving was good (except for _Isildur!!!! _and the weird expression he gets at the Hobbits' antics), but Bowie would have been tremendous.



I picture more of a Peter Deluise type for Bombadil. I'd say his father, if he hadn't already passed.


----------



## Mannahnin

Urriak said:


> I'll use a different example then... The Two Towers, specifically the Battle for Helm's Deep. In the movie, the battle is about 40 minutes long, a significant chunk of the movie. In the book, I think the battle is 4 pages long?
> 
> Christopher Tolkien said the movie "Eviscerated the book by making it an action movie for young people 15 to 25." He's probably mostly right considering that the whole point of the books is describing how horrible war is, and the movies definitely _glorify _war.
> 
> Anyway, if the Jackson movies aren't fan-fiction, then I don't see why Rings of Power is either.



Agreed.  The LotR movies are in many ways faithful and loving adaptations, but from a more purist standpoint contain many changes for the sake of quick drama, some of which actually undercut the characters or the primary storyline. 

Inventing additional drama in Aragorn & Arwen's relationship (including Elrond's disapproval), making Gimli primarily into comic relief, turning Ecthelion into a pretty simple antagonist rather than a tragic lord gradually losing his mind and hope, the Aragorn death fake-out in The Two Towers, the Army of the Dead making the victory of the men of Rohan and Gondor at the Pelennor Fields hollow, Frodo turning on and driving away Sam, Faramir falling prey to the same temptation that his brother did...  There are actually quite a number of changes, especially in the second and third movies, which really weren't necessary.

That being said, I still appreciate them for being much better than anyone expected, and a bit of a miracle of film making.


----------



## Mercurius

Mannahnin said:


> That being said, I still appreciate them for being much better than anyone expected, and a bit of a miracle of film making.



Yes, me too - and I think this is key.

I must admit that I actually liked at least one of those additions: the Aragorn and Arwen romance. I'm a huge Tolkien fan, but reading _Lord of the Rings -- _let along _The Silmarillion -- _is in some sense more akin to reading a Medieval epic than a modern novel, in terms of "reader-character proximity," if that makes sense. And of course Viggo Mortensen's excellent and underrated performance really humanized Aragorn in a way that isn't captured in the books.

As much as I love Tolkien, I love him more for his world-building, myth-making, and philosophical-thematic content, than for his ability as a novelist.


----------



## Mannahnin

I enjoyed the Aragorn and Arwen romance, and Arwen's general greater presence in the movies (taking Glorfindel's place in the events of FotR, for example) overall.  I think that latter was a good change that didn't clash with the story or betray the characters.

I think the romance as portrayed on screen still could have been awesome without Walsh & Boyens' invention of their quasi-break up, and of Elrond's disapproval.


----------



## Crimson Longinus

Mercurius said:


> Yes, me too - and I think this is key.
> 
> I must admit that I actually liked at least one of those additions: the Aragorn and Arwen romance. I'm a huge Tolkien fan, but reading _Lord of the Rings -- _let along _The Silmarillion -- _is in some sense more akin to reading a Medieval epic than a modern novel, in terms of "reader-character proximity," if that makes sense. And of course Viggo Mortensen's excellent and underrated performance really humanized Aragorn in a way that isn't captured in the books.



Yeah, I agree this was an addition I approve. And whilst people often complain about Faramir changes, I think it is decent too. That he is briefly tempted just like his brother, but makes a different choice is pretty poignant.


----------



## Mercurius

What about least favorite parts of the films?

For me I just never liked the "Galadriel gone wild" scene, or both her and Celebrim's extreeeemely slooooow cadence. It comes off as stilted more than it does ancient and wise.

Gimli as comic relief. Some is OK, but it felt a bit diminishing of the character (pun kind of intended).

Legolas was a bit too superheroic. I might be tainted by the Hobbit, though, where he attained Drizzt levels.

Sam and Frodo's bromance...just too much ("Oh, Sam").

The Uruk-hai are a bit comical, imo. Too WWF.

Eowyn killing the Witch King. Just too quick and easy. Not sure how they could have done it better, but it doesn't look believable. 

The CGI of the worgs. Last couple times I saw it, it really stood out. But at the time it was the best they had, I guess.

Generally minor quibbles, though.


----------



## Mannahnin

I loved, loved, loved Blanchett's Galadriel performance, but yes, the CGI & voice effects on her biggest dramatic moment were overdone.  They really could have kept it more subtle (even if they did enhance it, like Gandalf's confrontation of Bilbo over the ring) and been as or more effective, IMO.

Gimli as comic relief similarly overdone.  I am glad that the extended editions give us a little more of his soulfulness (e.g. with Galadriel's gift), even if we missed the wonderful pathos of him looking into the Mirrormere.

Super Legolas is kind of a thing all through the movies, but it gets more exaggerated as they go on.  It was a bit much for me; and that's speaking as someone who's wanted to be an elf thanks to Legolas since I was about six, when these books were first read to me.  The moments of seeing him walking on top of the snow at Caradhras gave me one of the purest feelings of movie magic (connecting to my childhood) that I've ever experienced.

Eowyn and the Witch King, OTOH, I thought was amazingly well done.


----------



## Crimson Longinus

Mannahnin said:


> I loved, loved, loved Blanchett's Galadriel performance, but yes, the CGI & voice effects on her biggest dramatic moment were overdone.



I like this extended version of the scene:


----------



## Rune

Urriak said:


> I'll use a different example then... The Two Towers, specifically the Battle for Helm's Deep. In the movie, the battle is about 40 minutes long, a significant chunk of the movie. In the book, I think the battle is 4 pages long?
> 
> Christopher Tolkien said the movie "Eviscerated the book by making it an action movie for young people 15 to 25." He's probably mostly right considering that the whole point of the books is describing how horrible war is, and the movies definitely _glorify _war.
> 
> Anyway, if the Jackson movies aren't fan-fiction, then I don't see why Rings of Power is either.



This divide is especially evident in the Battle of the Five Armies. Tolkien had his point-of-view character unconscious through most of it. Jackson turned it into a whole overly-long, bloated, and frankly nonsensical war-movie.


----------



## billd91

Rune said:


> This divide is especially evident in the Battle of the Five Armies. Tolkien had his point-of-view character unconscious through most of it. Jackson turned it into a whole overly-long, bloated, and frankly nonsensical war-movie.



I'm OK with most of the use of action in the first trilogy of movies, including the battle of Helm's Deep, but as soon as they announced that The Hobbit was being divided into three movies instead of an initially planned two, I was worried that they would bloat with filler. And they sure did. 
While I may have reservations about some of the ways the Jackson movies adapted LotR (Aragorn's brief disappearance, Legolas the implausible action hero, and Faramir hauling Frodo and Sam all the way back to Osgiliath being principal objections), I can still watch and enjoy them. I don't believe I've watched more than once or even own on DVD any of the Hobbit movies after the first.


----------



## Mannahnin

billd91 said:


> I'm OK with most of the use of action in the first trilogy of movies, including the battle of Helm's Deep, but as soon as they announced that The Hobbit was being divided into three movies instead of an initially planned two, I was worried that they would bloat with filler. And they sure did.
> While I may have reservations about some of the ways the Jackson movies adapted LotR (Aragorn's brief disappearance, Legolas the implausible action hero, and Faramir hauling Frodo and Sam all the way back to Osgiliath being principal objections), I can still watch and enjoy them. I don't believe I've watched more than once or even own on DVD any of the Hobbit movies after the first.



Indeed.

The LotR movies are great, with moments of badness.

The Hobbit movies are the opposite.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Mercurius said:


> Imagine casting Bombadil! I remember someone suggesting Robin Williams (RIP) eons ago, which I think could have worked. Williams was very "twinkly-eyed" and warm, and I think he'd be able to tone down his wackiness to the right level.
> 
> I still wish David Bowie had been cast as Elrond. Hugo Weaving was good (except for _Isildur!!!! _and the weird expression he gets at the Hobbits' antics), but Bowie would have been tremendous.



Yeah I think Hugo struggled a little with the character tbh. Bowie…hmmm that is interesting.


----------



## Henadic Theologian

Amazon should have just gotten the licence to the Forgotten Realms, instead of ultra rigid Middle Earth.

 Want brown dwarves? Gold Dwarves! Brown Elves? Green & Wood Elves! Female warriors? In Paladin, Fighter, Rogue, Ranger, Monk, Barbarian flavours. Most FR eras have Halflings. FR has orders of magnitude more flexibility then Middle Earth, is better suited to action and humour and romance, horror, etc...

 And soooo much more.

Just checked the Rings of Power trailer it's getting ratioed all to hell, roughly 445,000 dislikes to 75,000 likes. Should have gone with FR.


----------



## wicked cool

Rune said:


> This divide is especially evident in the Battle of the Five Armies. Tolkien had his point-of-view character unconscious through most of it. Jackson turned it into a whole overly-long, bloated, and frankly nonsensical war-movie.



tolkien writing when it came to action wasnt very good. if i remember correctly the battle with the troll in the fellowship was maybe a sentence or 2 . i personally loved Jackson vision for the original movies . now the hobbit turned into a bloated mess (at times)


----------



## Horwath

Henadic Theologian said:


> Amazon should have just gotten the licence to the Forgotten Realms, instead of ultra rigid Middle Earth.
> 
> Want brown dwarves? Gold Dwarves! Brown Elves? Green & Wood Elves! Female warriors? In Paladin, Fighter, Rogue, Ranger, Monk, Barbarian flavours. Most FR eras have Halflings. FR has orders of magnitude more flexibility then Middle Earth, is better suited to action and humour and romance, horror, etc...
> 
> And soooo much more.
> 
> Just checked the Rings of Power trailer it's getting ratioed all to hell, roughly 445,000 dislikes to 75,000 likes. Should have gone with FR.



We will have Honor among thieves for FR.

Guess we will see what will land better with general audience.

Not sure about Michelle Rodriguez as a barbarian, maybe Gwendoline Christie would be a better cast, but maybe she wanted to get away from warrior roles for a while...

I hope Michelle will remember that her character name is Holga and not Letty.
"we are not an adventuring party, we are family"


----------



## Rune

wicked cool said:


> tolkien writing when it came to action wasnt very good. if i remember correctly the battle with the troll in the fellowship was maybe a sentence or 2 . i personally loved Jackson vision for the original movies . now the hobbit turned into a bloated mess (at times)



I would argue that it wasn’t so much that he wasn’t good at it, but rather that he didn’t view it as the important part of his stories and thus deliberately chose not to emphasize it.


----------



## Morrus

Henadic Theologian said:


> Amazon should have just gotten the licence to the Forgotten Realms, instead of ultra rigid Middle Earth.
> 
> Want brown dwarves? Gold Dwarves! Brown Elves? Green & Wood Elves! Female warriors? In Paladin, Fighter, Rogue, Ranger, Monk, Barbarian flavours. Most FR eras have Halflings. FR has orders of magnitude more flexibility then Middle Earth, is better suited to action and humour and romance, horror, etc...
> 
> And soooo much more.
> 
> Just checked the Rings of Power trailer it's getting ratioed all to hell, roughly 445,000 dislikes to 75,000 likes. Should have gone with FR.



Yes, I’m sure nobody is going to watch it.


----------



## Mannahnin

Rune said:


> I would argue that it wasn’t so much that he wasn’t good at it, but rather that he didn’t view it as the important part of his stories and thus deliberately chose not to emphasize it.



Indeed. The places where he does focus on battle are stirring and great.


----------



## Hriston

Henadic Theologian said:


> Amazon should have just gotten the licence to the Forgotten Realms, instead of ultra rigid Middle Earth.
> 
> Want brown dwarves? Gold Dwarves! Brown Elves? Green & Wood Elves! Female warriors? In Paladin, Fighter, Rogue, Ranger, Monk, Barbarian flavours. Most FR eras have Halflings. FR has orders of magnitude more flexibility then Middle Earth, is better suited to action and humour and romance, horror, etc...
> 
> And soooo much more.
> 
> Just checked the Rings of Power trailer it's getting ratioed all to hell, roughly 445,000 dislikes to 75,000 likes. Should have gone with FR.



I wonder how FR books' sales figures match up with Tolkien's. Not very well I'd imagine.


----------



## Mannahnin

Hriston said:


> I wonder how FR books' sales figures match up with Tolkien's. Not very well I'd imagine.



One blogger I've found who analyzes this kind of stuff estimates that Dragonlance and FR together have sold around 100mm copies since the lines began in '84 and '87 respectively.  And that Tolkien's works in total are around 600mm.









						Leaving Money on the Table: Why is There No New D&D Fiction Being Published?
					

A shelf of books from the Forgotten Realms line. 292 books in the setting have been published between 1987 and 2020.      Dungeons and ...




					thewertzone.blogspot.com
				












						J.R.R. Tolkien novel sales pass 600 million
					

HarperCollins has released updated sales figures  for J.R.R. Tolkien's books, acquired by Tolkien fansite TheOneRing. These sales figures ha...




					thewertzone.blogspot.com


----------



## Horwath

Morrus said:


> Yes, I’m sure nobody is going to watch it.



Lots of people will watch it, I will watch it, but I am going in with level of optimism that I had after watching GoT season 8...


----------



## Paul Farquhar

Rune said:


> I would argue that it wasn’t so much that he wasn’t good at it, but rather that he didn’t view it as the important part of his stories and thus deliberately chose not to emphasize it.



Maybe the reason he was reluctant to emphasise it is because he lived through it?


----------



## trappedslider

Horwath said:


> Not sure about Michelle Rodriguez as a barbarian, maybe Gwendoline Christie would be a better cast, but maybe she wanted to get away from warrior roles for a while...
> 
> I hope Michelle will remember that her character name is Holga and not Letty.
> "we are not an adventuring party, we are family"



But how long will she live?


----------



## trappedslider

Horwath said:


> Lots of people will watch it, I will watch it, but I am going in with level of optimism that I had after watching GoT season 8...



I saw yesterday an interview with RR martin in which he says he was out of the loop long before the end of the show
here it is









						George R.R. Martin Reveals He Was “Out of the Loop” Long Before the Hated 'Game of Thrones' Finale
					

Martin has reportedly been much more hands-on for the upcoming 'House of the Dragon' prequel series.




					www.gq.com


----------



## ART!

Mannahnin said:


> I loved, loved, loved Blanchett's Galadriel performance, but yes, the CGI & voice effects on her biggest dramatic moment were overdone.



Agreed. It looks like it was all done in post-production, like they just turned on a fan and said, "eh, we'll figure it out later".


Henadic Theologian said:


> Just checked the Rings of Power trailer it's getting ratioed all to hell, roughly 445,000 dislikes to 75,000 likes. Should have gone with FR.



Trolls gonna troll, bots gonna bot.


----------



## Rune

Paul Farquhar said:


> Maybe the reason he was reluctant to emphasise it is because he lived through it?



And his friends didn’t.


----------



## Ryujin

ART! said:


> Agreed. It looks like it was all done in post-production, like they just turned on a fan and said, "eh, we'll figure it out later".
> 
> Trolls gonna troll, bots gonna bot.



Given that Galadriel bore one of the Elven Rings, I thought that the way she was portrayed when exhibiting her power was pretty good.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Hriston said:


> I wonder how FR books' sales figures match up with Tolkien's. Not very well I'd imagine.



By orders of magnitude. 

In comparison to Middle Earth, no one has ever heard of Faerun.


----------



## Nikosandros

ART! said:


> Trolls gonna troll, bots gonna bot.



Yep. Obviously, I don't know if I'll like the series or not, but the level of toxicity around it is already through the roof. I'm not surprised by this one bit, though.


----------



## Morrus

Nikosandros said:


> Yep. Obviously, I don't know if I'll like the series or not, but the level of toxicity around it is already through the roof. I'm not surprised by this one bit, though.



It's just S.O.P. at this point.


----------



## Mannahnin

doctorbadwolf said:


> By orders of magnitude.
> 
> In comparison to Middle Earth, no one has ever heard of Faerun.



I mean, a roughly 1/6 ratio (probably a bit better than that, for FR) isn't quite an order of magnitude.


----------



## billd91

Ryujin said:


> Given that Galadriel bore one of the Elven Rings, I thought that the way she was portrayed when exhibiting her power was pretty good.



Sure, it's very powerful. But I also always like the version of the scene in Bakshi's Lord of the Rings animated movie. There, she is a lot more gentle as if she dispensed with the temptation long ago and is just relating to Frodo what she could have been, had she taken the ring.


----------



## Nikosandros

billd91 said:


> Sure, it's very powerful. But I also always like the version of the scene in Bakshi's Lord of the Rings animated movie. There, she is a lot more gentle as if she dispensed with the temptation long ago and is just relating to Frodo what she could have been, had she taken the ring.



OTOH, in the book Galadriel is tested in that moment, when Frodo offers her the ring and thus atones her sins from when she was with Feanor.



> I pass the test, I will diminish, and go into the West, and remain Galadriel


----------



## Ryujin

Nikosandros said:


> OTOH, in the book Galadriel is tested in that moment, when Frodo offers her the ring and thus atones her sins from when she was with Feanor.



Exactly. It's meant to be a powerful moment in that character's life and the movie depicts it quite well.


----------



## billd91

Nikosandros said:


> OTOH, in the book Galadriel is tested in that moment, when Frodo offers her the ring and thus atones her sins from when she was with Feanor.



There's no OTOH. The passage in the book lends itself to either interpretation easily.


			
				LotR said:
			
		

> Galadriel laughed with a sudden clear laugh. "Wise the Lady Galadriel may be," she said, "yet here she has met her match in courtesy. Gently are you revenged for my testing of your heart at our first meeting."
> ...
> Then she let her hand fall, and the light faded, and suddenly she laughed again, and lo! she was shrunken: a slender elf-woman, clad in simple white, whose gentle voice was soft and sad."




It's entirely within the envisioning of the reader whether she's really tested and fights it off or she's engaging in a little bit of theatrics to underscore how serious the implications of Frodo's offer could have been while gently rebuffing it as a long-decided issue.


----------



## Nikosandros

I disagree. She wouldn't have mentioned the possibility of going back to the West if the issue had been long decided. This is also mentioned by Tolkien in some letters.


----------



## Mannahnin

Ryujin said:


> Exactly. It's meant to be a powerful moment in that character's life and the movie depicts it quite well.



I think the special effects are a _bit _overdone.  Blanchett's performance alone I think would have brought 90%+ of the drama and power it needed. Maybe just some mild light and audio processing to get some extra oomph, magic and emphasis on it.  I don't know if she even needed as much post processing as McKellan got in the scene where Galdalf confronts Bilbo over the ring, but they gave her more.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Mannahnin said:


> I mean, a roughly 1/6 ratio (probably a bit better than that, for FR) isn't quite an order of magnitude.



Got any source for the idea that that’s the ratio?


----------



## Hriston

Mannahnin said:


> One blogger I've found who analyzes this kind of stuff estimates that Dragonlance and FR together have sold around 100mm copies since the lines began in '84 and '87 respectively.  And that Tolkien's works in total are around 600mm.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Leaving Money on the Table: Why is There No New D&D Fiction Being Published?
> 
> 
> A shelf of books from the Forgotten Realms line. 292 books in the setting have been published between 1987 and 2020.      Dungeons and ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> thewertzone.blogspot.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> J.R.R. Tolkien novel sales pass 600 million
> 
> 
> HarperCollins has released updated sales figures  for J.R.R. Tolkien's books, acquired by Tolkien fansite TheOneRing. These sales figures ha...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> thewertzone.blogspot.com



If you read the articles, the blogger, Adam Whitehead, details only about 38 million in sales for the FR, the rest of the 100 million coming from Weis and Hickman’s Dragonlance’s 29 million with an apparently unknown source for the other 33 million in sales he reports  for combined Dragonlance and FR novels. 

I’m contrast, the 600 million figure he reports for Tolkien is acknowledged in the article to be “conservative” and apparently comes from a report TheOneRing releasef as a “gag” on April Fool’s Day. So, yes, at least an order of magnitude.


----------



## Mezuka

If the D&D movie is a success I can see novelization of the picture and spin-off books.


----------



## billd91

Mezuka said:


> If the D&D movie is a success I can see novelization of the picture and spin-off books.



I want to see who licenses it for a tie-in RPG.


----------



## Nikosandros

billd91 said:


> I want to see who licenses it for a tie-in RPG.



I don't know... the lore seems to be disjointed and all over the place. A game inspired by it would fail miserably.


----------



## Mezuka

billd91 said:


> I want to see who licenses it for a tie-in RPG.



Why not? You could call it the 'Kelvin Timeline' and sell a setting book!


----------



## Urriak

billd91 said:


> Sure, it's very powerful. But I also always like the version of the scene in Bakshi's Lord of the Rings animated movie. There, she is a lot more gentle as if she dispensed with the temptation long ago and is just relating to Frodo what she could have been, had she taken the ring.




Re-watched that scene to remember it... but yes, it is better. It's a much more realistic, wise response to the offer of the ring. She mocks the offer a little, almost like how a recovering alcoholic refuses an offer to drink. She knows how terrible a choice it would be to take it, and admits how tempting it is despite that. But she makes light of it too to defuse the tension somewhat while also explaining how giving her the ring is not a solution, but a new problem.

Makes a lot more sense than what the Jackson film did... it's a bit whiplash from craving, to horrifying speech, to resigned depression. Cinematic for sure, but I do feel the Bakshi version is probably more in-line with Tolkien's intent for that scene.


----------



## Dioltach

I'll be going away for a few days, so in preparation for the series' release I've just edited the title of this thread to allow spoilers.


----------



## MarkB

The new trailer seems to be trying to put more of an emphasis on characters, focusing on a lot of individuals in a manner that seems to hint at the idea of building some sort of fellowship without ever actually committing to it.


----------



## Tallifer

"Rings of Power" is an insult to J. R R. Tolkien and everything he stood for. His Mythology of England was* NOT* a racist, Brexit, Nazi ideology; nor does watering it down help any w*** cause. I would HAPPILY watch a drama or documentary about (for example) the Ashanti kingdom (there is an amazing podcast which discussed the same), but my advice to televise that instead of hijacking Tolkien to promote your political agenda.


----------



## Dioltach

Tallifer said:


> "Rings of Power" is an insult to J. R R. Tolkien and everything he stood for. His Mythology of England was* NOT* a racist, Brexit, Nazi ideology; nor does watering it down help any w*** cause. I would HAPPILY watch a drama or documentary about (for example) the Ashanti kingdom (there is an amazing podcast which discussed the same), but my advice to televise that instead of hijacking Tolkien to promote your political agenda.



Has the first episode aired yet?


----------



## John R Davis

Nope.
But in 2022 you don't need to watch, hear, see, touch, taste etc anything to be full of rage about it!


----------



## Morrus

Tallifer said:


> "Rings of Power" is an insult to J. R R. Tolkien and everything he stood for. His Mythology of England was* NOT* a racist, Brexit, Nazi ideology; nor does watering it down help any w*** cause. I would HAPPILY watch a drama or documentary about (for example) the Ashanti kingdom (there is an amazing podcast which discussed the same), but my advice to televise that instead of hijacking Tolkien to promote your political agenda.



Please see the rules about rants about "political agendas". As in, don't. Since you were ranting about "woke sharks" just a few days ago, we obviously haven't been clear enough, but here are the rules you agreed to: Terms and rules


----------



## Urriak

Tallifer said:


> "Rings of Power" is an insult to J. R R. Tolkien and everything he stood for. His Mythology of England was* NOT* a racist, Brexit, Nazi ideology; nor does watering it down help any w*** cause. I would HAPPILY watch a drama or documentary about (for example) the Ashanti kingdom (there is an amazing podcast which discussed the same), but my advice to televise that instead of hijacking Tolkien to promote your political agenda.




Ah yes, as we know Rings of Power is going to take a stand on the issue of.... Brexit?


----------



## billd91

Urriak said:


> Ah yes, as we know Rings of Power is going to take a stand on the issue of.... Brexit?



I, for one, will be watching out for the Ents' statement on the cap and trade proposal put forth by Arnor and their third quarter report on emission controls.


----------



## Mallus

billd91 said:


> I, for one, will be watching out for the Ents' statement on the cap and trade proposal put forth by Arnor and their third quarter report on emission controls.



I know this is a joke, but I would totally watch it. I bet I'm not alone. Inveterate world-building DMs hang out around here...


----------



## Ryujin

billd91 said:


> I, for one, will be watching out for the Ents' statement on the cap and trade proposal put forth by Arnor and their third quarter report on emission controls.



At least it's not between the Ents and the Elves. It could take centuries for them to decide what shape of table to use.


----------



## Mallus

Ryujin said:


> At least it's not between the Ents and the Elves. It could take centuries for them to decide what shape of table to use.



“The negotiations concluded in the 6th Age of Middle Earth.”


----------



## Urriak

billd91 said:


> I, for one, will be watching out for the Ents' statement on the cap and trade proposal put forth by Arnor and their third quarter report on emission controls.




Indeed, though I'm fully expecting that the Northern Numenor border protocol will tie up the negotiations in the season finale.


----------



## Mallus

Now I want Amazon to make a dour bleak police procedural set during the events of the Akallabêth. Slap some pointy ears on David Tennant and spend a hundred million or so. Is that too much to ask?


----------



## wicked cool

reviews are in of 1st 2 episodes (ign and comicbook). Both say first episode slow but IGN says second episode makes up for first episode flaws and gives it an 8/10. Both say its gorgeous


----------



## Ryujin

Mallus said:


> Now I want Amazon to make a dour bleak police procedural set during the events of the Akallabêth. Slap some pointy ears on David Tennant and spend a hundred million or so. Is that too much to ask?



I think that I would prefer a dour and bleak procedural set in modern day, starring David Tennant and Michael Sheen, as demonic and angelic police officers keeping the peace, between the two warring factions.


----------



## Aeson

I noticed a countdown on the Amazon app. 31 hours to the premiere.


----------



## Aeson

1st episode looks amazing. I want to live with the elves and visit the harfoots. 

Not only are elves immortal, but have regeneration also?


----------



## Crimson Longinus

Aeson said:


> 1st episode looks amazing. I want to live with the elves and visit the harfoots.




It indeed looks great. Hard to say about the story though. 



Aeson said:


> Not only are elves immortal, but have regeneration also?




Yeah, that's from Tolkien:
_Their spirits were tenacious therefore of life 'in the raiment of Arda', and far excelled the spirits of Men in power over that 'raiment', even from the first days protecting their bodies from many ills and assaults (such as disease), and healing them swiftly of injuries, so that they recovered from wounds that would have proved fatal to Men._

They can't regenerate lost limbs though, as evidenced by Maedhros.


----------



## Aeson

Would it be a fast healing ability instead of regeneration?


----------



## Aeson

I'm amused that the actress who play Nori is 21 but she looks 12. I wonder if they had to deage her.


----------



## wicked cool

After 2 episodes this is a mixed bag for me
most times special effects are amazing especially episode 2. Episode 1 had some minor "this looks fake parts" 
i totally see the politics/agenda that will be heavily criticized
The dwarf family scenes were really bad in the acting area. strong vibes from the 90's dinosaur sitcom where dad comes home. im grumpy but not grumpy was awful

Questions
is that a wringwraith sword hilt that the kid has?  
are they just making up some of the lore? i know who spaceman is but was this in the books/papers?


----------



## RuinousPowers

I thought it was fine. They leaned more into fantasy over realism, but this isn't too unexpected, as this is more an age of legends that the LotR setting.


----------



## GreyLord

wicked cool said:


> After 2 episodes this is a mixed bag for me
> most times special effects are amazing especially episode 2. Episode 1 had some minor "this looks fake parts"
> i totally see the politics/agenda that will be heavily criticized
> The dwarf family scenes were really bad in the acting area. strong vibes from the 90's dinosaur sitcom where dad comes home. im grumpy but not grumpy was awful
> 
> Questions
> is that a wringwraith sword hilt that the kid has?
> are they just making up some of the lore? i know who spaceman is but was this in the books/papers?




I thought it was implicit that they were going to be making stuff up as their source material that they are allowed to use is extremely limited.

Note:  I have not watched the series or even part of it at this point.


----------



## Zaukrie

wicked cool said:


> After 2 episodes this is a mixed bag for me
> most times special effects are amazing especially episode 2. Episode 1 had some minor "this looks fake parts"
> i totally see the politics/agenda that will be heavily criticized
> The dwarf family scenes were really bad in the acting area. strong vibes from the 90's dinosaur sitcom where dad comes home. im grumpy but not grumpy was awful
> 
> Questions
> is that a wringwraith sword hilt that the kid has?
> are they just making up some of the lore? i know who spaceman is but was this in the books/papers?



They have to "make stuff up" because the estate greatly limited what lore they could use. Plus, well, these stories weren't told in any detail. And lots of stuff happens in a make believe world that isn't tied to the stories we know.


----------



## Dioltach

I enjoyed the first episode. It was a bit tricky to make the metal adjustment that it's LotR but on television. I kept waiting for the movie to kick off, and having to remind myself that it's TV pacing.


----------



## Aeson

Dioltach said:


> I enjoyed the first episode. It was a bit tricky to make the metal adjustment that it's LotR but on television. I kept waiting for the movie to kick off, and having to remind myself that it's TV pacing.



Were you looking for Legolas in the battle scene too, or was it just me? lol


----------



## OB1

I was super lukewarm on this series but after the first couple of episodes last night I am hooked.  I'm not a huge Tolkien fan (forced myself to read the books two decades ago after watching Fellowship) but loved the LOTR films and the only background I have on the second age is from them.  That said, what hooked me were characters that I found myself caring about right from the start (unlike the GOT prequel) and the fantasy feel of the age.  Was amazing to see Moria in it's glory days, and love the way the lifespan of the elves has real implications in their relationships with other races.  Can't wait for more!


----------



## MarkB

Aeson said:


> Not only are elves immortal, but have regeneration also?



They'd have to really, otherwise the accumulated wear'n'tear of centuries would leave them looking like Deadpool.


wicked cool said:


> is that a wringwraith sword hilt that the kid has?



No rings yet, so no ringwraiths. Still, their weapons could pre-date them.

But presumably that symbol of Sauron on the blade is what's drawing the orcs, so the kid's bringing their doom right to them.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

Mallus said:


> “The negotiations concluded in the 6th Age of Middle Earth.”




And only because all of the Elves have finally traveled West and the Ents have all stopped moving.


----------



## MarkB

Having played Middle Earth Shadow of Mordor and Shadow of War, I have a very strong image of who Celebrimbor is. Seeing this version was a little jarring. I don't think he's going to quite measure up.


----------



## Nikosandros

Zaukrie said:


> They have to "make stuff up" because the estate greatly limited what lore they could use. Plus, well, these stories weren't told in any detail. And lots of stuff happens in a make believe world that isn't tied to the stories we know.



I've wondered why Amazon couldn't get the rights to the Silmarillion.  I know that they are separate because Tolkien sold the rights to LotR and the Hobbit and back then the rest had not yet been published. But it was my (perhaps mistaken) understanding that after Christopher's passing, the rest of the estate was more amenable to negotiating rights.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

Nikosandros said:


> I've wondered why Amazon couldn't get the rights to the Silmarillion.  I know that they are separate because Tolkien sold the rights to LotR and the Hobbit and back then the rest had not yet been published. But it was my (perhaps mistaken) understanding that after Christopher's passing, the rest of the estate was more amenable to negotiating rights.




The deal was signed in 2017. Christopher died in 2020, so what Amazon had to work with was already finalized. This may also be why we hear talk of some extra things being licensed piecemeal to Amazon after the initial deal. But they had a deadline to get the first season on-air as part of the deal, so re-negotiating after his death to include entire extra books would had not be possible and still meet that deadline.


----------



## Smackpixi

Seems like what Amazon licensed is pretty great for them, enough to put Tolkien’s name and LotR on it, but not enough to be limited in anyway from telling the story they want.  The price not so great for them.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

Smackpixi said:


> Seems like what Amazon licensed is pretty great for them, enough to put Tolkien’s name and LotR on it, but not enough to be limited in anyway from telling the story they want.  The price not so great for them.




Yeah, for all that money, you think they would have gotten the rights to more than just the Appendices in Return of the King, which from what I read recently is actually all they got. This did not include the rights to the actual stories at all.


----------



## GreyLord

Zaukrie said:


> They have to "make stuff up" because the estate greatly limited what lore they could use. Plus, well, these stories weren't told in any detail. And lots of stuff happens in a make believe world that isn't tied to the stories we know.




And just think...the family had a cow when asked by Williams to do the same thing a few decades ago.

My...my.  How the wheel turns.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

GreyLord said:


> And just think...the family had a cow when asked by Williams to do the same thing a few decades ago.
> 
> My...my.  How the wheel turns.




It is all a mixed bag. Back when C7 was still doing The One Ring, and still had forums where they would show up and answer questions, they told us that everything they created as new content/characters/etc for the time period in between The Hobbit and LotR when the game is set, had to all be read and approved by the Tolkien Estate, not Saul Zaentz's company, before it would be published.


----------



## Zaukrie

Loved the first two.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

I thought it was great, if a little over-reverential in places.


----------



## Horwath

this is a mixed bag for me also.

It is not completely horrible as I expected it to be, nor is it good as I had hope for it.

first two episodes are around or slightly below the Hobbit level.

some good parts, bunch of filler.

and the pace is sloooooow.

visual are great, maybe sterile somewhere, but still great, we can see where 80% of the budget went to.
props to the CGI team.

Karendriel is hell bent on revenge for her brother's death and wants to speak to Elven management all the time. Even if you are correct, and she is correct about Sauron, there is a thing called overextending, and Elrond rightfully has scolded her and told her that her zeal will create much company for her brother in death.

and that ice troll fight? haha!
why does she have a company with her if they are so incompetent?
Either she is so good that she does not need help in that quest or is she so stupid to bring bunch of incompetent "red shirts" just to have then for cannon fodder. That is somewhat irresponsible to your troops. It also put her in danger as a large group is easier to spot and there is clearly no use for them in combat.

That quest should have her alone there. Might be some better character development if she is alone with here rage, hate and zeal.
maybe some inner monologue voice over.

The bobbits, err harfoots can be cut completely and have us some more mass battle recollection about the war with Sauron.
They are like those endless, useless scenes in Hobbit with dwarves singing, and bathing and throwing plates...

And whats with amnesiac Maianator, Valardine model T-800 Olorin?
was he send back from the future or maybe just from asteroid belt around Arda.
I was half expecting Gandalf to start yelling; WHAT AGE IS IT??


Since I still cant be bothered to remember new character names just yet, I will say that only interesting thing would be the part with the black elf guy and his (not)girlfriend.
There could be something interesting in this; discover the mystery of the orcs.
also with her son and (not)Morgul blade.


Elrond and Durin storyline could be predicted from mile away, especially when Durin's wife entered the dialogue.
yeah, no one saw that reconsiliation coming...what a plot twist...

They might pull something decent about Elven/dwarven collaboration in building the towers, some orcs in digging the foundations, some new magical creatures discovered, anything.


it just seems that biggest limit is their source material of maybe 50 pages, they need to make a lot things up and have it not correlate with any books as they have no right to that material.
And they want to make 5 seasons of it? From that skinny source material?

guess, we'll see.
Best of luck to them, they'll need it.


----------



## HawaiiSteveO

OK so far, although few too many ‘music video scenes‘ that look terrific, but make no sense.
The harfoots are … odd.

Rings of Power: The new hobbits are filthy, hungry simpletons with stage-Irish accents. That’s $1bn well spent


----------



## Ryujin

HawaiiSteveO said:


> OK so far, although few too many ‘music video scenes‘ that look terrific, but make no sense.
> The harfoots are … odd.
> 
> Rings of Power: The new hobbits are filthy, hungry simpletons with stage-Irish accents. That’s $1bn well spent



That article puts the finger on something that's been digging at the back of my mind.


----------



## Hriston

Aeson said:


> I'm amused that the actress who play Nori is 21 but she looks 12. I wonder if they had to deage her.



Hobbits don't age as quickly as humans.


----------



## Hriston

wicked cool said:


> i totally see the politics/agenda that will be heavily criticized



What??



wicked cool said:


> are they just making up some of the lore? i know who spaceman is but was this in the books/papers?



It's all made up. I don't see where they're even using the appendices to which they have the rights.


----------



## Ryujin

Hriston said:


> What??
> 
> 
> It's all made up. I don't see where they're even using the appendices to which they have the rights.



Mostly for Elf names, I think.


----------



## Nikosandros

Ryujin said:


> Mostly for Elf names, I think.



Yes,  but not much more than that, so far...


----------



## Nikosandros

Visually it is truly stunning, but I'm not too keen on the acting so far.


----------



## Aeson

Nikosandros said:


> Visually it is truly stunning, but I'm not too keen on the acting so far.



I'm enjoying Poppy and Nori. A new Merry and Pippin. I'm not sure about Elrond. He has some big shoes to fill.


----------



## HawaiiSteveO

Trying to sort out how the dwarves got the briefcase from Pulp Fiction…,


----------



## Hriston

Aeson said:


> I'm enjoying Poppy and Nori. A new Merry and Pippin. I'm not sure about Elrond. He has some big shoes to fill.



Poppy and Nori are reminding me quite a bit of Sam and Frodo, actually, which I don't think is an accident.

Elrond on the other hand is completely wrong. For the record, I was not at all fond of his depiction in the films either, but even that was somewhat preferable. He's a lore-master and herald of Gil-galad. This unflattering depiction reduces him, to use Galadriel's word, to a politician, and a smarmy one at that.


----------



## Aeson

I see Sam and Frodo, but I see Nori and Poppy as comic relief, which was more Merry and Pippin. A blending of the four? In any case, I'm looking forward to more from them. 

Is it the acting or the dialogue? I think they give the actors a bunch of dialogue to work with. The elves in particular use a lot of flowery words. It's almost like watching a Shakespearean play.


----------



## billd91

Hriston said:


> Poppy and Nori are reminding me quite a bit of Sam and Frodo, actually, which I don't think is an accident.
> 
> Elrond on the other hand is completely wrong. For the record, I was not at all fond of his depiction in the films either, but even that was somewhat preferable. He's a lore-master and herald of Gil-galad. This unflattering depiction reduces him, to use Galadriel's word, to a politician, and a smarmy one at that.



I think he's doing fine. He's a herald - he's part of the court. Politics is going to be involved.


----------



## MarkB

Hriston said:


> Elrond on the other hand is completely wrong. For the record, I was not at all fond of his depiction in the films either, but even that was somewhat preferable. He's a lore-master and herald of Gil-galad. This unflattering depiction reduces him, to use Galadriel's word, to a politician, and a smarmy one at that.



"Herald" seems like a pretty close fit with "foreign envoy" to me.


----------



## Mallus

So far it’s far exceeding my expectations. It feels different from their Wheel of Time. More Tolkien-esque than Tolkien-derivative. Which is appropriate, but hardly a given going in.

It looks gorgeous. The elf boat sailing into the light of elf Heaven rivals anything in Jackson’s films. More importantly things just _feel_ right, it varies in tone (I was even scared at one point by a single orc, something I thought not possible after nearly 40 years of D&D!) with only a few false notes.

Really digging Senator Elrond. That’s an interesting take.


----------



## Hriston

Ryujin said:


> Mostly for Elf names, I think.



I was actually surprised when they mentioned the silmarils, although still no mention that the war they keep talking about was actually fought to reclaim them.


----------



## Arilyn

Aeson said:


> I'm enjoying Poppy and Nori. A new Merry and Pippin. I'm not sure about Elrond. He has some big shoes to fill.



Nori is my favourite so far. I remind myself that there is a vast number of years between tv Elrond and Elrond from "The Lord of the Rings." He shouldn't have the same presence. This slightly more awkward one makes sense.


----------



## Aeson

Am I wrong for wanting to kick the half-elf kid into the fiery depths of Mount Doom?


----------



## Mercurius

Someone on the last page said "better than I feared, not as good as I hoped." I've only watched the first episode, but that's how I feel so far.

I don't like the depiction of elves, though. I was immediately put off by the opening scene in which the elvish came across as Celtic human brats, just in nicer clothes. I just don't see Tolkien's elves, even children, behaving in such a way. This was compounded by Elrond writing...a political speech for Gil-galad? That, again, was quite incongruous with Tolkien's depiction of elves, for whom Art (capital A) was a way of life - the most basic mode of being. One would think that such very human frailties--as a king needing a speech-writer--would not be applicable, especially to a thousands-of-years old Elvish high king.

Meaning, the elves are far too human. They come across as idealized Celts, at best. And given the centrality of elves to Tolkien and this series, this is disappointing.

I also felt it was quite boring. I'm not one to need lots of action, and in some sense prefer non-action scenes even to fantasy tales, but the dialogue was tedious and the acting mediocre, for the most part.

Now the good: Impressive visuals, for the most part. And...well, I'll wait for the second episode.


----------



## Davies

Interesting call-forward from Elrond's conversation with Galadriel to the one he will much later have with Arwen.

As to the elf children in that first scene ... innocence is not the positive that it once was. It can also be an unawareness of how one can hurt, or be hurt. The scene also sets up Galadriel's darker side in a way that the Helkaraxe (which can't be used) could have done.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

Hriston said:


> Poppy and Nori are reminding me quite a bit of Sam and Frodo, actually, which I don't think is an accident.
> 
> Elrond on the other hand is completely wrong. For the record, I was not at all fond of his depiction in the films either, but even that was somewhat preferable. He's a lore-master and herald of Gil-galad. This unflattering depiction reduces him, to use Galadriel's word, to a politician, and a smarmy one at that.



Herald _means _politician.


----------



## MarkB

Mercurius said:


> Someone on the last page said "better than I feared, not as good as I hoped." I've only watched the first episode, but that's how I feel so far.
> 
> I don't like the depiction of elves, though. I was immediately put off by the opening scene in which the elvish came across as Celtic human brats, just in nicer clothes. I just don't see Tolkien's elves, even children, behaving in such a way. This was compounded by Elrond writing...a political speech for Gil-galad? That, again, was quite incongruous with Tolkien's depiction of elves, for whom Art (capital A) was a way of life - the most basic mode of being. One would think that such very human frailties--as a king needing a speech-writer--would not be applicable, especially to a thousands-of-years old Elvish high king.
> 
> Meaning, the elves are far too human. They come across as idealized Celts, at best. And given the centrality of elves to Tolkien and this series, this is disappointing.
> 
> I also felt it was quite boring. I'm not one to need lots of action, and in some sense prefer non-action scenes even to fantasy tales, but the dialogue was tedious and the acting mediocre, for the most part.
> 
> Now the good: Impressive visuals, for the most part. And...well, I'll wait for the second episode.



Even in Tolkien's writing, elves weren't perfect beings incapable of cruelty or pettiness. Look at the dwarves' interactions with the elves of Mirkwood in The Hobbit.


----------



## Sepulchrave II

7/10 good effort but needs improvement. 

It did feel a bit awkward at times, and I would have also preferred a little more unearthliness and Faerie in the elves. Hopefully the actors will grow into their roles. I’m also hoping they avoid too much Wuxia in the combat, but recognise that this is kind of par for the course in 2022.


----------



## Hriston

Paul Farquhar said:


> Herald _means _politician.



her·ald
/ˈherəld/
HISTORICAL
an official employed to oversee state ceremony, precedence, and the use of armorial bearings, and to make proclamations, carry ceremonial messages, and oversee tournaments.

pol·i·ti·cian
/ˌpäləˈtiSHən/
a person who is professionally involved in politics, especially as a holder of or a candidate for an elected office.
"a local politician"

US
a person who acts in a manipulative and devious way, typically to gain advancement within an organization.
Not the same.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

Hriston said:


> her·ald
> /ˈherəld/
> HISTORICAL
> an official employed to oversee state ceremony, precedence, and the use of armorial bearings, and to make proclamations, carry ceremonial messages, and oversee tournaments.
> 
> pol·i·ti·cian
> /ˌpäləˈtiSHən/
> a person who is professionally involved in politics, especially as a holder of or a candidate for an elected office.
> "a local politician"
> 
> US
> a person who acts in a manipulative and devious way, typically to gain advancement within an organization.
> Not the same.



It helps if you know the full meaning, rather than just read the first thing that pops up on an online dictionary. A herald, as used by Tolkien, is the representative of a ruler. It's almost the same as an ambassador, apart from a herald represents an individual, rather than a nation.

And an ambassador is a professional politician.

Another example, as used by Tolkien, is the Mouth of Sauron, who is Sauron's Herald.

All the stuff about heraldry evolved later, in the medieval period. But Tolkien was a Saxon scholar, not a medievalist.


----------



## Sepulchrave II

Paul Farquhar said:


> It helps if you know the full meaning, rather than just read the first thing that pops up on an online dictionary. A herald, as used by Tolkien, is the representative of a ruler. It's almost the same as an ambassador, apart from a herald represents an individual, rather than a nation.
> 
> And an ambassador is a professional politician.
> 
> Another example, as used by Tolkien, is the Mouth of Sauron, who is Sauron's Herald.
> 
> All the stuff about heraldry evolved later, in the medieval period. But Tolkien was a Saxon scholar, not a medievalist.



Heralds absolutely prefigured ambassadors; historically, they were generally given a good deal of room to negotiate - especially considering the speed of communication.

Also, in the kind of feudal (or quasi-feudal) system to which Tolkien alludes, the political class (or ruling class) _are_ the warrior class.

Interestingly, Eonwe, the herald of Manwe, did _not_ have the authority to pardon Sauron at the end of the First Age - but by his own judgment. Sauron, presumably, thought he might - or he wouldn't have appealed to him.


----------



## Hriston

Paul Farquhar said:


> It helps if you know the full meaning, rather than just read the first thing that pops up on an online dictionary. A herald, as used by Tolkien, is the representative of a ruler. It's almost the same as an ambassador, apart from a herald represents an individual, rather than a nation.
> 
> And an ambassador is a professional politician.
> 
> Another example, as used by Tolkien, is the Mouth of Sauron, who is Sauron's Herald.
> 
> All the stuff about heraldry evolved later, in the medieval period. But Tolkien was a Saxon scholar, not a medievalist.



It helps if you read what I posted. Although there is an overlap in meaning, _herald_ does not have the same meaning as _politician_. A herald does not necessarily act "in a manipulative and devious way," which is how I was using the word in context.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

Hriston said:


> It helps if you read what I posted. Although there is an overlap in meaning, _herald_ does not have the same meaning as _politician_. A herald does not necessarily act "in a manipulative and devious way," which is how I was using the word in context.



Shock news: not all politicians - especially ones who are appointed rather than elected - are dishonest.


----------



## Hriston

Paul Farquhar said:


> Shock news: not all politicians - especially ones who are appointed rather than elected - are dishonest.



Again, words can have nuanced meanings.

This TV show depicts the fictional character of Elrond, Herald of the High King, as a less than honest, behind the scenes puller of strings. In his conversation with Galadriel, although he professes to be her friend and tells her he's going to speak plainly, he doesn't tell her that, at the ceremony, the High King is going to declare an end to war and grant her passage to the West, which he obviously knew ahead of time because he wrote the speech. And although he looks surprised at her reaction, it came off, at least to me, as a set-up to maneuver her into an awkward position where she could no longer pursue her goals. This was not to my liking. (ETA: Perhaps more importantly, this type of behavior is not implicit in the description _herald._)


----------



## Ryujin

Hriston said:


> Again, words can have nuanced meanings.
> 
> This TV show depicts the fictional character of Elrond, Herald of the High King, as a less than honest, behind the scenes puller of strings. In his conversation with Galadriel, although he professes to be her friend and tells her he's going to speak plainly, he doesn't tell her that, at the ceremony, the High King is going to declare an end to war and grant her passage to the West, which he obviously knew ahead of time because he wrote the speech. And although he looks surprised at her reaction, it came off, at least to me, as a set-up to maneuver her into an awkward position where she could no longer pursue her goals. This was not to my liking.



Though it might be the sort of thing that a friend would do, if they thought that their friend was self-destructing.


----------



## Aeson

Ryujin said:


> Though it might be the sort of thing that a freind would do, if they thought that their friend was self-destructing.



He thought he was protecting her from herself. I can see it.


----------



## Mort

It's interesting how the show portrays Galadriel and Elrond as  contemporaries.

In the books Galadriel is significantly older than Elrond (She's actually older than Gil Galad) and is, in fact, his mother in law.

Also no mention of Galadriel's husband (or her even having one). I wonder if the show will ignore that entirely or it'll be something that develops on the show.


----------



## Hriston

Ryujin said:


> Though it might be the sort of thing that a friend would do, if they thought that their friend was self-destructing.





Aeson said:


> He thought he was protecting her from herself. I can see it.



He might have the best of intentions, but using a public ceremony to pressure someone into making a decision with which you know they disagree is highly manipulative. That being said, I think the whole vowing revenge on Sauron thing is extremely stupid.


----------



## Ryujin

Hriston said:


> He might have the best of intentions, but using a public ceremony to pressure someone into making a decision with which you know they disagree is highly manipulative. That being said, I think the whole vowing revenge on Sauron thing is extremely stupid.



Think of it like an intervention, which is also a manipulative exercise.


----------



## billd91

Mort said:


> It's interesting how the show portrays Galadriel and Elrond as  contemporaries.
> 
> In the books Galadriel is significantly older than Elrond (She's actually older than Gil Galad) and is, in fact, his mother in law.
> 
> Also no mention of Galadriel's husband (or her even having one). I wonder if the show will ignore that entirely or it'll be something that develops on the show.



I think that with an elven lifespan, they might as well be contemporaries. What's a thousand years here and there when you've all got more than one millennia under your belt?
And I believe Galadriel becomes Elrond's mother in law early in the Third Age, quite a chunk of time after this transpires. 

But there are still things I'm wondering about. Galadriel is already married to Celeborn as of the end of the First Age and there's been no mention of him at all so far. There are elements of the stories that suggest they spend long times apart doing their own thing - but one of them jumping ship heading to the Undying Lands is kind of a weird take on the saga.


----------



## FitzTheRuke

I think I figured out what I don't quite like about this portrayal of Galadriel - I am used to her being an _introverted_ bad ass. Here, she seems to be an _extroverted_ bad-ass. She also has her social abilities inverted - effectively she is an antisocial extrovert when I am used to her being a social introvert. (More my kind of people). 

I get that she's significantly younger, but these are the kinds of things that are usually part of your _nature_, not something that changes over your lifetime (well, you can learn to battle against your nature, but it will always be a battle).

In a lot of ways Arondir "feels" more like how I'd expect a young Galadriel to be.

But I've long since reconciled myself to this show being a fun fantasy show that doesn't have to connect to Tolkien beyond some similar themes and names. Like someone's D&D campaign.


----------



## Ryujin

But how much of what people are mentioning was "missed" is from the TotR appendices, and how much is from The Silmarillion?


----------



## Hriston

Ryujin said:


> Think of it like an intervention, which is also a manipulative exercise.



That was my thought too, but at least an intervention is typically a private affair among family and friends and relies on direct communication. This, on the other hand, is an exercise in political theater where Galadriel is being asked to accept an official narrative that she knows is not true.


----------



## Crimson Longinus

Mort said:


> It's interesting how the show portrays Galadriel and Elrond as  contemporaries.
> 
> In the books Galadriel is significantly older than Elrond (She's actually older than Gil Galad) and is, in fact, his mother in law.



Yeah, though how old are all of these people at this point? Sure, Galadriel is quite a bit older than Gil-Galad or Elrond, but it might not matter much once everyone is hundreds or thousands of years old.



Mort said:


> Also no mention of Galadriel's husband (or her even having one). I wonder if the show will ignore that entirely or it'll be something that develops on the show.



Yeah, it is a tad weird that Celeborn has not even been mentioned. Canonically they should already been married for quite a while at this point.

---

As for the show in general, my initial impressions are cautiously positive. It feels like Middle-Earth to me and of course everything looks gorgeous. It is hard to say about the story at this point, but I mostly like the characters.

I used to be a Tolkien nerd, but frankly at this point I have forgotten most of what I once knew. And I didn't do a refresh course before watching the show; I'll try to treat the show as its own version, and try not to be too upset if they deviate from the canon. And it helps to remember that Tolkien had several versions of the stories of this era and changed things all the time, so what is "canon" is rather nebulous to begin with.


----------



## Ryujin

Hriston said:


> That was my thought too, but at least an intervention is typically a private affair among family and friends and relies on direct communication. This, on the other hand, is an exercise in political theater where Galadriel is being asked to accept an official narrative that she knows is not true.



I would say that comes part & parcel with being at the top of the political food chain.


----------



## Hriston

Ryujin said:


> I would say that comes part & parcel with being at the top of the political food chain.



Yeah, if I'm understanding what you mean, I think I agree. I think something good about the scene is it shows that Gil-galad and Elrond are aware of how important an elf Galadriel is. Sending her across the sea, though, just seems like a self interested effort to get her out of the way, especially with regard to the subsequent scene where the king assigns Elrond to begin working with Celebrimbor as soon as they think she's gone.


----------



## Dioltach

Hriston said:


> Sending her across the sea, though, just seems like a self interested effort to get her out of the way, especially with regard to the subsequent scene where the king assigns Elrond to begin working with Celebrimbor as soon as they think she's gone.



Wasn't there a bit where Gil-Galad said that, if Sauron became trouble again, it would be because of Galadriel? In that case, and assuming that he's wise and insightful enough to make such pronouncements, they're doing the right thing in convincing her to make the voyage to Valinor - which, it must be noted, isn't just some empty honour, it's a reward that every Elf has spent thousands of years yearning for.


----------



## Ryujin

Hriston said:


> Yeah, if I'm understanding what you mean, I think I agree. I think something good about the scene is it shows that Gil-galad and Elrond are aware of how important an elf Galadriel is. Sending her across the sea, though, just seems like a self interested effort to get her out of the way, especially with regard to the subsequent scene where the king assigns Elrond to begin working with Celebrimbor as soon as they think she's gone.



There could be self-interest involved but, then again, it could be two people who know her very well both trying to reward her for the work she has already done, and trying to get her off a self destructive path. They seem to truly believe that the danger is past. Consider that when she was on a ship bound for the Undying Lands, in fact right at the 'gates', she started to swim the presumably thousands of miles back to Middle Earth. Making that journey by swimming would be impossible. That shows a self destructive obsession.


----------



## FitzTheRuke

Forget the Channel, it's gotta be _at least_ like swimming across the Atlantic!


----------



## Dioltach

Maybe she's hoping to get a lift from a whale. Do Elves speak Whale? "HELLLOOOO-OOOO! I NEE-ee-EEED A LIII-ift HOO-oo-OOME!"

Or however you say that in Quenya.


----------



## trappedslider

Ryujin said:


> But how much of what people are mentioning was "missed" is from the TotR appendices, and how much is from The Silmarillion?



This should be posted at the top of each page in this thread along with a reminder of what they can use.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Hriston said:


> Poppy and Nori are reminding me quite a bit of Sam and Frodo, actually, which I don't think is an accident.
> 
> Elrond on the other hand is completely wrong. For the record, I was not at all fond of his depiction in the films either, but even that was somewhat preferable. He's a lore-master and herald of Gil-galad. This unflattering depiction reduces him, to use Galadriel's word, to a politician, and a smarmy one at that.



I think it makes sense that he is a politically engaged puller of strings at this time in his past. It fits. 


Hriston said:


> Again, words can have nuanced meanings.
> 
> This TV show depicts the fictional character of Elrond, Herald of the High King, as a less than honest, behind the scenes puller of strings. In his conversation with Galadriel, although he professes to be her friend and tells her he's going to speak plainly, he doesn't tell her that, at the ceremony, the High King is going to declare an end to war and grant her passage to the West, which he obviously knew ahead of time because he wrote the speech. And although he looks surprised at her reaction, it came off, at least to me, as a set-up to maneuver her into an awkward position where she could no longer pursue her goals. This was not to my liking. (ETA: Perhaps more importantly, this type of behavior is not implicit in the description _herald._)



Elrond always seemed like a fairly deeply flawed person, to me. I’m seeing nothing especially out of character for the much younger version of the character we meet much later in life in the hobbit and the Trilogy.


----------



## Ryujin

FitzTheRuke said:


> Forget the Channel, it's gotta be _at least_ like swimming across the Atlantic!



The maps I've seen seem to imply that the distance would be comparable.


----------



## Hriston

doctorbadwolf said:


> I think it makes sense that he is a politically engaged puller of strings at this time in his past. It fits.
> 
> Elrond always seemed like a fairly deeply flawed person, to me. I’m seeing nothing especially out of character for the much younger version of the character we meet much later in life in the hobbit and the Trilogy.



I think you're comparing this Elrond to the one in the films. I'm comparing him to the one in the books.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Hriston said:


> I think you're comparing this Elrond to the one in the films. I'm comparing him to the one in the books.



Nah, they’re both layered and subtle, which is largely how you describe a manipulator with good ends. 

And this is set before his brother chooses mortality and dies a mortal death, his home is lost, he watches the evil he thought gone return and nearly destroy everything he cares for, a whole war, and then generations of men of relatively peaceful slow diminishment. 

His depiction here tracks. 

Could do with more songs, but that element of Tolkien elves always seems to get lost in live action.


----------



## billd91

doctorbadwolf said:


> Nah, they’re both layered and subtle, which is largely how you describe a manipulator with good ends.
> 
> And this is set before his brother chooses mortality and dies a mortal death, his home is lost, he watches the evil he thought gone return and nearly destroy everything he cares for, a whole war, and then generations of men of relatively peaceful slow diminishment.



Not according to the timeline in the LotR appendices. By the time the elves establish Eregion, Elros is already three centuries dead.
I'm waiting for the show to visit Númenor.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

billd91 said:


> Not according to the timeline in the LotR appendices. By the time the elves establish Eregion, Elros is already three centuries dead.
> I'm waiting for the show to visit Númenor.



Except the timeline isn’t being used here, but sure. One of the things I listed may have already happened. 

Do you feel that has some significant impact of the truth or relevance of the point I made in that post?


----------



## Hriston

doctorbadwolf said:


> Nah, they’re both layered and subtle, which is largely how you describe a manipulator with good ends.



I don't see it. Maybe you have an example from the books? In the Hobbit and LotR, he serves primarily as a source of exposition and connection to the past. He was a witness, as the herald of Gil-galad, to these earlier times.



doctorbadwolf said:


> And this is set before his brother chooses mortality and dies a mortal death,



I think this isn't right. Elrond has clearly made his choice to live among the elves, and I think it has been more than five hundred years since then (more like one thousand). Elros has surely died by this time.



doctorbadwolf said:


> his home is lost, he watches the evil he thought gone return and nearly destroy everything he cares for, a whole war, and then generations of men of relatively peaceful slow diminishment.
> 
> His depiction here tracks.
> 
> Could do with more songs, but that element of Tolkien elves always seems to get lost in live action.



I'm not sure what you think these biographical details imply about Elrond. The show-writers seem to be leaning into a certain depiction of Elrond as a crafty statesman, and I find it to be unfitting. Elrond is a lore-master and a healer. He established the refuge of Rivendell for his people after the fall of Eregion. None of that says _cunning diplomat_ to me.


----------



## Hriston

billd91 said:


> I'm waiting for the show to visit Númenor.



I think the shadow of the boat we see at the end of the second episode is going to be Numenorean.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Hriston said:


> I don't see it. Maybe you have an example from the books? In the Hobbit and LotR, he serves primarily as a source of exposition and connection to the past. He was a witness, as the herald of Gil-galad, to these earlier times.
> 
> 
> I think this isn't right. Elrond has clearly made his choice to live among the elves, and I think it has been more than five hundred years since then (more like one thousand). Elros has surely died by this time.
> 
> 
> I'm not sure what you think these biographical details imply about Elrond. The show-writers seem to be leaning into a certain depiction of Elrond as a crafty statesman, and I find it to be unfitting. Elrond is a lore-master and a healer. He established the refuge of Rivendell for his people after the fall of Eregion. None of that says _cunning diplomat_ to me.



He’s explicitly stated to hold a political position in an important court at this point in his life. A herald in this context is a political position. A diplomat. 

If you find it incongruous to see the young version of a subtle and wise leader who is stated to have been a diplomat under a great old king depicted as a canny diplomat…I think you and I have biases and expectations that are too far apart of further discussion on the topic to be fruitful.


----------



## billd91

Hriston said:


> I think the shadow of the boat we see at the end of the second episode is going to be Numenorean.



I hope so. They're the major power of the Second Age. We need to start seeing them.


Hriston said:


> I'm not sure what you think these biographical details imply about Elrond. The show-writers seem to be leaning into a certain depiction of Elrond as a crafty statesman, and I find it to be unfitting. Elrond is a lore-master and a healer. He established the refuge of Rivendell for his people after the fall of Eregion. None of that says _cunning diplomat_ to me.



No, I'm down with it so far. Elrond isn't *just* a lore master and healer. He was the herald of the high king - and that probably means he got sent around doing things for Gil-Galad like being sent to Eregion from Lindon. Plus, he becomes the lord of the Noldor remnant in Middle Earth when he leads them and establishes Imladris, and that tells me the people followed him, probably because he was good at leading and statecraft and not just lore and healing. He's definitely a polymath.


----------



## Ryujin

Hriston said:


> I'm not sure what you think these biographical details imply about Elrond. The show-writers seem to be leaning into a certain depiction of Elrond as a crafty statesman, and I find it to be unfitting. Elrond is a lore-master and a healer. He established the refuge of Rivendell for his people after the fall of Eregion. None of that says _cunning diplomat_ to me.



You're disregarding the possibility of change, due to extremis. We may well see him become the person he is, in later life, through the difficulties that we know are coming.


----------



## Hriston

doctorbadwolf said:


> He’s explicitly stated to hold a political position in an important court at this point in his life. A herald in this context is a political position. A diplomat.
> 
> If you find it incongruous to see the young version of a subtle and wise leader who is stated to have been a diplomat under a great old king depicted as a canny diplomat…I think you and I have biases and expectations that are too far apart of further discussion on the topic to be fruitful.



I think you're right about that. I don't think Elrond shouldn't be capable. It's just that we see him maneuvering against Galadriel while at the same time professing friendship, which leans too far into the dishonest politician trope for the conception I have of the character.


----------



## reelo

Dioltach said:


> ... they're doing the right thing in convincing her to make the voyage to Valinor - which, it must be noted, isn't just some empty honour, it's a reward that every Elf has spent thousands of years yearning for.




A reward they are technically not able to bestow: Galadriel having been one of the chief actors in the Fëanorian rebellion, after the War of Wrath she is one of the few remaining Noldor in Middle-Earth explicitly bound by the Doom of Mandos and banned from returning to Valinor.

It is only when (In the Lord of the Rings) she prays to Manwë that Frodo might go to Eressëa in her stead, that her ban is lifted, by the Valar themselves!


----------



## Nikosandros

Aeson said:


> I'm enjoying Poppy and Nori. A new Merry and Pippin. I'm not sure about Elrond. He has some big shoes to fill.



Yes Poppy and Nori work for me, but I'm perplexed both by Elrond and especially Galadriel. I get that she's supposed to be extremely intense and driven, but - in the first two episodes, I found her somewhat unconvincing.


----------



## Hriston

Ryujin said:


> You're disregarding the possibility of change, due to extremis. We may well see him become the person he is, in later life, through the difficulties that we know are coming.



Yes, of course. This is standard character development in a prequel. You give the character a flaw they didn't have in the original material and have them overcome it by the end of the prequel to become more like the character we recognize. It's getting pretty tired as a storytelling technique if you ask me.


----------



## Hriston

billd91 said:


> I hope so. They're the major power of the Second Age. We need to start seeing them.



Agreed, and the fact they haven't been mentioned in any of the exposition is quite odd, as if their existence is a secret to Galadriel and the elves of Middle-earth. I think the show wants it to be a big reveal in the third episode for some reason.



billd91 said:


> No, I'm down with it so far. Elrond isn't *just* a lore master and healer. He was the herald of the high king - and that probably means he got sent around doing things for Gil-Galad like being sent to Eregion from Lindon. Plus, he becomes the lord of the Noldor remnant in Middle Earth when he leads them and establishes Imladris, and that tells me the people followed him, probably because he was good at leading and statecraft and not just lore and healing. He's definitely a polymath.



I'd be fine with that depiction. It's the hint of backstabbing that seems off to me.


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots

MarkB said:


> Even in Tolkien's writing, elves weren't perfect beings incapable of cruelty or pettiness.



That's more of a 2E D&D thing


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots

It amuses me that, in future, D&D players will be able to point at harfoots as an example of the 3E/4E wandering halfling. The circle is now complete.


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots

Ryujin said:


> You're disregarding the possibility of change, due to extremis. We may well see him become the person he is, in later life, through the difficulties that we know are coming.



I would assume that would be a large part of the fun of writing this series.

"They end up X, but where would they have been three thousand (!) years prior?"


----------



## Morrus

My goodness, that was good. I liked the new Game of Thrones, but this is in another league.


----------



## MarkB

Morrus said:


> My goodness, that was good. I liked the new Game of Thrones, but this is in another league.



I haven't seen the new Game of Thrones, but I did get the theme tune playing in the back of my head every time they did one of those pans across the Middle Earth map.


----------



## Olgar Shiverstone

Morrus said:


> My goodness, that was good. I liked the new Game of Thrones, but this is in another league.



Thanks for that. Yours is a review I can trust.


----------



## Morrus

MarkB said:


> I haven't seen the new Game of Thrones, but I did get the theme tune playing in the back of my head every time they did one of those pans across the Middle Earth map.



There's some irony there, as I'm pretty sure Tolkien did the fantasy map thing first!


----------



## Aeson

Nikosandros said:


> Yes Poppy and Nori work for me, but I'm perplexed both by Elrond and especially Galadriel. I get that she's supposed to be extremely intense and driven, but - in the first two episodes, I found her somewhat unconvincing.



I read, some are complaining that she's not feminine enough.  Galadriel is the least of my complaints.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

P


Hriston said:


> I think you're right about that. I don't think Elrond shouldn't be capable. It's just that we see him maneuvering against Galadriel while at the same time professing friendship, which leans too far into the dishonest politician trope for the conception I have of the character.



Fair enough. I’m certainly not discounting the possibility that by the end of the season I will fully agree with you. Amazon is the company that…did what it did…to the Wheel of Time, after all. I just don’t think that what they’ve shown is so much cunning and duplicitous as canny and skilled at social and political maneuvering. I don’t think his professed friendship is false on any level, judging purely from what has been shown.


----------



## Lidgar

I decided long ago to treat this series as a prequel to the films - and that it would follow the film version of the characters more closely than the books.

I believe in so doing, I can enjoy the series for being it’s own thing (same approach I took with Wheel of Time). I’ll reserve judgment on it as a whole until the season is finished, but so far I’m enjoying it.


----------



## reelo

I just finished the pilot. While the visuals are certainly stunning, I find the power-dynamics of the elves quite irritating. If we go by the Silmarillion, Ereinion Gil-Galad is the son of Fingon, which would make Galadriel his first cousin once removed.
Alternatively, Tolkien had planned for Gil-Galad to be the son of Orodreth, son of Angrod (Christopher Tolkien decided against this, but later regretted that decision) because it allowed Turgon to become High King first after the death of Fingon.
This would have made Galadriel Gil-Galad's great aunt.
In both of these cases she should have commanded a lot more respect from Gil-Galad than is shown in the show. She certainly wasn't spring-chicken anymore by the 2nd Age, and certainly older and wiser than Ereinion. 

Don't get me wrong: I _want_ to like the show but I'm afraid they're taking "creative liberties" that chafe heavily with established lore.


----------



## Morrus

reelo said:


> Don't get me wrong: I _want_ to like the show but I'm afraid they're taking "creative liberties" that chafe heavily with established lore.



This show is more for us LoTR movie fans, not entrenched Tolkien nerds. Folks who quote from the Silmarilion are probanly not the target audience.


----------



## Ryujin

reelo said:


> I just finished the pilot. While the visuals are certainly stunning, I find the power-dynamics of the elves quite irritating. If we go by the Silmarillion, Ereinion Gil-Galad is the son of Fingon, which would make Galadriel his first cousin once removed.
> Alternatively, Tolkien had planned for Gil-Galad to be the son of Orodreth, son of Angrod (Christopher Tolkien decided against this, but later regretted that decision) because it allowed Turgon to become High King first after the death of Fingon.
> This would have made Galadriel Gil-Galad's great aunt.
> In both of these cases she should have commanded a lot more respect from Gil-Galad than is shown in the show. She certainly wasn't spring-chicken anymore by the 2nd Age, and certainly older and wiser than Ereinion.
> 
> Don't get me wrong: I _want_ to like the show but I'm afraid they're taking "creative liberties" that chafe heavily with established lore.



Information from The Silmarillion is explicitly off limits to them. They don't have the rights. They can use what's in The Lord of the Rings and its appendices. Pretty sure that all you listed is off the table.


----------



## Hriston

Ryujin said:


> Information from The Silmarillion is explicitly off limits to them. They don't have the rights. They can use what's in The Lord of the Rings and its appendices. Pretty sure that all you listed is off the table.



Does this mean they have to change things that aren't explicitly stated in the LotR?


----------



## reelo

Morrus said:


> This show is more for us LoTR movie fans, not entrenched Tolkien nerds. Folks who quote from the Silmarilion are probanly not the target audience



Hey, don't exclude me from the movie fans! They were done with uttermost respect and I love them to bits! (Edit: LotR, I mean. The Hobbit movies are utter trash)

This however? I have no problem with ethnically diverse elves, dwarves, or proto-hobbits, nor anything that is completely made-up but doesn't contradict canon. The depiction of Galadriel and her interplay with Gil-Galad and Elrond does just that, though, imho.


----------



## reelo

Ryujin said:


> Information from The Silmarillion is explicitly off limits to them. They don't have the rights. They can use what's in The Lord of the Rings and its appendices. Pretty sure that all you listed is off the table.



It might be off-limits to show or even just name-drop, but the contracts Amazon signed supposedly stipulate that the show can nonetheless not explicitly contradict any of that material.


----------



## GreyLord

Morrus said:


> This show is more for us LoTR movie fans, not entrenched Tolkien nerds. Folks who quote from the Silmarilion are probanly not the target audience




So...if I understand right...JRR Tolkien and Christopher Tolkien would hate this show?

(That sounds about right...I think JRR Tolkien felt nothing would do justice for LotR or it's properties in a translation from written book to film form, and Christopher Tolkien I think felt similarly).


----------



## Ryujin

Hriston said:


> Does this mean they have to change things that aren't explicitly stated in the LotR?



I should think it means they would have to consciously steer away from it, in order to avoid a lawsuit.


----------



## Ryujin

reelo said:


> It might be off-limits to show or even just name-drop, but the contracts Amazon signed supposedly stipulate that the show can nonetheless not explicitly contradict any of that material.



That would seem to be an impossible tightrope to walk.


----------



## Morrus

GreyLord said:


> So...if I understand right...JRR Tolkien and Christopher Tolkien would hate this show?



You’d have to ask them. I don’t imagine you or I  are authorised to speak for them.


----------



## Davies

So ... that's the Arkenstone in the chest that the Durins are fretting about, right?


----------



## Hriston

Davies said:


> So ... that's the Arkenstone in the chest that the Durins are fretting about, right?



The Arkenstone was found in Erebor. Mithril would be my guess.


----------



## Argyle King

I'm not sure how I feel yet. 

This far, I'm feeling similar to how I felt watching some of the okay-ish Boba Fett episodes: I wouldn't say they're bad, but something doesn't seem quite right. 

FWIW, I fall somewhere between being a Tolkien-nerd and being a fan of the movies. I read The Hobbit when I was a kid; I enjoyed LoTR movies as an adult. I didn't particularly like the more-recent Hobbit movies but highly enjoyed the old cartoon-movie.


----------



## Hriston

I've done some re-watching of the first two episodes and have a few observations.

When the Galadriel voice-over is talking about the Noldor's journey to Middle-earth to make war on Morgoth, we see a map of the coast of Middle-earth as it appears in the Third Age, as if Beleriand had never existed.

I don't think Finrod ever vowed to destroy Sauron, nor was he hunting Sauron when he was captured. However, he did make a vow to help the descendants of Barahir which he was fulfilling when he was captured by Sauron and imprisoned in Tol-in-Gaurhoth. He was killed there by one of Sauron's werewolves, defending the life of Beren son of Barahir.

The regional accents used for the harfoots and dwarves are a bit jarring. IMO, it would have been better not to associate fantastic races with real world nationalities.

According to the scene-transition map, the Arondir/Bronwyn subplot takes place in the east of what will become Mordor. Although I acknowledge the need to introduce the location early in the series in some way because of its later importance as Sauron's chosen home-base, I find the idea that elves under the command of Gil-galad would be occupying Mordor to watch over a population of men whose ancestors were loyal to Morgoth during the War of the Jewels which took place in Beleriand, around two thousand miles away from Mordor, to be somewhat improbable. The realm of Gil-galad at its height extended only as far eastward as the Misty Mountains.

I'm getting major Viggo Mortensen as Aragorn vibes off of Halbrand. Coupled with the boy in the Southlands/Mordor saying their king would return one day, I have no idea where they're going with this.

The Stranger - we're being given lots of hints that this is Sauron, and I think the most interesting thing that's happened with him so far is when asked who he is, he repeats the words_ mána_ and _úrë. _These are the quenya words for "blessed" and "fire". All I can make of the way he has been introduced is the show might be taking the concept that the lives of the Valar (Maiar like Sauron included) are bound within the world so that their lives become its life to mean that Sauron cannot die and has been "sent back" like Gandalf, not of his own will, and has not yet fully remembered who he is.


----------



## Davies

Hriston said:


> The Stranger - we're being given lots of hints that this is Sauron, and I think the most interesting thing that's happened with him so far is when asked who he is, he repeats the words_ mána_ and _úrë. _These are the quenya words for "blessed" and "fire".



Or possibly "the Secret Fire ... the flame of Anor".


----------



## Paul Farquhar

Hriston said:


> which he obviously knew ahead of time because he wrote the speech.



Keeping the confidences of you liege is a pretty important part of the job of herald. Leaking the contents of a speech ahead of schedule is the sort of thing dishonest politicians do.


----------



## Nikosandros

Aeson said:


> I read, some are complaining that she's not feminine enough.  Galadriel is the least of my complaints.



I never said anything about feminine. I'm simply not liking her acting so far. IMO, she's overdoing the intense and fixed stare, for example.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

Hriston said:


> as if Beleriand had never existed.



This is because the only map of Beleriand is in the Silmarillion, and therefore off limits.


Hriston said:


> I don't think Finrod ever vowed to destroy Sauron



Tolkien never said he didn't. You think Tolkien wrote down every single thing a person who lived for thousands of years ever did and said?


Hriston said:


> The regional accents used for the harfoots and dwarves are a bit jarring. IMO, it would have been better not to associate fantastic races with real world nationalities.



They aren't. The harfoots are using a mix of northern and central British accents. For example, Lenny Henry (Sadoc) is using his own regional accent. He comes from Dudley, in the West Midlands. And of course Nori's Australian accent creeps in as a tendency to go UP at the end of sentences.


----------



## John R Davis

Yep. They can't use the Silmarillion ( I hope that's not whats in the box! Silmarils).
I thought all mountains had hearts.

I really enjoyed. I bonded with many of the characters very quickly ( unlike HOTD where I'm still not sure).

The Stranger will be the Miai Olorin I think.

I wasn't offended by the Harfoots having a slight Irish twang; and I thought they were quite clever and not country bumpkin compared to previous hobbits on the big screen.

Why are all humans always so scruffy in ME media!

Very good; more please


----------



## reelo

Having the Fëanorians land in Eriador instead of Beleriand, having a Valinorean elf, daughter of Finarfin, being bossed around by one of her lesser cousins (because that's what Gil-Galad is), and making her travel to Valinor _against_ the ban of the Valar _DOES_ "offensively contradict" things they don't have the rights to, as far as I'm concerned.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

John R Davis said:


> I hope that's not whats in the box! Silmarils



It will be Mithril:

It's coveted by elves - hence the need to keep it secret;
It's the cause of the fall of Khazad Dum;
One of the elven rings is made of Mithril.



John R Davis said:


> Why are all humans always so scruffy in ME media!



The southlanders are meant to be poor. We haven't met Numenoreans yet.


----------



## GreyLord

Morrus said:


> You’d have to ask them. I don’t imagine you or I  are authorised to speak for them.




As per your statement, those who could quote the Silmarilion...which...if anyone could...they could.

And, as per your statement, you said those who could quote it were not the target audience.

Just rephrasing to see if I understood your meaning well enough.

(though the later portion of what I stated is something that has been tossed about in regard to Tolkien (both of them) and their thoughts pertaining to film or TV portrayals of Middle Earth writings, which means someone already asked them about that portion or they shared it without being asked already).

PS:  Just to be clear, I don't have an opinion on the show itself currently.  I haven't watched any of it so I don't know what to think of it.  I think I am an adequate fan of LotR ideas and fiction, but probably not as big as most of those who have jumped onto watching it already.  I have the ability, just haven't taken the time to watch it.

This isn't a critique of the show, just an observation regarding the statements about it.  It's not in bad company, the younger Tolkien (Christopher) didn't think much about the LotR or Hobbit Movies either from what I've heard, nor felt it caputured the literature all that well.  Other younger members of the family (or at least one, I think their name is...Jacob?) were at least somewhat enthused by the movies, or at least the LotR movies.  Christopher Tolkien seemed to also have a quote or two regarding his father's thoughts on these items as well, or at least from that perspective before his Father's death.

I find it interesting though that your statement, in relation to what I've read about the Tolkien's thoughts (both Father and Son and their writings) say in regards to film media portraying Middle Earth, and thus probably a good indication what their thoughts would be pertaining to the show, and suprisingly, that it may be a good representation of what they would feel about it when you take into consideration how they felt about more faithful adaptations of the Middle Earth works.

Personally I really enjoy the LotR AND the Hobbit Trilogies, speaking for myself.  I haven't seen the TV show though, so no idea if I would like it or not.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

GreyLord said:


> (though the later portion of what I stated is something that has been tossed about in regard to Tolkien (both of them) and their thoughts pertaining to film or TV portrayals of Middle Earth writings, which means someone already asked them about that portion or they shared it without being asked already).



JRRT disliked film and TV in general (and gramophones, and any new-fangled media). So it's fair to say that he would not have enjoyed _any_ TV or movie adaptation of his work (or anyone else's work). If it's not a quiet evening down the pub chatting with mates, JRRT would have hated it.


----------



## Nikosandros

Paul Farquhar said:


> JRRT disliked film and TV in general (and gramophones, and any new-fangled media). So it's fair to say that he would not have enjoyed _any_ TV or movie adaptation of his work (or anyone else's work). If it's not a quiet evening down the pub chatting with mates, JRRT would have hated it.



Very true. He was a staunch conservative in many ways besides politics.


----------



## Ryujin

John R Davis said:


> The Stranger will be the Miai Olorin I think.



That was my thought, too.


----------



## MarkB

Morrus said:


> This show is more for us LoTR movie fans, not entrenched Tolkien nerds. Folks who quote from the Silmarilion are probanly not the target audience.



I feel quite fortunate in that regard, although I'm a big fan of the novels and I definitely read through The Silmarillion and The Book of Lost Tales during my teens, at this point when it comes to anything specific from those sources, I'm


----------



## reelo

Ryujin said:


> That was my thought, too.



Olorin/Gandalf doesn't arrive in ME until 1000TA, well after the Battle of the Last Alliance, though, when the Elven Rings had already existed for over a millennium.


----------



## Nikosandros

reelo said:


> Olorin/Gandalf doesn't arrive in ME until 1000TA, well after the Battle of the Last Alliance, though, when the Elven Rings had already existed for over a millennium.



I don't think that they felt particularly constrained by the "official" timeline.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

reelo said:


> Olorin/Gandalf doesn't arrive in ME until 1000TA, well after the Battle of the Last Alliance, though, when the Elven Rings had already existed for over a millennium.






Nikosandros said:


> I don't think that they felt particularly constrained by the "official" timeline.



Whilst they might be adjusting the timeline (and I have no problem with that), it's also possible that the separate storylines are not in fact contemporaneous, but are actually happening in three separate time zones. The Witcher series 1 did this. Note that no dates are given. They could use dates, since the timeline is in the LotR appendix.

It's also possible that "Gandalf" is a fake-out. That's what you are supposed to think.


----------



## reelo

Paul Farquhar said:


> It's also possible that "Gandalf" is a fake-out. That's what you are supposed to think.




That's my guess as well. At least I hope it is a fake-out. The wizards are supposed to arrive in Lindon by boat, iirc. 
Círdan hands Gandalf the Ring of Fire on that occasion.


----------



## Nikosandros

Paul Farquhar said:


> Whilst they might be adjusting the timeline (and I have no problem with that), it's also possible that the separate storylines are not in fact contemporaneous, but are actually happening in three separate time zones. The Witcher series 1 did this. Note that no dates are given. They could use dates, since the timeline is in the LotR appendix.




They certainly could show different stories separated in time, I hadn't thought about that. I have a vague recollection that I've read that the authors stated that they would compress the timeline in order not to have all the non-elf characters die off of old age, but I'm not positive.



Paul Farquhar said:


> It's also possible that "Gandalf" is a fake-out. That's what you are supposed to think.



I agree that we don't know yet. He could be many different things at this point and, certainly, the audience is meant to be kept guessing.


----------



## Olgar Shiverstone

reelo said:


> Olorin/Gandalf doesn't arrive in ME until 1000TA, well after the Battle of the Last Alliance, though, when the Elven Rings had already existed for over a millennium.



Right ... I seem to recall some explicit text about Cirdan giving Gandalf his ring when Gandalf arrives on the shores of Middle Earth. Having Gandalf/Olorin show up in the second age would explicitly contradict that.

Ah! Found the text I remember in the Appendices:



			
				RotKAppendix said:
			
		

> For Círdan saw further and deeper than any other in Middle-earth, and he welcomed Mithrandir at the Grey Havens, knowing whence he came and whither he would return.
> 
> 'Take this ring, Master,' he said, 'for your labours will be heavy; but it will support you in the weariness that you have taken upon yourself. For this is the Ring of Fire, and with it you may rekindle hearts in a world that grows chill. But as for me, my heart is with the Sea, and I will dwell by the grey shores until the last ship sails. I will await you.'


----------



## Zardnaar

I'm not familiar with the source material. Read the hobbit a long time ago, never finished LOTR I find it boring. 

 Show so far is alright better than WoT, not as good as House of the Dragon, Witcher or Shadow and Bone. BUT it's early so see how it goes.

 5 fantasy shows, 4 of them are good or better imho.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

reelo said:


> That's my guess as well. At least I hope it is a fake-out. The wizards are supposed to arrive in Lindon by boat, iirc.
> Círdan hands Gandalf the Ring of Fire on that occasion.



Doesn't bother me. If they want to tell a story about how Gandalf helped to found the Shire, I'm fine with that so long as the story is entertaining. It's not holy scripture, it's an entertainment.


----------



## Zubatcarteira

They're definitely changing the lore quite a bit, and the dialogue is weird at times, but I liked it well enough. Nowhere near as bad as I expected.


----------



## Morrus

I think if it's NOT Gandalf, they're trying very hard to make you think it is.


----------



## Zubatcarteira

I wonder if they're changing how the Elven reincarnation works, everyone seemed to treat Finrod's death as quite final, and Elrond didn't say, "Girl, you can see your brother again when you go to Valinor, stop talking like he's dead".


----------



## MarkB

Paul Farquhar said:


> Whilst they might be adjusting the timeline (and I have no problem with that), it's also possible that the separate storylines are not in fact contemporaneous, but are actually happening in three separate time zones. The Witcher series 1 did this. Note that no dates are given. They could use dates, since the timeline is in the LotR appendix.
> 
> It's also possible that "Gandalf" is a fake-out. That's what you are supposed to think.



I don't think it's separate times. All parties simultaneously witnessed the red meteor that turned out to be the stranger, and that would have to be a pretty big red herring.


----------



## John R Davis

It's plausible Miai came and went throughout the ages so I'm fine for meteorite man to be one!


----------



## Rabulias

Morrus said:


> I think if it's NOT Gandalf, they're trying very hard to make you think it is.



The fireflies dying off after their use seemed very un-Gandalf to me.


----------



## Bagpuss

Henadic Theologian said:


> Amazon should have just gotten the licence to the Forgotten Realms, instead of ultra rigid Middle Earth.



I don't think it would have worked FR and even D&D still doesn't have the same name recognition and prestige as LotR.


Henadic Theologian said:


> Just checked the Rings of Power trailer it's getting ratioed all to hell, roughly 445,000 dislikes to 75,000 likes. Should have gone with FR.



Haters gonna hate. I had some issues with it which I'll mention elsewhere but on the whole it was a much more engaging series than Obi-Wan and probably had more respect for the source material too. I'd give it a 7 or 8 out of 10, but I'm not a huge Tolkien fan.


----------



## Bagpuss

Rabulias said:


> The fireflies dying off after their use seemed very un-Gandalf to me.



I thought they were reflecting his energy levels as they sort of collapsed as he did.


----------



## Ryujin

I certainly agree that the fireflies dying doesn't seem very Gandalf-like. IMDB simply lists the character as "The Stranger" for all 8 episodes, at the moment. I don't think, however, that he's Sauron either. If he's going to influence the creation of the rings, then he's pretty far off the mark at the moment. He also seems to be human in appearance, rather than an Elf, so he wouldn't be trusted by the Elves in such a heavy task.


----------



## TheSword

Bagpuss said:


> I thought they were reflecting his energy levels as they sort of collapsed as he did.



I agree with @Rabulias, killing animal life around him is definitely not very Gandalf. But very Sauron.

I also don’t think it’s a coincidence that we see him fall to earth as a flaming meteor when we see Galadriel banish him at the end of the Hobbit films as a great meteor that then lands in Mordor.

Blessed Fire definitely isn’t Gandalf.

I think they are trying to show the similarity that originally existed between Gandalf and Sauron. Presumably we will see now the rings of power make him so much more powerful.

For the record I really enjoyed the first two seasons. All the BS one star reviews on Rotten Tomatoes is why fans don’t get nice things and why there are so few really good quality fantasy genre stuff comparative to horror, crime, romance, action etc.


----------



## Hriston

Davies said:


> Or possibly "the Secret Fire ... the flame of Anor".



I re-watched the scene (again), and he says this in response to being asked _where_ he's from and if there are any others like him. I agree that it's probably a reference to the Secret Fire, aka the Flame Imperishable. The lines he scratches in the dirt could be runes, although Nori suggests it might be a map. This left me with the impression that he's referring to Aman and that he has been cast out in some way.


----------



## Hriston

Paul Farquhar said:


> Keeping the confidences of you liege is a pretty important part of the job of herald. Leaking the contents of a speech ahead of schedule is the sort of thing dishonest politicians do.



There's no question of him being good at his job. The question is whether he's being completely honest with his so-called friend. I think in that moment he chose to maintain professional discretion over being forthright with his friend. He seems to have good intentions, but it was unfair to Galadriel, in my opinion, not to tell her that she was essentially walking into an ambush.


----------



## John R Davis

It's almost like we need to watch to find out!
Is it Friday again yet


----------



## Hriston

Paul Farquhar said:


> This is because the only map of Beleriand is in the Silmarillion, and therefore off limits.



Using the Third Age map wasn't the only choice available. By doing so, the narrative constructed is that the War of the Jewels took place somewhere east of the Blue Mountains in contradiction of the published materials.



Paul Farquhar said:


> Tolkien never said he didn't. You think Tolkien wrote down every single thing a person who lived for thousands of years ever did and said?



You're correct. I should have said "in Tolkien's writings" which is what I meant.



Paul Farquhar said:


> They aren't. The harfoots are using a mix of northern and central British accents. For example, Lenny Henry (Sadoc) is using his own regional accent. He comes from Dudley, in the West Midlands. And of course Nori's Australian accent creeps in as a tendency to go UP at the end of sentences.



Huh. To me, the harfoot actors sound like they're trying to do an Irish accent while the dwarf actors sound like they're trying to do a Scottish accent. I can also hear where they're failing at times to do so and where it makes the dialog sound a bit strained and unnatural, which is part of my complaint.


----------



## reelo

TheSword said:


> All the BS one star reviews on Rotten Tomatoes is why fans don’t get nice things and why there are so few really good quality fantasy genre stuff comparative to horror, crime, romance, action etc.




While I agree that most of the RT reviews are bots, I think some critique is valid.
As for your assessment that this is "why there is so little good fantasy stuff", that's simple: either do a _FAITHFUL_ adaption of existing stuff, or have writers, you know, come up with quality _original_ stuff.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

Hriston said:


> Huh. To me, the harfoot actors sound like they're trying to do an Irish accent while the dwarf actors sound like they're trying to do a Scottish accent. I can also hear where they're failing at times to do so and where it makes the dialog sound a bit strained and unnatural, which is part of my complaint.



How familiar are you with a West Midlands accent? The "Harfoot accent" is an intentionally artificial mixture. It's what Tolkien would have referred to as a "working class" accent, back in the days when it was acceptable to use the term.


----------



## Zaukrie

reelo said:


> While I agree that most of the RT reviews are bots, I think some critique is valid.
> As for your assessment that this is "why there is so little good fantasy stuff", that's simple: either do a _FAITHFUL_ adaption of existing stuff, or have writers, you know, come up with quality _original_ stuff.



I'm curious, why does a new story have to be "faithful"? Also, given this time period wasn't written about in any detail, how do you know it isn't what happened in a fictional world? Like, why does any of this matter if it's a good story? I just don't get it. I truly don't understand all the anger and hate on the internet over fiction that is literally not offensive.


----------



## reelo

Zaukrie said:


> Given this time period wasn't written about in any detail, how do you know it isn't what happened in a fictional world?




It _WAS_ written about, by the original author. In the Silmarillion, the Unfinished Tales of Middle-Earth, the History of Middle-Earth series, and in letters by Tolkien. Unfortunately neither of those were parts of the licensing deal, so Amazon can't use them. BUT, according to the producers, they can also not _contradict_ what's in those writings. And that's the crux of the matter.


----------



## RuinousPowers

reelo said:


> It _WAS_ written about, by the original author. In the Silmarillion, the Unfinished Tales of Middle-Earth, the History of Middle-Earth series, and in letters by Tolkien. Unfortunately neither of those were parts of the licensing deal, so Amazon can't use them. BUT, according to the producers, they can also not _contradict_ what's in those writings. And that's the crux of the matter.



Don't we have to assume that all the stuff has been vetted by Tolkien's estate, and so none of the stuff is contradicting the writings?


----------



## Zaukrie

reelo said:


> It _WAS_ written about, by the original author. In the Silmarillion, the Unfinished Tales of Middle-Earth, the History of Middle-Earth series, and in letters by Tolkien. Unfortunately neither of those were parts of the licensing deal, so Amazon can't use them. BUT, according to the producers, they can also not _contradict_ what's in those writings. And that's the crux of the matter.



Why does it matter?


----------



## FitzTheRuke

There is one thing that the show's writers know that _we don't_ and that is: Where it all is going. I think we can assume that if they have said that they mean to not contradict any of the writings, then they probably haven't, even if it _seems_ like they have, when we're not very far into the story yet.


----------



## reelo

Zaukrie said:


> Why does it matter?



If you are content with inconsequential fanfiction, it doesn't. 
But then it should be labeled as such.


----------



## Zaukrie

reelo said:


> If you are content with inconsequential fanfiction, it doesn't.
> But then it should be labeled as such.



You want some kind of disclaimer? Then the show would be ok? Again, what does it matter? What changes about the originals? Nothing. What does it matter?


----------



## Zaukrie

Zaukrie said:


> You want some kind of disclaimer? Then the show would be ok? Again, what does it matter? What changes about the originals? Nothing. What does it matter?



Really... If it was labeled fanfiction, people would stop complaining?


----------



## Morrus

reelo said:


> If you are content with inconsequential fanfiction, it doesn't.
> But then it should be labeled as such.



It’s just a tv show. It’s all inconsequential. Making it slavishly follow some existing text won’t make it any less inconsequential.


----------



## Ryujin

Just rewatched the first episode to make sure of my premise. I don't recall reading anyone here commenting on this. They seem to be going to rather great lengths to have the audience connect the dots of Theo (the kid who found the sundered sword) being the son of Bronwyn (the healer) and Arondir (the Elven watchman). They never show the kid's ears. Arondir is the only Elf in the garrison who doesn't instinctively distrust humans. Bronwyn's is the "only friendly touch" that Arondir has known during his watch. Between this, and the sword hilt, it would seem that something rather big was being set up.


----------



## MarkB

Ryujin said:


> Just rewatched the first episode to make sure of my premise. I don't recall reading anyone here commenting on this. They seem to be going to rather great lengths to have the audience connect the dots of Theo (the kid who found the sundered sword) being the son of Bronwyn (the healer) and Arondir (the Elven watchman). They never show the kid's ears. Arondir is the only Elf in the garrison who doesn't instinctively distrust humans. Bronwyn's is the "only friendly touch" that Arondir has known during his watch. Between this, and the sword hilt, it would seem that something rather big was being set up.



Plus the fact that he can hear what he assumes to be mice scurrying under the floor, loudly enough to keep him awake at night.

It seemed pretty obvious that we're supposed to draw those dots. Whether that's foreshadowing or misdirection remains to be seen.


----------



## Arilyn

Tolkien wrote a mass of information about Middle Earth. A lot of it is written as history more than literature. In order to make movies and TV shows, there is going to be a lot of changes. Events will need to be condensed, characters fleshed out, sensibilities crafted for the modern audience, etc. 

Just look at Gandalf. He feels right in the movies, but he's actually quite different. In the books, he's arrogant and makes a lot of mistakes, mistakes the script writers foisted on to other characters! 

Al we can really ask is that we feel we are transported to Middle Earth, and that there are engaging characters and epic tales that fit loosely into canon. So far, I'm enjoying the series.


----------



## Dioltach

Ryujin said:


> Just rewatched the first episode to make sure of my premise. I don't recall reading anyone here commenting on this. They seem to be going to rather great lengths to have the audience connect the dots of Theo (the kid who found the sundered sword) being the son of Bronwyn (the healer) and Arondir (the Elven watchman). They never show the kid's ears. Arondir is the only Elf in the garrison who doesn't instinctively distrust humans. Bronwyn's is the "only friendly touch" that Arondir has known during his watch. Between this, and the sword hilt, it would seem that something rather big was being set up.



My wife and I thought the same, but then we watched the two of them set out on their journey. They don't look like a couple who have been intimate enough to have a child.


----------



## Hriston

Paul Farquhar said:


> How familiar are you with a West Midlands accent?



Apparently, not very. I watched a few youtube videos purporting to be examples of West Midlands and/or Black Country accents, and it's not quite like I imagined. It actually reminded me a bit of recordings of Tolkien I've heard though.



Paul Farquhar said:


> The "Harfoot accent" is an intentionally artificial mixture. It's what Tolkien would have referred to as a "working class" accent, back in the days when it was acceptable to use the term.



I had a copy of the Nicol Williamson reading of The Hobbit when I was growing up, and I've always imagined Bilbo and other hobbits using the same accent he uses for the character. It's similar to the one used by Sean Astin for Sam in the Peter Jackson movie (although I'm sure it was butchered pretty badly by him). It's not quite what I heard in those videos, though, as a West Midlands or Black Country accent. I read that Williamson spent a lot of  time in Birmingham growing up, though, so it might not be that far off.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

Ryujin said:


> Just rewatched the first episode to make sure of my premise. I don't recall reading anyone here commenting on this. They seem to be going to rather great lengths to have the audience connect the dots of Theo (the kid who found the sundered sword) being the son of Bronwyn (the healer) and Arondir (the Elven watchman). They never show the kid's ears. Arondir is the only Elf in the garrison who doesn't instinctively distrust humans. Bronwyn's is the "only friendly touch" that Arondir has known during his watch. Between this, and the sword hilt, it would seem that something rather big was being set up.




If you go back to before the first trailer came out and we just had interviews with people involved with the show and a few stills released, I am pretty sure I read in one of them that those two do get together as a couple, and yes, she has a son, but from before meeting him, I think I also remember.


----------



## Nikosandros

Dioltach said:


> My wife and I thought the same, but then we watched the two of them set out on their journey. They don't look like a couple who have been intimate enough to have a child.



I agree. My impression is that they haven't even explicitly declared to each other, much less become intimate.


----------



## Ryujin

Dioltach said:


> My wife and I thought the same, but then we watched the two of them set out on their journey. They don't look like a couple who have been intimate enough to have a child.



A couple who have spent years trying to not look like a couple, because both of their races consider it to be a taboo, might behave that way even when no one seems to be around, just to be safe.


----------



## Ryujin

Enevhar Aldarion said:


> If you go back to before the first trailer came out and we just had interviews with people involved with the show and a few stills released, I am pretty sure I read in one of them that those two do get together as a couple, and yes, she has a son, but from before meeting him, I think I also remember.



I have just started rewatching those, to see if there's any hint.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

Ryujin said:


> I have just started rewatching those, to see if there's any hint.




Of course, the problem with trailers is they so often include stuff that end up cut from the final version, or heavily reworked, like with Rogue One. I still want the original ending from the trailer where the two leads survive.

Anyway, what I am remembering was definitely in a written article, maybe the one Vanity Fair did with all the first looks at several of the characters, including those two?


----------



## OneRedRook

I've enjoyed the current two episodes for the most part. I do kind of wish that the elves were a bit more fey; I quite like Galadriel's high-mindedness, and would have liked to see a bit more of that from the rest of the elven side of the story (Elrond gets a pass here as I feel like being even-tempered is probably one of his fundamental character traits). Ultimately the show went for a more human-accessible take, which is fine, but if they are going to do that I'd have preferred they keep a closer focus on the human stories.

In particular, the Arondir/Bronwyn story feels heavy-handed so far, and I just can't see this Gil-Galad wielding Aeglos on the slopes of Mount Doom. Maybe they'll turn it around.

The harfoots have been fun to watch. I don't understand the link the story was trying to draw between then Stranger's broken twig and the dad's broken ankle, though. Was he trying to warn Nori? Is he accidentally prophetic? I don't get it.

I'm also not really sure what they're doing with Galadriel-adrift-at-sea; the sea-monster bit in particular felt like a bit of unresolved "and-then-this-happened" storytelling.

All that said, apart from the visuals, I've really enjoyed the orcs-and-dark-magic scene, most of the Galadriel and Elrond scenes, and Bronwyn and Theo taking on the orc. The scenes with the Stranger I feel I can't judge until we see the payoff, but they have the potential to be good as well.

I have a bet with myself that Galadriel will somehow be responsible for Sauron fully taking on 'The Eye' as his identity. Like, I know his sigil currently looks like an eye so maybe we'll find out he's already taken that on, but I'm expecting her to cause him to lose one of his eyes, or something similar.



reelo said:


> having a Valinorean elf, daughter of Finarfin, being bossed around by one of her lesser cousins (because that's what Gil-Galad is),




I mean, he is High King of the Noldor in Middle-earth. The problem here is that Galadriel is the youngest child of the youngest child of Finwe; a lot of systems of organising succession would place her as one of the last choices for the crown (I spent the last hour or so looking over the relevant family trees trying to tease out what their system is, a process which isn't helped by the fact that Gil-Galad's placement in the Silmarillion seems to be regarded as questionable if not actually incorrect, including by Christopher Tolkien apparently)

You could argue that "High King of the Noldor" didn't actually carry that much weight in the books, but I think by the Second Age everyone's calmed down a bit and generally acknowledges Gil-Galad's rule.

I realise this is the finickiest of tangential points; I'm mostly making it to try justifying the time I just spent looking at fictional family trees.



reelo said:


> and making her travel to Valinor _against_ the ban of the Valar _DOES_ "offensively contradict" things they don't have the rights to, as far as I'm concerned.




I think it's hard to say things like this contradict other works they don't have the rights to, when, like Tolkien's elves, those sources say both 'yes' and 'no'. At least one version of the story has her refusing the pardon of the Valar out of pride (as opposed to an edict banning her return). Maybe that was part of the appeal of choosing Galadriel as one of the main through-lines of the new story - her story in the sources is all over the shop, giving the writers cover whilst still staying within the rights of what they do have.

_[Edited for clarity]_


----------



## Ryujin

Enevhar Aldarion said:


> Of course, the problem with trailers is they so often include stuff that end up cut from the final version, or heavily reworked, like with Rogue One. I still want the original ending from the trailer where the two leads survive.
> 
> Anyway, what I am remembering was definitely in a written article, maybe the one Vanity Fair did with all the first looks at several of the characters, including those two?



Turns out that if you rewatch the original trailers, with some context from the first two episodes, they become really spoileriffic.


----------



## TheSword

reelo said:


> While I agree that most of the RT reviews are bots, I think some critique is valid.
> As for your assessment that this is "why there is so little good fantasy stuff", that's simple: either do a _FAITHFUL_ adaption of existing stuff, or have writers, you know, come up with quality _original_ stuff.



What’s wrong with being inspired by something? Nobody minds when somebody reimagines Shakespeare… well some people do, they’re just not worth worrying about. It’s a good thing to take a novel and adapt it to the screen. Most people understand things won’t translate directly.

The fragments this series is based on are snippets, pieced together from appendixes, off shoots and ramblings. Never turned into a coherent story. Maybe it would have more had Tolkein had time, but he didn’t and so it wasn’t. What makes Tolkien’s work sacrosanct when other IP is fair game.


----------



## Morrus

TheSword said:


> What’s wrong with being inspired by something? Nobody minds when somebody reimagines Shakespeare… well some people do, they’re just not worth worrying about. It’s a good thing to take a novel and adapt it to the screen. Most people understand things won’t translate directly.
> 
> The fragments this series is based on are snippets, pieced together from appendixes, off shoots and ramblings. What makes Tolkien’s work sacrosanct when everything else is fair game?



Like Marvel movies aren't panel-accurate versions of the comics. Usually a literal translation from page to screen would be awful.


----------



## TheSword

reelo said:


> Having the Fëanorians land in Eriador instead of Beleriand, having a Valinorean elf, daughter of Finarfin, being bossed around by one of her lesser cousins (because that's what Gil-Galad is), and making her travel to Valinor _against_ the ban of the Valar _DOES_ "offensively contradict" things they don't have the rights to, as far as I'm concerned.



Offensive? How can this be offensive? Who is insulted by this, in what way, and how is it offensive to you?


----------



## Davies

OneRedRook said:


> The harfoots have been fun to watch. I don't understand the link the story was trying to draw between then Stranger's broken twig and the dad's broken ankle, though. Was he trying to warn Nori? Is he accidentally prophetic? I don't get it.



If you believe that the Stranger is benevolent, then he may have been trying to warn her. If you believe him to be malevolent, it is possible that he caused the accident so that the harfoots don't go their way before they help him.

Or, possibly, there is no causal connection.


----------



## MarkB

OneRedRook said:


> I'm also not really sure what they're doing with Galadriel-adrift-at-sea; the sea-monster bit in particular felt like a bit of unresolved "and-then-this-happened" storytelling.



Yeah, there's definitely something unresolved with that. My best guess is that they've been picked up by a Corsair ship, and that the wyrm will be their unintentional rescuer from that situation.


----------



## Ryujin

MarkB said:


> Yeah, there's definitely something unresolved with that. My best guess is that they've been picked up by a Corsair ship, and that the wyrm will be their unintentional rescuer from that situation.



I'm voting Numenor, based on the little bit of sail we can see.


----------



## John R Davis

Morrus said:


> It’s just a tv show. It’s all inconsequential. Making it slavishly follow some existing text won’t make it any less inconsequential.



I'm fine with them tweaking as they need, as you say, despite the wording you have used.


----------



## Olgar Shiverstone

MarkB said:


> Yeah, there's definitely something unresolved with that. My best guess is that they've been picked up by a Corsair ship, and that the wyrm will be their unintentional rescuer from that situation.



I think the DM just rolled a wandering monster.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

MarkB said:


> I feel quite fortunate in that regard, although I'm a big fan of the novels and I definitely read through The Silmarillion and The Book of Lost Tales during my teens, at this point when it comes to anything specific from those sources, I'm
> View attachment 260367



Same. I have, at times in the past, been _obsessed_ with the Legendarium. I knew all about Faenor, Gil-Galad, and have read everything published before about the early 2000’s. 

Luckily, ADHD robs me of details pretty relentlessly, so I’ve learned to not care about the sorts of changes they’ve made. 

Though I do and will always hate the exclusion of Tom Bombadil and the Scouring of The Shire from the movies.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Davies said:


> Or possibly "the Secret Fire ... the flame of Anor".



Doesn’t that refer to the ring he wouldn’t have yet?


reelo said:


> Having the Fëanorians land in Eriador instead of Beleriand, having a Valinorean elf, daughter of Finarfin, being bossed around by one of her lesser cousins (because that's what Gil-Galad is), and making her travel to Valinor _against_ the ban of the Valar _DOES_ "offensively contradict" things they don't have the rights to, as far as I'm concerned.



Those are fairly “in the weeds” details, to be fair.


----------



## Hriston

One last observation is the fundamental change this show presents to the departure of the elves from Middle-earth to the Undying Lands. In the source material, individual elves make this decision for themselves, and when they do, they either build a boat or they take ship from the Grey Havens. As long as they aren't under the Ban, they don't need anyone's permission. They just go.

The reason many elves, including Galadriel, haven't left Middle-earth in the Second Age is because they don't want to leave. Many of them were born in Middle-earth. It's their home where they've labored and fought. They have friends and families there. Some of them, including Galadriel, have ambitions of ruling lands of their own in the wide spaces of Middle-earth. That's why Galadriel left Aman and why she is unwilling to heed the summons to return at the end of the First Age.

The alternative concept the show presents is completely bizarre. It depicts every elf as eager to give up the life they've known as soon as the High King deems to reward them for services rendered. It's unthinkable that Galadriel might not accept his bounty. The corollary, of course, is that if Gil-galad doesn't pick you as one of the lucky winners, you're imprisoned in Middle-earth where you absolutely don't want to be. It's distopian. The scene on the boat reminded me of Logan's Run.


----------



## Davies

doctorbadwolf said:


> Doesn’t that refer to the ring he wouldn’t have yet?



There are two schools of thought on that; one of them, as you say, says that he's talking about Narya, where the other notes that "Anor" is the Sindarin for "sun" and concludes that he's referring to the fruit of Laurelin and thus the light of Valinor in general.


----------



## Hriston

Davies said:


> There are two schools of thought on that; one of them, as you say, says that he's talking about Narya, where the other notes that "Anor" is the Sindarin for "sun" and concludes that he's referring to the fruit of Laurelin and thus the light of Valinor in general.



Or just what it says: the Secret Fire, which is the Flame Imperishable which is with Ilúvatar and gives reality and life to all creation. Tolkien said it’s the Holy Ghost, so basically on a mission from God.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Davies said:


> There are two schools of thought on that; one of them, as you say, says that he's talking about Narya, where the other notes that "Anor" is the Sindarin for "sun" and concludes that he's referring to the fruit of Laurelin and thus the light of Valinor in general.



Seems like that leads back to the ring, to me, but yeah I don’t think the Stranger is Gandalf. 
Some fan service is just too silly.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

TheSword said:


> Offensive? How can this be offensive? Who is insulted by this, in what way, and how is it offensive to you?



When Tolkien visited the USA he was dismayed about just how seriously people were taking his work, which he was well aware was just a piece of fiction created for his own amusement. He was concerned that is had become a substitute for "true" religion, as he believed it. By that time he was too old to do much about it, although he touches on those issues in his forward to LotR.


----------



## trappedslider

I'm getting to the point of asking "Which appendices is that in?" when someone brings up something that clearly isn't in it.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

Hriston said:


> Apparently, not very. I watched a few youtube videos purporting to be examples of West Midlands and/or Black Country accents, and it's not quite like I imagined. It actually reminded me a bit of recordings of Tolkien I've heard though.
> 
> 
> I had a copy of the Nicol Williamson reading of The Hobbit when I was growing up, and I've always imagined Bilbo and other hobbits using the same accent he uses for the character. It's similar to the one used by Sean Astin for Sam in the Peter Jackson movie (although I'm sure it was butchered pretty badly by him). It's not quite what I heard in those videos, though, as a West Midlands or Black Country accent. I read that Williamson spent a lot of  time in Birmingham growing up, though, so it might not be that far off.



Tolkien spent some time growing up in the Black Country, so it's probably pretty close to his imagined "hobbit" accent. Not familiar with that reading though. I first heard the Hobbit read to the class by my primary school teacher. Who I guess had a Liverpool accent since I lived in Liverpool at the time. With regard to the Harfoots, my first thought was "what accent?!" (apart from the occasional Australian twang) so I guess it's pretty close to the accents I grew up with in Liverpool, Lancashire and Yorkshire.

As for dwarves, the "dwarven accent" was a well established trope long before the LotR movies. Check out Baldur's Gate CRPG, and even, in written form, some of the Forgotten Realms novels. It's parodied by Terry Pratchett. I detected more Welsh than Scots in TRoP dwarves. There is a kind of logic in that. The Welsh are stereotypically famous for their mining and singing.


----------



## TheSword

doctorbadwolf said:


> Seems like that leads back to the ring, to me, but yeah I don’t think the Stranger is Gandalf.
> Some fan service is just too silly.



I’d stake all the money in pocket it is Sauron. He broke the halflings leg with magic, consciously or unconsciously! He kills fireflies! He flares up fire when he gets emotional. This guy is sinister.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

TheSword said:


> I’d stake all the money in pocket it is Sauron. He broke the halflings leg with magic, consciously or unconsciously! He kills fireflies! He flares up fire when he gets emotional. This guy is sinister.



But why would Sauron be "in the sky"? So far as we know he is lurking somewhere in Middle Earth. And it's said he was completely unaware of halflings until he encountered Gollum.

There is a middle option: Saruman.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

MarkB said:


> Yeah, there's definitely something unresolved with that. My best guess is that they've been picked up by a Corsair ship, and that the wyrm will be their unintentional rescuer from that situation.



It's a Numenorean ship, and the shadow is Isildur.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

trappedslider said:


> I'm getting to the point of asking "Which appendices is that in?" when someone brings up something that clearly isn't in it.



There are no "stories" in the appendix (apart from the tale of Aragorn and Arwen, most of which made it into the extended edition of the movies). As in "here are some characters, and this stuff happens to them" (there isn't much of that in the Silmarillion either, JRRT did not think it was in a suitable state for publication when he died). The poems are a significant source with regards to narrative. There is a timeline in the appendices.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

Paul Farquhar said:


> But why would Sauron be "in the sky"? So far as we know he is lurking somewhere in Middle Earth. And it's said he was completely unaware of halflings until he encountered Gollum.
> 
> There is a middle option: Saruman.




Because Saruman first comes to Middle-Earth in the 3rd Age with Gandalf and Radagast and the two "blue mages".

And Sauron is the fallen angel Lucifer, so maybe they made that comparison a bit more literal for the show?


----------



## reelo

Enevhar Aldarion said:


> Sauron is the fallen angel Lucifer, so maybe they made that comparison a bit more literal for the show?




But he was already _in/on_ Middle-Earth at that time. After the War of Wrath, he wasn't captured, but fled and hid IN Middle-Earth.


----------



## Dioltach

There was a bit where Nori says that the Stranger was _meant _to fall near her, so she was _meant _to help him. That reminded me very much of Gandalf's speech to Frodo in Moria, where he implies that there are stronger forces at work backing Frodo up.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

Enevhar Aldarion said:


> Because Saruman first comes to Middle-Earth in the 3rd Age with Gandalf and Radagast and the two "blue mages".



Tolkien doesn't actually say that was the_ first _visit for any of them. All five are basically angels. Do they really spend all their time sitting on their butts in heaven?

There are, of course, many other spirit beings in Middle Earth. Tom Bombadil has been mentioned, but there is also Goldberry, and the balrogs. Even the balrog of Moria is a shapechanger (and is glimpsed briefly in a trailer) and could hypothetically appear in human guise. And might even have fallen during the Second Age.


Enevhar Aldarion said:


> And Sauron is the fallen angel Lucifer, so maybe they made that comparison a bit more literal for the show?



Sauron already fell, during the 1st age. In order for him to fall at this point, he would have to be in heaven (Valinor).


----------



## Paul Farquhar

Dioltach said:


> There was a bit where Nori says that the Stranger was _meant _to fall near her, so she was _meant _to help him. That reminded me very much of Gandalf's speech to Frodo in Moria, where he implies that there are stronger forces at work backing Frodo up.



This is clearly intentional, but* who* meant it to happen on this occasion isn't clear.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

reelo said:


> But he was already _in/on_ Middle-Earth at that time. After the War of Wrath, he wasn't captured, but fled and hid IN Middle-Earth.



Indeed, and this is clearly stated as being the case in the TV show.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

My personal guess: Sauron _is_ the evil sword of evilness. He is a shapechanger, no reason he can't disguise himself as an object.


----------



## Dioltach

Or maybe the sword hilt is his first attempt at pouring his evil essence into an object.


----------



## Imaculata

So, is the show worth watching for someone who has only seen the movies?


----------



## Hriston

TheSword said:


> I’d stake all the money in pocket it is Sauron. He broke the halflings leg with magic, consciously or unconsciously! He kills fireflies! He flares up fire when he gets emotional. This guy is sinister.



Also, the crater in which he landed, when viewed from overhead, is a spitting image of the Eye of Sauron! Not to mention that Nori says the fire of the crater is not hot to the touch, meaning that he negates all heat around himself, a sign that Galadriel has told us means evil is nearby.


----------



## Hriston

Imaculata said:


> So, is the show worth watching for someone who has only seen the movies?



Yes, absolutely. It’s very good. But please read the books. They’re much better than the movies.


----------



## Dioltach

Hriston said:


> Also, the crater in which he landed, when viewed from overhead, is a spitting image of the Eye of Sauron! Not to mention that Nori says the fire of the crater is not hot to the touch, meaning that he negates all heat around himself, a sign that Galadriel has told us means evil is nearby.



Good points. I noticed the eye thing, and I was wondering about the "cold fire". It reminded me of the One Ring staying cool even after it was thrown into the fireplace.


----------



## wicked cool

i know that we are guessing here on the stranger but isnt it written in the books who it is ? Im not sure the rules on this site 100% so i not going to say .

 we dont know what happened to the blue mages or what Tom was? Tom was not the same as the wizards/a maia?


----------



## Paul Farquhar

So, with Galadriel hot on his tail, Sauron jumps into a giant catapult and launches himself into a low orbit. A couple of weeks later he comes crashing back down to Middle Earth somewhere near the future location of Dol Guldur.

Yup, that sounds just like the sort of thing Tolkien would write...


----------



## Horwath

Paul Farquhar said:


> So, with Galadriel hot on his tail, Sauron jumps into a giant catapult and launches himself into a low orbit. A couple of weeks later he comes crashing back down to Middle Earth somewhere near the future location of Dol Guldur.
> 
> Yup, that sounds just like the sort of thing Tolkien would write...



that is some next level Sun Tzu strategy...


----------



## Mallus

Imaculata said:


> So, is the show worth watching for someone who has only seen the movies?



Absolutely.


----------



## reelo

Imaculata said:


> So, is the show worth watching for someone who has only seen the movies?



Absolutely. I'd go as far as to say that the less you know of Tolkien's legendarium, the more you'll enjoy the show. Unfortunately.


----------



## Horwath

reelo said:


> Absolutely. I'd go as far as to say that the less you know of Tolkien's legendarium, the more you'll enjoy the show. Unfortunately.



if this show was named "Adventures in Faerun" it would be far better.
Than it would stand on it's own merit and not be compared to masterpiece of LotR


----------



## Paul Farquhar

Horwath said:


> that is some next level Sun Tzu strategy...



What I neglected to mention is whilst in space he takes on the guise of Darth Plagueis the Wise and trains an apprentice.


----------



## Mort

Horwath said:


> if this show was named "Adventures in Faerun" it would be far better.
> Than it would stand on it's own merit and not be compared to masterpiece of LotR




Amazon spent WAY too much money on rights to not use the LoTR name!


----------



## Zubatcarteira

Sauron tried to sneakily get back to Valinor through the north, but Tulkas found him and kicked him into orbit, making him fall near Mordor and lose his memory from his head injuries.


----------



## Horwath

Mort said:


> Amazon spent WAY too much money on rights to not use the LoTR name!



I know that.

Just as House of the dragon has to compete with GoT seasons 1-4, but luckily it also has to compete with GoT seasons 7&8.
if HoD goes to level of GoT season 5, it would be great.

same for RoP, GoT season 5 would be a great mark for that show, but I doubt it.


----------



## RuinousPowers

Paul Farquhar said:


> What I neglected to mention is whilst in space he takes on the guise of Darth Plagueis the Wise and trains an apprentice.



That's in _Unfinished Tales II: Space Boogaloo_, right?


----------



## Horwath

RuinousPowers said:


> That's in _Unfinished Tales II: Space Boogaloo_, right?



remember;

Service in Host of Valar guaranties immortality!

_Would you like to know more?_


----------



## Mallus

Horwath said:


> if this show was named "Adventures in Faerun" it would be far better.
> Than it would stand on it's own merit and not be compared to masterpiece of LotR



It holds up nicely to a bunch of appendixes and the Silmarillion, though.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

Mallus said:


> It holds up nicely to a bunch of appendixes and the Silmarillion, though.



And it's way better than The Hobbit. All three movies and the novel.


----------



## trappedslider

Paul Farquhar said:


> There are no "stories" in the appendix (apart from the tale of Aragorn and Arwen, most of which made it into the extended edition of the movies). As in "here are some characters, and this stuff happens to them" (there isn't much of that in the Silmarillion either, JRRT did not think it was suitable for in a suitable state for publication when he died). The poems are a significant source with regards to narrative. There is a timeline in the appendices.



My point is, and it may have been missed but the appendices are the ONLY source of info they are allowed to use.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

trappedslider said:


> My point is, and it may have been missed but the appendices are the ONLY source of info they are allowed to use.



And references in the main text. There is lots of stuff mentioned in the books in poems and in background info that never made it into the movies. For example, they could mention Gondolin, since it is mentioned in The Hobbit.


----------



## Hriston

Dioltach said:


> Good points. I noticed the eye thing, and I was wondering about the "cold fire". It reminded me of the One Ring staying cool even after it was thrown into the fireplace.



That's a very good point! And  Nori's line - "It isn't hot." - echoes Gandalf's "It's quite cool." when he gives the ring to Frodo.


----------



## Zubatcarteira

I'm pretty sure that was alluding to the earlier scene where the torches of the elves didn't have any heat inside Sauron's lair.


----------



## Bagpuss

Zubatcarteira said:


> I'm pretty sure that was alluding to the earlier scene where the torches of the elves didn't have any heat inside Sauron's lair.




Which seems all related to the same phenomena, evil sucking the heat out of things.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Paul Farquhar said:


> Even the balrog of Moria is a shapechanger (and is glimpsed briefly in a trailer)



That’s probably Gothmog, Lord of The Balrogs, IMO.


----------



## Mallus

I am enjoying the fact I can’t tell if it’s Gandalf, Sauron, or Saruman who fell out of the sky.


----------



## Nikosandros

Paul Farquhar said:


> So, with Galadriel hot on his tail, Sauron jumps into a giant catapult and launches himself into a low orbit. A couple of weeks later he comes crashing back down to Middle Earth somewhere near the future location of Dol Guldur.
> 
> Yup, that sounds just like the sort of thing Tolkien would write...



I recall a letter to some physicist at Oxford discussing the orbital dynamics of an ideal Maia with cylindrical symmetry.


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots

doctorbadwolf said:


> Seems like that leads back to the ring, to me, but yeah I don’t think the Stranger is Gandalf.
> Some fan service is just too silly.



Yeah, he's several thousand years too early. It's some other Maiar.


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots

Paul Farquhar said:


> When Tolkien visited the USA he was dismayed about just how seriously people were taking his work, which he was well aware was just a piece of fiction created for his own amusement. He was concerned that is had become a substitute for "true" religion, as he believed it. By that time he was too old to do much about it, although he touches on those issues in his forward to LotR.



He should see the weird creeps on Facebook, with their names spelled out in Norse runes, talking about how it's a "legendarium of the Anglo-Saxon people."

JRRT would be thrilled to see the ordinary pedants, in contrast.


----------



## Zaukrie

Imaculata said:


> So, is the show worth watching for someone who has only seen the movies?



It's better if you aren't obsessed with the books, frankly. So, yes


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots

Paul Farquhar said:


> There are, of course, many other spirit beings in Middle Earth. Tom Bombadil has been mentioned, but there is also Goldberry, and the balrogs. Even the balrog of Moria is a shapechanger (and is glimpsed briefly in a trailer) and could hypothetically appear in human guise. And might even have fallen during the Second Age.



Wasn't that balrog a leftover from the First Age?


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots

Imaculata said:


> So, is the show worth watching for someone who has only seen the movies?



My wife loved the first two episodes and has never cracked the cover of a JRRT book.


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots

Paul Farquhar said:


> And it's way better than The Hobbit. All three movies and the novel.



Those are fighting words. About the novel, obviously. Carry on with hating the movies.


----------



## reelo

Whizbang Dustyboots said:


> Those are fighting words. About the novel, obviously. Carry on with hating the movies.



Agreed. The novel is an absolute classic, the movies are trash, Peter Jackson or not.


----------



## TheSword

Hriston said:


> Apparently, not very. I watched a few youtube videos purporting to be examples of West Midlands and/or Black Country accents, and it's not quite like I imagined. It actually reminded me a bit of recordings of Tolkien I've heard though.



As someone from the West Midlands and currently living there I can say that there aren’t any characters with a Black Country accent in TRoP. (Though Lenny Henry is from Dudley). 

These are two good examples of that accent which is really distinctive. Gran and the Bloody Baron. Both from the Witcher 3 game. You definitely know it when you hear it. You can also hear it in the Peaky Blinders series, which is set in and around Birmingham.




Hriston said:


> I had a copy of the Nicol Williamson reading of The Hobbit when I was growing up, and I've always imagined Bilbo and other hobbits using the same accent he uses for the character. It's similar to the one used by Sean Astin for Sam in the Peter Jackson movie (although I'm sure it was butchered pretty badly by him). It's not quite what I heard in those videos, though, as a West Midlands or Black Country accent. I read that Williamson spent a lot of  time in Birmingham growing up, though, so it might not be that far off.



So Sean Austin in LOTR had a West Country accent common to SW england - particularly Cornwall. The quintessential farmers accent. Which I guess is easy to confuse with Black Country because of the name. In the first video with Gran, Little Jonny has a classic West Country accent.

Nicol Williamson actually speaks pretty good RP Queens English without any accent at all when reading The Hobbit. Though he tends to use Yorkshire accents for dwarves… which I’m sure started a trend.

The Harfoots definitely have an Irish base with there own twang. That’s been corroborated by producers. To be honest I think they’re trying to evoke the British traveler community accent which also has a strong Irish twang and would make a lot of sense in the context. But maybe they’re downplaying that in interviews.


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots

reelo said:


> Agreed. The novel is an absolute classic, the movies are trash, Peter Jackson or not.



There is a great 90 minute movie to be assembled from the nine hours of those films.


----------



## Ryujin

Paul Farquhar said:


> Tolkien doesn't actually say that was the_ first _visit for any of them. All five are basically angels. Do they really spend all their time sitting on their butts in heaven?
> 
> There are, of course, many other spirit beings in Middle Earth. Tom Bombadil has been mentioned, but there is also Goldberry, and the balrogs. Even the balrog of Moria is a shapechanger (and is glimpsed briefly in a trailer) and could hypothetically appear in human guise. And might even have fallen during the Second Age.
> 
> Sauron already fell, during the 1st age. In order for him to fall at this point, he would have to be in heaven (Valinor).



The Dwarves "delved too deep" and awakened the Balrog, so he was already in the heart of the mountain by this time. Their greed for Mithril presumably results in the downfall of their kingdom. And pretty sure that's what is in the "Pulp Fiction" chest.


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots

Ryujin said:


> The Dwarves "delved too deep" and awakened the Balrog, so he was already in the heart of the mountain by this time. Their greed for Mithril presumably results in the downfall of their kingdom. And pretty sure that's what is in the "Pulp Fiction" chest.



The video previewing the rest of the season shows the prince holding up shiny gray ore and saying "this will change everything," so yeah, mithril.


----------



## Ryujin

TheSword said:


> As someone from the West Midlands and currently living there I can say that there isn’t anyone with a Black Country accent in TRoP.
> 
> These are two good examples of that accent which is really distinctive. Gran and the Bloody Baron. Both from the Witcher 3 game. You definitely know it when you hear it. You can also hear it in the Peaky Blinders series, which is set in and around Birmingham.
> 
> 
> 
> So Sean Austin in LOTR had a West Country accent common to SW england - particularly Cornwall. The quintessential farmers accent. Which I guess is easy to confuse with Black Country because of the name. In the first video with Gran, Little Jonny has a classic West Country accent.
> 
> Nicol Williamson actually speaks pretty good RP Queens English without any accent at all when reading The Hobbit. Though he tends to use Yorkshire accents for dwarves… which I’m sure started a trend.
> 
> The Harfoots definitely have an Irish base with there own twang. That’s been corroborated by producers. To be honest I think they’re trying to evoke the British traveler community accent which also has a strong Irish twang and would make a lot of sense in the context. But maybe they’re downplaying that in interviews.



It has to be said: All this "Bruther" stuff puts me in mind of Alexi Sales, who is from Anfield/Liverpool. (I suck at figuring regional British accents.)


----------



## TheSword

Ryujin said:


> It has to be said: All this "Bruther" stuff puts me in mind of Alexi Sales, who is from Anfield/Liverpool. (I suck at figuring regional British accents.)



It’s alright. It’s amazing how in England a few miles can be the difference between totally different accents. I remember an Australian comedian being mocked by the audience because he couldn’t tell the difference between a Manchester accent and a Liverpool one. He then riposted by saying they were only 30 miles apart and asking the audience if they could tell the difference between a Sidney accent and a Perth accent which was 2400 miles apart. I thought fair play.


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots

TheSword said:


> It’s alright. It’s amazing how in England a few miles can be the difference between totally different accents. I remember an Australian comedian being mocked by the audience because he couldn’t tell the difference between a Manchester accent and a Liverpool one. He then riposted by saying they were only 30 miles apart and asking the audience if they could tell the difference between a Sidney accent and a Perth accent which was 2400 miles apart. I thought fair play.



The rest of the world assumes the English are doing this with their accents as a long-running joke on the rest of us.


----------



## FitzTheRuke

Weirdly, accents shift further on smaller scales than they do on larger ones, and more the more the population stays put and less the more the population moves about. It's peculiar but fascinating.


----------



## reelo

Whizbang Dustyboots said:


> There is a great 90 minute movie to be assembled from the nine hours of those films.



That is true. The "Maple Films" edit.


----------



## Stalker0

I feel like people are getting way too caught up in the "accuracy" of the show.... considering even the Silmarillion is basically a hodge podge of notes and thoughts, not a real story. the simple truth is, the story we are seeing on the screen doesn't exist in any literature, its a blank canvas, so let them fill it.

Frankly this show blows away House of the Dragon and Wheel of Time, all of the characters so far I have found interesting and intense. The settings are beautiful and grand (way grander than WoT looked). The build up is solid, it is slow but I would rather have that than rush through it. Just awesome, its the best start to a fantasy show I have seen in a while.


----------



## Ryujin

reelo said:


> That is true. The "Maple Films" edit.



There are a ton of different edits. Topher Grace, of "That '70s Show" fame, likes doing fan edits of films and did a 85 minute version that's supposedly very good, though I've not seen it.


----------



## Olgar Shiverstone

Dioltach said:


> Or maybe the sword hilt is his first attempt at pouring his evil essence into an object.



It's a Horcrux? I guess the One Ring does qualify ...


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

Ryujin said:


> There are a ton of different edits. Topher Grace, of "That '70s Show" fame, likes doing fan edits of films and did a 85 minute version that's supposedly very good, though I've not seen it.




That is way too short and cuts like that can be pretty insulting to the people who made the movies, especially if the cuts remove actors completely from a movie, just because someone thought they were irrelevant. But yes, The Hobbit trilogy had some filler in it, as can be seen by the extended cut of each including maybe 5 minutes or so of extra footage, compared to 30+ minutes added into each film in the LotR trilogy for their extended versions. And while all the Necromancer stuff is in there to pad the movies, as well as to explain where Gandalf was always disappearing off to, I would like to see the three films split differently: one or two for all the actual Hobbit stuff and one for all the Necromancer stuff. But still cut back on a lot, or all, of the battle against Smaug inside the mountain, since that did not happen at all, and get rid of the inter-species romance sub-plot.


----------



## Olgar Shiverstone

Paul Farquhar said:


> And it's way better than The Hobbit. ..*. and the novel.*



_throws down gauntlet_
You, sah, have insulted a great piece of literature. Apologize, or we shall have_ words._


TheSword said:


> It’s alright. It’s amazing how in England a few miles can be the difference between totally different accents. I remember an Australian comedian being mocked by the audience because he couldn’t tell the difference between a Manchester accent and a Liverpool one. He then riposted by saying they were only 30 miles apart and asking the audience if they could tell the difference between a Sidney accent and a Perth accent which was 2400 miles apart. I thought fair play.



Sort of like Americans think 100 years is a long time and Brits think 100 miles is a long way.


----------



## Ryujin

Enevhar Aldarion said:


> That is way too short and cuts like that can be pretty insulting to the people who made the movies, especially if the cuts remove actors completely from a movie, just because someone thought they were irrelevant. But yes, The Hobbit trilogy had some filler in it, as can be seen by the extended cut of each including maybe 5 minutes or so of extra footage, compared to 30+ minutes added into each film in the LotR trilogy for their extended versions. And while all the Necromancer stuff is in there to pad the movies, as well as to explain where Gandalf was always disappearing off to, I would like to see the three films split differently: one or two for all the actual Hobbit stuff and one for all the Necromancer stuff. But still cut back on a lot, or all, of the battle against Smaug inside the mountain, since that did not happen at all, and get rid of the inter-species romance sub-plot.



I feel differently. To me, turning a nice little story into many hours of drawn-out crap is insulting to the source material. I don't feel that way about the LotR movies. Not even the extended cuts. You know what I think is insulting to the people who worked on those movies? Taking the scenes in which those (not existing in the book) Orcs were involved, in which actors took hours of sitting in a chair in order to have prosthetics applied, only to have them scrubbed from the film with CGI.


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots

Stalker0 said:


> Frankly this show blows away House of the Dragon and Wheel of Time, all of the characters so far I have found interesting and intense.



I would be so depressed if I was editing together the second season of Wheel of Time right now.


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots

Olgar Shiverstone said:


> It's a Horcrux? I guess the One Ring does qualify ...



I always thought it was meant to be the prototype of the lich's phylactery in D&D.


----------



## Olgar Shiverstone

Whizbang Dustyboots said:


> I always thought it was meant to be the prototype of the lich's phylactery in D&D.



Yeah, JK totally ripped off D&D ripping off JRRT. (Or Jack Vance. Or Robert E. Howard).


----------



## Stalker0

One reason I’m liking the show is that while the characters are archetypal right now, they are played just so darn well.

I can feel nori bursting with wonder, I can feel the raw determination in Galadriel, I like the Elrond that is one a bit awkward in his action but the next so confident when he is in his element, etc.

I got more emotion from these actors in one episode than I got in a season of WoT


----------



## OB1

Stalker0 said:


> One reason I’m liking the show is that while the characters are archetypal right now, they are played just so darn well.
> 
> I can feel nori bursting with wonder, I can feel the raw determination in Galadriel, I like the Elrond that is one a bit awkward in his action but the next so confident when he is in his element, etc.
> 
> I got more emotion from these actors in one episode than I got in a season of WoT



And to add to this, with clear emotion you get clear conflict and with clear conflict you get an engaging story that you as the viewer feels.  GoT had it for the first few seasons, so far HoD doesn't.  

And for the record (sorry for the side rant), I think the end of GoT is Martin's issue, not D and D.  The reason he hasn't finished the books is because he can't figure out a way to get the characters to do what he wants for the story he wants to tell. D&D just said forget it, we'll force it so we can finish.  Unless Martin decides to allow his ending to change, he'll never finish.


----------



## Stalker0

OB1 said:


> And for the record (sorry for the side rant), I think the end of GoT is Martin's issue, not D and D.  The reason he hasn't finished the books is because he can't figure out a way to get the characters to do what he wants for the story he wants to tell. D&D just said forget it, we'll force it so we can finish.  Unless Martin decides to allow his ending to change, he'll never finish.



I’ll disagree.

Deneareyes ending failed because it was too sudden and came out the absolute dumbest moment possible. Take some time to stretch that out, and put some real pressure that causes her to have to make the “key evil decision”, and I could absolutely buy it.

Jaime - also can work in the context of a “drug addiction”. Cersei is his drug, and drugs bring down great men. His ending is an utter tragedy but completely workable, just don’t have him bed and leave brienne right before to make him look like an utter douche.

Bran- just have bran do anything (and I mean anything) to help beat the apocalypse, and suddenly you have some real cred for people to consider him king. Or go dark side and have manipulate to become king behind the scenes…either works.

Etc

The ending can mostly work if you actually spend some effort and time to work the angles


----------



## OB1

Stalker0 said:


> I’ll disagree.
> 
> Deneareyes ending failed because it was too sudden and came out the absolute dumbest moment possible. Take some time to stretch that out, and put some real pressure that causes her to have to make the “key evil decision”, and I could absolutely buy it.
> 
> Jaime - also can work in the context of a “drug addiction”. Cersei is his drug, and drugs bring down great men. His ending is an utter tragedy but completely workable, just don’t have him bed and leave brienne right before to make him look like an utter douche.
> 
> Bran- just have bran do anything (and I mean anything) to help beat the apocalypse, and suddenly you have some real cred for people to consider him king. Or go dark side and have manipulate to become king behind the scenes…either works.
> 
> Etc
> 
> The ending can mostly work if you actually spend some effort and time to work the angles



It's been 10 years and Martin hasn't figured it out is all I'm saying.  /endthreadjack


----------



## Mage of Spellford

My opinion: Pretty but boring -- the first genre series that I actually fell asleep while watching. Not sure how the writers and directors could manage to spend that much money and end up with a story that hasn't got the depth of most video games.

I feel happy for anybody that enjoys this series, I really tried to at least be intrigued by the mysteries and the beautiful scenery but the dialogue and pacing is GOT season 7 and 8 bad.  I wish you all the best but fortunately we have a virtual endless supply of alternatives these days to choose from and I'm out.

Just my opinion.


----------



## Rabulias

OB1 said:


> It's been 10 years and Martin hasn't figured it out is all I'm saying.  /endthreadjack



I don't think it's the ending that Martin has a problem with. He justs writes slowly (or writes and rewrites and rewrites....). After taking two years for each of the first three books, book 4 took him 5 years to write. Book 5 took 6 years. That was 2011, so we have been waiting 11 years for book 6. The ending is book 7, so I don't see that being the problem.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

TheSword said:


> As someone from the West Midlands and currently living there I can say that there aren’t any characters with a Black Country accent in TRoP. (Though Lenny Henry is from Dudley).
> 
> These are two good examples of that accent which is really distinctive. Gran and the Bloody Baron. Both from the Witcher 3 game. You definitely know it when you hear it. You can also hear it in the Peaky Blinders series, which is set in and around Birmingham.
> 
> 
> 
> So Sean Austin in LOTR had a West Country accent common to SW england - particularly Cornwall. The quintessential farmers accent. Which I guess is easy to confuse with Black Country because of the name. In the first video with Gran, Little Jonny has a classic West Country accent.
> 
> Nicol Williamson actually speaks pretty good RP Queens English without any accent at all when reading The Hobbit. Though he tends to use Yorkshire accents for dwarves… which I’m sure started a trend.
> 
> The Harfoots definitely have an Irish base with there own twang. That’s been corroborated by producers. To be honest I think they’re trying to evoke the British traveler community accent which also has a strong Irish twang and would make a lot of sense in the context. But maybe they’re downplaying that in interviews.



Given Tolkien's Backstory, a rural West Midlands accent would probably have been closer to what he envisioned. But West Country is a standard "drama school" accent, as is oirish.


Ryujin said:


> It has to be said: All this "Bruther" stuff puts me in mind of Alexi Sales, who is from Anfield/Liverpool. (I suck at figuring regional British accents.)



My dad is from Anfield. I've moved around a lot though, so my accent is all messed up.


Olgar Shiverstone said:


> Sort of like Americans think 100 years is a long time and Brits think 100 miles is a long way.



I'm pretty sure there are different accents for different New York boroughs. People just aren't sufficiently familiar with them (even in the US) to recognise them. If you aren't familiar with an accent, you tend to hear something you are familiar with, rather than label it "unidentified accent". But people in the US tend to be very bad at telling British accents from Australian, and they are a lot more than a 100 miles apart.

Ther is a large Irish population in Liverpool. By boat Ireland isn't much further than Manchester. The accent actually extends south and west through Cheshire to the Welsh boarder. The Manchester accent, on the other hand, extends north and east through the mill towns of the Lancashire hills. There exists a mid-point accent in Warrington.

As for Irish, a Belfast accent is very very different to a Dublin accent, and neither is much like drama school oirish.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

Rabulias said:


> I don't think it's the ending that Martin has a problem with. He justs writes slowly (or writes and rewrites and rewrites....). After taking two years for each of the first three books, book 4 took him 5 years to write. Book 5 took 6 years. That was 2011, so we have been waiting 11 years for book 6. The ending is book 7, so I don't see that being the problem.



Martin conceptualised himself into a corner. A Song of Ice and Fire was written to deconstruct Lord of the Rings. Tolkien was a theist, and as such "good deeds are rewarded" is one of the fundamental laws of his universe. So, in Martin's universe, good deeds are punished.

The problem is, one of those tropes that Martin set out to deconstruct is "has a satisfying ending". Things are put right, villains are punished, and at least some people get to live happily ever after. Martin can't write that without undermining his initial concept. In fact "doesn't have an ending" is probably the right solution.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

Olgar Shiverstone said:


> Yeah, JK totally ripped off D&D ripping off JRRT. (Or Jack Vance. Or Robert E. Howard).



Which is not the case. JK hates the fantasy genre, and has never read any of those.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

Olgar Shiverstone said:


> _throws down gauntlet_
> You, sah, have insulted a great piece of literature. Apologize, or we shall have_ words._



The Lord of the Rings is great literature. The Hobbit was a clumsily written prototype with minimal characterisation, an uneven tone, and a plot ripped off from the third part of Beowulf.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

Ryujin said:


> The Dwarves "delved too deep" and awakened the Balrog, so he was already in the heart of the mountain by this time. Their greed for Mithril presumably results in the downfall of their kingdom. And pretty sure that's what is in the "Pulp Fiction" chest.



This is what is said in LotR. But as it is spoken by a character, rather than with authorial authority, it might not be true. "Unreliable Narrator" is an authorial tool Tolkien touches on himself with Bilbo's first account of acquiring the ring. It's something the showrunners can make much more use of. The thing about history is it often isn't completely accurate, and the LotR appendices are presented as history.


----------



## Zardnaar

Paul Farquhar said:


> What I neglected to mention is whilst in space he takes on the guise of Darth Plagueis the Wise and trains an apprentice.




Did you write season 8 of GoT?


----------



## Bagpuss

Paul Farquhar said:


> The Lord of the Rings is great literature.



And like most "great literature" is a tedious read.


----------



## Zardnaar

Bagpuss said:


> And like most "great literature" is a tedious read.




 Never managed to finish it.


----------



## TheSword

So I made a mistake… a big mistake.

I mistakenly watched a YouTube video detailing a fans ‘dismantling’ of the series…. In order to try and understand why it has been rated so badly by the audience. Twenty minutes of reactionary, racist, bitter, jealous complaining about the most minor details in the series.

It was the very definition of toxic fandom. One of the good things about a series like this is that it gets brought to light and action can be taken. I fear we need another Mark Hamil to step forward and say you aren’t real fans. Peter Jackson might be able to do it. Maybe. He should.


----------



## Zardnaar

TheSword said:


> So I made a mistake… a big mistake.
> 
> I mistakenly watched a YouTube video detailing a fans ‘dismantling’ of the series…. Twenty minutes of reactionary, racist, bitter, jealous complaining about the most minor details in the series.
> 
> It was the very definition of toxic fandom. The best thing about this series is that it gets brought to light and action can be taken. I fear we need another Mark Hamil to step forward and say you aren’t real fans. Peter Jackson might be able to do it. Maybe. He should.




 Dont watch stuff like that. You'll get more pop ups of similar stuff.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

Bagpuss said:


> And like most "great literature" is a tedious read.



I enjoyed it, but I have bounced of plenty of other literary greats.

There is no literature so great that everyone likes it.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

TheSword said:


> So I made a mistake… a big mistake.
> 
> I mistakenly watched a YouTube video detailing a fans ‘dismantling’ of the series…. Twenty minutes of reactionary, racist, bitter, jealous complaining about the most minor details in the series.
> 
> It was the very definition of toxic fandom. The best thing about this series is that it gets brought to light and action can be taken. I fear we need another Mark Hamil to step forward and say you aren’t real fans. Peter Jackson might be able to do it. Maybe. He should.



Neil Gaiman had a go, but he is having a hard enough time with his own toxic fans. Peter Jackson has a snit on, because he wasn't consulted. But given the mess he made of The Hobbit, I can't blame them.

The thing is, whenever someone consumes media they create their own version of the story in their imagination. From the look and sound of the characters, to the deeper meanings. Before the internet, you would only be exposed to other people's versions of the story if you studied literature at a higher level. In which case, you would have guidance from a teacher. Without that training, people feel they are being told their version is *wrong*, which equates to an attack on their core identity. So they lash out.


----------



## Ryujin

Paul Farquhar said:


> Given Tolkien's Backstory, a rural West Midlands accent would probably have been closer to what he envisioned. But West Country is a standard "drama school" accent, as is oirish.
> 
> My dad is from Anfield. I've moved around a lot though, so my accent is all messed up.
> 
> I'm pretty sure there are different accents for different New York boroughs. People just aren't sufficiently familiar with them (even in the US) to recognise them. If you aren't familiar with an accent, you tend to hear something you are familiar with, rather than label it "unidentified accent". But people in the US tend to be very bad at telling British accents from Australian, and they are a lot more than a 100 miles apart.
> 
> Ther is a large Irish population in Liverpool. By boat Ireland isn't much further than Manchester. The accent actually extends south and west through Cheshire to the Welsh boarder. The Manchester accent, on the other hand, extends north and east through the mill towns of the Lancashire hills. There exists a mid-point accent in Warrington.
> 
> As for Irish, a Belfast accent is very very different to a Dublin accent, and neither is much like drama school oirish.



I don't have a lot of trouble differentiating between the various English accents and Australian, but Australian and New Zealand accents tend to throw me. I don't find it easy to differentiate the "a" = "u" in a New Zealand accent in realtime.


----------



## Zardnaar

Ryujin said:


> I don't have a lot of trouble differentiating between the various English accents and Australian, but Australian and New Zealand accents tend to throw me. I don't find it easy to differentiate the "a" = "u" in a New Zealand accent in realtime.




 Being a kiwi I don't usually have trouble with Aussie/Canadian/English or Yank accent and can sometimes get a regional one. We also speak a bit faster I think than USA.


----------



## Ixal

Oh no, fans pay attention to detail in a franchise which which prides itself to be detailed and consistent.....


----------



## Paul Farquhar

Because Strider was never a hobbit...


----------



## BRayne

Paul Farquhar said:


> Because Strider was never a hobbit...



Last time, _you said_ Bilbo’s front door was blue, and _you said _Thorin had a gold tassel on his hood, but you’ve just said that Bilbo’s front door was green, and the tassel on Thorin’s hood was silver


----------



## Hriston

Paul Farquhar said:


> Tolkien spent some time growing up in the Black Country, so it's probably pretty close to his imagined "hobbit" accent. Not familiar with that reading though. I first heard the Hobbit read to the class by my primary school teacher. Who I guess had a Liverpool accent since I lived in Liverpool at the time. With regard to the Harfoots, my first thought was "what accent?!" (apart from the occasional Australian twang) so I guess it's pretty close to the accents I grew up with in Liverpool, Lancashire and Yorkshire.
> 
> As for dwarves, the "dwarven accent" was a well established trope long before the LotR movies. Check out Baldur's Gate CRPG, and even, in written form, some of the Forgotten Realms novels. It's parodied by Terry Pratchett. I detected more Welsh than Scots in TRoP dwarves. There is a kind of logic in that. The Welsh are stereotypically famous for their mining and singing.






TheSword said:


> As someone from the West Midlands and currently living there I can say that there aren’t any characters with a Black Country accent in TRoP. (Though Lenny Henry is from Dudley).
> 
> These are two good examples of that accent which is really distinctive. Gran and the Bloody Baron. Both from the Witcher 3 game. You definitely know it when you hear it. You can also hear it in the Peaky Blinders series, which is set in and around Birmingham.
> 
> 
> 
> So Sean Austin in LOTR had a West Country accent common to SW england - particularly Cornwall. The quintessential farmers accent. Which I guess is easy to confuse with Black Country because of the name. In the first video with Gran, Little Jonny has a classic West Country accent.
> 
> Nicol Williamson actually speaks pretty good RP Queens English without any accent at all when reading The Hobbit. Though he tends to use Yorkshire accents for dwarves… which I’m sure started a trend.
> 
> The Harfoots definitely have an Irish base with there own twang. That’s been corroborated by producers. To be honest I think they’re trying to evoke the British traveler community accent which also has a strong Irish twang and would make a lot of sense in the context. But maybe they’re downplaying that in interviews.



Here's an example of the voices Nicol Williamson did for Bilbo and Gollum:

Bilbo's accent seems somewhat regional and has been how I imagine hobbits talking since I first heard it. I'd be interested if either of you think it's West Midlands or something else that Williamson might have been going for.


----------



## Stalker0

Mage of Spellford said:


> I feel happy for anybody that enjoys this series, I really tried to at least be intrigued by the mysteries and the beautiful scenery but the dialogue and pacing is GOT season 7 and 8 bad.



pacing wise if anything it’s the opposite of GoT season 8. GoT plot was moving lightning fast by the end, quick to the point of absurdity (ie teleporting people to keep up with plot).

Rings of power has started off at a pretty slow and methodical pace, some would argue too slow, but definately a different problem than GoT season 8.

As for the writing, if it’s not your cup of tea it’s not your cup of tea. That said, from what we have seen so far nothing written is “stupid”, ie the characters are still acting reasonably and in character. Again the character are archetypal but consistent. Of course it’s only been two episodes, it’s pretty easy to be consistent with not a lot has happened yet


----------



## Paul Farquhar

Hriston said:


> Here's an example of the voices Nicol Williamson did for Bilbo and Gollum:
> 
> Bilbo's accent seems somewhat regional and has been how I imagine hobbits talking since I first heard it. I'd be interested if either of you think it's West Midlands or something else that Williamson might have been going for.



It's really good! It sounds like a West Country accent to me - somewhere round Somerset/Wiltshire. See if you can find Pam Ayers for comparison. If you want to be picky, it's a bit too working class - Bilbo should be more upper middle class. In LotR Tolkien makes the class-based accent distinctions plain between the hobbits. But really, who cares? It's a great reading.


----------



## Ryujin

Paul Farquhar said:


> It's really good! It sounds like a West Country accent to me - somewhere round Somerset/Wiltshire. See if you can find Pam Ayers for comparison. If you want to be picky, it's a bit too working class - Bilbo should be more upper middle class. In LotR Tolkien makes the class-based accent distinctions plain between the hobbits. But really, who cares? It's a great reading.



I would go as far as to say it should be Upper Class as Bilbo just lived on his inheritance and it sounds like even his parents were independently wealthy, rather than working.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

Ryujin said:


> I would go as far as to say it should be Upper Class as Bilbo just lived on his inheritance and it sounds like even his parents were independently wealthy, rather than working.



That was considered middle class in those days - independently wealthy, but no inherited title. title. Bilbo is "new money" on the Baggins side. Pippin is "Old Money", and very nearly says "What Ho Gamgee!"


----------



## John R Davis

As an aside come on GW get some ROP licencing sorted so you can steal more of my money. Want my Galadriel v Snow Troll minis!!


----------



## TheSword

Paul Farquhar said:


> It's really good! It sounds like a West Country accent to me - somewhere round Somerset/Wiltshire. See if you can find Pam Ayers for comparison. If you want to be picky, it's a bit too working class - Bilbo should be more upper middle class. In LotR Tolkien makes the class-based accent distinctions plain between the hobbits. But really, who cares? It's a great reading.



Yes I agree. West Country.

Funnily enough I listened to these as a teenager on cassette tapes, borrowed from the library… that I promptly copied. Which goes to show how old I’m. That was radical technology then.


----------



## TheSword

Ryujin said:


> I would go as far as to say it should be Upper Class as Bilbo just lived on his inheritance and it sounds like even his parents were independently wealthy, rather than working.



Sure but an accent is based on the community you surround yourself with. One family of plummy speakers surrounded by a community of country bumpkins isn’t necessarily going to develop a strong accent in their children if those children are mixing with the farmers and the children.

That said accents can develop according to social circumstances as well. I attended a lecture by the author of the book Peaky Blinders is inspired by and he explained that the Brummie accent became much stronger and defined as a result of immigration into the manufacturing city of Birmingham in the mid 1900’s.

The comedian John Bishop, who has a beautiful Scouse accent explained that his accent became stronger when as a kid his family had their inner city tenements in Liverpool knocked down and they were relocated to the suburbs. His whole community developed a stronger scouse accent because of self consciousness about not being seen as Liverpudlian any more. In his words they became more scouse than scousers.

A nice little video… that also shows off the Bob Bryson’s welsh accent.


----------



## Dioltach

Paul Farquhar said:


> Pippin is "Old Money", and very nearly says "What Ho Gamgee!"



Now I want a Jeeves & Wooster version of the Lord of the Rings.

"So Jeeves, this Sauron chap. Better or worse than my Aunt Agatha?"
"It is hard for me to say, Sir. The Dark Lord shares many of Mrs Gregson's qualities. Of the two, however, I do not believe that Mrs Gregson has ever been subject to a more powerful being."

---
"If Sir would take a moment, he would see that the ring on his finger is not in fact the (ahum) One Ring. I took the liberty of replacing it with Mr Aragorn's engagement ring. The actual One Ring is on its way to Mount Doom, in the hands of an Eagle acquaintance of mine. Ah, I believe that it has just reached its destination. Will there be anything further? Then if Sir will excuse me, I must return to my ironing. I will lay out Sir's light grey suit for dinner."


----------



## FitzTheRuke

Zardnaar said:


> Being a kiwi I don't usually have trouble with Aussie/Canadian/English or Yank accent and can sometimes get a regional one. We also speak a bit faster I think than USA.




Are you saying that you can tell the difference between a Canadian accent and an American one? I'm not sure I believe it. (I mean, I can see you being able to tell the difference between a Toronto accent and a Brooklyn accent, say, because frankly _everyone_ can (though they might not know that that is what they are) but a general US/CAN average accent? 

I'm from Vancouver, and while visiting Japan, I met some Americans who said, "You're Canadian? But you have no accent!", to which I responded "You're just saying that because I sound like people on TV. That's because most people you see on TV are from Vancouver."

It's an exaggeration with some small truth to it.


----------



## Ryujin

FitzTheRuke said:


> Are you saying that you can tell the difference between a Canadian accent and an American one? I'm not sure I believe it. (I mean, I can see you being able to tell the difference between a Toronto accent and a Brooklyn accent, say, because frankly _everyone_ can (though they might not know that that is what they are) but a general US/CAN average accent?
> 
> I'm from Vancouver, and while visiting Japan, I met some Americans who said, "You're Canadian? But you have no accent!", to which I responded "You're just saying that because I sound like people on TV. That's because most people you see on TV are from Vancouver."
> 
> It's an exaggeration with some small truth to it.



There is a reason why so many American newscasters, over the years, have been Canadian.


----------



## Mallus

Ryujin said:


> There is a reason why so many American newscasters, over the years, have been Canadian.



They've even infiltrated our games shows and rock music!


----------



## Ryujin

TheSword said:


> Sure but an accent is based on the community you surround yourself with. One family of plummy speakers surrounded by a community of country bumpkins isn’t necessarily going to develop a strong accent in their children if those children are mixing with the farmers and the children.
> 
> That said accents can develop according to social circumstances as well. I attended a lecture by the author of the book Peaky Blinders is inspired by and he explained that the Brummie accent became much stronger and defined as a result of immigration into the manufacturing city of Birmingham in the mid 1900’s.
> 
> The comedian John Bishop, who has a beautiful Scouse accent explained that his accent became stronger when as a kid his family had their inner city tenements in Liverpool knocked down and they were relocated to the suburbs. His whole community developed a stronger scouse accent because of self consciousness about not being seen as Liverpudlian any more. In his words they became more scouse than scousers.
> 
> A nice little video… that also shows off the Bob Bryson’s welsh accent.



On the other hand I would spend a couple of weeks at a rental cottage, in an area frequented by Western New Yorkers, and come home sounding like I was from Rochester.


----------



## Ryujin

Mallus said:


> They've even infiltrated our games shows and rock music!



You would be quite surprised, if you knew the whole truth. Don't tell anyone...


----------



## Paul Farquhar

FitzTheRuke said:


> Are you saying that you can tell the difference between a Canadian accent and an American one?



You can usually tell by the volume!


----------



## Ryujin

Paul Farquhar said:


> You can usually tell by the volume!



Not necessarily, though. I'm fairly loud (hard of hearing in one ear... is my excuse) and talk with the speed of an auctioneer.


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots

Paul Farquhar said:


> Which is not the case. JK hates the fantasy genre, and has never read any of those.



Parallel evolution is a thing. The author of the Sookie Stackhouse novels apparently never heard of Vampire: the Masquerade before she published, but the show based on her novels, True Blood, basically comes off like World of Darkness: The Very Horny TV Show. Sometimes, certain ideas just make sense to multiple authors independently. (And I don't believe for a minute that those involved in the _show_ didn't have a complete set of oWoD books on hand.)


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots

Zardnaar said:


> Dont watch stuff like that. You'll get more pop ups of similar stuff.



Definitely erase it from your YouTube history ASAP.


----------



## Ryujin

Whizbang Dustyboots said:


> Parallel evolution is a thing. The author of the Sookie Stackhouse novels apparently never heard of Vampire: the Masquerade before she published, but the show based on her novels, True Blood, basically comes off like World of Darkness: The Very Horny TV Show. Sometimes, certain ideas just make sense to multiple authors independently. (And I don't believe for a minute that those involved in the _show_ didn't have a complete set of oWoD books on hand.)



And some things are just so culturally ubiquitous that even if you don't have direct interaction, they can bleed through from other sources.

And as an unintentional "Vampire: The Masquerade" tribute, it was far better than the on purpose "Kindred: The Embraced." Curse Aaron Spelling and his ilk.


----------



## Maxperson

billd91 said:


> I, for one, will be watching out for the Ents' statement on the cap and trade proposal put forth by Arnor and their third quarter report on emission controls.



I forsee that this won't go well and the entwives will leave in protest.


----------



## Dioltach

Oooh, new spinoff! "The Real Entwives of Mirkwood".


----------



## Ryujin

Dioltach said:


> Oooh, new spinoff! "The Real Entwives of Mirkwood".



I hear it's somewhat of a slow burn.


----------



## Maxperson

FitzTheRuke said:


> I think I figured out what I don't quite like about this portrayal of Galadriel - I am used to her being an _introverted_ bad ass. Here, she seems to be an _extroverted_ bad-ass. She also has her social abilities inverted - effectively she is an antisocial extrovert when I am used to her being a social introvert. (More my kind of people).
> 
> I get that she's significantly younger, but these are the kinds of things that are usually part of your _nature_, not something that changes over your lifetime (well, you can learn to battle against your nature, but it will always be a battle).



She was younger, yes, but not enough to make that large of a change.  The current show is set about 2000 years before the war of the ring, which means she is already 6000 years old.  Elves don't really change that much and by the ripe age of 6k, she's not really going to change anymore.

The show should be portraying her like the movies did.  That said, I'm not sure she is introverted. She went with Fingolfin and his followers from Aman to Middle Earth across the Helcaraxe and then took part in the wars that followed.  It wasn't until around 400 years from the time of this show that she went to dwell in Lothlorien and it was another 500ish years before she assumed control of that place.  By that time all the elves had retreated to their strongholds.


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots

Yeah, we saw Galadriel in LotR for a very short window at a very particular point in time. If you met me at a dinner party where I was talking to friends of mine who went into politics, it wouldn't be accurate to think that was my life, at all.

We're seeing a _lot_ more of Galadriel and Elrond than we have previously. They are going to do things they haven't done before -- which mostly consisted of war councils -- and show other sides of their personalities.

It would be a lot less plausible if we never saw other sides of them in this show.


----------



## Maxperson

Aeson said:


> I'm enjoying Poppy and Nori. A new Merry and Pippin. I'm not sure about Elrond. He has some big shoes to fill.



Nori bothers me, but only because of the name.  Nori and the other dwarves went with Bilbo to reclaim the Lonely Mountain.  I just can't get past her not being a dwarf.


----------



## Maxperson

reelo said:


> Having the Fëanorians land in Eriador instead of Beleriand, having a Valinorean elf, daughter of Finarfin, being bossed around by one of her lesser cousins (because that's what Gil-Galad is), and making her travel to Valinor _against_ the ban of the Valar _DOES_ "offensively contradict" things they don't have the rights to, as far as I'm concerned.



She didn't travel to Aman against the ban as the ban was lifted after the War of Wrath 1000 years prior to the where we are in the show. Galadriel was offered a return to Valinor at the end of the War of Wrath which she turned down.  The other elves in the boat would similarly have been allowed to go to Aman.


----------



## Maxperson

reelo said:


> Olorin/Gandalf doesn't arrive in ME until 1000TA, well after the Battle of the Last Alliance, though, when the Elven Rings had already existed for over a millennium.



Depends on the source.  In The Peoples of Middle-Earth, they are said to have arrived around the time of the forging of the One Ring.  The being found by Nori and the others might be Radagast, with the way he talks to creatures and the trees bowed to him.


----------



## Maxperson

Ryujin said:


> I certainly agree that the fireflies dying doesn't seem very Gandalf-like. IMDB simply lists the character as "The Stranger" for all 8 episodes, at the moment. I don't think, however, that he's Sauron either. If he's going to influence the creation of the rings, then he's pretty far off the mark at the moment. He also seems to be human in appearance, rather than an Elf, so he wouldn't be trusted by the Elves in such a heavy task.



Plus Sauron was unaware of the Hobbits, which wouldn't be the case if he showed up with these Harfoots.


----------



## Ryujin

Maxperson said:


> Depends on the source.  In The Peoples of Middle-Earth, they are said to have arrived around the time of the forging of the One Ring.  The being found by Nori and the others might be Radagast, with the way he talks to creatures and the trees bowed to him.



I think that's just an Istari thing, in general. Gandalf spoke to a moth and, of course, the Eagles.


----------



## MarkB

Maxperson said:


> She was younger, yes, but not enough to make that large of a change.  The current show is set about 2000 years before the war of the ring, which means she is already 6000 years old.  Elves don't really change that much and by the ripe age of 6k, she's not really going to change anymore.
> 
> The show should be portraying her like the movies did.  That said, I'm not sure she is introverted. She went with Fingolfin and his followers from Aman to Middle Earth across the Helcaraxe and then took part in the wars that followed.  It wasn't until around 400 years from the time of this show that she went to dwell in Lothlorien and it was another 500ish years before she assumed control of that place.  By that time all the elves had retreated to their strongholds.



Events change people, even elves. The Galadriel we see in the movies is one who has lost nearly everyone she's ever known, either to death or to the elves' long, slow departure from Middle Earth, leader of a people who are now rare almost to the point of being mythical, and guardian of a secret source of power and security against an overwhelming foe who would subsume and subjugate it if ever given the chance.


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots

Maxperson said:


> Nori bothers me, but only because of the name.  Nori and the other dwarves went with Bilbo to reclaim the Lonely Mountain.  I just can't get past her not being a dwarf.



She's "Eleanor" and they call her "Nori" because apparently it's a popular Middle Earth nickname. (I watch shows with captions on, and her parents periodically "Eleanor" her when she's being a pain in the ass.)


----------



## Maxperson

MarkB said:


> Events change people, even elves. The Galadriel we see in the movies is one who has lost nearly everyone she's ever known, either to death or to the elves' long, slow departure from Middle Earth, leader of a people who are now rare almost to the point of being mythical, and guardian of a secret source of power and security against an overwhelming foe who would subsume and subjugate it if ever given the chance.



From the beginning of the 1st age she was a source of wisdom and a counselor to the other leaders.  She did not take part in any major battles.  Seeing her this bloodthirsty is a huge departure from who she was for the entirety of her existence.


----------



## Zaukrie

Maxperson said:


> From the beginning of the 1st age she was a source of wisdom and a counselor to the other leaders.  She did not take part in any major battles.  Seeing her this bloodthirsty is a huge departure from who she was for the entirety of her existence.



So what? How does it matter? Neil Gaiman, who likely knows a thing or two about what is wrong with adapting novels to tv, says this isn't an issue.....


----------



## Dire Bare

TheSword said:


> So I made a mistake… a big mistake.
> 
> I mistakenly watched a YouTube video detailing a fans ‘dismantling’ of the series…. In order to try and understand why it has been rated so badly by the audience. Twenty minutes of reactionary, racist, bitter, jealous complaining about the most minor details in the series.
> 
> It was the very definition of toxic fandom. One of the good things about a series like this is that it gets brought to light and action can be taken. I fear we need another Mark Hamil to step forward and say you aren’t real fans. Peter Jackson might be able to do it. Maybe. He should.



Amazon turned off the on-site reviews for a couple of days, because Rings of Power is being review bombed by those same toxic trolls you stumbled across. This is, sadly, the new normal.

Most fans and viewers are not so toxic, but those toxic trolls are LOUD and OBNOXIOUS . . . and tiresome. Every fandom has them now, and they feel very entitled to not just share their opinions, but to actively work at bringing down shows and the entertainers involved.

Makes me sad for humanity.


----------



## Maxperson

Zaukrie said:


> So what? How does it matter? Neil Gaiman, who likely knows a thing or two about what is wrong with adapting novels to tv, says this isn't an issue.....



Oh, right, because Appeals to Authority are really convincing.  It matters because it fundamentally changes who she is, even as portrayed in the movies.  It would have been better to make her the voice of wisdom that she was and make the new elf the bloodthirsty one.


----------



## Dire Bare

Ixal said:


> Oh no, fans pay attention to detail in a franchise which which prides itself to be detailed and consistent.....



Which franchise? Lord of the Rings? That's adorable.

This is a franchise with FOUR novels and volumes of background material that is anything but consistent. Detailed, yes, but not as detailed as you seem to think.


----------



## Maxperson

OneRedRook said:


> I mean, he is High King of the Noldor in Middle-earth. The problem here is that Galadriel is the youngest child of the youngest child of Finwe; a lot of systems of organising succession would place her as one of the last choices for the crown (I spent the last hour or so looking over the relevant family trees trying to tease out what their system is, a process which isn't helped by the fact that Gil-Galad's placement in the Silmarillion seems to be regarded as questionable if not actually incorrect, including by Christopher Tolkien apparently)
> 
> You could argue that "High King of the Noldor" didn't actually carry that much weight in the books, but I think by the Second Age everyone's calmed down a bit and generally acknowledges Gil-Galad's rule.



Except that she and Celeborn did serve under Gil-Galad as leaders of a group of elves, and then later as rulers of Eregion under him.  The show is fairly close to her history on this point.


----------



## Zardnaar

FitzTheRuke said:


> Are you saying that you can tell the difference between a Canadian accent and an American one? I'm not sure I believe it. (I mean, I can see you being able to tell the difference between a Toronto accent and a Brooklyn accent, say, because frankly _everyone_ can (though they might not know that that is what they are) but a general US/CAN average accent?
> 
> I'm from Vancouver, and while visiting Japan, I met some Americans who said, "You're Canadian? But you have no accent!", to which I responded "You're just saying that because I sound like people on TV. That's because most people you see on TV are from Vancouver."
> 
> It's an exaggeration with some small truth to it.




 Most of the time yes. Sometimes I get it wrong though so a strong Canadian accent I can. 

Some have a generic mid Atlantic type accent and unless they say about one can mistake them for Muricans. Much to their chagrin. 

 Sometimes I can broadly pick an American accent eg wid west, west coast, Southern, east coast very rarely state. 

 I can't get Canadian or English regional ones not sure they exist in Australia. With English I can sometimes tell they're from somewhere but I don't know them well enough to guess where that some where is.
 We don't really have them here but there's a stereotype of Southland accents that seems to be dying out and someone (pakeha) occasionally has a Maori accent which usually means they're from "up north" somewhere.


----------



## Maxperson

Paul Farquhar said:


> It's a Numenorean ship, and the shadow is Isildur.



Isildur isn't born for another 1500 years or so.


----------



## Ryujin

Zardnaar said:


> Most of the tinevyes. Sometimes I get it wrong though so a strong Canadian accent I can.
> 
> Some have a generic mid Atlantic type accent and unless they say about one can mistake them for Muricans. Much to their chagrin.
> 
> Sometimes I can broadly pick an American accent eg wid west, west coast, Southern, east coast very rarely state.
> 
> I can't get Canadian or English regional ones not sure they exist in Australia. With English I can sometimes tell they're from somewhere but I don't know them well enough to guess where that some where is.



I have legitimately never met someone who has a "Mid-Atlantic Accent" and have only heard it in old radio serials, and movies from the 1930s.


----------



## Maxperson

Paul Farquhar said:


> My personal guess: Sauron _is_ the evil sword of evilness. He is a shapechanger, no reason he can't disguise himself as an object.



This would be a new ability.  Maia were spirits who could put on flesh bodies like clothing.  It wasn't really shapechanging and they couldn't do objects.


----------



## Arilyn

Accents and accent influences are interesting. I grew up in the Vancouver area. In grade one, my teacher had an Irish accent that I kinda picked up. I didn't sound Irish but my parents said my inflections changed, especially my rs, and right up into my teens, people I'd run into assumed I was American.


----------



## Zardnaar

Ryujin said:


> I have legitimately never met someone who has a "Mid-Atlantic Accent" and have only heard it in old radio serials, and movies from the 1930s.




 For me it's that rare American with no string accent and some Canadians have it. 

 I usually guess east coast/NE USA but it's not exact.


----------



## Zubatcarteira

They're definitely changing a lot in regards to lore, compressing the timeline and stuff. Not a huge issue for me, even the LoTR movies changed a ton of stuff.


----------



## Dioltach

Dire Bare said:


> Amazon turned off the on-site reviews for a couple of days, because Rings of Power is being review bombed by those same toxic trolls you stumbled across. This is, sadly, the new normal.
> 
> Most fans and viewers are not so toxic, but those toxic trolls are LOUD and OBNOXIOUS . . . and tiresome. Every fandom has them now, and they feel very entitled to not just share their opinions, but to actively work at bringing down shows and the entertainers involved.
> 
> Makes me sad for humanity.



They started well before the first episode had even aired. Which kind of destroyed any credibility they could possibly have had.


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots

The "Mid-Atlantic Accent" has a naming issue. Since the phony accent is called that, but there are people who do live in a region of the US called the Mid-Atlantic and they do have a distinctive accent, it leads to confusion.

Basically, watch the characters on The Wire and you get a very Baltimore ("Ballmur") version of it, but it's generally representative.


----------



## Zaukrie

Maxperson said:


> Oh, right, because Appeals to Authority are really convincing.  It matters because it fundamentally changes who she is, even as portrayed in the movies.  It would have been better to make her the voice of wisdom that she was and make the new elf the bloodthirsty one.



Why does it matter if she's changed for a different story? That's my question. Why does it matter? As for Gaiman, I'm merely pointing out that an author doesn't think it matters.....


----------



## Maxperson

Zaukrie said:


> Why does it matter if she's changed for a different story? That's my question. Why does it matter? As for Gaiman, I'm merely pointing out that an author doesn't think it matters.....



Why does it matter that you like one food over another?  Changing who people expert her to be will bother many more people(and not just Tolkien fans) than leaving her the same would have.  Why irritate a lot of people if you don't have to?


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

Maxperson said:


> Isildur isn't born for another 1500 years or so.




That means nothing because of the time compression Amazon is using. Taking 2000 years of history and cramming it into 200 years, or maybe less, so the shorter-lived main characters don't die off in between seasons, will screw with a lot of stuff about the 2nd Age.


----------



## Ryujin

Zardnaar said:


> For me it's that rare American with no string accent and some Canadians have it.
> 
> I usually guess east coast/NE USA but it's not exact.



I was born in the Canadian Maritimes; New Brunswick to be exact. My old accent only comes out, these days, when I'm under stress. I've tried to describe it to people but the best I've been able to do is, "Imagine someone from Newfoundland who was dropped on his head as a child. Repeatedly."


----------



## Ryujin

Whizbang Dustyboots said:


> The "Mid-Atlantic Accent" has a naming issue. Since the phony accent is called that, but there are people who do live in a region of the US called the Mid-Atlantic and they do have a distinctive accent, it leads to confusion.
> 
> Basically, watch the characters on The Wire and you get a very Baltimore ("Ballmur") version of it, but it's generally representative.



PRobably best to refer to the fake accent as "Trans-Atlantic" then, as that's one of the other names that it's known by.


----------



## Ryujin

Maxperson said:


> Why does it matter that you like one food over another?  Changing who people expert her to be will bother many more people(and not just Tolkien fans) than leaving her the same would have.  Why irritate a lot of people if you don't have to?



People change. Presumably even Elves change. Gordon Ramsey is well known for being an abusive "chef." Back in the days when he was coming up, he was the one being insulted and abused on TV. And he was the one crying.

_EDIT_- - Hey, you were the one who mentioned food


----------



## John R Davis

Dire Bare said:


> Amazon turned off the on-site reviews for a couple of days, because Rings of Power is being review bombed by those same toxic trolls you stumbled across. This is, sadly, the new normal.
> 
> Most fans and viewers are not so toxic, but those toxic trolls are LOUD and OBNOXIOUS . . . and tiresome. Every fandom has them now, and they feel very entitled to not just share their opinions, but to actively work at bringing down shows and the entertainers involved.
> 
> Makes me sad for humanity.



The Tyranny of the Minority; ruins it for everyone sadly.


----------



## MarkB

Maxperson said:


> Why does it matter that you like one food over another?  Changing who people expert her to be will bother many more people(and not just Tolkien fans) than leaving her the same would have.  Why irritate a lot of people if you don't have to?



The character I've seen in these two episodes doesn't particularly go against what I saw in the movies. I can fully believe that the person I saw then took a proactive role in opposing Sauron a couple of thousand years previously.

The last thing I want from this series is to see people being carbon-copies of their older counterparts. I want interesting times and character growth, not just same old same old.


----------



## Maxperson

So this is what I thought of the first two episoded.

1. I was irritated by the prologue. It made it seem like the Noldor just happily sailed over to Middle Earth to fight Morgoth. No mention of the Silmarils, no mention of the Kinslaying, and no mention of the oath.  The 2nd episode fixed this a bit by mentioning the Silmarils and Morgoth stealing them.
2. I very much dislike unwise, militant Galadriel.  That just flat out isn't her.  It also made no sense for her to jump off a ship on the other side of the ocean with no possibility of swimming back.  Either have her refuse to get on the ship, or have her cross the Helcaraxe again and leave Aman that way.
3. I very much liked the dwarves.  The Hobbit and LotR badly mistreated dwarves by making them comic relief.  This show got them right. I also didn't mind that the dwarven women didn't have beards. That would have been a hard sell to the masses.
4. I'm not sold on the Harfoot storyline, but how I end up feeling about it will depend on who and what The Stranger is.
5. The orc killed near the end of episode 2 was way to hard to kill.  A dagger in the back didn't even phase it and then a bigger whatever that was through the back was only an issue because it hit things. They feel pain and are mortal.
6. I'm mixed at this point on the portrayal of the elves in general, but it's too early for final judgment there.


----------



## Maxperson

Ryujin said:


> People change. Presumably even Elves change. Gordon Ramsey is well known for being an abusive "chef." Back in the days when he was coming up, he was the one being insulted and abused on TV. And he was the one crying.
> 
> _EDIT_- - Hey, you were the one who mentioned food



People don't generally regress from who they were 6000 years ago, 5000 years ago, 4000 years ago, 3000 years ago, 2000 years ago, and 1000 years ago, then a few hundred years later go back to what they were for 6000 years when they move to the forest.


----------



## Crimson Longinus

Maxperson said:


> I very much dislike unwise, militant Galadriel.



 Is she unwise? She's right the others just don't want to believe her.



Maxperson said:


> That just flat out isn't her.  It also made no sense for her to jump off a ship on the other side of the ocean with no possibility of swimming back.  Either have her refuse to get on the ship, or have her cross the Helcaraxe again and leave Aman that way.



Yeah, that was definitely really weird.


----------



## Maxperson

Crimson Longinus said:


> Is she unwise? She's right the others just don't want to believe her.
> 
> 
> Yeah, that was definitely really weird.



Galadriel from even before she left Aman was not warlike or super angry.  She didn't swear the oath and disagreed with how her kin behaved.  She was the wise counselor and didn't partake in the wars, even when her kin were killed.  For her to give that up and suddenly become a warlike, angry, orc hating elf is grossly out of character for her. It would be like Steve Rogers suddenly becoming a serial killer for a few years and then changing back. 

People change, yes, but they generally don't change that drastically without a traumatic brain injury or a brain tumor.


----------



## MarkB

Maxperson said:


> People don't generally regress from who they were 6000 years ago, 5000 years ago, 4000 years ago, 3000 years ago, 2000 years ago, and 1000 years ago, then a few hundred years later go back to what they were for 6000 years when they move to the forest.



This show's canon doesn't include portrayals of her from 6000 years ago. They don't have access to that material, and aren't bound by it.

And if anything's going to change someone, it's the death of a loved one.


----------



## Zaukrie

Maxperson said:


> Why does it matter that you like one food over another?  Changing who people expert her to be will bother many more people(and not just Tolkien fans) than leaving her the same would have.  Why irritate a lot of people if you don't have to?



I guess I'm not being clear. Why does it matter to you if she's portrayed differently in this story? Nothing changes in the stories you've already read/watched. This is a new story. And, it likely doesn't irritate even a tiny majority of viewers. Just the vocal ones, I'd guess. We really don't know.


----------



## Tonguez

Maxperson said:


> Oh, right, because Appeals to Authority are really convincing.  It matters because it fundamentally changes who she is, even as portrayed in the movies.  It would have been better to make her the voice of wisdom that she was and make the new elf the bloodthirsty one.



‘Her pride was unwilling to return, a defeated suppliant for pardon; _but now she burned with desire_ to follow Fëanor with her anger to whatever lands he might come, and to thwart him in all ways that she could.

_Pride still moved her when, at the end of the Elder Days after the final overthrow of Morgoth, she refused the pardon of the Valar for all who had fought against him, and remained in Middle-earth. It was not until two long ages more had passed, when at last all that she had desired in her youth came to her hand_, the Ring of Power and the dominion of Middle-earth of which she had dreamed, that her wisdom was full grown and she rejected it, and passing the last test departed from Middle-earth for ever.”


----------



## MarkB

Maxperson said:


> It also made no sense for her to jump off a ship on the other side of the ocean with no possibility of swimming back.  Either have her refuse to get on the ship, or have her cross the Helcaraxe again and leave Aman that way.



They went to some trouble to describe the song of Valinor, how it echoes in the hearts of elves. I think maybe Galadriel fully believed that she might choose to make her way back one day, right up until they reached the threshold and the other elves began to hear and join in with the song. That's when she realised that if she departed into that eternal peace, she'd likely never summon the will to return.


----------



## Maxperson

Tonguez said:


> ‘Her pride was unwilling to return, a defeated suppliant for pardon; _but now she burned with desire_ to follow Fëanor with her anger to whatever lands he might come, and to thwart him in all ways that she could.
> 
> _Pride still moved her when, at the end of the Elder Days after the final overthrow of Morgoth, she refused the pardon of the Valar for all who had fought against him, and remained in Middle-earth. It was not until two long ages more had passed, when at last all that she had desired in her youth came to her hand_, the Ring of Power and the dominion of Middle-earth of which she had dreamed, that her wisdom was full grown and she rejected it, and passing the last test departed from Middle-earth for ever.”



Yes.  She rejected Feanor and his war.  She sought to thwart him, not join the military and do what he did. How did she try and do that, but being the wise counselor to those who opposed him.


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots

Maxperson said:


> Why irritate a lot of people if you don't have to?



Given the constraints that Amazon is under -- use the appendices but _not_ anything not present in Hobbit/LotR -- atop the usual constraints of adapting a book to filmed entertainment, they probably figured a certain level of irritation was inevitable and wanted to go with what would be the best TV. They also have Bezos looking over their shoulder with a very specific idea of what the show should be.


----------



## Maxperson

Whizbang Dustyboots said:


> Given the constraints that Amazon is under -- use the appendices but _not_ anything not present in Hobbit/LotR -- atop the usual constraints of adapting a book to filmed entertainment, they probably figured a certain level of irritation was inevitable and wanted to go with what would be the best TV. They also have Bezos looking over their shoulder with a very specific idea of what the show should be.



Yes, but...

Jeff Bezos reveals warning from his son for Amazon's new 'Lord of the Rings' series—'Dad, please don't eff this up'


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots

Maxperson said:


> So this is what I thought of the first two episoded.
> 
> 1. I was irritated by the prologue. It made it seem like the Noldor just happily sailed over to Middle Earth to fight Morgoth. No mention of the Silmarils, no mention of the Kinslaying, and no mention of the oath.  The 2nd episode fixed this a bit by mentioning the Silmarils and Morgoth stealing them.



How much of that is in the appendices?


Maxperson said:


> 3. I very much liked the dwarves.  The Hobbit and LotR badly mistreated dwarves by making them comic relief.  This show got them right. I also didn't mind that the dwarven women didn't have beards. That would have been a hard sell to the masses.



The princess has facial hair, just not a full beard. I think they did a good job of splitting the difference.


----------



## Tonguez

Maxperson said:


> Yes.  She rejected Feanor and his war.  She sought to thwart him, not join the military and do what he did. How did she try and do that, but being the wise counselor to those who opposed him.



Thats a fair enough interpretation, but when the Elfs are summoned to war why would Galadriel not join? Tolkien also states “She was of Amazon disposition and bound up her hair as a crown when taking part in athletic feats.” - she was athletic as well as wise, and Amazon = Warrior woman in Tolkien speak.


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots

Crimson Longinus said:


> Yeah, that was definitely really weird.



You all need to go re-read your Beowulf, one of JRRT's big influences for the Hobbit. (I say "influence" but "flat-out ripped off the theft of an item from a treasure hoard, unleashing an angry dragon on the mortal world" is more accurate.)

Beowulf's first heroic deed, which we hear about but don't see, is him fighting a sea serpent in the middle of the ocean, which he was swimming in because he's Beowulf. Galadriel jumps off a ship that was about to enter Elf Heaven and plans to swim back to the mortal world hundreds (?) of miles away because she's a mythic hero thousands of years old.

Samwise would be dead.

Aragorn would probably be dead.

Gandalf would be Gandalf the Bloated and Pale.

But Galadriel is a Beowulf-level badass, as she also shows by using a dagger as a piton in the mountains.


----------



## Maxperson

Tonguez said:


> Thats a fair enough interpretation, but when the Elfs are summoned to war why would Galadriel not join? Tolkien aslo states “She was of Amazon disposition and bound up her hair as a crown when taking part in athletic feats.” - she was athletic as well as wise, and Amazon = Warrior woman in Tolkien speak.



But she also did not take part in any of the major battles of the ages.  She was athletic, but not warlike.


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots

Maxperson said:


> But she also did not take part in any of the major battles of the ages.  She was athletic, but not warlike.



So far she hasn't.


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots

Maxperson said:


> Yes, but...
> 
> Jeff Bezos reveals warning from his son for Amazon's new 'Lord of the Rings' series—'Dad, please don't eff this up'



Bezos' 12 rules also suggest that Galadriel is going to change over the course of the series as, so far, she is inarguably the protagonist of the series to whom the rules would largely apply.

I think by the end of season eight, we're very likely to see very little distance between who she is at that point of Rings of Power and who she is in Fellowship.


----------



## billd91

Maxperson said:


> Yes.  She rejected Feanor and his war.  She sought to thwart him, not join the military and do what he did. How did she try and do that, but being the wise counselor to those who opposed him.



Here's the question. Does it literally say that or is that what you think the text implies?

There's not a whole hell of a lot said about Galadriel in general, and even less that the show has to work with. From the LotR appendices, we know she's counted as one of the 3 greatest of the Eldar, which is why she bears a ring (the others being Gil-Galad and Círdan). We also know that she's the one who throws down Dol Guldor with her power. So we know she's formidable. But beyond that, we have little that is concrete for the show to go on without dipping into other sources that are off limits.


----------



## Maxperson

Whizbang Dustyboots said:


> Is any of that in the appendices?



I'm not sure.  Aragorn tells the hobbits the story of Beren and Luthien, and silmarils get mentioned as being taken by Morgoth in episode 2, so presumably it is.  Or maybe they can also use the movies.

Looking at appendix A it says that Feanor forsook Aman and let a large number of elves to middle earth to recover the Silmarils.  It mentions Luthien and her quest to take the silmarils from Morgoth's crown.

Appendix B mentions Galadriel being married to Celeborn.

It's also interesting to note that Sauron starts working with the smiths of Eregion around S.A.1200, but it's not until 1500 that they begin making the rings, and the elven rings are made in 1590.  The One Ring is forged in 1600. This is all in Apendix B.

Maybe the series will jump decades or centuries to tell the story.


Whizbang Dustyboots said:


> The princess has facial hair, just not a full beard. I think they did a good job of splitting the difference.



Huh.  I didn't see it.


----------



## Maxperson

billd91 said:


> Here's the question. Does it literally say that or is that what you think the text implies?
> 
> There's not a whole hell of a lot said about Galadriel in general, and even less that the show has to work with. From the LotR appendices, we know she's counted as one of the 3 greatest of the Eldar, which is why she bears a ring (the others being Gil-Galad and Círdan). We also know that she's the one who throws down Dol Guldor with her power. So we know she's formidable. But beyond that, we have little that is concrete for the show to go on without dipping into other sources that are off limits.



"First Age
Once in Beleriand, she lived nominally with one of her brothers, most likely Finrod, but* spent much time at the court of Thingol and Melian in Menegroth, where she arrived in FA 52 *and was welcomed because of her family relationship to Thingol's brother Olwë, Galadriel's maternal grandfather. She met Celeborn, a kinsman of Thingol, in Doriath. She also traveled to visit her brother, Finrod, in his realm of Nargothrond multiple times. Her three other brothers were killed during various battles in the First Age.

Galadriel became friends with Melian the Maia, who wanted to know the cause of the Exile of the Ñoldor. Galadriel only briefly narrated the story to her, leaving out the death of Finwë, the Kinslaying at Alqualondë, and the burning of the ships at Losgar. She dwelt in Nargothrond with her brother Finrod, and asked him if he would take no wife. But Finrod had taken an oath only for himself, and his beloved had been left in Valinor.

*She had no role in the major wars of the First Age, believing that defeating Morgoth was beyond the power of the Eldar*; when Morgoth was defeated by the coming of the Valar out of the West she, having played no part in the earlier Kinslaying, was offered safe return to Valinor. However, she chose not to leave Middle-earth, and was the only leader of the Ñoldor exiles to remain after the First Age."

She spent most her time in the first age living in security, talking with Melian and taking no role in the major wars of the first age. 

*"Second Age*​Celeborn and Galadriel traveled first to Lindon, where they ruled over a group of Elves as a fiefdom under Gil-galad, the High King of the Ñoldor. Sometime later, they had a daughter, Celebrían. They moved eastward and established the realm of Eregion, or Hollin, which they ruled under Gil-galad. Eregion, to the west of the Misty Mountains near Khazad-dûm, was a prosperous kingdom during this time, and had open trade with the Dwarves. Also, during this time, they made contact with a Nandorin settlement in the valley of the Anduin, later to be known as Lothlórien. Subsequently, when Celebrimbor took over the rule of Eregion, Galadriel left by way of the mines of Khazad-dûm. After the death of King Amdír, in the War of the Last Alliance, and the departure his son Amroth, Celeborn and Galadriel became the Lord and Lady of Lothlórien."

In the second age she settled into being a ruler, then left to go to Lothlorien.  No wars or battles.


----------



## trappedslider




----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots

Maxperson said:


> Huh.  I didn't see it.



Look for extremely lush sideburns going down almost to her chin. It's soft and curly, so coded more feminine than dwarven male facial hair, but it's definitely facial hair.


----------



## billd91

Maxperson said:


> *"Second Age*​Celeborn and Galadriel traveled first to Lindon, where they ruled over a group of Elves as a fiefdom under Gil-galad, the High King of the Ñoldor. Sometime later, they had a daughter, Celebrían. They moved eastward and established the realm of Eregion, or Hollin, which they ruled under Gil-galad. Eregion, to the west of the Misty Mountains near Khazad-dûm, was a prosperous kingdom during this time, and had open trade with the Dwarves. Also, during this time, they made contact with a Nandorin settlement in the valley of the Anduin, later to be known as Lothlórien. Subsequently, when Celebrimbor took over the rule of Eregion, Galadriel left by way of the mines of Khazad-dûm. After the death of King Amdír, in the War of the Last Alliance, and the departure his son Amroth, Celeborn and Galadriel became the Lord and Lady of Lothlórien."
> 
> In the second age she settled into being a ruler, then left to go to Lothlorien.  No wars or battles.



So, in other words, with respect to the Second Age, you’re taking her behavior as *implied* by the source material, not literal.


----------



## Nikosandros

Enevhar Aldarion said:


> That means nothing because of the time compression Amazon is using. Taking 2000 years of history and cramming it into 200 years, or maybe less, so the shorter-lived main characters don't die off in between seasons, will screw with a lot of stuff about the 2nd Age.



Yes, Isildur, along with Pharazon and Elendil is listed among the cast of characters on Amazon's web page for the series. As I stated upthread, they almost certainly have compressed the timeline.


----------



## Maxperson

trappedslider said:


>



My wife during the first episode of Rings of Power said, "I can't do this again.  I went through enough of it with Game of Thrones.  This show is yours."


----------



## Maxperson

Nikosandros said:


> Yes, Isildur, along with Pharazon and Elendil is listed among the cast of characters on Amazon's web page for the series. As I stated upthread, they almost certainly have compressed the timeline.



I sincerely hope not.  I'd rather see some sort of cameo vision of the future that involves Isildur than for Amazon to mess up the timeline that badly.


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots

Maxperson said:


> I sincerely hope not.  I'd rather see some sort of cameo vision of the future that involves Isildur than for Amazon to mess up the timeline that badly.



They could do time skips each season, since season eight is going to presumably end with Sauron getting the One Ring lopped off his finger.


----------



## Maxperson

Whizbang Dustyboots said:


> They could do time skips each season, since season eight is going to presumably end with Sauron getting the One Ring lopped off his finger.



Yeah.  That's doable.  Just don't condense the timeline.  Skip around.


----------



## Nikosandros

Maxperson said:


> I sincerely hope not.  I'd rather see some sort of cameo vision of the future that involves Isildur than for Amazon to mess up the timeline that badly.



_“We took some events that happened over here, and some events that happened over here, and some events that happened over here, and sort of compressed them all in the timeline [gestures moving hands together]. And we worked very closely with the Tolkien Estate from the beginning, and said “Are you guys comfortable with us, you know, compressing this that much?” and they said “No we think it’s essential that you guys do that”._









						Rings Of Power Time Compression Approved By Tolkien Estate Says Showrunner
					

According to co-showrunner J.D. Payne, The Rings of Power time compression was approved by the Tolkien Estate. There were many fans lamenting this time




					lrmonline.com


----------



## Ryujin

Whizbang Dustyboots said:


> They could do time skips each season, since season eight is going to presumably end with Sauron getting the One Ring lopped off his finger.



Given that Galadriel and company were searching for Sauron for several hundred years, that's likely the route they'll take.


----------



## Maxperson

Zaukrie said:


> I guess I'm not being clear. Why does it matter to you if she's portrayed differently in this story? Nothing changes in the stories you've already read/watched. This is a new story. And, it likely doesn't irritate even a tiny majority of viewers. Just the vocal ones, I'd guess. We really don't know.



I know the other stories and they she isn't like that. For this story to completely change her character is super annoying.  While it doesn't change those other stories, the conflicting natures matter to me.


----------



## Rabulias

Tonguez said:


> Tolkien also states “She was of Amazon disposition and bound up her hair as a crown when taking part in athletic feats.” - she was athletic as well as wise, and Amazon = Warrior woman in Tolkien speak.



Or, taken another way, JRRT knew she would make a good protagonist in a show on Amazon.


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots

Ryujin said:


> Given that Galadriel and company were searching for Sauron for several hundred years, that's likely the route they'll take.



Sauron = all-time Hide and Seek champion


----------



## Tonguez

Maxperson said:


> Yeah.  That's doable.  Just don't condense the timeline.  Skip around.



That means it’s an all elf show since not even Dwarfs live long enough to cover the whole timeframe.


----------



## Morrus

Maxperson said:


> People don't generally regress from who they were 6000 years ago, 5000 years ago, 4000 years ago, 3000 years ago, 2000 years ago, and 1000 years ago, then a few hundred years later go back to what they were for 6000 years when they move to the forest.



Do they not? I’d be interested in seeing your data.


----------



## Maxperson

Tonguez said:


> That means it’s an all elf show since not even Dwarfs live long enough to cover the whole timeframe.



Or different good actors get cycled in and are just as significant a part of the show as the elves.


----------



## MarkB

Tonguez said:


> That means it’s an all elf show since not even Dwarfs live long enough to cover the whole timeframe.



And also that both the heroes and villains advance their plans at glacial speed, except when we're watching. It's a tough sell having the villainous scheme progressing for hundreds of years unopposed and then just suddenly tuning back in when one of the protagonists finally notices something's up.


----------



## MarkB

Maxperson said:


> Or different good actors get cycled in and are just as significant a part of the show as the elves.



AppleTV's Foundation series is trying this approach. Based on the first season, they're not doing terribly at it, but also not wonderfully.


----------



## Maxperson

Morrus said:


> Do they not? I’d be interested in seeing your data.



I'd have to dig up some corpses and ask them as nobody alive has gone past the early 100's in years. 

In people with smaller lifespans, though...









						Does your personality change as you get older?
					

Good news: we get better over time.




					www.livescience.com
				




So it can be pronounced, though it doesn't go into drastic changes like Galadriel seems to have undergone, and the changes mentioned in the article above show that people change to become calmer and more sensitive, not more militant and angry.

But if you look up major or drastic changes, such as the one Galadriel has undergone, you get results like this.









						Personality Change Due to Another Medical Condition
					

Personality Change Due to Another Medical Condition is a diagnosis used to identify a persistent personality change caused by medical condition




					www.psychdb.com


----------



## Morrus

Maxperson said:


> I'd have to dig up some corpses and ask them as nobody alive has gone past the early 100's in years.



Yes.


----------



## Tonguez

Maxperson said:


> I'd have to dig up some corpses and ask them as nobody alive has gone past the early 100's in years.
> 
> In people with smaller lifespans, though...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Does your personality change as you get older?
> 
> 
> Good news: we get better over time.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.livescience.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So it can be pronounced, though it doesn't go into drastic changes like Galadriel seems to have undergone, and the changes mentioned in the article above show that people change to become calmer and more sensitive, not more militant and angry.
> 
> But if you look up major or drastic changes, such as the one Galadriel has undergone, you get results like this.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Personality Change Due to Another Medical Condition
> 
> 
> Personality Change Due to Another Medical Condition is a diagnosis used to identify a persistent personality change caused by medical condition
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.psychdb.com



I’d think the near destruction of her world (twice), the deaths of her family and friends and near disappearance of her species might count as significant trauma


----------



## Ryujin

Tonguez said:


> I’d think the near destruction of her world (twice), the deaths of her family and friends and near disappearance of her species might count as significant trauma



Indeed. It's almost as if the incredible upheavals at the end of one age and the beginning of another might be tough on a person.


----------



## Hussar

Can I just say that it’s kinda sad that the first original Middle Earth stories we’ve had are being crucified by book fans who are insisting that the books that largely no one has read must be adhered to?

I was actually quite excited when I heard these would be new stories. Now? All I see in my feeds are endless hate and worse. Has totally sucked any desire I had to watch these. 

Twelve year old me would have sold a kidney to watch this. Fifty year old me just can’t get past the wall of noise.


----------



## Ryujin

Hussar said:


> Can I just say that it’s kinda sad that the first original Middle Earth stories we’ve had are being crucified by book fans who are insisting that the books that largely no one has read must be adhered to?
> 
> I was actually quite excited when I heard these would be new stories. Now? All I see in my feeds are endless hate and worse. Has totally sucked any desire I had to watch these.
> 
> Twelve year old me would have sold a kidney to watch this. Fifty year old me just can’t get past the wall of noise.



Even Elon Musk is whining about the show and, if anything, that should make people more want to watch it.


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots

Hussar said:


> Can I just say that it’s kinda sad that the first original Middle Earth stories we’ve had are being crucified by book fans who are insisting that the books that largely no one has read must be adhered to?
> 
> I was actually quite excited when I heard these would be new stories. Now? All I see in my feeds are endless hate and worse. Has totally sucked any desire I had to watch these.
> 
> Twelve year old me would have sold a kidney to watch this. Fifty year old me just can’t get past the wall of noise.



Clear some time this weekend, put away all your devices, and just watch nearly three hours of new Lord of the Rings content. It'll be an enjoyable time.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Bagpuss said:


> And like most "great literature" is a tedious read.



Nah, it’s as far from tedious as you can get without reading an action comic book. 


Paul Farquhar said:


> But people in the US tend to be very bad at telling British accents from Australian, and they are a lot more than a 100 miles apart.



Well, that’s because Australians have British accents.


----------



## Tonguez

Hussar said:


> Can I just say that it’s kinda sad that the first original Middle Earth stories we’ve had are being crucified by book fans who are insisting that the books that largely no one has read must be adhered to?
> 
> I was actually quite excited when I heard these would be new stories. Now? All I see in my feeds are endless hate and worse. Has totally sucked any desire I had to watch these.
> 
> Twelve year old me would have sold a kidney to watch this. Fifty year old me just can’t get past the wall of noise.



Ignore the noise, dont be sucked in by the few ranters on social media

50 yr old me is enjoying that tale and the world building


----------



## Olgar Shiverstone

Paul Farquhar said:


> The Lord of the Rings is great literature. The Hobbit was a clumsily written prototype with minimal characterisation, an uneven tone, and a plot ripped off from the third part of Beowulf.



That's it. WORDS!

Blurp._ Thweek_. *FLIBBERTIGIBBET!*

//
I mean, it's not exactly surprising that a scholar of Beowulf would rip off Beowulf, even unconsciously.

On the topic of accents, has anyone listened to the Andy Serkis audiobooks of Lord of the Rings? He does different British accents for each of the hobbits, and all of the characters for that matter. My problem is, while I can tell they are different, I don't know enough to know where they are from and if that origin has any particular meaning for the character.

Can anyone share insight?


----------



## Dire Bare

Hussar said:


> Can I just say that it’s kinda sad that the first original Middle Earth stories we’ve had are being crucified by book fans who are insisting that the books that largely no one has read must be adhered to?
> 
> I was actually quite excited when I heard these would be new stories. Now? All I see in my feeds are endless hate and worse. Has totally sucked any desire I had to watch these.
> 
> Twelve year old me would have sold a kidney to watch this. Fifty year old me just can’t get past the wall of noise.



Shows and movies being review-bombed by toxic fans is the new normal. Those of us who are a bit more rational, need to adapt in order to continue enjoying our fandoms.

I expected the hate and vitriol, and it bothers me not a whit. I decided to simply watch the first few episodes and make up my own mind . . . . and so far I'm loving it!

Not to say that everyone who dislikes the new series is a toxic review-bombing troll . . . the next level down is _fans-with-unrealistic-expectations_, based on books very few have actually read. If one is a big Tolkien apocrypha fan, and is disappointed that the new series isn't adhering slavishly to the "History of Middle-Earth" books . . . that's a fair enough point-of-view, but it is incredibly unrealistic to think this show (or one like it) would have ended up any other way.

The only issue I've had so far is watching a show very visually and tonally reminiscent of the Jackson films, but with the pacing of a television series . . . but I'm adapting. I'm also irritated at the licensing situation, that Amazon could only land the appendices and can't pull from the Silmarillion or the history volumes . . . . the Tolkien estate needs to get their house in order. But I never expected an adaptation that didn't change the source material, and I'm enjoying the show so far.


----------



## Page

I'm not a Tolkien scholar. I have read his works, and I found them occasionally beautiful but mostly stodgy and inept as works of narrative fiction. They are clearly the product of a professor more interested in mythology, world building and linguistics than storytelling. But his imagination and writing stands the test of time for good reason. I think the first two episodes of The Rings of Power serve his legacy better than anything Jackson produced after Fellowship.


----------



## Rabulias

Maxperson said:


> Yeah.  That's doable.  Just don't condense the timeline.  Skip around.



I have only read _The Hobbit_ (a couple of times over the years) and _The Lord of the Rings_ (once, long ago, and I did not read the appendices), so I have no sense of the timeline outside of "the big four."

I don't see how the _story _is enhanced by such a long timeline, unless some element of the tale is something that would take centuries to accomplish (like, say, the construction of The Wall over in _Game of Thrones_). In fact, to me, it strains my suspension of disbelief that they searched for Sauron for hundreds of years and failed to find him (assuming he still is in Middle Earth).


----------



## FitzTheRuke

Maxperson said:


> She was younger, yes, but not enough to make that large of a change.  The current show is set about 2000 years before the war of the ring, which means she is already 6000 years old.  Elves don't really change that much and by the ripe age of 6k, she's not really going to change anymore. The show should be portraying her like the movies did.



This part I agree with.


Maxperson said:


> That said, I'm not sure she is introverted. She went with Fingolfin and his followers from Aman to Middle Earth across the Helcaraxe and then took part in the wars that followed.  It wasn't until around 400 years from the time of this show that she went to dwell in Lothlorien and it was another 500ish years before she assumed control of that place.  By that time all the elves had retreated to their strongholds.



Here I think you're misunderstanding me. Introversion has nothing to do with deeds.


Whizbang Dustyboots said:


> Yeah, we saw Galadriel in LotR for a very short window at a very particular point in time. If you met me at a dinner party where I was talking to friends of mine who went into politics, it wouldn't be accurate to think that was my life, at all.



Of course. But I would get a pretty good idea of the very basics of who you are.


Whizbang Dustyboots said:


> We're seeing a _lot_ more of Galadriel and Elrond than we have previously. They are going to do things they haven't done before -- which mostly consisted of war councils -- and show other sides of their personalities.



Sure. Other sides aren't usually _opposite_ sides, though.


Whizbang Dustyboots said:


> It would be a lot less plausible if we never saw other sides of them in this show.



Absolutely, but to use an exaggeration to make a point, one does not often go all the way from a dudebro jock to an introspective nerd. It feels to me like Galadriel has gone (in reverse) from a wise calm quiet telepath to a brash angry soldier. I get that she's younger, but it seems like too far a leap to me.

Don't get me wrong, I don't really _care_. I like the show. She can be a tough elf fighter named Galadriel, that's fine. But she doesn't seem like the same person AT ALL.

EDIT: I posted this before reading the last bunch of pages.


----------



## BRayne

I feel like this show is best viewed through the same framing device as Tolkien first wrote it, it's myth. Tolkien translated the Red Book of Westmarch and several other fragmentary passages. Payne, McKay, et al then later translate something let's call "On The Rings of Power" and some of this contradicts bits in the fragments Tolkien translated, which is not dissimilar from say Homer and Hesiod's accounts of Aphrodite's birth being contradictory.


----------



## FitzTheRuke

BRayne said:


> I feel like this show is best viewed through the same framing device as Tolkien first wrote it, it's myth. Tolkien translated the Red Book of Westmarch and several other fragmentary passages. Payne, McKay, et al then later translate something let's call "On The Rings of Power" and some of this contradicts bits in the fragments Tolkien translated, which is not dissimilar from say Homer and Hesiod's accounts of Aphrodite's birth being contradictory.




Yeah, that's a good idea. Before "continuity" became a thing (which has only been something that built over the last century) tales could be told with a whole LOTTA details mixed up. Even subbing in some characters for others, mixing up names, all of these things were common in storytelling. 

In this story, Galadriel is an angry soldier and Elrond is a smarmy politician. (Maybe. They'll probably both grow and change over the course of the story). 

I'm fine with that, really, as long as it's a good story as it goes.


----------



## Hriston

The problem with Galadriel's character in this show isn't that she's depicted as a warrior. As has been noted, Tolkien's writings have many references to Galadriel directly taking part in armed conflicts, most notably that she defended the Teleri and their ships at the First Kinslaying.

The problem is her character already contained a flaw - that despite her rejection of Morgoth, her mind had been infected by his lies, and she believed she could have dominion in Middle-earth if she rebelled against the Valar. Her character arc, resolving this flaw, takes place in the LotR when Frodo offers her the Ring, and she refuses. They can't resolve this flaw in this series. It has to wait until the LotR.

So she can have an arc in this story, the writers have given her a new flaw - that she is driven to destroy Sauron by a desire for revenge for her brother's death - and this new flaw seems to drive pretty much all her decisions, so that the original character is nearly unrecognizable.

The writers don't seem to have invented this new flaw from whole cloth, however. Galadriel is Sauron's chief enemy throughout the Second Age, and according to this reddit post, at one point, in conversation with Celebrimbor after the forging of the One Ring has been revealed, she vows to remain in Middle-earth until she has defeated Sauron.


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots

Remember, folks, it's two episodes in of an eight-episode season that is, itself, the first of eight seasons. We haven't seen the full version of these characters yet, especially since they've had so many characters and places to introduce.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Tonguez said:


> ‘Her pride was unwilling to return, a defeated suppliant for pardon; _but now she burned with desire_ to follow Fëanor with her anger to whatever lands he might come, and to thwart him in all ways that she could.
> 
> _Pride still moved her when, at the end of the Elder Days after the final overthrow of Morgoth, she refused the pardon of the Valar for all who had fought against him, and remained in Middle-earth. It was not until two long ages more had passed, when at last all that she had desired in her youth came to her hand_, the Ring of Power and the dominion of Middle-earth of which she had dreamed, that her wisdom was full grown and she rejected it, and passing the last test departed from Middle-earth for ever.”



Sounds like a passionate person. 


Hussar said:


> book fans who are insisting that the books that largely no one has read must be adhered to?



LOL wut. 

One of the most widely read works of fiction _ever_, but largely no one has read it.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

Hriston said:


> The problem with Galadriel's character in this show isn't that she's depicted as a warrior. As has been noted, Tolkien's writings have many references to Galadriel directly taking part in armed conflicts, most notably that she defended the Teleri and their ships at the First Kinslaying.



That's because at the time writing the idea that a woman _could_ be a warrior was radical and out there - when Tolkien was born women where considered the property of their male relative, and he was 26 before (some) women got the right to vote in the UK. Hence, _Dernhelm is Eowyn and can kill the Witch King because she is no man _is treated as a big surprise in the book, and was intended as a radical pro-feminist statement. For a modern audience this is obvious, and in the movie Peter Jackson doesn't try to conceal "Dernhelm's" identity.

Now, they could have gone with the "full caster" approach, but Galadriel killing the ice troll with Guiding Bolts would have made for a very different, much more high magic tone. Tolkien's view was magic is subtle. And subtle doesn't work well on TV and film. Which is why the scene in the Extended Edition were Saruman casts fireball is so bad.

So yes, they made changes in Galadriel, but they were necessary, given the different time and the different medium.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

doctorbadwolf said:


> Nah, it’s as far from tedious as you can get without reading an action comic book.



The pacing of LotR is slow, but I would consider a strength, not a weakness. The characters do stop to smell the flowers, and in the process remind everyone why Middle Earth is worth saving.

But I can understand why it frustrates some readers who just want to get on with fighting orcs.


----------



## Hussar

I do wish that Amazon would take a Disney on this. Declare everything non-canon and go from there. 

Of course the hue and cry would be doubly deafening but at least we wouldn’t have to listen to people talk about books no one has read or even slightly cares about.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

Maxperson said:


> Isildur isn't born for another 1500 years or so.



He's in the cast.

Slavish adherence to the source material does not make for good TV.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

Maxperson said:


> This would be a new ability.  Maia were spirits who could put on flesh bodies like clothing.  It wasn't really shapechanging and they couldn't do objects.



Tolkien doesn't define "rules" for magic or explains how it works. That is why it's magic. So he never says "can't do objects". The only rule was that after the fall of Numenor Sauron could never again "take on fair form". But if it was as easy as changing clothes, Gandalf could have escaped from Orthanc by changing _himself_ into an eagle.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

Hussar said:


> I do wish that Amazon would take a Disney on this. Declare everything non-canon and go from there.



There is no such thing as "canon". There are the books, and then there are things based on the books. When you adapt something to a different medium you make changes. It used to be people understood this. No one is saying "this is the true version, and your version is wrong".


----------



## Bagpuss

doctorbadwolf said:


> LOL wut.
> 
> One of the most widely read works of fiction _ever_, but largely no one has read it.




LotR might be but I'm not sure how many people actually read the appendices, The Silmarillion (which they can't use but can't contradict?) or his other works. Or for that matter how many people just own a copy but never really read it.

The TV show also needs a much wider audience than people that the read books.


----------



## reelo

Maxperson said:


> This would be a new ability. Maia were spirits who could put on flesh bodies like clothing. It wasn't really shapechanging and they couldn't do objects.



Actually, in the Lay of Beren and Lúthien, while Sauron rules over Tol-in-Gauroth where he has Beren and Finrod imprisoned, during the battle with Huan he shapechanges into a wolf and into a giant bat subsequently. Granted, those are not "objects", but still that's shapechanging nonetheless.


----------



## Hussar

Heh, really?  The Silmarillion or the Lost Tales are some of the most widely read fiction ever?  I'm thinking not so much.


----------



## reelo

Hussar said:


> Can I just say that it’s kinda sad that the first original Middle Earth stories we’ve had are being crucified by book fans who are insisting that the books that largely no one has read must be adhered to?




If you can't create an original story without having to resort to altering that which already exists in order for it to fit, is it really worthwhile doing?

And the fact that fewer people have read the Silmarillion shouldn't be a valid argument. People who know the Hobbit and the Lord of the Rings and who want more Middle-Earth should read what's there, first. If they can't be *rs*d to do that and want it handed to them on a platter, they should at least acknowledge the fact that those who _have_ read those books have a right to be passionate about an accurate translation from one medium to another. 


I have no problem with the completely made-up parts of the show (the Harfoots and Arondir), only with established characters and situations being altered significantly.


----------



## Hussar

reelo said:


> If you can't create an original story without having to resort to altering that which already exists in order for it to fit, is it really worthwhile doing?
> 
> And the fact that fewer people have read the Silmarillion shouldn't be a valid argument. People who know the Hobbit and the Lord of the Rings and who want more Middle-Earth should read what's there, first. If they can't be *rs*d to do that and want it handed to them on a platter, they should at least acknowledge the fact that those who _have_ read those books have a right to be passionate about an accurate translation from one medium to another.
> 
> 
> I have no problem with the completely made-up parts of the show (the Harfoots and Arondir), only with established characters and situations being altered significantly.




Absolutely.  Who wants to watch Hamlet for the fifteen thousandth time without trying to recreate, change, or otherwise alter it?  We shouldn't ever allow for the various Sherlock Holmes remakes?  I guess we absolutely must not allow Lucy Liu to play Watson.  Never minding the fantastic Irregulars.   How many versions of Spider Man are there?  Never minding other super hero stories.  Conan should be Howard and only Howard?  No one should ever make a different Conan story?  Guess twenty or thirty years of Conan comic books can just be thrown away.  Two Dune movies, one close to the source material and one that gave us things like Weirding Modules and the fantastic Dune video games.  

On and on.  That is the primary purpose of all art - to build one each other and take things in new directions.

And the level of gate keeping here is pretty breath taking.  People who want more Middle Earth stories "should read what's there first"?  No thanks.  Some of us read the Silmarillion, or at least tried to, and realized that it was dry, boring and utterly disinteresting to read. 

Never minding the Lost Tales. 

There is no "should" here.  Those "established characters" are just fiction.  They have no feelings.  Reinvisioning, remaking, rewriting characters is ABSOLUTELY what you should be doing.  Simply regurgitating someone else's works just to pander to a vocal, but, ultimately, tiny sliver of fandom who actually cares is the absolute worst thing they could do. 

The best thing for any of these properties is to have a giant disclaimer right up front.  "HERE BE NEW IDEAS.  Warning, warning.  If you are against new ideas then do NOT watch this.  You will be disappointed."


----------



## BRayne

Hussar said:


> Absolutely.  Who wants to watch Hamlet for the fifteen thousandth time without trying to recreate, change, or otherwise alter it?  We shouldn't ever allow for the various Sherlock Holmes remakes?  I guess we absolutely must not allow Lucy Liu to play Watson.  Never minding the fantastic Irregulars.   And the level of gate keeping here is pretty breath taking.  People who want more Middle Earth stories "should read what's there first"?  No thanks.  Some of us read the Silmarillion, or at least tried to, and realized that it was dry, boring and utterly disinteresting to read.
> 
> Never minding the Lost Tales.
> 
> There is no "should" here.  Those "established characters" are just fiction.  They have no feelings.  Reinvisioning, remaking, rewriting characters is ABSOLUTELY what you should be doing.  Simply regurgitating someone else's works just to pander to a vocal, but, ultimately, tiny sliver of fandom who actually cares is the absolute worst thing they could do.
> 
> The best thing for any of these properties is to have a giant disclaimer right up front.  "HERE BE NEW IDEAS.  Warning, warning.  If you are against new ideas then do NOT watch this.  You will be disappointed."




No, I'm still upset about de Troyes putting his ridiculous Gary Stu self-insert Lancelot into Arthurian stories. If you have no respect for the canon don't write it!


----------



## Tonguez

Hussar said:


> Some of us read the Silmarillion, or at least tried to, and realized that it was dry, boring and utterly disinteresting to read.



I read the Slmarillion and prefir it over the Lord of the Rings novels.
but yeah I get your point and am enjoying RoP


----------



## Hussar

BRayne said:


> No, I'm still upset about de Troyes putting his ridiculous Gary Stu self-insert Lancelot into Arthurian stories. If you have no respect for the canon don't write it!



Ok, totally made my day with this.


----------



## Hussar

Tonguez said:


> I read the Slmarillion and prefir it over the Lord of the Rings novels.
> but yeah I get your point and am enjoying RoP



Sorry, I did get carried away there.  _*I*_ found it too dry and boring to read.  Not that it's badly written or anything like that.  I just bounced right off of it and totally could not get into it.  Then again, I've read both the Hobbit and Lord of the Rings multiple times and still have not read more than the first two lines of any of the poetry in any of the books.  As soon as that indent hits, I'm skipping pages.

I think I was about twenty years old before I actually learned the Appendix was meant to be read.


----------



## trappedslider

Hussar said:


> I think I was about twenty years old before I actually learned the Appendix was meant to be read.



still haven't read them


----------



## reelo

Hussar said:


> The best thing for any of these properties is to have a giant disclaimer right up front. "HERE BE NEW IDEAS. Warning, warning. If you are against new ideas then do NOT watch this. You will be disappointed."




I am not against new ideas _per se_ as I have already stated. But when you translate a work from one medium to another, it would be well to do so faithfully first. _Then_ you can start working with it.

Imagine a digital artist announcing that they're gonna colorize an old b/w photography of some famous person. And in doing so, they not only colorize the photo, but also erase moles, soften the skin, and alter the haircut of the person in the photo.
The end result might be stunning. It might be aesthetically pleasing. But you'd still wonder what the original photo would have looked like, colorized. 

I don't hate the new show — nor its fans. But I'm a tad bit disappointed and I feel it is a valid sentiment, both to have and to express. I refuse to be lumped in with trolls and racist that have raged against the show ever since the first character portraits were released. I gave the show the benefit of doubt and find it... lacking. That's all.


----------



## reelo

Hussar said:


> I still have not read more than the first two lines of any of the poetry in any of the books. As soon as that indent hits, I'm skipping pages.




Ah well. My enjoyment of Tolkien's poetry has led me to reading (and enjoying) his version of "Sir Gawain and the Green Knight" in Middle-English alliterative verse, as well as his, and other authors' translations of "Beowulf", and trying to learn Old English eventually.

Back when I was studying Sumerian philology we were always told to go back to the originals before going into secondary literature.

YMMV.


----------



## BRayne

Hussar said:


> Ok, totally made my day with this.




After I posted that I did a little research and found a fun coincidence. The estimated publishing years of Geoffrey of Monmouth's _Historia Regum Britanniae_, where we find the earliest accounts of most of the Arthurian canon, and de Troyes' _Lancelot, the Knight of the Cart _are 1136 and 1181 which puts them 45 years apart. Guess what was published 45 years ago next Thursday? The Silmarillion


----------



## Paul Farquhar

Hussar said:


> Heh, really?  The Silmarillion or the Lost Tales are some of the most widely read fiction ever?  I'm thinking not so much.



I would imagine the Silmarillion rivals A Brief History of Time as the most _un_read book!


----------



## Paul Farquhar

reelo said:


> Ah well. My enjoyment of Tolkien's poetry has led me to reading (and enjoying) his version of "Sir Gawain and the Green Knight" in Middle-English alliterative verse, as well as his, and other authors' translations of "Beowulf", and trying to learn Old English eventually.
> 
> Back when I was studying Sumerian philology we were always told to go back to the originals before going into secondary literature.
> 
> YMMV.



Seamus Heaney's Beowulf is much better. Tolkien was a first-rate scholar, but second-rate poet.


----------



## Hriston

Paul Farquhar said:


> That's because at the time writing the idea that a woman _could_ be a warrior was radical and out there - when Tolkien was born women where considered the property of their male relative, and he was 26 before (some) women got the right to vote in the UK. Hence, _Dernhelm is Eowyn and can kill the Witch King because she is no man _is treated as a big surprise in the book, and was intended as a radical pro-feminist statement. For a modern audience this is obvious, and in the movie Peter Jackson doesn't try to conceal "Dernhelm's" identity.
> 
> Now, they could have gone with the "full caster" approach, but Galadriel killing the ice troll with Guiding Bolts would have made for a very different, much more high magic tone. Tolkien's view was magic is subtle. And subtle doesn't work well on TV and film. Which is why the scene in the Extended Edition were Saruman casts fireball is so bad.
> 
> So yes, they made changes in Galadriel, but they were necessary, given the different time and the different medium.



I’m not sure what changes you mean. In the part of my post you quoted, I said the portrayal of Galadriel as a warrior is NOT a problem in my view because it IS consistent with Tolkien’s writings about her. It seems to me like you’re responding to something I didn’t write.


----------



## reelo

Paul Farquhar said:


> Seamus Heaney's Beowulf is much better. Tolkien was a first-rate scholar, but second-rate poet.



That might be, I haven't read Heaney's (yet)
Currently reading Liuzza's.

I found Tolkien's "Green Knight" very good, though.


----------



## Nikosandros

I imagine what would happen if Pinocchio was released by Disney today. Anger and outrage at the betrayal of the text! Where is Collodi's sarcasm? Why isn't the talking cricket smashed to his death and why has he been renamed?!


----------



## Hussar

Nikosandros said:


> I imagine what would happen if Pinocchio was released by Disney today. Anger and outrage at the betrayal of the text! Where is Collodi's sarcasm? Why isn't the talking cricket smashed to his death and why has he been renamed?!



Didn't they just release a live action one?  I thought i read something about that.

As far as the example of the colorized photo?  Nope.  Would not bother me in the least.  I would judge the photo for being a thing itself and while I could certainly compare the two, claiming that the second one should conform in some way to the first one is not something I would do.  Now, if the second one was claiming to be a faithful copy of the first, only colorized, then, sure, that's a different story.

But, Rings of Power has been billed as its own thing right from the beginning.  They are NOT using, and heck cannot use, the original source material.  Full stop.  So, it's "inspired by" all the way through.  

Now, to be fair, "I don't like it" is a perfectly reasonable reaction and I would defend someone's not liking something to the ends of the earth.  But, I'm just so sick and tired of all the hoopla about how they are somehow offending Tolkien (He's spinning in his grave) and things like that.  Good grief.  If you don't like it, there are a thousand other things to watch.  I just don't get the incessant need that people have to scream at the top of their lungs about how much they dislike something.  

((The above is 100% NOT directed at anyone in this thread.  Absolutely not.  It is very much NOT my intention to point fingers at anyone.  I am talking about the Twitterati and the umpteen "Rings of Power hates Tolkien" stories that are crossing my feed on a daily basis.  Elon Musk can take a long walk off a short pier.


----------



## Nikosandros

Hussar said:


> Didn't they just release a live action one?  I thought i read something about that.





Yes, they actually released it, but I haven't seen it and I was thinking about the old classic, which certainly changes a lot of things from the book.


Hussar said:


> As far as the example of the colorized photo?  Nope.  Would not bother me in the least.  I would judge the photo for being a thing itself and while I could certainly compare the two, claiming that the second one should conform in some way to the first one is not something I would do.  Now, if the second one was claiming to be a faithful copy of the first, only colorized, then, sure, that's a different story.



I apologize, I'm not following you here.



Hussar said:


> But, Rings of Power has been billed as its own thing right from the beginning.  They are NOT using, and heck cannot use, the original source material.  Full stop.  So, it's "inspired by" all the way through.




Yes, that much has been clear right from the start.


Hussar said:


> Now, to be fair, "I don't like it" is a perfectly reasonable reaction and I would defend someone's not liking something to the ends of the earth.  But, I'm just so sick and tired of all the hoopla about how they are somehow offending Tolkien (He's spinning in his grave) and things like that.  Good grief.  If you don't like it, there are a thousand other things to watch.  I just don't get the incessant need that people have to scream at the top of their lungs about how much they dislike something.
> 
> ((The above is 100% NOT directed at anyone in this thread.  Absolutely not.  It is very much NOT my intention to point fingers at anyone.  I am talking about the Twitterati and the umpteen "Rings of Power hates Tolkien" stories that are crossing my feed on a daily basis.  Elon Musk can take a long walk off a short pier.



I agree. Personally, I'm not crazy about the series so far, but I'll keep watching it and I hope that it grows on me. In any event, I find it visually stunning.


----------



## reelo

Hussar said:


> I'm just so sick and tired of all the hoopla about how they are somehow offending Tolkien (He's spinning in his grave) and things like that. Good grief. If you don't like it, there are a thousand other things to watch. I just don't get the incessant need that people have to scream at the top of their lungs about how much they dislike something.
> 
> ((The above is 100% NOT directed at anyone in this thread. Absolutely not. It is very much NOT my intention to point fingers at anyone. I am talking about the Twitterati and the umpteen "Rings of Power hates Tolkien" stories that are crossing my feed on a daily basis. Elon Musk can take a long walk off a short pier.




I don't feel pointed at, don't worry. 

It just gets tiresome (for me) to defend my position of disappointement from any attempts to lump me (and other is my case) in with the toxic racists that are rampant in many fandoms (of which LotR is just the most recent) these last few years, and that's why tend to be vocal about it.

Edit: I'm not saying it (the lumping-in with racists) happens here on these boards. But I want to avoid confusion whenever I can.


----------



## billd91

Hussar said:


> Twelve year old me would have sold a kidney to watch this. Fifty year old me just can’t get past the wall of noise.



Twelve year old me, maybe. But within a few years, every time a fantasy movie was announced, me and my friends would groan, 'Oh! It's gonna suck!"

Of course, that was the state of 1980s fantasy adaptations for film and television. Times are a bit different now. Production values and budgets are higher. There have been some much higher quality adaptations out there of various works to build up our hopes.

And yet, we are coming after the Hobbit trilogy, which was not adapted very well and had tons of high production value scenes that were pretty much just filler, and the last couple seasons of Game of Thrones, which saw a decline in quality as it moved past collaboration with the original author. And, of course, we had the Star Wars sequel trilogy which had some really good characterizations and interesting story points, but largely amounted to a rehash of the first movie, a story painting itself into corners, and a wrap up that may have worked itself out of the corner but pretty much repudiated most character advancement in its predecessor.

So, yeah, we've got expectations all over the map and a recent history of feeling burned by various choices made by movie-makers and showrunners to the point where I'm kind of back at more cynical teenage me thinking "Oh! It's gonna suck!" Fortunately, RoP has largely been better than that, but I'm still scratching my head at what they're doing with Galadriel at sea. Of all of the elements of RoP so far, it kind of sticks out like a sore thumb of WTF?


----------



## Paul Farquhar

billd91 said:


> I'm still scratching my head at what they're doing with Galadriel at sea



They are using her as a viewpoint character to explain Numenor.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

Nikosandros said:


> I imagine what would happen if Pinocchio was released by Disney today. Anger and outrage at the betrayal of the text! Where is Collodi's sarcasm? Why isn't the talking cricket smashed to his death and why has he been renamed?!



I'm still smarting over the non-death of the little mermaid!

Oh, and when is the release date for Disney's Hamlet?


----------



## Tonguez

Paul Farquhar said:


> I'm still smarting over the non-death of the little mermaid!
> 
> Oh, and when is the release date for Disney's Hamlet?



1994 with a remake in 2019


----------



## Stalker0

Whizbang Dustyboots said:


> Remember, folks, it's two episodes in of an eight-episode season that is, itself, the first of eight seasons. We haven't seen the full version of these characters yet, especially since they've had so many characters and places to introduce.



True to the first part, but its a very expensive show. Expecting it to go a full 8 seasons is a very lofty expectation, that's a LONG time in the tv game.


----------



## Maxperson

Paul Farquhar said:


> Tolkien doesn't define "rules" for magic or explains how it works. That is why it's magic. So he never says "can't do objects". The only rule was that after the fall of Numenor Sauron could never again "take on fair form". But if it was as easy as changing clothes, Gandalf could have escaped from Orthanc by changing _himself_ into an eagle.



He could have escaped.............if it wasn't for Gandalf being the only remaining Istari to remain obedient to the edict to restrict his power.


----------



## Maxperson

reelo said:


> Actually, in the Lay of Beren and Lúthien, while Sauron rules over Tol-in-Gauroth where he has Beren and Finrod imprisoned, during the battle with Huan he shapechanges into a wolf and into a giant bat subsequently. Granted, those are not "objects", but still that's shapechanging nonetheless.



Yes. SAURON could shapechange.  That was a power given to him.  Luthien could change the shapes of others.  That was a power given to her.  The ability to take forms was a power given to all Maia and involved becoming spirit again and then reclothing yourself in a different form.  Shapechanging was never an ability that we saw given to Gandalf.


----------



## Maxperson

Paul Farquhar said:


> He's in the cast.
> 
> Slavish adherence to the source material does not make for good TV.



Neither does complete destruction of the timeline.  A get condensing some things a bit, but bringing Isildur, part of a family who left after the destruction of Numenor and born well into the next age, into the timeline now is just....................................bad.


----------



## Maxperson

Paul Farquhar said:


> I would imagine the Silmarillion rivals A Brief History of Time as the most _un_read book!



I've read both!  And enjoyed them. A Brief History of Time only has about 9% of the sales that The Silmarillion has, though.


----------



## Maxperson

Paul Farquhar said:


> They are using her as a viewpoint character to explain Numenor.



They could have just explained it like it happened, with the Edain who helped during the War of Wrath and suffered because of Morgoth being granted Numenor. They have the rights to show that.


----------



## Zaukrie

reelo said:


> I am not against new ideas _per se_ as I have already stated. But when you translate a work from one medium to another, it would be well to do so faithfully first. _Then_ you can start working with it.
> 
> Imagine a digital artist announcing that they're gonna colorize an old b/w photography of some famous person. And in doing so, they not only colorize the photo, but also erase moles, soften the skin, and alter the haircut of the person in the photo.
> The end result might be stunning. It might be aesthetically pleasing. But you'd still wonder what the original photo would have looked like, colorized.
> 
> I don't hate the new show — nor its fans. But I'm a tad bit disappointed and I feel it is a valid sentiment, both to have and to express. I refuse to be lumped in with trolls and racist that have raged against the show ever since the first character portraits were released. I gave the show the benefit of doubt and find it... lacking. That's all.



There is no intrinsic need to translate in any way. Why is this hard to understand? It's a different fictional story. Nothing more or less.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

Maxperson said:


> They could have just explained it like it happened, with the Edain who helped during the War of Wrath and suffered because of Morgoth being granted Numenor. They have the rights to show that.



Stuff that happens over hundreds of years does not make an entertaining TV show. Viewers need to engage with characters, not a narrator telling you about string of monarchs who begat other monarchs. If that's your bag, there is the History Channel.


----------



## Maxperson

Paul Farquhar said:


> Stuff that happens over hundreds of years does not make an entertaining TV show. Viewers need to engage with characters, not a narrator telling you about string of monarchs who begat other monarchs. If that's your bag, there is the History Channel.



It doesn't have to. This is about the forging of Rings of Power and the 2nd age.  Isildur has no business being here at all.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

Maxperson said:


> It doesn't have to. This is about the forging of Rings of Power and the 2nd age.  Isildur has no business being here at all.



It's an entertainment. It is not a history program. Isuldur is in because he ties into the Lord of the Rings movies, and this show's target endpoint is the beginning of those movies. Numenor is in because it's an interesting story that explains Aragorn in the movies. But it wouldn't be interesting TV if it has a string of monarchs who keep dying and being replaced by other monarchs just as the audience is becoming engaged with them.


----------



## Dire Bare

doctorbadwolf said:


> LOL wut.
> 
> One of the most widely read works of fiction _ever_, but largely no one has read it.





Hussar said:


> Heh, really?  The Silmarillion or the Lost Tales are some of the most widely read fiction ever?  I'm thinking not so much.



I think folks are trying to say . . . "The Hobbit" and "The Lord of the Rings" ARE some of the most widely read works of fiction, but . . . . "The Silmarillion" and the 10+ multi-volume "History of Middle-Earth" series is NOT very widely read.


----------



## FitzTheRuke

Hussar said:


> And the level of gate keeping here is pretty breath taking.




I think that's a bit of a stretch, unless you don't mean "this thread" by "here". Almost everyone here likes the show, myself included. Though I think that there's not much point in discussing it at all if we can't nit-pick a little. And I think anyone who actually doesn't like it who's chimed in here, has been pretty civil about it (even if they're generally a little too reverent for the source material, IMO).

Just to be clear on some of my earlier points: I have absolutely no problem with Galadriel being a butt-kicking soldier. I think my problem probably comes from her seeming to go from how I see her as a social introvert (like myself) to an anti-social extrovert. She feels to me like she's gone from "one of us" to "one of _them_". 

(This is me trying to analyse my own feelings on the subject - anyone else is free to feel differently).


----------



## Mort

Paul Farquhar said:


> It's an entertainment. It is not a history program. Isuldur is in because he ties into the Lord of the Rings movies, and this show's target endpoint is the beginning of those movies. Numenor is in because it's an interesting story that explains Aragorn in the movies. But it wouldn't be interesting TV if it has a string of monarchs who keep dying and being replaced by other monarchs just as the audience is becoming engaged with them.



Even (and often even especially) in fiction, There's always a danger when taking existing characters that have an established history and messing with their place in the timeline. 

The benefit to a "known" character is it gives people something familiar to draw them in, the drawback is the expectations that come with the familiar character.

Personally, I do just want to see a 'good" story and if Isildur can be a part of that then great. But There might be some extra hurdles (for me).

Introducing a known character brings extra baggage to overcome. It's like _Strange New Worlds_ introducing T'Pring and Spock before TNG. It's cute watching their relationship grow and develop but there's a real hint of sadness and tragedy that overlays the supposed fun.


----------



## Dioltach

Paul Farquhar said:


> But it wouldn't be interesting TV if it has a string of monarchs who keep dying and being replaced by other monarchs just as the audience is becoming engaged with them.



[Mel Brooks voice] Hey, it worked for A Game of Thrones!


----------



## Maxperson

Paul Farquhar said:


> It's an entertainment. It is not a history program. Isuldur is in because he ties into the Lord of the Rings movies, and this show's target endpoint is the beginning of those movies. Numenor is in because it's an interesting story that explains Aragorn in the movies. But it wouldn't be interesting TV if it has a string of monarchs who keep dying and being replaced by other monarchs just as the audience is becoming engaged with them.



Okay, but then this is NOT the story of the 2nd age or the Rings of Power. With just what we have in the appendices in the LotR, we know that this story that they are telling is completely false.  I wish they wouldn't try to call it Lord of the Rings and just say it's a fantasy story with another name.


----------



## Maxperson

Dire Bare said:


> I think folks are trying to say . . . "The Hobbit" and "The Lord of the Rings" ARE some of the most widely read works of fiction, but . . . . "The Silmarillion" and the 10+ multi-volume "History of Middle-Earth" series is NOT very widely read.



Over 1 million copies of the Silmarillion have sold.


----------



## Mort

Paul Farquhar said:


> But it wouldn't be interesting TV if it has a string of monarchs who keep dying and being replaced by other monarchs just as the audience is becoming engaged with them.




Actually, it could be a really interesting take from the Elven perspective. How it's so hard for them to relate to/understand mortals because they just keep changing/dying on them.

We already had a bit of this with Elrond and Durin. I think it could be VERY interesting if done with the elves and humans. Not that it will be, we pretty much know that's not the direction.


----------



## Maxperson

Mort said:


> Actually, it could be a really interesting take from the Elven perspective. How it's so hard for them to relate to/understand mortals because they just keep changing/dying on them.
> 
> We already had a bit of this with Elrond and Durin. I think it could be VERY interesting if done with the elves and humans. Not that it will be, we pretty much know that's not the direction.



Yeah.  Imagine disconnect Elrond would feel if he showed up to visit a human King friend 30 years later only to find out that not only did he die of old age, but his son took over and died of old age, and now his friend's grandson is on the throne.


----------



## Dioltach

Maxperson said:


> Over 1 million copies of the Silmarillion have sold.



I have one of them. Never got beyond the first 30 pages or so. My sister has another, also largely unread.


----------



## Maxperson

Dioltach said:


> I have one of them. Never got beyond the first 30 pages or so. My sister has another, also largely unread.



That's okay.  I've read mine multiple times and loaned it out to a few friends to read, so I got you two covered.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Maxperson said:


> Neither does complete destruction of the timeline.  A get condensing some things a bit, but bringing Isildur, part of a family who left after the destruction of Numenor and born well into the next age, into the timeline now is just....................................bad.



Isildur stole a fruit from the white tree of Numenor and used it to plant the white tree of Gondor. He was very much alive when Numenor fell.


----------



## Maxperson

doctorbadwolf said:


> Isildur stole a fruit from the white tree of Numenor and used it to plant the white tree of Gondor. He was very much alive when Numenor fell.



You are correct, but he was born 1600 years after the rings were forged and Numenor sank right after he left.  He still has no business being in this series.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Maxperson said:


> You are correct, but he was born 1600 years after the rings were forged and Numenor sank right after he left.  He still has no business being in this series.



The series will deal with the entire 2nd Age, including the fall of Sauron to the Last Alliance, so he very much has every bit of business being in the series.

Edit: I get it, canon is important to you. I really do. 

But they are compressing the timeline, with the blessing of the estate.


----------



## Maxperson

doctorbadwolf said:


> The series will deal with the entire 2nd Age, including the fall of Sauron to the Last Alliance, so he very much has every bit of business being in the series.



Clearly it doesn't.  It deals with a few years that apparently comprise the entirety of what happened over thousands of years in the 2nd age. At least if the time compression that the was quoted earlier is accurate. 

If they don't condense it(or not by a lot) and we see the rings forged, then time happen, then the One Ring is forged, then a lot more time happen, then Sauron get captured, then more time happen, then Isildur leave, I'm okay with that.  If we've already seen the shadow of Isildur and the rings haven't even been forged yet, he has no business being there.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Maxperson said:


> Clearly it doesn't.  It deals with a few years that apparently comprise the entirety of what happened over thousands of years in the 2nd age. At least if the time compression that the was quoted earlier is accurate.
> 
> If they don't condense it(or not by a lot) and we see the rings forged, then time happen, then the One Ring is forged, then a lot more time happen, then Sauron get captured, then more time happen, then Isildur leave, I'm okay with that.  If we've already seen the shadow of Isildur and the rings haven't even been forged yet, he has no business being there.



If you are that rigidly adhered to canon, this show will disappoint you.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

Maxperson said:


> Okay, but then this is NOT the story of the 2nd age or the Rings of Power.



No, it's not. It's a TV show based on plot ideas from a novel.


Maxperson said:


> With just what we have in the appendices in the LotR, we know that this story that they are telling is completely false.



News for you. It's ALL FALSE. It's called fiction. It's when people make stuff up in order to amuse themselves or other people.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

Mort said:


> Actually, it could be a really interesting take from the Elven perspective. How it's so hard for them to relate to/understand mortals because they just keep changing/dying on them.
> 
> We already had a bit of this with Elrond and Durin. I think it could be VERY interesting if done with the elves and humans. Not that it will be, we pretty much know that's not the direction.



That's more the realm of a high concept science fiction movie* or a single episode of Star Trek that a popular mainstream drama.

*_The Fountain_ kind of goes there.


----------



## Maxperson

doctorbadwolf said:


> If you are that rigidly adhered to canon, this show will disappoint you.



I'm not, but neither does canon mean diddly and squat like Isildur showing up now would mean.


----------



## Maxperson

Paul Farquhar said:


> No, it's not. It's a TV show based on plot ideas from a novel.



Then the name should be changed.


----------



## Ryujin

Little Known Fact: Elves are really, really boring. Most of the time they lay around eating grapes in their tree houses, until the next epic War For All Creation comes around.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

Maxperson said:


> Then the name should be changed.



Why? They are using ideas and characters from the novel. Which is a lot more than some novel adaptations do. See the aforementioned Little Mermaid.


----------



## Maxperson

Ryujin said:


> Little Known Fact: Elves are really, really boring. Most of the time they lay around eating grapes in their tree houses, until the next epic War For All Creation comes around.



Well, sometimes they forge Palantiri, black swords of doom, Silmarils or Rings of Power.


----------



## Ryujin

Maxperson said:


> Well, sometimes they forge Palantiri, black swords of doom, Silmarils or Rings of Power.



Sure, but arts and crafts days are just filler.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

Ryujin said:


> Sure, but arts and crafts days are just filler.



What about the days they spend colouring in the William Morris wallpaper?


----------



## Ryujin

Paul Farquhar said:


> What about the days they spend colouring in the William Morris wallpaper?



After doing blotter acid?


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots

Stalker0 said:


> True to the first part, but its a very expensive show. Expecting it to go a full 8 seasons is a very lofty expectation, that's a LONG time in the tv game.



It's a passion project for the man who has periodically been the richest man in the history of the planet.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Maxperson said:


> I'm not, but neither does canon mean diddly and squat like Isildur showing up now would mean.



Eh, I don’t agree with the idea that compressing the timeline is a big deal. 

The idea of trying to make a tv show wherein a large chunk of the cast only survives for 1-2 seasons, another large chunk will be in half the show, and the final chunk will be there from beginning to end, simply due to lifespans, but it’s all one coherent story, is vastly more palatable in written media than in video media, IMO.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Maxperson said:


> Then the name should be changed.



Why? It’s set in the same world, and the central conflict is literally about the same titular antagonistic character.


----------



## Maxperson

doctorbadwolf said:


> Why? It’s set in the same world, and the central conflict is literally about the same titular antagonistic character.



It's like taking character from the Airforce and calling him Maverick, then making a movie about a weightlifting between America and the Russians.  Goose, one of Maverick's airforce buddies gets killed in a weightlifting accident before Maverick takes the competition down.  We can call it Top Gun because the central conflict is the same, it is set in the same world, and it has the same characters.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

Maxperson said:


> Okay, but then this is NOT the story of the 2nd age or the Rings of Power.



It's* a* story of the Second Age and the Rings of Power. It's not the only version of the story.


Maxperson said:


> With just what we have in the appendices in the LotR, we know that this story that they are telling is completely false.



Completely false just like what Tolkien wrote. There is no "true" version of the story because Tolkien made it all up, as I'm pretty sure he would point out, where he around to do so.


Maxperson said:


> I wish they wouldn't try to call it Lord of the Rings and just say it's a fantasy story with another name.



It's called The Rings of Power - that is an original title. But you know those movies called the Lord of the Rings? They changed a lot of stuff in those too. Name any movie based on a classic text - they will have changed lots of stuff in those as well. You can even look at shows based on history, like the Serpent Queen. They changed lots of stuff there too. Because the point is to entertain, not tell people something that this true.


----------



## Maxperson

Paul Farquhar said:


> It's* a* story of the Second Age and the Rings of Power. It's not the only version of the story.



More accurately.  It's a story of *a* Second Age and *some* Rings of Power, just not that are set in Tolkien's Middle Earth.


Paul Farquhar said:


> Completely false just like what Tolkien wrote. There is no "true" version of the story because Tolkien made it all up, as I'm pretty sure he would point out, where he around to do so.



I'm sure if you wrote a book about the second age and the rings of power set in Middle Earth, the above argument would completely save you from being sued for copyright infringement.

"You see your honor, it's all made up and false, so there can't be a copyright about it.  Tolkien's story isn't a true version, so they have no claim."


Paul Farquhar said:


> It's called The Rings of Power - that is an original title. But you know those movies called the Lord of the Rings? They changed a lot of stuff in those too. Name any movie based on a classic text - they will have changed lots of stuff in those as well. You can even look at shows based on history, like the Serpent Queen. They changed lots of stuff there too. Because the point is to entertain, not tell people something that this true.



Yes those movies did, and I wasn't happy about those changes, either.  At least they weren't nearly as drastic as these changes.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Maxperson said:


> It's like taking character from the Airforce and calling him Maverick, then making a movie about a weightlifting between America and the Russians.  Goose, one of Maverick's airforce buddies gets killed in a weightlifting accident before Maverick takes the competition down.  We can call it Top Gun because the central conflict is the same, it is set in the same world, and it has the same characters.



That’s a terrible analogy. 

It’s like making a Top Gun prequel and not worrying about the timeline of the characters life and fighter tech lining up right, at worst.


----------



## Maxperson

doctorbadwolf said:


> That’s a terrible analogy.
> 
> It’s like making a Top Gun prequel and not worrying about the timeline of the characters life and fighter tech lining up right, at worst.



It's a good analogy.  I altered lots of established facts, just like the show is doing.


----------



## Ryujin

When it comes to book adaptations, I'm pretty much a purist. At least for books that I've read. Holding this production to that same level is something that I would consider ridiculous for me to do, given that they aren't permitted access to the material that would allow them to do so. If they stick the landing on the feel (I'm still withholding judgment on that), rather than the letter of the source, then I'll consider it a win.


----------



## Ryujin

Maxperson said:


> It's a good analogy.  I altered lots of established facts, just like the show is doing.



If they altered those facts between the "Top Gun" novel and it's half dozen ancillary works, that they don't legally have access to in order to do their TV show, you mean?


----------



## Maxperson

Ryujin said:


> If they altered those facts between the "Top Gun" novel and it's half dozen ancillary works, that they don't legally have access to in order to do their TV show, you mean?



No. They drastically altered the facts as established by the LotR which they do legally have access to.  The timeline is set in those books.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Maxperson said:


> It's a good analogy.  I altered lots of established facts, just like the show is doing.



You altered facts that determine what kind of story Top Gun is, and that make it wholly incompatible with the original. 

Changing how close together the forging of the rings and the fall of Numenor are doesn’t change the nature of the story, nor does it necessarily become an AU from the original story. 

They made Galadriel a warrior. That doesn’t contradict anything in LOTR, it doesn’t change who she is in the 3rd Age, it changes nothing of any importance, and isn’t even directly contradictory to the Silmarillion. No one becomes a different person entirely because Isildur was around when the rings were forged.


----------



## MarkB

Maxperson said:


> It's like taking character from the Airforce and calling him Maverick, then making a movie about a weightlifting between America and the Russians.  Goose, one of Maverick's airforce buddies gets killed in a weightlifting accident before Maverick takes the competition down.  We can call it Top Gun because the central conflict is the same, it is set in the same world, and it has the same characters.



Change the title to Top Guns and I think you're onto a winner there.


----------



## Maxperson

doctorbadwolf said:


> You altered facts that determine what kind of story Top Gun is, and that make it wholly incompatible with the original.



Just as this does with the original.  The LotR establishes the original names and dates and the current 2nd Age show is wholly incompatible with that original story.  It also alters the original story of Sauron and Numenor as established by the LotR books.


doctorbadwolf said:


> Changing how close together the forging of the rings and the fall of Numenor are doesn’t change the nature of the story, nor does it necessarily become an AU from the original story.



If you alter it by a few years, sure.  When you have someone who is explicitly born 1500+ years AFTER the current date, explicitly AFTER the forging of the rings, you are drastically altering the facts and the nature of the story.  Now Isildur will be long dead before he can take his family and exit doomed Numenor. 


doctorbadwolf said:


> They made Galadriel a warrior. That doesn’t contradict anything in LOTR, it doesn’t change who she is in the 3rd Age, it changes nothing of any importance, and isn’t even directly contradictory to the Silmarillion. No one becomes a different person entirely because Isildur was around when the rings were forged.



Making her a warcrazed elf changes who she is fundamentally.  She was explicitly NOT a warrior.  She took part in no battles.  She was against the warring nature of her family.


----------



## Maxperson

MarkB said:


> Change the title to Top Guns and I think you're onto a winner there.



Nah.  Maverick is cocky!  He's going to beat Russia with one hand tied behind his back.


----------



## Maxperson

LOL


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Maxperson said:


> Just as this does with the original.  The LotR establishes the original names and dates and the current 2nd Age show is wholly incompatible with that original story.



No, it’s not. Containing a timeline contradiction is not incompatible. 


Maxperson said:


> It also alters the original story of Sauron and Numenor as established by the LotR books.
> 
> If you alter it by a few years, sure.  When you have someone who is explicitly born 1500+ years AFTER the current date, explicitly AFTER the forging of the rings, you are drastically altering the facts and the nature of the story.  Now Isildur will be long dead before he can take his family and exit doomed Numenor.



Except he won’t be, because they’re compressing the timeline. 

It also doesn’t change anything about LOTR. 


Maxperson said:


> Making her a warcrazed elf changes who she is fundamentally.  She was explicitly NOT a warrior.  She took part in no battles.  She was against the warring nature of her family.



That’s your read, not explicit in the text. 

By my read, it’s a pretty reasonable take on the character at this point in her life.


----------



## Maxperson

doctorbadwolf said:


> No, it’s not. Containing a timeline contradiction is not incompatible.



Isildur being alive in S.A. 1600 is incompatible with Isildur being born in S.A. 3219.  He can't be both.  The established story is that he was born in 3219.  Any story of him being alive in S.A. is incompatible with the established story.  They cannot both be true at the same time, so there is zero compatibility.

You can't compress the timeline that much.  There has to be time to construct the forge, forge all the rings, have Sauron go make the One Ring, have the elves forge the three in secret, have them realize what Sauron is capable of, have the Numenoreans capture him, have him take the time to corrupt Ar-Pharazon and get him to attack Aman, have Isildur escape, then destroy Numenor, have time for Isildur to establish the kingdoms of Arnor and Gondor, then construct multiple cities and towers, and THEN get caught up and attack Sauron to cut off the ring.  That's not going to all happen in a few years.  Or even a few dozen years.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Maxperson said:


> Isildur being alive in S.A. 1600 is incompatible with Isildur being born in S.A. 3219. He can't be both.



It does not matter. It’s a made up date in a fairy story, and it has no impact on the nature of who Isildur is, not the importance of his deeds, nor the nature of those deeds.


----------



## Maxperson

doctorbadwolf said:


> It does not matter. It’s a made up date in a fairy story, and it has no impact on the nature of who Isildur is, not the importance of his deeds, nor the nature of those deeds.



The date of birth matters as much as anything else in the story.  Might as well not have him cut off the hand and instead cut Sauron's head off, then take the ring and rule.  All of those things are changed facts of the story.  All of them change the story.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Maxperson said:


> The date of birth matters as much as anything else in the story.  Might as well not have him cut off the hand and instead cut Sauron's head off, then take the ring and rule.  All of those things are changed facts of the story.  All of them change the story.



They are not equivalent. You are taking the idea of canon to a remarkable extreme that is entirely unreasonable to ask of any creator, ever.


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots

Maxperson said:


> You are correct, but he was born 1600 years after the rings were forged and Numenor sank right after he left.  He still has no business being in this series.



He has no business being in this _season._ They've explicitly said the series ends when Sauron loses the ring. They will be doing time jumps.


----------



## Maxperson

Whizbang Dustyboots said:


> He has no business being in this _season._ They've explicitly said the series ends when Sauron loses the ring. They will be doing time jumps.



We can hope.  But they've said that they are condensing the timeline, so it may not be much of a jump if at all.


----------



## Stalker0

I can respect the concern about introducing characters at vastly "wrong" points in the timeline, as that can have a big impact on the overall story.

However, the concern on Galadriel to me is an overreaction. People change, sometimes dramatically. There is nothing that has been presented that suggests Galadriel will not be the woman we see some 1500 years from now. How she gets there....well we just have to wait and see!


----------



## Paul Farquhar

Maxperson said:


> More accurately.  It's a story of *a* Second Age and *some* Rings of Power, just not that are set in Tolkien's Middle Earth.
> 
> I'm sure if you wrote a book about the second age and the rings of power set in Middle Earth, the above argument would completely save you from being sued for copyright infringement.



Paying for the licence is what saves you from being sued. And once you have paid for something it it's yours - you can do whatever you want with it. It's not "Tolkien's Middle Earth", He's dead and the estate sold the rights. It's Amazon's Middle Earth now.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

Maxperson said:


> Isildur being alive in S.A. 1600 is incompatible with Isildur being born in S.A. 3219. He can't be both.



But his birthday is irrelevant to the story. Tolkien set out to write pretend history, not a TV show. He didn't have to worry about having characters the audience could relate too and follow.


Maxperson said:


> The established story is that he was born in 3219



No it isn't. No dates are given in either the PJ movies or this TV show.


Maxperson said:


> The date of birth matters as much as anything else in the story.



Indeed. Which is not at all. Made up stuff does not MATTER. It is an entertainment, nothing more.


Maxperson said:


> Might as well not have him cut off the hand and instead cut Sauron's head off, then take the ring and rule.



A story which Tolkien himself outlines in his forward to TotR. Because it's fiction, you can do whatever you want with it. You try to choose whatever is most entertaining.


----------



## Nikosandros

Paul Farquhar said:


> Paying for the licence is what saves you from being sued. And once you have paid for something it it's yours - you can do whatever you want with it. It's not "Tolkien's Middle Earth", He's dead and the estate sold the rights. It's Amazon's Middle Earth now.



I didn't know this. So, has Amazon purchased full rights to LotR? I thought that they had a license.


----------



## wicked cool

The Facebook post I think was a mistake. I get what you wanted to do but I think it’s going to hurt the show in the long run. You went after the fans and they are the ones you have to win over. This show might not have enough casual fans to keep it afloat based on its budget


----------



## Mort

wicked cool said:


> The Facebook post I think was a mistake. I get what you wanted to do but I think it’s going to hurt the show in the long run. You went after the fans and they are the ones you have to win over. This show might not have enough casual fans to keep it afloat based on its budget




The premiere drew over 25 million viewers, the largest Amazon has had to date for ANY show.

Sure that will drop, but if it keeps even a fraction of those viewers it will be fine.


----------



## Nikosandros

Maxperson said:


> We can hope.  But they've said that they are condensing the timeline, so it may not be much of a jump if at all.



Elendil and Isildur are in today's episode. No time jump at all, I believe.


----------



## reelo

Nikosandros said:


> Elendil and Isildur are in today's episode. No time jump at all, I believe.



No. No time-jump. It's all contracted. And you know what? While I'm still quite miffed about the way they had Galadriel end up in Númenor, I've warmed up a bit to the show. I wish the dwarves in the second episode were a bit more than _comic relief_ but at least they're well-portrayed.
I quite like Arondir's arc so far.
We got spoken Quenya (though I wonder why Nandor would speak that, and not some dialect of Sindarin) and lots of namedrops from the First Age.

One other thing I found weird (in the 2nd episode) was Celebrimbor referring to Fëanor like it was just any elf. He could at least passingly mention that Fëanor was his grandfather and that this hammer was the closest thing to a family-heirloom. Establishing that close family-link would add some gravitas to Celebrimbor's character.

I'll keep watching. I might just end up liking it.


----------



## Maxperson

reelo said:


> No. No time-jump. It's all contracted. And you know what? While I'm still quite miffed about the way they had Galadriel end up in Númenor, I've warmed up a bit to the show. I wish the dwarves in the second episode were a bit more than _comic relief_ but at least they're well-portrayed.
> I quite like Arondir's arc so far.
> We got spoken Quenya (though I wonder why Nandor would speak that, and not some dialect of Sindarin) and lots of namedrops from the First Age.
> 
> One other thing I found weird (in the 2nd episode) was Celebrimbor referring to Fëanor like it was just any elf. He could at least passingly mention that Fëanor was his grandfather and that this hammer was the closest thing to a family-heirloom. Establishing that close family-link would add some gravitas to Celebrimbor's character.
> 
> I'll keep watching. I might just end up liking it.



Other than the kids in the helmets, I didn't see the dwarves as comic relief.


----------



## reelo

Maxperson said:


> Other than the kids in the helmets, I didn't see the dwarves as comic relief.



It's the fake Scottish accent, probably. Tolkien's dwarves are inspired by the Jews, not the Scots. But ever since PJ's movies (or possibly since the Warcraft games) it's too late to portray them correctly.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

reelo said:


> It's the fake Scottish accent, probably. Tolkien's dwarves are inspired by the Jews, not the Scots. But ever since PJ's movies (or possibly since the Warcraft games) it's too late to portray them correctly.



Aren’t the dwarves more Slavic in accent in the Warcraft games? Or am I confused because their dance is Slavic in WoW?


----------



## John R Davis

I really liked Numenor.
Convinced myself Halbrand is Sauron as well ( despite the end of the episode)


----------



## Morrus

Maxperson said:


> Other than the kids in the helmets, I didn't see the dwarves as comic relief.



There's always somebody. This time it's you. OK, so this thread is basically the Maxperson hatewatch thread with people replying to you. As you're dominating the thread, please start a new thread about why you hate the show, so those of us who like it can talk about it. Thanks!

In the meantime, I'm turning this into a + thread for fan of the show to discuss the plot and stuff.


----------



## Davies

Watching Episode 3:

Galadriel: "Did you say ride?"
Narrator: "She was almost as tired of walking everywhere as everyone who read about her walking everywhere was."


----------



## Ryujin

Davies said:


> Watching Episode 3:
> 
> Galadriel: "Did you say ride?"
> Narrator: "She was almost as tired of walking everywhere as everyone who read about her walking everywhere was."



And the pure joy on her face...


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots

John R Davis said:


> I really liked Numenor.
> Convinced myself Halbrand is Sauron as well ( despite the end of the episode)



"My people have no king," from episode two, certainly sounds like he's talking about the people of Mordor we see being menaced by orcs elsewhere in the series.


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots

Finally watched the episode. They're almost trying too hard to make us think Halbrand is Sauron. (His one skill, other than brooding: metal work.)

This feels like a red herring, but I'm enjoying the parallels to Aragorn, but with him being a king of a land that served Morgoth.


----------



## billd91

The Arondir story is currently the best one in the series, based on Episode 3.


----------



## FitzTheRuke

I loved the Chihuahua-worg. They've used wolves and pit-bulls before. It's about time someone used a really NASTY dog as their model for a worg!


----------



## Zardnaar

I need to rewatch episode 3 as I fell asleep. Not due to the show was just really shattered. 

 Dwarven Scotti's accent thing was around in 90's afaik predating Jackson's LOTR movies.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

Zardnaar said:


> Dwarven Scotti's accent thing was around in 90's afaik predating Jackson's LOTR movies.



This. I was trying to trace it back to it's root. It's tricky, but I think it's D&D. The earliest written evidence of Scots-speaking dwarves I can find is in Darkwalker on Moonshae, the first Forgotten Realms novel (1987). However, I seem to remember images of kilted ginger dwarves (which could be considered a racist stereotype) associated with Warhammer, also in the mid-late 80s. I have no datable evidence for that though.


----------



## Zardnaar

Paul Farquhar said:


> This. I was trying to trace it back to it's root. It's tricky, but I think it's D&D. The earliest written evidence of Scots-speaking dwarves I can find is in Darkwalker on Moonshae, the first Forgotten Realms novel (1987). However, I seem to remember images of kilted ginger dwarves (which could be considered a racist stereotype) associated with Warhammer, also in the mid-late 80s. I have no datable evidence for that though.




 D&D Scottish Dwarves were in novels at least.


----------



## Maxperson

Whizbang Dustyboots said:


> Finally watched the episode. They're almost trying too hard to make us think Halbrand is Sauron. (His one skill, other than brooding: metal work.)



Two skills.  Honeyed words. He's really good at persuading people.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

Whizbang Dustyboots said:


> They're almost trying too hard to make us think Halbrand is Sauron.



I think they are trying really hard to make us think several characters could be Sauron. Which is why I plumped for the sword. Agatha Christie style misdirection.


----------



## reelo

I've seen a compelling argument for the fact that Halbrand being evil is a red herring, and his people becoming the ancestors to what will later become the Rohirrim.



> Exhibit A: His early promo posters. He will probably forge that horse-head sword himself.
> 
> Exhibit B: His name is Rohirric. Halbrand means "strong-sword" in Old English, the language that Tolkien used to represent the language of Rohan. Remember the character Erkenbrand ("precious-sword") from the Two Towers novel (his role was given to Éomer in the films).
> 
> Exhibit C: We've seen Halbrand on horseback a couple times in the trailers and he does seem like a good rider. He's also clearly talented at blacksmithing (NOT silversmithing), an important skill in Rohan's culture (armor, weapons, horseshoes, etc).
> 
> Exhibit D: Composer Bear McCreary chose to use the Norwegian hardanger fiddle as the primary instrument to represent Halbrand. This is an unusual instrument and has been used in only a few cinematic scores before now, the most notable being The Lord of the Rings films where composer Howard Shore used the hardanger fiddle to represent Rohan and its people. Halbrand has a musical connection to Rohan.




While those are compelling arguments, Tolkien has stated that the ancestors of the Rohirrim lived in the (upper) Vales of the Anduin, and are more akin to the Dalemen and the Beornings. They are so-called "Middle Men" that are neither counted among the Edain, nor were ever in league with Morgoth in the First Age.

Maybe the writers will have Halbrand's kin be exiled from what is about to become Mordor, and move up the Anduin to mingle with, or become, the ancestors of the aforementioned people. Who knows.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

The name Halbrand is Saxon. Pretty much all the non-numenorian humans we have met have Saxon names.


----------



## Zardnaar

Paul Farquhar said:


> The name Halbrand is Saxon. Pretty much all the non-numenorian humans we have met have Saxon names.




 Fantasy Germans and Scots.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

Zardnaar said:


> Fantasy Germans and Scots.



No, they are very deliberately and systematically Saxon. It's not a case of random fantasy name generator. I'm pretty sure the writers are sufficiently Tolkien-fans that their choice of names is significant. Halbrand means "half-edged [sword]".


----------



## Zardnaar

Paul Farquhar said:


> No, they are very deliberately and systematically Saxon. It's not a case of random fantasy name generator. I'm pretty sure the writers are sufficiently Tolkien-fans that their choice of names is significant. Halbrand means "half-edged [sword]".




 Bad joke Saxons originated in Germany. Saxony even. Proto Germans?


----------



## Paul Farquhar

Zardnaar said:


> Bad joke Saxons originated in Germany. Saxony even. Proto Germans?



Germany didn't exist until fairly recently, Old Saxony was a small part of current Germany, overlapping with current Denmark and the Netherlands.


----------



## Zardnaar

Paul Farquhar said:


> Germany didn't exist until fairly recently, Old Saxony was a small part of current Germany, overlapping with current Denmark and the Netherlands.




I'm aware of that. Germans predate Germany by centuries though. Bad joke.


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots

billd91 said:


> The Arondir story is currently the best one in the series, based on Episode 3.



The notion that none of the male characters are heroic or admirable was always laughable, but it's clearly nonsense with this episode.


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots

I'm not a Warhammer player or fan myself, but it was my impression that's where Scot dwarves came from originally.


----------



## reelo

Whizbang Dustyboots said:


> I'm not a Warhammer player or fan myself, but it was my impression that's where Scot dwarves came from originally.



Yeah. WarCRAFT copied from WarHAMMER in that regard.


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully

Paul Farquhar said:


> Neil Gaiman had a go, but he is having a hard enough time with his own toxic fans. Peter Jackson has a snit on, because he wasn't consulted. But given the mess he made of The Hobbit, I can't blame them.
> 
> The thing is, whenever someone consumes media they create their own version of the story in their imagination. From the look and sound of the characters, to the deeper meanings. Before the internet, you would only be exposed to other people's versions of the story if you studied literature at a higher level. In which case, you would have guidance from a teacher. Without that training, people feel they are being told their version is *wrong*, which equates to an attack on their core identity. So they lash out.



The earliest time I experienced this was when one of the _The Three Investigators (_very popular in German as "Die Drei Fragezeichen???") contained an illustration of the characters that didn't mesh at all with how I envisioned them. Mind you, I also have the habit of glossing over detailed descriptions of things, so maybe the illustration was quite reasonable_. _But I wasn't having it and still ignore it.

---

So far, I enjoy the show. 
Halbrands scene with the guild-guys seemed to show some regret that he knew that things would turn out bad for them if they seriously attacked him. I am not really looking yet for "possible Saurons in disguise", but I would interpret his behaviour more as a sign that he was hiding how tough and dangerous he is, but that he beat them up made me wonder if it was a bit of a PTSD reaction that triggered a rage, something he really tried to avert. I suppose one could also see it as a sign that he's evil and can't hide it entirely, but.. Well, I don't think he's bad. But I am happy to be proven wrong over the next few episodes or seasons.


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots

reelo said:


> Yeah. WarCRAFT copied from WarHAMMER in that regard.



Warcraft I allegedly started off as a licensed product that ended up not getting the license from GW.


----------



## Davies

Mustrum_Ridcully said:


> Halbrands scene with the guild-guys seemed to show some regret that he knew that things would turn out bad for them if they seriously attacked him. I am not really looking yet for "possible Saurons in disguise", but I would interpret his behaviour more as a sign that he was hiding how tough and dangerous he is, but that he beat them up made me wonder if it was a bit of a PTSD reaction that triggered a rage, something he really tried to avert.



There was something odd about his eyes when he leapt up from his beating. I would need to examine frame by frame to be sure, but his eyes just looked _wrong_.


----------



## Ryujin

Davies said:


> There was something odd about his eyes when he leapt up from his beating. I would need to examine frame by frame to be sure, but his eyes just looked _wrong_.



Nope, they were just wide open and, well, crazed. I just rewatched it. I will say, however, that breaking a forearm with just pressure like that isn't an easy thing. It's not like he wound up and smashed it against the edge of the doorway, either. He just _pushed_.


----------



## RuinousPowers

I am totally NOT getting "Halbrand is Sauron" vibes. I am getting proto-Rohirrim vibes though.  The Stranger is totally Gandalf.


----------



## Hriston

Clearly, Halbrand has a tendency to become ultra-violent when the pressure's on. That scene reminded me of Nicholas Cage in Wild at Heart. His ancestor swore allegiance to Morgoth, so maybe it has something to do with that. I think his secret identity has already been revealed. He's the hereditary king of "the Southlands" aka Mordor, and he's running from his destiny for the same reason as movie Aragorn, fear he will fail just like his ancestor.

I think he has another secret left to reveal, though...


Spoiler



Who was that kid's dad, and who left that family heirloom behind?


----------



## Ryujin

RuinousPowers said:


> I am totally NOT getting "Halbrand is Sauron" vibes. I am getting proto-Rohirrim vibes though.  The Stranger is totally Gandalf.



"The Southlands" would seem to be the right place for him to be the king of what would become the Rohirrim. If you haven't seen this yet, it's definitely worth a look:









						Interactive Map of Middle-Earth - LotrProject
					

High resolution interactive map of J.R.R. Tolkien's Middle-earth with timeline of events, character movements and locations.



					lotrproject.com


----------



## Olgar Shiverstone

Ryujin said:


> "The Southlands" would seem to be the right place for him to be the king of what would become the Rohirrim. If you haven't seen this yet, it's definitely worth a look:



Except that that idea is largely in violent disagreement with the source material; Rohan isn't founded until much later in the Third Age and the House of Eorl comes from the northern end of the Anduin. If this Halbrand guy takes his people north in the end it aligns, but the Rohirrim did not originate from people who were already in what became Gondor.


----------



## Hriston

_Adar_, the name of the leader of the orcs, is Sindarin for _father. _I don't think he's Sauron, but he's clearly part of Sauron's plan to establish himself in Mordor, and I guess he's an elf?


----------



## Ryujin

Olgar Shiverstone said:


> Except that that idea is largely in violent disagreement with the source material; Rohan isn't founded until much later in the Third Age and the House of Eorl comes from the northern end of the Anduin. If this Halbrand guy takes his people north in the end it aligns, but the Rohirrim did not originate from people who were already in what became Gondor.



Sure, except that we already know that the Tolkien timeline is right out the window.


----------



## RuinousPowers

Hriston said:


> _Adar_, the name of the leader of the orcs, is Sindarin for _father. _I don't think he's Sauron, but he's clearly part of Sauron's plan to establish himself in Mordor, and I guess he's an elf?



I would love it if it was a werewolf or vampire, since we haven't seen them onscreen yet.


----------



## Hriston

The map of Númenor isn't in the appendices, so that must be one of the things for which they got permission from the estate.


----------



## Hriston

I think there's some heavy misdirection, one way or another, with regard to the true identity of the Stranger. He befriends Nori's family in this episode, but if he's Sauron, this could prefigure his befriending of the elves of Eregion as Annatar when he poses as an emissary of the Valar.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

Ryujin said:


> Nope, they were just wide open and, well, crazed. I just rewatched it. I will say, however, that breaking a forearm with just pressure like that isn't an easy thing. It's not like he wound up and smashed it against the edge of the doorway, either. He just _pushed_.



Barbarian rage?


Hriston said:


> I think he has another secret left to reveal, though...
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> undefined



Which was why I pointed out the translation of his name. Whilst "Halbrand" would normally refer to a sword with a single cutting edge, I believe an alternative, more literal, translation could be "half of a sword". Which implies the existence of the other half...

But linguistically, the name ties him to the Rohirrim.

I would like a closer look at his symbol though. It's clearly meant to resemble Aragorn's at first glance, but I suspect there is something else hidden there. Suspiciously, all the publicity shots of Halbrand are cropped or otherwise conceal his necklace.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

Hriston said:


> I think there's some heavy misdirection, one way or another, with regard to the true identity of the Stranger. He befriends Nori's family in this episode, but if he's Sauron, this could prefigure his befriending of the elves of Eregion as Annatar when he poses as an emissary of the Valar.



The Stranger would seem to be a candidate for the Annatar identity. But I think the main reason for these "who's Sauron" shenanigans is to avoid the situation where the elves look like chumps by being taken in by an obvious villain. If he can fool elf lords he ought to be able to fool a (mostly human) TV audience!


----------



## Paul Farquhar

Further analysis of Halbrand's necklace:

Whilst superficially it ties into the idea of mirror-Aragorn by resembling this:





This design (from the movie rather than the books) is in the form of white stone in the centre of a flower, with leaves behind.

From what I saw in episode 3, Halbrand's looked like a top-down image of a swan, attached to a leather pouch. It would be useful if anyone managed to make a screen capture!

If it is a swan, that would connect it to Galadriel herself. Possibly something Sauron might use in order to fool her with something she likes? Dol Amroth also uses a swan logo, but this seems a bit obscure.

If it is some other winged creature, an eagle would connect it to the Valar Manwe, but this seems unlikely to me. It could be something darker, such as a dragon, giant bat, or fell beast. It has been suggested that Halbrand might eventually become the Witch King of Angmar.


----------



## John R Davis

Ooooh I like TWKOA idea!!


----------



## Maxperson

Paul Farquhar said:


> If it is some other winged creature, an eagle would connect it to the Valar Manwe, but this seems unlikely to me. It could be something darker, such as a dragon, giant bat, or fell beast. It has been suggested that Halbrand might eventually become the Witch King of Angmar.



I had the thought that he might be being set up to become one of the 9. Falling in with and helping Galadriel will put him in good position to be gifted one of the rings for mortal men when the time comes.


----------



## MarkB

Paul Farquhar said:


> From what I saw in episode 3, Halbrand's looked like a top-down image of a swan, attached to a leather pouch. It would be useful if anyone managed to make a screen capture!



I found this with a Google image search:










Paul Farquhar said:


> It has been suggested that Halbrand might eventually become the Witch King of Angmar.



Presumably pretty much any current king or leader of human nations is a strong candidate for being a ringwraith by the end of the series.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

MarkB said:


> I found this with a Google image search:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Presumably pretty much any current king or leader of human nations is a strong candidate for being a ringwraith by the end of the series.



Looks like a goose, seen from below!

Could be a flaming torch or sword hilt though.

Currently he is the only human leader in the show (assuming we can rule out Elendil, Isildur, Anarion* and anyone female).



*That would be a twist!


----------



## John R Davis

Need 7 dwarves to give rings to as well!


----------



## Paul Farquhar

John R Davis said:


> Need 7 dwarves to give rings to as well!



We know Dain IV gets one. The others are probably extras. I can't see them doing the full rounds of dwarven kingdoms.


----------



## Olgar Shiverstone

Ryujin said:


> Sure, except that we already know that the Tolkien timeline is right out the window.



Well, yeah, and I'm not loving that though I can sort of understand the producer/writer desire to introduce a cast early then have them remain the same through the whole series. I don't personally think that's necessary -- what better way to highlight the cultural differences between elves and men than to have the human characters disappear each season? -- but I'm not in entertainment so what do I know.

I'd hope the major beats are the same, and the fact that they are running events set thousands of years apart simultaneously shouldn't have to change the major events, especially if part of Amazon's charter is "don't contradict the printed material".

If Halbrand is a new character, and part of a new culture, that's fine. Or heir to a culture that isn't explored in LotR, that's fine. Swan symbol -- founder of Dol Amroth? I also like the theory of corruption that makes him into one of the Nine, because we need some characters to have a tragic fall, not just identify the mustache-twisting evil folks and have them be predictably evil.


----------



## MarkB

It occurs to me that, if events are time-compressed into a single narrative, what we may well be heading for is another Star Wars prequels Palpatine / Clone Wars situation.

Darth Sauron is raising an army of evil ready to take on the forces of light and plunge the world into darkness, as the elves, humans and dwarves unite against him.

Meanwhile Senator Sauron the wise counsellor is selling the good guys on this wonderful new rings-of-power concept he and Celebrimbor have come up with which will allow them to unite their powers and defeat those awful awful orcs and their oh-so-terrible leader.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

Well, if they resurrect Christopher Lee to play Adar, we will know you are right.


----------



## Hriston

Paul Farquhar said:


> Which was why I pointed out the translation of his name. Whilst "Halbrand" would normally refer to a sword with a single cutting edge, I believe an alternative, more literal, translation could be "half of a sword". Which implies the existence of the other half...



Ah yes, I hadn't considered the meaning of his name! That ties him not only to the evil sword of evil, but is also yet another way that he's an antitype of Aragorn who also had a broken sword. Maybe the remaining shards are what's in the pouch he wears around his neck.



Paul Farquhar said:


> But linguistically, the name ties him to the Rohirrim.



I'm not sure how much to make of this. The show writers could be just aping Tolkien's use of OE names for the non-Dúnedain men we've seen in the LotR movies, but having the people of Tirharad driven out of Mordor could serve to explain why the Rohirrim were in need of lands later granted them by the king of Gondor. However, I'm not seeing much in the way of Rohirric material culture.



Paul Farquhar said:


> I would like a closer look at his symbol though. It's clearly meant to resemble Aragorn's at first glance, but I suspect there is something else hidden there. Suspiciously, all the publicity shots of Halbrand are cropped or otherwise conceal his necklace.



Another parallel with Aragorn would be the hint of a green stone at the top of the talisman.


----------



## Hriston

If Sauron's sigil is meant to be a pictograph of Mordor (which it most certainly is), then why did he mark the body of Finrod Felagund with it? Surely, if the message carried by the sigil is for his followers to gather in Mordor and await his return in the event of Morgoth's defeat, the decomposing body of a slain elf is a rather unfitting vehicle!


----------



## Hriston

I think it's a nice bit of a nod to fans of the Silmarillion and other accounts of the Elder Days that the far northern fortress where they fought the ice troll might have been Utumno.


----------



## Hussar

Can I just say thank you to @Morrus for turning this into a plus thread? THIS is what fandom should look like.


----------



## Zaukrie

Really liking this show a lot. I'm no Tolkien junky, so to be it's just good fantasy. And beautiful to boot.


----------



## Zardnaar

Zaukrie said:


> Really liking this show a lot. I'm no Tolkien junky, so to be it's just good fantasy. And beautiful to boot.




 It's the prettiest one definitely. 

 We've got 5 or 6 fantasy shows atm I haven't seen Sandman.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

Hriston said:


> If Sauron's sigil is meant to be a pictograph of Mordor (which it most certainly is), then why did he mark the body of Finrod Felagund with it? Surely, if the message carried by the sigil is for his followers to gather in Mordor and await his return in the event of Morgoth's defeat, the decomposing body of a slain elf is a rather unfitting vehicle!



A taunt. An angry Galadriel is off balance and isn't thinking clearly.

Also, if @MarkB is correct, Mordor and Adar is a Phantom Menace. Sauron _wants_ the forces of good focused there whilst he enacts his real scheme behind the scenes.


----------



## Hriston

Paul Farquhar said:


> A taunt. An angry Galadriel is off balance and isn't thinking clearly.



Ah, so you’re imagining that Sauron allowed Finrod’s body to be recovered or even had it delivered to Galadriel in order to set her in motion following his trail. Hmm. 



Paul Farquhar said:


> Also, if @MarkB is correct, Mordor and Adar is a Phantom Menace. Sauron _wants_ the forces of good focused there whilst he enacts his real scheme behind the scenes.



Considering that the keystone of his “real scheme” is to forge the One Ring in the fires of Mt. Doom, I would think he’d want the establishment of his strength in Mordor enacted too.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

Hriston said:


> Ah, so you’re imagining that Sauron allowed Finrod’s body to be recovered or even had it delivered to Galadriel in order to set her in motion following his trail. Hmm.



Seems likely.


Hriston said:


> Considering that the keystone of his “real scheme” is to forge the One Ring in the fires of Mt. Doom, I would think he’d want the establishment of his strength in Mordor enacted too.



In the source material Sauron's forces are defeated by the Numenorians (and it is implied that it was a ploy). It seems likely this will also happen in the TV series. No reason that should prevent him accessing Mt. Doom if he is in the guise of a good guy.


----------



## Hriston

Paul Farquhar said:


> Seems likely.
> 
> In the source material Sauron's forces are defeated by the Numenorians (and it is implied that it was a ploy). It seems likely this will also happen in the TV series. No reason that should prevent him accessing Mt. Doom if he is in the guise of a good guy.



In the source material, he already has the ring at that point.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

Hriston said:


> In the source material, he already has the ring at that point.



He does, but that is clearly changed. Which is probably a good thing in this case. If the One Ring is so all powerful how come the Numenorians could defeat him? It undermines the premise of The Lord of the Rings.


----------



## reelo

Paul Farquhar said:


> If the One Ring is so all powerful how come the Numenorians could defeat him? It undermines the premise of The Lord of the Rings.




Not at all. It is said that Sauron _allowed_ himself to be taken prisoner and feigned humbleness. Seeing the might and pride of Númenoreans he probably thought it entertaining to have them rebel against the Valar, though he did not foresee that Númenor would be utterly destroyed and drowned. Had he not had the Ring (which, I would guess, he did NOT take to Númenor but left in Mordor) he would have been destroyed during the Drowning of Númenor.


----------



## MarkB

reelo said:


> Not at all. It is said that Sauron _allowed_ himself to be taken prisoner and feigned humbleness. Seeing the might and pride of Númenoreans he probably thought it entertaining to have them rebel against the Valar, though he did not foresee that Númenor would be utterly destroyed and drowned. Had he not had the Ring (which, I would guess, he did NOT take to Númenor but left in Mordor) he would have been destroyed during the Drowning of Númenor.



Maybe he just kept it hidden while he was there, Pulp Fiction style.


----------



## reelo

MarkB said:


> Maybe he just kept it hidden while he was there, Pulp Fiction style.



Well I guess it would have been swallowed by the Sundering Sea then. The way I understand it —and I may be completely off the mark here— is that Sauron did _indeed_ die when Númenor sank, but since the One Ring already existed and, more imprlortantly, he knew where it was and had access to it, his naked "spirit" was able to take shape again rather quickly after that "incident".


----------



## Paul Farquhar

reelo said:


> Not at all. It is said that Sauron _allowed_ himself to be taken prisoner and feigned humbleness. Seeing the might and pride of Númenoreans he probably thought it entertaining to have them rebel against the Valar



This is a matter of the motivation of Sauron, which isn't well defined. Does he seek power, or seek to cause suffering? Given how the One Ring is portrayed in LotR, you are suggesting he threw a fight he could easily have won purely to engage is a spot of sadism.


reelo said:


> though he did not foresee that Númenor would be utterly destroyed and drowned.



That would make Sauron to be really pretty dumb.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

reelo said:


> Well I guess it would have been swallowed by the Sundering Sea then. The way I understand it —and I may be completely off the mark here— is that Sauron did _indeed_ die when Númenor sank, but since the One Ring already existed and, more imprlortantly, he knew where it was and had access to it, his naked "spirit" was able to take shape again rather quickly after that "incident".



That would be my interpretation too. His physical form died, just like Gandalf's did in the Balrog fight.

The idea that he would have been willingly parted from the One Ring seems a little unlikely though.


----------



## Ryujin

From what we saw in the movies, the victors took The One Ring at the final battle and were going to destroy it in the fires of Mount Doom. Then Isildur refused to destroy it and was later killed in battle, losing the ring in a river where he fell. This is where, more than two thousand years later, Gollum finds His Precious.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

Ryujin said:


> From what we saw in the movies, the victors took The One Ring at the final battle and were going to destroy it in the fires of Mount Doom. Then Isildur refused to destroy it and was later killed in battle, losing the ring in a river where he fell. This is where, more than two thousand years later, Gollum finds His Precious.



But the battle in which Numenor defeats Sauron and drags him home in chains isn't the FINAL battle.


----------



## Ryujin

Paul Farquhar said:


> But the battle in which Numenor defeats Sauron and drags him home in chains isn't the FINAL battle.



True enough. Still, it's the one in which Sauron loses the ring, when it's cut from his hand.


----------



## Zubatcarteira

I liked the Hobbit parts, the Elf bois in the slave camp was alright, but I'm not liking the Numenor stuff, just weird how things are going, and what the hell was that horse slow-mo scene.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

Ryujin said:


> True enough. Still, it's the one in which Sauron loses the ring, when it's cut from his hand.



No it isn't, he is defeated by Numenorian forces before that in the source material. But for some reason Tolkien doesn't explain well Sauron is captured without the Ring. He then persuades the Numenorians to attack heaven, with predictable results, returns to Middle Earth, sets himself up again, is defeated by the Last Alliance of Elves and Men (not just Numenorians), and _then _the ring is cut from his hand.


----------



## billd91

Paul Farquhar said:


> He does, but that is clearly changed. Which is probably a good thing in this case. If the One Ring is so all powerful how come the Numenorians could defeat him? It undermines the premise of The Lord of the Rings.



I don't think it completely undermines it, nor is the ring all powerful. It's got the majority of Sauron's power worked into it, sure, but neither Morgoth nor Sauron were ever completely invulnerable to personal might. But the impression in the appendices is that the might of the Númenorians was *SO* overwhelming when they went after him his forces honestly routed from the field. He may have foreseen an opportunity to prey on Númenorian pride and fear of death when he begged pardon and that may be why he too didn't flee?
I think this is an important element of the fall of Númenor story. They were at their utter apex in power, capable of *actually defeating* Sauron, when they were destroyed because of their own excessive ambition. And how the mighty have fallen...


----------



## Paul Farquhar

Here is how I think the TV series will play out (if it runs its full course).

Celebrimbor crafts the 3 rings, with the help of Durin IV.
Adar (AKA Fake-Sauron) declares himself in Mordor.
Galadriel leads an army of Numenorians to attack Fake-Sauron. [end of series one]
Meanwhile, Real-Sauron befriends Celebrimbor.
Fake-Sauron persuades the Numenorians to attack the Valar.
Real-Sauron suggests that rings for men and dwarves would help to secure future alliances.
Numenor sinks, Real-Sauron crafts the One Ring. [end of series two]


----------



## Paul Farquhar

billd91 said:


> I think this is an important element of the fall of Númenor story. They were at their utter apex in power, capable of *actually defeating* Sauron



This is the kind of thing that wouldn't work well in TV. How do you show that power? Unless you are going to take the high magic approach and give them an army of fireball throwing wizards, you are limited to conventional pseudo-medieval military might. Which would not plausibly have a chance against the magical power of the One Ring as depicted in the movie. Remember, TV doesn't do subtle magic.


----------



## Ryujin

Paul Farquhar said:


> No it isn't, he is defeated by Numenorian forces before that in the source material. But for some reason Tolkien doesn't explain well Sauron is captured without the Ring. He then persuades the Numenorians to attack heaven, with predictable results, returns to Middle Earth, sets himself up again, is defeated by the Last Alliance of Elves and Men (not just Numenorians), and _then _the ring is cut from his hand.



I don't remember anything from The Silmarillion. Too long ago and too boring a read.

_EDIT_ - And that's from a guy who used to read mythology and religious texts for fun.


----------



## Dausuul

Paul Farquhar said:


> He does, but that is clearly changed. Which is probably a good thing in this case. If the One Ring is so all powerful how come the Numenorians could defeat him? It undermines the premise of The Lord of the Rings.



One of the dominant themes of the Lord of the Rings was the diminishing of mortals. The people of the Third Age were lesser than those of the Second Age, who were themselves lesser than those of the First. Moreover, the Numenoreans had received great blessings and gifts from the Valar, most of which were withdrawn with Numenor's downfall.

I do agree that this is tricky to show on TV. LotR has a lot of subtle themes which just don't translate to the screen. However, it's not necessary to depict Numenor beating Sauron down. In the books, it's not indicated that any battle took place at all--Sauron's armies flee before Numenor's might, and Sauron comes out to surrender. The show can simply follow that path, with a bit of exposition to tell the audience that not even the Ring can overcome the might of Numenor.

(As for the Ring, IIRC, Tolkien said that Sauron did take it with him to Numenor. After Numenor fell and Sauron's body was destroyed, his spirit retained enough power to carry it back across the sea.)


----------



## Maxperson

Paul Farquhar said:


> Seems likely.
> 
> In the source material Sauron's forces are defeated by the Numenorians (and it is implied that it was a ploy). It seems likely this will also happen in the TV series. No reason that should prevent him accessing Mt. Doom if he is in the guise of a good guy.



In the books it's Ar-Pharazon that led the Numenoreans to sail against Aman. In this show Pharazon is chancellor. I wouldn't put it past the writers to have Chancellor Palpatine, I mean Pharazon be Sauron in this show.


----------



## Maxperson

Paul Farquhar said:


> He does, but that is clearly changed. Which is probably a good thing in this case. If the One Ring is so all powerful how come the Numenorians could defeat him? It undermines the premise of The Lord of the Rings.



The Numenoreans had gifts(enhanced life, strength, technology, etc.) from the Valar, plus the gifts of blood they got from having elven and maia blood in their veins.  They were mighty enough and had great enough numbers that they could have destroyed him and all of his orcs, so Sauron surrendered and went to work from within to poison and ultimately destroy them.


----------



## Dausuul

Maxperson said:


> In the books it's Ar-Pharazon that led the Numenoreans to sail against Aman. In this show Pharazon is chancellor. I wouldn't put it past the writers to have Chancellor Palpatine, I mean Pharazon be Sauron in this show.



On the death of King Tar-Palantir, his daughter Tar-Miriel was to succeed to the throne, but Pharazon forced her into marriage and claimed it for himself.

Since Tar-Palantir is still alive in the show, with Miriel being referred to as "queen regent," they have not contradicted this plotline yet... though they are certainly stretching it a bit.


----------



## Maxperson

Paul Farquhar said:


> That would be my interpretation too. His physical form died, just like Gandalf's did in the Balrog fight.
> 
> The idea that he would have been willingly parted from the One Ring seems a little unlikely though.



We know from the books that he wasn't invincible with it and he would surely know that.  There's no way that he would take it with him when as a prisoner he would be searched thoroughly before he would be imprisoned on Numenor. Plus he would know that if he hid it so that it could not be found, he would be able to use it to reform himself should he be killed. Given the circumstances, it was very likely that he would have willingly been parted from the ring.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

Maxperson said:


> In the books it's Ar-Pharazon that led the Numenoreans to sail against Aman. In this show Pharazon is chancellor. I wouldn't put it past the writers to have Chancellor Palpatine, I mean Pharazon be Sauron in this show.



Yeah, I'm pretty sure this guy is a villain. Probably not Sauron himself, but a puppet.


----------



## Maxperson

Paul Farquhar said:


> No it isn't, he is defeated by Numenorian forces before that in the source material. But for some reason Tolkien doesn't explain well Sauron is captured without the Ring. He then persuades the Numenorians to attack heaven, with predictable results, returns to Middle Earth, sets himself up again, is defeated by the Last Alliance of Elves and Men (not just Numenorians), and _then _the ring is cut from his hand.



He wasn't captured.  When Numenor attacked, his forces fled with barely any fight.  Sauron decided to allow himself to be captured at that point, when he easily could have just shapechanged(he had that ability) and regrouped.  But he knew that he could not defeat Numenor with might of arms, so he surrendered to destroy them from within.  He had time to hide the ring before surrender.


----------



## Dausuul

Maxperson said:


> We know from the books that he wasn't invincible with it and he would surely know that.  There's no way that he would take it with him when as a prisoner he would be searched thoroughly before he would be imprisoned on Numenor. Plus he would know that if he hid it so that it could not be found, he would be able to use it to reform himself should he be killed. Given the circumstances, it was very likely that he would have willingly been parted from the ring.



Per Tolkien's letters, Sauron did take the Ring with him:

_"Sauron's personal 'surrender' was voluntary and cunning*: he got free transport to Numenor! He naturally had the One Ring, and so very soon dominated the minds and wills of most of the Númenóreans. (I do not think Ar-Pharazôn knew anything about the One Ring. The Elves kept the matter of the Rings very secret, as long as they could. In any case Ar-Pharazôn was not in communication with them.)"_

Taking the Ring was a bit of a gamble, perhaps, but as a surrendering head of state Sauron was in a very different position from a common prisoner of war. It's not like they would have strip-searched him, nor would they have any reason to take one plain gold ring off his hand.


----------



## Maxperson

Dausuul said:


> Per Tolkien's letters, Sauron did take the Ring with him:
> 
> _"Sauron's personal 'surrender' was voluntary and cunning*: he got free transport to Numenor! He naturally had the One Ring, and so very soon dominated the minds and wills of most of the Númenóreans. (I do not think Ar-Pharazôn knew anything about the One Ring. The Elves kept the matter of the Rings very secret, as long as they could. In any case Ar-Pharazôn was not in communication with them.)"_



Interesting.  I never really went over the letters.  It seems odd that they would allow him to keep anything, even jewelry.  Especially given the ring's power of seduction over those mortals that see it.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

Dausuul said:


> Per Tolkien's letters, Sauron did take the Ring with him:
> 
> _"Sauron's personal 'surrender' was voluntary and cunning*: he got free transport to Numenor! He naturally had the One Ring, and so very soon dominated the minds and wills of most of the Númenóreans. (I do not think Ar-Pharazôn knew anything about the One Ring. The Elves kept the matter of the Rings very secret, as long as they could. In any case Ar-Pharazôn was not in communication with them.)"_



That's very interesting, since it puts a significant chunk of the blame on the elves.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

Maxperson said:


> Interesting.  I never really went over the letters.  It seems odd that they would allow him to keep anything, even jewelry.  Especially given the ring's power of seduction over those mortals that see it.



I would imagine the master of the ring could make the ring itself invisible.

Especially if no one had been warned to look for it.

It does raise the issue of how did the ring get from the bottom of the sea back to Middle Earth? Maybe inside a fish?

Oh, we already had Galadriel swimming hundreds of miles, didn't we (I imagined Dory singing to her)! Maybe Sauron does the same!


----------



## Maxperson

Paul Farquhar said:


> I would imagine the master of the ring could make the ring itself invisible.
> 
> Especially if no one had been warned to look for it.
> 
> It does raise the issue of how did the ring get from the bottom of the sea back to Middle Earth? Maybe inside a fish?



Good point.  That would have allowed him to have it with him.  But now we're left with a conundrum.  How the hell did he recover it from the bottom of the ocean, or even find it given the tidal wave that would have swept his body and the ring out to sea before it sank at some random location?  

If he had it hidden back in Mordor, his spirit could have gone to it and used the power to reform.  He didn't have the ability to intuitively know where the ring was, though, or poor Smeagol would never have found his precious since Sauron would have just gone to the river and recovered his body and the ring thousands of years before.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

Sauron turns into a bat (no doubt remembering to shout "bat")?


----------



## Dausuul

Paul Farquhar said:


> That's very interesting, since it puts a significant chunk of the blame on the elves.



The Elves made a number of mistakes in the Second Age. Collaborating with Sauron to make the Rings in the first place was not the brightest of ideas, even if they didn't know who he was at the time.

(And the Elves of the Second Age were paragons of wisdom and restraint compared to the Elves of the First Age. The war of the Elves against Morgoth was a grand tragedy, and like a classic tragedy, it springs from the fatal flaws of the hero.)


Paul Farquhar said:


> I would imagine the master of the ring could make the ring itself invisible.



Very good point. Galadriel does this with her Ring in "Fellowship," so presumably Sauron could do the same if he wanted.


Paul Farquhar said:


> It does raise the issue of how did the ring get from the bottom of the sea back to Middle Earth? Maybe inside a fish?



A later quote from the same letter: "_Though reduced to 'a spirit of hatred borne on a dark wind', I do not think one need boggle at this spirit carrying off the One Ring, upon which his power of dominating minds now largely depended._"


----------



## billd91

Paul Farquhar said:


> I would imagine the master of the ring could make the ring itself invisible.
> 
> Especially if no one had been warned to look for it.
> 
> It does raise the issue of how did the ring get from the bottom of the sea back to Middle Earth? Maybe inside a fish?
> 
> Oh, we already had Galadriel swimming hundreds of miles, didn't we (I imagined Dory singing to her)! Maybe Sauron does the same!



It's also possible that if Sauron's form was destroyed while wearing the ring, it stayed with his "spirit of hatred" that went back to Middle Earth and reformed along with his corporeal form. When Sauron turns up again, it's only a little over a century. Contrast that with about 2400 years for his reappearance in the Third Age. This may be the difference between having the ring on him at time of defeat/destruction and not.


----------



## Dioltach

Paul Farquhar said:


> I would imagine the master of the ring could make the ring itself invisible.
> 
> Especially if no one had been warned to look for it.



I'm thinking more along the lines of the Jack Black skit from the Council of Elrond.


----------



## reelo

Paul Farquhar said:


> Here is how I think the TV series will play out (if it runs its full course).
> 
> Celebrimbor crafts the 3 rings, with the help of Durin IV.
> Adar (AKA Fake-Sauron) declares himself in Mordor.
> Galadriel leads an army of Numenorians to attack Fake-Sauron. [end of series one]
> Meanwhile, Real-Sauron befriends Celebrimbor.
> Fake-Sauron persuades the Numenorians to attack the Valar.
> Real-Sauron suggests that rings for men and dwarves would help to secure future alliances.
> Numenor sinks, Real-Sauron crafts the One Ring. [end of series two]




The thing is, the 3 elven rings were crafted _after_ the others, iirc, not before.


----------



## MarkB

reelo said:


> The thing is, the 3 elven rings were crafted _after_ the others, iirc, not before.



They were all elven-crafted though, right? What, were they using the Dwarves and Men as beta testers?


----------



## Ryujin

MarkB said:


> They were all elven-crafted though, right? What, were they using the Dwarves and Men as beta testers?



"Hey, why don't we knock out a few trinkets and get the feel of the new tools, before we knock out the real works of art?" Sounds pretty Elf-like to me.


----------



## reelo

Ryujin said:


> "Hey, why don't we knock out a few trinkets and get the feel of the new tools, before we knock out the real works of art?" Sounds pretty Elf-like to me.



Yes, all rings were forged in secret, by the Gwaith-i-Mirdain (Celebrimbor's smiths) under the "tutelage" of Annatar/Sauron.

The 3 elven rings were forged "behind Sauron's back" so to speak. And that's why he assailed and devastated Eregion.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Paul Farquhar said:


> This is a matter of the motivation of Sauron, which isn't well defined. Does he seek power, or seek to cause suffering? Given how the One Ring is portrayed in LotR, you are suggesting he threw a fight he could easily have won purely to engage is a spot of sadism.



It being a ploy doesn’t mean he could have easily won. 


Paul Farquhar said:


> That would make Sauron to be really pretty dumb.



How so? It was an unprecedented event.


----------



## Hriston

Paul Farquhar said:


> He does, but that is clearly changed. Which is probably a good thing in this case. If the One Ring is so all powerful how come the Numenorians could defeat him? It undermines the premise of The Lord of the Rings.



So you believe Númenor's challenging of Sauron's might in Mordor is imminent. I'm not so sure. We haven't seen much worth challenging yet - just some goblins digging tunnels.

And Sauron possessing the One Ring when he surrenders to Númenor doesn't undermine the premise of the LotR which is that Sauron at the end of the Third Age is already too powerful for any force present in Middle-earth at the time to defeat through strength of arms alone, even without the ring, and that destroying the ring is the only chance the free peoples have of stopping him. Of course, if he gets the ring, things will be that much worse, but he's going to win anyway. 

In the Second Age, even after Sauron forges the ring, things are very different. Númenor and the realm of Gil-galad are both quite powerful and together drive Sauron back to Mordor in SA 1700, at the end of the War of the Elves and Sauron. Much later in the Second Age, Sauron surrenders due to the overwhelming might possessed by Númenor alone, realizing he can only destroy his greatest rival from within. Finally, contrary to your point considering the event's prominence in LotR lore, at the end of the Second Age, Sauron loses the ring because his forces are defeated at the Battle of Dagorlad by the Last Alliance of Elves and Men, the combined forces of Gil-galad and the new realms in exile, Arnor and Gondor and is besieged in the Barad-dûr for seven years, ending with Sauron himself making a last desperate sortie in which he was wounded by Gil-galad and Elendil, allowing Isildur the chance to cut off his finger.

At the end of the Third Age, there is no Last Alliance to be formed. Arnor has been destroyed and Gondor is a shadow of its former strength. The elves are departing across the sea, forsaking Middle-earth. Sauron's victory is a forgone conclusion because there is virtually no one to stand against him.


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots

Hriston said:


> Ah, so you’re imagining that Sauron allowed Finrod’s body to be recovered or even had it delivered to Galadriel in order to set her in motion following his trail. Hmm.



If ordinary elves can be made into orcs, could Galadriel conceivably be made into something more?


----------



## Zaukrie

I really wish there was a thread about the sow,, and a thread for super fans. Because some of us don't want to know more than is in the show.  Nor to wade through pages of posts to talk about it. Oh well. Have fun debating details.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

Hriston said:


> So you believe Númenor's challenging of Sauron's might in Mordor is imminent. I'm not so sure. We haven't seen much worth challenging yet - just some goblins digging tunnels.



Definitely. This is a TV show, the audience want to see BATTLES. There needs to be one before the end of the first season (and besides, we have seen glimpses in trailers).


----------



## Paul Farquhar

Zaukrie said:


> I really wish there was a thread about the sow,, and a thread for super fans. Because some of us don't want to know more than is in the show.  Nor to wade through pages of posts to talk about it. Oh well. Have fun debating details.



No one KNOWS anything, apart from they are not sticking slavishly to the source material (some of which they are not even allowed to use).


----------



## John R Davis

Yeah. If they did have first age permission then you see some epic very high level fights. Maybe one day 

Maybe the thread should be just about the Show really


----------



## Paul Farquhar

reelo said:


> The thing is, the 3 elven rings were crafted _after_ the others, iirc, not before.



Which again, doesn't make any sense. Why would the elves create rings that could be controlled by the One Ring if the knew of the One Ring? It makes more sense if the Elven Rings are crafted first, and the One Ring is specifically made to dominate them.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

doctorbadwolf said:


> How so? It was an unprecedented event.



_I_ know what would happen if mortals tried to invade heaven! And Sauron knows the power and character of the Valar as well as anyone. He must have known what would happen (and Tolkien's letter suggests this was the case).


----------



## Nikosandros

Paul Farquhar said:


> Which again, doesn't make any sense. Why would the elves create rings that could be controlled by the One Ring if the knew of the One Ring? It makes more sense if the Elven Rings are crafted first, and the One Ring is specifically made to dominate them.



The three elven rings were different from the others and could not be dominated by the One Ring.


----------



## carrot

Paul Farquhar said:


> Which again, doesn't make any sense. Why would the elves create rings that could be controlled by the One Ring if the knew of the One Ring? It makes more sense if the Elven Rings are crafted first, and the One Ring is specifically made to dominate them.



The One Ring was forged last, after the 7,9 and the 3. Celebrimbor sensed the One as it was created, was aware of what it meant. He immediately stopped wearing the 3 and hid them.They were not used again until after the One was cut from Saurons hand.


----------



## reelo

Paul Farquhar said:


> Which again, doesn't make any sense. Why would the elves create rings that could be controlled by the One Ring if the knew of the One Ring? It makes more sense if the Elven Rings are crafted first, and the One Ring is specifically made to dominate them.



They didn't. The way I understand it, the events run like this: 
Celebrimbor and Annatar/Sauron crafted the 7 and the 9 thogether, after an unspecified number of "minor" rings.
Annatar/Sauron disappears, presumably to Mordor.
Celebrimbor crafts the 3, in secrecy, using the knowledge gaines from Annatar.
Sauron crafts the One. The Elves and Sauron become aware of each other's betrayal as soon as the One is created.
Enraged (because he cannot control the 3) Sauron lays waste to Eregion, reclaiming the 7 (actually just 6, as Durin III was already given one of the 7) and the 9, but fails to claim the 3.


----------



## carrot

Yep - sounds about right - he couldn’t control the 3 because no-one was wearing them. And he failed to claim them because they were hidden and he couldn’t find them.


----------



## Hriston

Paul Farquhar said:


> _I_ know what would happen if mortals tried to invade heaven! And Sauron knows the power and character of the Valar as well as anyone. He must have known what would happen (and Tolkien's letter suggests this was the case).



Sauron wanted to create a war between the Númenóreans and the Valar. He didn’t count on the intervention of Ilúvatar.


----------



## Hussar

Paul Farquhar said:


> Which again, doesn't make any sense. Why would the elves create rings that could be controlled by the One Ring if the knew of the One Ring? It makes more sense if the Elven Rings are crafted first, and the One Ring is specifically made to dominate them.



Heh.  Isn't it funny.

Tolkien writes this story, and everyone still claims that the Valar are still good angels despite committing mass genocide and forcing the rest of the world to be less powerful.

Weiss and Hickman tell pretty much exactly the same story and people will shout until they are blue in the face that the gods of Krynn cannot possibly be good and they are all evil and everyone should abandon the gods...

I mean, it's basically just a retelling of the Atlantis myth in both cases.  But, in one, we are supposed to think that all the Valar are still forces for good and whatnot, while in the other, despite following almost exactly the same story, we're supposed to think that the Gods of Krynn are all evil dicks.

Just something that struck me.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

Hussar said:


> Heh.  Isn't it funny.
> 
> Tolkien writes this story, and everyone still claims that the Valar are still good angels despite committing mass genocide and forcing the rest of the world to be less powerful.
> 
> Weiss and Hickman tell pretty much exactly the same story and people will shout until they are blue in the face that the gods of Krynn cannot possibly be good and they are all evil and everyone should abandon the gods...
> 
> I mean, it's basically just a retelling of the Atlantis myth in both cases.  But, in one, we are supposed to think that all the Valar are still forces for good and whatnot, while in the other, despite following almost exactly the same story, we're supposed to think that the Gods of Krynn are all evil dicks.
> 
> Just something that struck me.



That Valar are not gods, they are not defined as "good", no one is required to worship them in order to get stuff, and they are based on the Aesir, who have always been portrayed as nuanced and flawed.

Tolkien leaves it to his readers to decide if the actions of the Valar are justified, he doesn't tell them what they should think.


----------



## Hriston

Whizbang Dustyboots said:


> If ordinary elves can be made into orcs, could Galadriel conceivably be made into something more?



Good question. Maybe _she's_ the Balrog of Moria.

More seriously though, I think the elves of Aman would be more resistant to being corrupted into orcs than the dark elves captured by Morgoth for that purpose in the ages of starlight.

ETA: The gnomes captured by Morgoth in the War of the Jewels during the First Age, for example, didn't become goblins. They were forced to work in his mines as slaves, however, and when they escaped or were freed, they were often mistrusted by other elves as spies, and sometimes not without good reason.


----------



## Davies

Dausuul said:


> Since Tar-Palantir is still alive in the show



Or so we've been led to believe.


----------



## Maxperson

Paul Farquhar said:


> Which again, doesn't make any sense. Why would the elves create rings that could be controlled by the One Ring if the knew of the One Ring? It makes more sense if the Elven Rings are crafted first, and the One Ring is specifically made to dominate them.



They didn't know about it at first.  Sauron crafted the One Ring in secret, just as the elves crafted the Three in secret.  However, since the elven rings used the same knowledge in their making as the rest, the One Ring could dominate them like any other.  That's why they were hidden and not worn until after Sauron was defeated by the Last Alliance of Elves and Men.


----------



## Maxperson

Nikosandros said:


> The three elven rings were different from the others and could not be dominated by the One Ring.



This is wrong.  They could be dominated by it since they used the same knowledge in their crafting.  Think of the knowledge as a back door that the One Ring could use to insert a control virus through. When Sauron put on the One, the elves felt it and took off their rings, which enraged Sauron and he declared war on them over it.


----------



## Maxperson

carrot said:


> Yep - sounds about right - he couldn’t control the 3 because no-one was wearing them. And he failed to claim them because they were hidden and he couldn’t find them.



The rings weren't what he controlled per se.  The One allowed him to control those wearing the rings as they were all linked to the master ring through the knowledge used in their crafting and the essence of himself that he infused into the One.  When the elves took of their rings, he no longer had ability to control anyone and got really upset.  So upset that he threw a tantrum and broke Eregion trying to get them.


----------



## Nikosandros

Maxperson said:


> This is wrong.  They could be dominated by it since they used the same knowledge in their crafting.  Think of the knowledge as a back door that the One Ring could use to insert a control virus through. When Sauron put on the One, the elves felt it and took off their rings, which enraged Sauron and he declared war on them over it.



Upon going back to the sources, I must concede the point.


----------



## Hussar

Paul Farquhar said:


> That Valar are not gods, they are not defined as "good", no one is required to worship them in order to get stuff, and they are based on the Aesir, who have always been portrayed as nuanced and flawed.
> 
> Tolkien leaves it to his readers to decide if the actions of the Valar are justified, he doesn't tell them what they should think.



Well, that's because Middle Earth doesn't have clerics.  But, I'm not sure I buy that they aren't meant to be gods.  Taken from the Wiki entry:



> The Valar were the fourteen Ainur who, after being molded of Eru's thought, entered Arda after its creation, to give order to the world and combat the new evils of Melkor. They had helped to begin the shaping of Arda through the music of Ilúvatar, and often referred to one another as "brother" or "sister". Each of the Ainur had added his or her own part to the music creating the world incarnate, save for Melkor, who at the time was counted as the strongest of them. His vision of what Arda should have been differed from Eru's, which led to his banishment and great rebellion that would cause most of the ills of the world of Arda.




It sounds an awful lot like these are gods (or at least close enough for government work) and are meant to be seen as good.  Considering even the little I know about things, it was always pretty clear that the Valar oppose Melkor and are meant to be the "good guys".  

My point anyway, is that the Numenor story and the Cataclysm of Krynn are basically both retellings of the Atlantis story.  Yet, one gets the pass and the other does not.  I just thought it was kinda funny.


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots

Paul Farquhar said:


> That Valar are not gods, they are not defined as "good", no one is required to worship them in order to get stuff, and they are based on the Aesir, who have always been portrayed as nuanced and flawed.



Is "hot mess" a nuance?

It's hard to decide whether the Norse or Greek gods are more like a Real Housewives TV show.


----------



## Hriston

Paul Farquhar said:


> Definitely. This is a TV show, the audience want to see BATTLES. There needs to be one before the end of the first season (and besides, we have seen glimpses in trailers).



The show seems on pace to have one battle scene per episode, and I agree a really big battle would be a good way to end the first season climactically.

I don't think Ar-Pharazôn's challenge to Sauron is the right fit, however, for a couple reasons. First, in the sources, it doesn't result in a battle. Sauron simply surrenders. Second, it parks Sauron in Númenor too early. The series is supposed to run five seasons, and I would assume the downfall of Númenor would come at the end of season three or four at the earliest, so unless the show is (a) going to spend a lot of time with Sauron in Númenor or (b) focus on the kingdoms in exile after the downfall, I don't think we'll see Sauron taken prisoner until maybe the end of season two.

For the end of season one, I'd say the War of the Elves and Sauron is a good fit. Sauron is beaten soundly by Gil-galad with help from Númenor (thanks to Galadriel's diplomacy) and is routed back to Mordor, but all the players (except Celebrimbor; his work is done) are still on the table, and Sauron now has the ring.


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots

Hriston said:


> For the end of season one, I'd say the War of the Elves and Sauron is a good fit. Sauron is beaten soundly by Gil-galad with help from Númenor (thanks to Galadriel's diplomacy) and is routed back to Mordor, but all the players (except Celebrimbor; his work is done) are still on the table, and Sauron now has the ring.



We're almost halfway done with this season. In the words of Ron Burgundy, things would have to escalate quickly.

I'd guess we're going to have the season end with Sauron revealed to the audience, but not other characters, setting us up for watching the next season or two and yelling at the TV as the characters other than Galadriel and maybe a few others are taken in by him and his fun idea of making everyone class rings.


----------



## Ryujin

Hussar said:


> Well, that's because Middle Earth doesn't have clerics.  But, I'm not sure I buy that they aren't meant to be gods.  Taken from the Wiki entry:
> 
> It sounds an awful lot like these are gods (or at least close enough for government work) and are meant to be seen as good.  Considering even the little I know about things, it was always pretty clear that the Valar oppose Melkor and are meant to be the "good guys".
> 
> My point anyway, is that the Numenor story and the Cataclysm of Krynn are basically both retellings of the Atlantis story.  Yet, one gets the pass and the other does not.  I just thought it was kinda funny.



It's a fair comparison, however, "order" doesn't necessarily equate to "good." History has many counter-examples.


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots

Ryujin said:


> It's a fair comparison, however, "order" doesn't necessarily equate to "good." History has many counter-examples.



Ooh, as does World of Warcraft! In fact, the extra-planar group that everyone _assumed_ to be representing the forces of Good turn out to be much more interested in a rigid adherence to their theoretically benevolent philosophy, even if they have to kill everyone who objects.


----------



## Ryujin

Whizbang Dustyboots said:


> Ooh, as does World of Warcraft! In fact, the extra-planar group that everyone _assumed_ to be representing the forces of Good turn out to be much more interested in a rigid adherence to their theoretically benevolent philosophy, even if they have to kill everyone who objects.



Like Peacemaker says, "I cherish peace with all of my heart. I don't care how many men, women and children I kill to get it."


----------



## Hriston

Whizbang Dustyboots said:


> We're almost halfway done with this season. In the words of Ron Burgundy, things would have to escalate quickly.
> 
> I'd guess we're going to have the season end with Sauron revealed to the audience, but not other characters, setting us up for watching the next season or two and yelling at the TV as the characters other than Galadriel and maybe a few others being taken in by him and his fun idea of making everyone class rings.



You're right, of course. It's far too fast of a timetable.

I was just looking for a good battle to end the season with, but the writers will probably have to make one up because it doesn't really exist in the sources.


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots

Ryujin said:


> Like Peacemaker says, "I cherish peace with all of my heart. I don't care how many men, women and children I kill to get it."



One of the safer quotes to use from him.


----------



## MarkB

Hriston said:


> You're right, of course. It's far too fast of a timetable.
> 
> I was just looking for a good battle to end the season with, but the writers will probably have to make one up because it doesn't really exist in the sources.



It feels like they're building up to a climactic season denouement in the Southlands. I'm guessing that Galadriel, Halbrand and Arondir manage to get their respective stuff together in time to muster some small counter-force, maybe sufficient to save the villagers who took shelter in the elven watchtower, but otherwise it will be a complete rout, with the orcs moving in and taking over entirely.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

MarkB said:


> It feels like they're building up to a climactic season denouement in the Southlands. I'm guessing that Galadriel, Halbrand and Arondir manage to get their respective stuff together in time to muster some small counter-force, maybe sufficient to save the villagers who took shelter in the elven watchtower, but otherwise it will be a complete rout, with the orcs moving in and taking over entirely.



There is a shot in a trailer of Isildur fighting orcs, and a volcano appears to erupt.


----------



## MarkB

Paul Farquhar said:


> There is a shot in a trailer of Isildur fighting orcs, and a volcano appears to erupt.



I hadn't recalled that, but was wondering whether we'd see something like that - clearly, if they're taking over those lands to found Mordor, they're going to want to do something about the sunlight, and setting off Mount Doom would be the obvious solution. Just wasn't sure they'd get to that this season.


----------



## Hriston

Does anyone else think it was kind of convenient that “the Stranger" both apparently caused Largo's injury and ingratiated himself with his family by helping them out of that little jam in which they happened to find themselves?


----------



## MarkB

Hriston said:


> Does anyone else think it was kind of convenient that “the Stranger" both apparently caused Largo's injury and ingratiated himself with his family by helping them out of that little jam in which they happened to find themselves?



If he appeared to be in any way coherent and deliberate in his actions, sure, but as it is, it'd be tough to see him undertaking that degree of complex planning.


----------



## John R Davis

Hmm. Wizards are cunning


----------



## Ryujin

Hriston said:


> Does anyone else think it was kind of convenient that “the Stranger" both apparently caused Largo's injury and ingratiated himself with his family by helping them out of that little jam in which they happened to find themselves?



I'm more thinking that he might not have any idea of his power or limitations in his new human body, and so might be wrecking mayhem inadvertently.


----------



## MarkB

Ryujin said:


> I'm more thinking that he might not have any idea of his power or limitations in his new human body, and so might be wrecking mayhem inadvertently.



Yeah, for him to have intentionally pre-planned it, he'd need to have had a detailed awareness of (a) the Harfoots' migratory nature, (b) the specific make-up of Nori's family group, and (c) the whole "those who fall behind get left behind" mentality, meaning that nobody else would volunteer to help out with their wagon.

And sure, he could be a sufficient master-manipulator to have set all that up, all the while pretending to be barely comprehending of his surroundings - but if he really is that good, then basically nobody stands a chance against him, and that's no fun narratively.


----------



## Hriston

MarkB said:


> It feels like they're building up to a climactic season denouement in the Southlands. I'm guessing that Galadriel, Halbrand and Arondir manage to get their respective stuff together in time to muster some small counter-force, maybe sufficient to save the villagers who took shelter in the elven watchtower, but otherwise it will be a complete rout, with the orcs moving in and taking over entirely.



I think Galadriel will succeed in getting Elendil and Isildur to come along for this adventure, although probably unlooked for at the eleventh hour after what seems like a hopeless defense of the villagers in the tower.


----------



## MarkB

Hriston said:


> I think Galadriel will succeed in getting Elendil and Isildur to come along for this adventure, although probably unlooked for at the eleventh hour after what seems like a hopeless defense of the villagers in the tower.



"Look for me at dawn of the third day... tides and weather permitting."


----------



## Hriston

MarkB said:


> If he appeared to be in any way coherent and deliberate in his actions, sure, but as it is, it'd be tough to see him undertaking that degree of complex planning.



The Stranger appears to be one of the Ainur, who have a degree of prescience due to their familiarity with the Music. This was how Gandalf knew to send Bilbo along on the Quest of Erebor. So it isn't so much a matter of complex planning, but more like hitting beats you half remember are there.



Ryujin said:


> I'm more thinking that he might not have any idea of his power or limitations in his new human body, and so might be wrecking mayhem inadvertently.



That's just what someone would want you to think if they didn't want you to know they were really the dark lord.


----------



## Ryujin

Hriston said:


> The Stranger appears to be one of the Ainur, who have a degree of prescience due to their familiarity with the Music. This was how Gandalf knew to send Bilbo along on the Quest of Erebor. So it isn't so much complex planning, but more like hitting beats that you half remember are there.
> 
> 
> That's just what someone would want you to think if they didn't want you to know they were really the dark lord.



... or it might just have been coincidental events and have nothing at all to do with The Stranger, except giving him a narrative reason to help.


----------



## Hriston

Ryujin said:


> ... or it might just have been coincidental events and have nothing at all to do with The Stranger, except giving him a narrative reason to help.



As an audience member, it didn't look merely coincidental.

ETA: I think we were shown quite clearly that the two events are connected.


----------



## Dioltach

John R Davis said:


> Hmm. Wizards are cunning



Don't you mean "subtle"?


----------



## John R Davis

Dioltach said:


> Don't you mean "subtle"?



Depends on your colour!


----------



## Zardnaar

Bit boring this week. Weakest episode so far imho. Wasn't bad at least.


----------



## wicked cool

Is the person leading the orcs a figure from lore? Was an ok episode


----------



## Ryujin

wicked cool said:


> Is the person leading the orcs a figure from lore? Was an ok episode



Figuring that's Sauron. I thought that Elves didn't scar?


----------



## wicked cool

Ryujin said:


> Figuring that's Sauron. I thought that Elves didn't scar?



See I thought the stranger was


----------



## John R Davis

Tension building up 
Enjoyed Ep4


----------



## MarkB

So, what does the hilt do, or signify? We've had confirmation that it's what the orcs were seeking, and we now know that it is specifically an heirloom of those who served Morgoth and Sauron. Why is it so important to the orcs and their Father?


----------



## John R Davis

Maybe it's holds some of Saurons essence? ( Maybe it's his hiding place?)


----------



## Ryujin

MarkB said:


> So, what does the hilt do, or signify? We've had confirmation that it's what the orcs were seeking, and we now know that it is specifically an heirloom of those who served Morgoth and Sauron. Why is it so important to the orcs and their Father?



Maybe it was a gift from Sauron to the King of the Southlands, when they were serving him? At any rate it seems to be a blood powered Lightsabre because it seemed to be back down to its original broken blade length, when he later pulled it out of the bag.


----------



## reelo

I wonder if Adar could perhaps be Maeglin, the son of Eöl the Dark Elf, and the hilt be that of Anguirel, his sword. Of course, Maeglin is supposed to have died during the Fall of Gondolin, but I suppose the writers could have him survive that (it is a stretch, I am aware) but at least he  is one "known" elf who had been wholly corrupted by Morgoth.


----------



## Hriston

wicked cool said:


> Is the person leading the orcs a figure from lore?



No, but from his conversation with Arondir, it seems he had been present in Beleriand in the First Age, as was Arondir apparently. I was a bit surprised at the mention of Beleriand since it seemed like it had been implied that the Battles of Beleriand had taken place farther east, to make Mordor/the Southlands relevant as a place from which men loyal to Morgoth could have come, for example.


----------



## Davies

reelo said:


> I wonder if Adar could perhaps be Maeglin, the son of Eöl the Dark Elf, and the hilt be that of Anguirel, his sword. Of course, Maeglin is supposed to have died during the Fall of Gondolin, but I suppose the writers could have him survive that (it is a stretch, I am aware) but at least he  is one "known" elf who had been wholly corrupted by Morgoth.



He could be Maeglin's heretofore unrecorded offspring; while obsessed with Idril, he would not be the first obsessed individual to have satisfied certain "needs" with others whom he viewed with contempt for not being the object of his desires. (I do not insist on this theory.)

Meanwhile, Celebrimbor has been triggering my paranoia alarms a lot since he first showed up, and never more than in this episode. Why would the fact that he'd known Earendil have been hidden from Elrond?


----------



## Hriston

My impression of Adar is that he's using the most expedient (and thoroughly evil) means at his disposal to prevent the reemergence of Sauron by setting himself up as dark lord of Mordor so there's no power vacuum for Sauron to fill. Seizing the sword seems to be part of that. Perhaps he'll turn out to be an ally to Galadriel when Sauron shows up, although she'd probably reject him and any help he would offer. He might serve as a mirror to Galadriel -- what could happen if she's consumed by her desire for revenge.


----------



## Rabulias

Waldreg has shown himself to be a follower of Morgoth and Sauron, and he believes the starfall to be a sign heralding Sauron's return. Another ambiguous hint that the Stranger is Sauron, or perhaps someone sent to oppose Sauron in his imminent rise.


----------



## Ryujin

Rabulias said:


> Waldreg has shown himself to be a follower of Morgoth and Sauron, and he believes the starfall to be a sign heralding Sauron's return. Another ambiguous hint that the Stranger is Sauron, or perhaps someone sent to oppose Sauron in his imminent rise.



They were purposefully very vague with the wording of that particular statement. It appears that they actively want everyone to be guessing about who Sauron is, just like the humanoid Cylons in Battlestar Galactica. Spoiler: EVERYONE was.


----------



## MarkB

Ryujin said:


> They were purposefully very vague with the wording of that particular statement. It appears that they actively want everyone to be guessing about who Sauron is, just like the humanoid Cylons in Battlestar Galactica. Spoiler: EVERYONE was.



Well, hopefully in this case they're actually leading the audience to guess the truth about questions they've actually worked out the answers to in advance and aren't just going to make up later, unlike the writers of Battlestar Galactica, Lost or The X-Files.


----------



## John R Davis

I like the idea he is a rival to Sauron


----------



## Hriston

I think Nori will somehow discover the Stranger's constellation can only be seen by travelling south, leading them, of course, to Mordor. I also think it will turn out to be providential in some way that she was "meant" to find and help the Stranger, just like Bilbo was "meant", in Gandalf's words, to find the ring.


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots

I keep thinking about Adar saying that the accepted truths about Middle-Earth are largely lies.

Given his relationship to the orcs and his odd appearance, I was thinking that the accepted story is that elves being turned into orcs has been largely understood as something _done_ to unwilling elves. But what if there were one or more elves complicit in it, even willing volunteers? Then Adar could be either a true believer or even the one who implemented this, making him truly the orcs' collective father.


----------



## Rabulias

Whizbang Dustyboots said:


> Given his relationship to the orcs and his odd appearance, I was thinking that while the accepted story is that elves being turned into orcs has been largely understood as something _done_ to unwilling elves, what if there were one or more elves complicit in it, even willing? Then Adar could be either a true believer or even the one who implemented this, making him truly the orcs' collective father?



Perhaps his transformation was disrupted in some way, leaving him is some half-orc/half-elf state? Maybe he is the result of the first attempts at creating orcs from elves long ago, and it just did not go 100%? This position and longevity could lead to him being named "father" by other orcs.


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots

I definitely think we're going to get some deep true-to-the-TV-show orc lore soon.


----------



## RuinousPowers

Hussar said:


> Well, that's because Middle Earth doesn't have clerics.  But, I'm not sure I buy that they aren't meant to be gods.  Taken from the Wiki entry:
> 
> 
> 
> It sounds an awful lot like these are gods (or at least close enough for government work) and are meant to be seen as good.  Considering even the little I know about things, it was always pretty clear that the Valar oppose Melkor and are meant to be the "good guys".
> 
> My point anyway, is that the Numenor story and the Cataclysm of Krynn are basically both retellings of the Atlantis story.  Yet, one gets the pass and the other does not.  I just thought it was kinda funny.



Krynn doesn't get a pass because of alignment, D&D polytheism, and the silly notion that evil, and evil gods, are necessary.  

ME has one true God, and the idealized world would have everyone being in harmony with him. Krynn's idealized world has evil and good locked in perpetual struggle. 

6 "Good" gods sitting idly by while a whole city is destroyed isn't normal, but on Krynn it is. Krynn, not even once.


----------



## Davies

... I think they may be implying that the One Ring's pernicious influence is partially due to its materials, given the way that Durin was acting towards the mithril. I'm not sure how I feel about that.


----------



## billd91

Davies said:


> ... I think they may be implying that the One Ring's pernicious influence is partially due to its materials, given the way that Durin was acting towards the mithril. I'm not sure how I feel about that.



I don’t believe there’s any reference to the One Ring being made of mithril. Only one of the elven rings is apparently mithril, so a variety of materials is certainly possible for any of these rings.


----------



## FitzTheRuke

billd91 said:


> I don’t believe there’s any reference to the One Ring being made of mithril. Only one of the elven rings is apparently mithril, so a variety of materials is certainly possible for any of these rings.




Yeah, Mithril usually looks silver, too. The one ring looks gold.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

RuinousPowers said:


> Krynn doesn't get a pass because of alignment, D&D polytheism, and the silly notion that evil, and evil gods, are necessary.
> 
> ME has one true God, and the idealized world would have everyone being in harmony with him. Krynn's idealized world has evil and good locked in perpetual struggle.



Krynn doesn’t have an idealized world, actually. It has a default state of chaos from which the three axis of balance create enough order for mortal life to exist and have some hope of thriving. 


RuinousPowers said:


> 6 "Good" gods sitting idly by while a whole city is destroyed isn't normal, but on Krynn it is. Krynn, not even once.



That’s super normal. How many RL religions lack gods who destroy, sometimes on a larger scale than other times? 

Worlds like Krynn judge morality based on a scale in which mortals only really matter as a whole, not individually. That’s only a problem from a very mortal-centric perspective. If we take the setting seriously in premises, and think about them as a whole, we see worlds in which no one sat down and said _in universe_ that the universe needs evil and evil gods. The universe just _has_ them. 


In Krynn specifically, the universe has them because the children of Chaos are gods of evil, good, and neutrality. That’s it. 

No ideal, just a state of being that must be dealt with as it exists when playing in that world as written.


----------



## Maxperson

reelo said:


> I wonder if Adar could perhaps be Maeglin, the son of Eöl the Dark Elf, and the hilt be that of Anguirel, his sword. Of course, Maeglin is supposed to have died during the Fall of Gondolin, but I suppose the writers could have him survive that (it is a stretch, I am aware) but at least he  is one "known" elf who had been wholly corrupted by Morgoth.



I don't think even Maeglin would work with orcs or be referred to as their father.


----------



## Maxperson

Rabulias said:


> Waldreg has shown himself to be a follower of Morgoth and Sauron, and he believes the starfall to be a sign heralding Sauron's return. Another ambiguous hint that the Stranger is Sauron, or perhaps someone sent to oppose Sauron in his imminent rise.



I took that to be an ignorant man seeing "omens" in something and taking it for Sauron's return.  He didn't strike me as someone with a lot of knowledge of what the signs of Sauron's return would be.


----------



## Maxperson

FitzTheRuke said:


> Yeah, Mithril usually looks silver, too. The one ring looks gold.



It was gold, or appeared to be.


----------



## RuinousPowers

doctorbadwolf said:


> Krynn doesn’t have an idealized world, actually. It has a default state of chaos from which the three axis of balance create enough order for mortal life to exist and have some hope of thriving.
> 
> That’s super normal. How many RL religions lack gods who destroy, sometimes on a larger scale than other times?
> 
> Worlds like Krynn judge morality based on a scale in which mortals only really matter as a whole, not individually. That’s only a problem from a very mortal-centric perspective. If we take the setting seriously in premises, and think about them as a whole, we see worlds in which no one sat down and said _in universe_ that the universe needs evil and evil gods. The universe just _has_ them.
> 
> 
> In Krynn specifically, the universe has them because the children of Chaos are gods of evil, good, and neutrality. That’s it.
> 
> No ideal, just a state of being that must be dealt with as it exists when playing in that world as written.



The destruction myths rely on either a single God or a pantheon with one head gid that sets all morality. Krynn is more like 3 separate pantheons with no "true morality" as each pantheon rewards its followers with eternal life and elevated positions for its faithful after death.


----------



## Tonguez

Rabulias said:


> Perhaps his transformation was disrupted in some way, leaving him is some half-orc/half-elf state? Maybe he is the result of the first attempts at creating orcs from elves long ago, and it just did not go 100%? This position and longevity could lead to him being named "father" by other orcs.



I was thinking may be the Orcs refer to him as Father because he quite literally is their Father - maybe the implication is that Orcs are’nt just corrupted elfs, they are the ‘true’ breed of elfs



Maxperson said:


> I took that to be an ignorant man seeing "omens" in something and taking it for Sauron's return.  He didn't strike me as someone with a lot of knowledge of what the signs of Sauron's return would be.



not so ignorant given he did have possession of the Hilt and knew what it could do. Maybe a low level servant of Morgoth who managed to recover the hilt and has kept the faith for a long long time.


----------



## RuinousPowers

I'm thinking Adar might have helped Morgoth create the orcs. Would be nice if there were a few BBEG other than Sauron around to keep things interesting.


----------



## Maxperson

RuinousPowers said:


> I'm thinking Adar might have helped Morgoth create the orcs. Would be nice if there were a few BBEG other than Sauron around to keep things interesting.



Morgoth had MANY fallen maia.  It would be pretty easy to give him some allies/servants from those unknown maia who were not Balrogs.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

RuinousPowers said:


> The destruction myths rely on either a single God or a pantheon with one head gid that sets all morality.



That is false. Most European pantheons, for instance, do not all agree with eachother or their “head god” on morality, yet most still have myths of their gods destroying stuff. 

There are _often_ gods who war with eachother. The real world just doesn’t have the idea of cosmic alignment like D&D. 


RuinousPowers said:


> Krynn is more like 3 separate pantheons with no "true morality" as each pantheon rewards its followers with eternal life and elevated positions for its faithful after death.



Okay?


----------



## wicked cool

Ok interesting episode but I have lots of questions
The elf at the tree battle story? Was that the current king
The king story a lie? 
The angelic people? These the same as gandolf 
The wargs in the forest? Were the wargs created by Sauron or mystery elf
The boat at the end. How many of these are actually Tolkien creations?


----------



## Aeson

I missed something, was The Stranger freezing his own arm/leg? After Nori ran away I noticed the trees moving. Did The Stranger cause it or were they speaking to each other?


----------



## Sacrosanct

So does the gauntlet of "father" pretty much prove that's Sauron?  I thought the prevailing theory he was a disgraced elf (name starts with an M, but I can't recall the whole thing.  Meaglin maybe?)


----------



## MarkB

I loved the walking song. Especially the echo of Bilbo's rhyme about Aragorn at the end, suggesting it's destined to survive being passed down through many generations of harfoots and hobbits.


----------



## Ryujin

When Elrond looks at his piece of Mithril and then turns to look at the sky, isn't that The Stranger's constellation that he's looking up at?


----------



## Kaodi

If Adar is one of the M-named Sons of Feanor that survived that would certainly be a twist. And it might even explain why he reacted to such hostility to the name of Sauron: Sauron was a willing servant of Morgoth, whereas the orcs are merely Morgoth's "creation" .

But in any case I came here to say that this plot line where if the elves do not get mithril they will wither away _in less than a year_ is just every kind of stupid. Like, the shows origin of mithril is interesting, if unnecessary. But this whole, "Wow, good thing we found this this year or we would all be toast," is just bloody insane.


----------



## Ryujin

I'm beginning to wonder if there isn't actually a dual timeline being run, as some have speculated. Perhaps what's happening in the Southlands was actually what happened in Halbrand's youth and why he's ashamed (because they bent the knee to "Father"). Is he Theo, grown up?

Doubtful, but it would have been an interesting way to go.


----------



## Davies

"I'm peril?"

"'Dangerous! ... And so am I, very dangerous: more dangerous than anything you will ever meet, unless you are brought alive before the seat of the Dark Lord."

We could still be getting herringed, but ...


----------



## Tonguez

Ryujin said:


> I'm beginning to wonder if there isn't actually a dual timeline being run, as some have speculated. Perhaps what's happening in the Southlands was actually what happened in Halbrand's youth and why he's ashamed (because they bent the knee to "Father"). Is he Theo, grown up?
> 
> Doubtful, but it would have been an interesting way to go.



Thats a kinda cool idea actually



Davies said:


> "I'm peril?"
> 
> "'Dangerous! ... And so am I, very dangerous: more dangerous than anything you will ever meet, unless you are brought alive before the seat of the Dark Lord."
> 
> We could still be getting herringed, but ...




yeah I thought that was a little too obvious so Im sure it was a misdirect.
has any character in the books displayed his ground strike type ability or the icy healing thing?

And does anyone know who the cultist types are Who were investigating the crater? Were the elfs?



wicked cool said:


> The wargs in the forest? Were the wargs created by Sauron or mystery elf



Wargs were a race _in service_ of Sauron but Tolkien doesnt say who created them, they may have been created by Morgoth or be some natural race of Middle-Earth


----------



## wicked cool

Aeson said:


> I missed something, was The Stranger freezing his own arm/leg? After Nori ran away I noticed the trees moving. Did The Stranger cause it or were they speaking to each other?



Not sure on trees but he was freezing away the wounds caused by magic on the wargs


----------



## billd91

Kaodi said:


> But in any case I came here to say that this plot line where if the elves do not get mithril they will wither away _in less than a year_ is just every kind of stupid. Like, the shows origin of mithril is interesting, if unnecessary. But this whole, "Wow, good thing we found this this year or we would all be toast," is just bloody insane.



yeah, I’m with you on that one. It can’t be anything as simple as mithril being extremely useful and they can make fantastically beautiful things with it. Some writer has to up the stakes and make it an existential necessity for the elves.


----------



## John R Davis

Liked the mithril origin story.
Could have inserted epic Balrog v Elf ( Glorfindel??) fight scene.
Elves now dying without it I am unsure on.

The 3 pale persons have names according to internet..they could be istari trying to find one of their own??


----------



## Paul Farquhar

John R Davis said:


> Elves now dying without it I am unsure on.



Is it even true? Gil Galad looked fishy to me. Gil Galad is Sauron would be a shock twist, and would fit with Adar's "everything you know is a lie" comment. Presumably it's meant to justify why the Three are needed and what they actually do.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

wicked cool said:


> The wargs in the forest? Were the wargs created by Sauron or mystery elf



They were created when a mummy and daddy warg got together...

Whilst they are often used by the forces of evil, wargs are just beasts.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

Waldreg? I thought his name was Baldric!


----------



## Paul Farquhar

MarkB said:


> So, what does the hilt do?



My guess: it's the key to making Mount Doom erupt, thus spreading darkness over the land and transforming it into Mordor.


----------



## AK81

billd91 said:


> yeah, I’m with you on that one. It can’t be anything as simple as mithril being extremely useful and they can make fantastically beautiful things with it. Some writer has to up the stakes and make it an existential necessity for the elves.



I don't think the story is true. I have a feeling that Sauron is in the background whispering lies to Gil-galad and Celebrimbor, and he probably need the mithril to create the rings.


----------



## Morrus

I'm starting to feel the nmber of mystery boxes is getting a little too much. In a story where we purportedly know who all the major players are going to be, we're wondering who the stranger, Adar, and Halbrand are, where/who is Sauron, what's the sword, etc. I'm hoping we get some answers to some of these soon.


----------



## Hussar

Morrus said:


> I'm starting to feel the nmber of mystery boxes is getting a little too much. In a story where we purportedly know who all the major players are going to be, we're wondering who the stranger, Adar, and Halbrand are, where/who is Sauron, what's the sword, etc. I'm hoping we get some answers to some of these soon.



Heh, well, they do have to fill 8 seasons with material.


----------



## Morrus

Hussar said:


> Heh, well, they do have to fill 8 seasons with material.



If I have to wait 8 years to get the answers to those questions, I'm not gonna make it!


----------



## MarkB

Ryujin said:


> I'm beginning to wonder if there isn't actually a dual timeline being run, as some have speculated. Perhaps what's happening in the Southlands was actually what happened in Halbrand's youth and why he's ashamed (because they bent the knee to "Father"). Is he Theo, grown up?
> 
> Doubtful, but it would have been an interesting way to go.



The issue there is that these characters all saw the Red Star, same as everyone else. Waldreg even thinks it's an omen of Sauron's return.

And sure, there could have been two separate Red Star events, but at that point the show's gone from simple misdirection to actively trolling the audience.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

Schrodinger's Red Star.


----------



## MarkB

Paul Farquhar said:


> My guess: it's the key to making Mount Doom erupt, thus spreading darkness over the land and transforming it into Mordor.



Quite possibly, yes. I wonder how much blood it's going to need to absorb to do that.


----------



## Ryujin

MarkB said:


> The issue there is that these characters all saw the Red Star, same as everyone else. Waldreg even thinks it's an omen of Sauron's return.
> 
> And sure, there could have been two separate Red Star events, but at that point the show's gone from simple misdirection to actively trolling the audience.



I don't see that as much of an issue. There are 5 Istari, plus Sauron, who could have all fallen.


----------



## billd91

Morrus said:


> If I have to wait 8 years to get the answers to those questions, I'm not gonna make it!



And unless it gets better, the show's not going to make it 8 years except as a Bezos vanity project.


----------



## Morrus

billd91 said:


> And unless it gets better, the show's not going to make it 8 years except as a Bezos vanity project.



 I think it's really good.


----------



## Zaukrie

Kaodi said:


> If Adar is one of the M-named Sons of Feanor that survived that would certainly be a twist. And it might even explain why he reacted to such hostility to the name of Sauron: Sauron was a willing servant of Morgoth, whereas the orcs are merely Morgoth's "creation" .
> 
> But in any case I came here to say that this plot line where if the elves do not get mithril they will wither away _in less than a year_ is just every kind of stupid. Like, the shows origin of mithril is interesting, if unnecessary. But this whole, "Wow, good thing we found this this year or we would all be toast," is just bloody insane.



I agree with you on mithral and their souls for sure. I expect it is another lie?


----------



## Arilyn

I'm pretty sure the mithral thing is a lie. "And they were all of them deceived." 
It's a con to get the rings in elven hands.


----------



## Morrus

So should we read anything into Poppy's song lyrics?

_(copy pasted from the internet - any mistakes are not mine!)_

The sun is fast fallin'
Beneath trees of stone
The light in the tower
No longer my home
Passed eyes of pale fire
Black sand for my bed
I trade all I've known
For the unknown ahead.

Call to me, call to me
Lands far away
For I must now wander
This wandering day
Away must I wander
This wandering day

Of drink I have little
And food I have less
My strength tells me no
But the path demands yes

My legs are so short
And the way is so long
I've no rest nor comfort
No comfort but song

Sing to me, sing to me
Lands far away
Oh rise up and guide me
This wandering day
Please promise you'll find me
This wandering day

At last comes their answer
Through cold and through frost
That not all who wonder
Or wander are lost
No matter the sorrow
No matter the cost
That not all who wonder
Or wander are lost


----------



## Ryujin

Morrus said:


> So should we read anything into Poppy's song lyrics?
> 
> _(copy pasted from the internet - any mistakes are not mine!)_
> 
> The sun is fast fallin'
> Beneath trees of stone
> The light in the tower
> No longer my home
> Passed eyes of pale fire
> Black sand for my bed
> I trade all I've known
> For the unknown ahead.
> 
> Call to me, call to me
> Lands far away
> For I must now wander
> This wandering day
> Away must I wander
> This wandering day
> 
> Of drink I have little
> And food I have less
> My strength tells me no
> But the path demands yes
> 
> My legs are so short
> And the way is so long
> I've no rest nor comfort
> No comfort but song
> 
> Sing to me, sing to me
> Lands far away
> Oh rise up and guide me
> This wandering day
> Please promise you'll find me
> This wandering day
> 
> At last comes their answer
> Through cold and through frost
> That not all who wonder
> Or wander are lost
> No matter the sorrow
> No matter the cost
> That not all who wonder
> Or wander are lost



Certainly makes it sound like they came out of Mordor, doesn't it? Unless someone else can think of where black sand and eyes of pale fire might be found, other than Mount Doom.


----------



## Morrus

Ryujin said:


> Certainly makes it sound like they came out of Mordor, doesn't it? Unless someone else can think of where black sand and eyes of pale fire might be found, other than Mount Doom.



Mount Doom hasn’t erupted at this point … is it even there?


----------



## FitzTheRuke

Paul Farquhar said:


> Waldreg? I thought his name was Baldric!



Well, his plan sure was 'cunning'.


----------



## Ryujin

Morrus said:


> Mount Doom hasn’t erupted at this point … is it even there?



Not that we know of, anyway. I was thinking that it's what is shown in the Mordor glyph, but Mount Doom is further north. I wonder if it was shown in the map that was in the Numenorian library? Worth going back for a look.


----------



## Hussar

Morrus said:


> If I have to wait 8 years to get the answers to those questions, I'm not gonna make it!




Not an X-files fan?


----------



## Olgar Shiverstone

Episode 5: What in the name of JRRT did I just watch? When did mithril become elven midichlorians?


----------



## Arilyn

Olgar Shiverstone said:


> Episode 5: What in the name of JRRT did I just watch? When did mithril become elven midichlorians?



I'm pretty sure this is a deceit. It's the way in to get the rings made and to con the elves into accepting them. The Enemy is using an elven legend to manipulate the elves. That better be what's going on!


----------



## Hriston

Morrus said:


> Mount Doom hasn’t erupted at this point … is it even there?



Bronwyn names Orodruin as a location in the area in episode four. I believe the line was something like, "... from here to Orodruin."


----------



## Ryujin

Hriston said:


> Bronwyn names Orodruin as a location in the area in episode four. I believe the line was something like, "... from here to Orodruin."



Good catch.


----------



## Hriston

wicked cool said:


> Ok interesting episode but I have lots of questions
> The elf at the tree battle story? Was that the current king



No, not explicitly. It was an unnamed elf. 



wicked cool said:


> The king story a lie?



We don't know. Elrond says it's believed to be apocryphal. 



wicked cool said:


> The angelic people? These the same as gandolf



I suppose you mean the people tracking the Stranger. I don't know who they are, but they seemed sinister to me rather than angelic. When you say "the same as Gandalf", I suppose you're asking if they're wizards? I don't know if the show writers have decided to have wizards exist in their version of the Second Age. 



wicked cool said:


> The wargs in the forest? Were the wargs created by Sauron or mystery elf



In Tolkien's legendarium, the Enemy cannot create but can only corrupt and pervert to his will that which is in the world. So the wargs in origin must have been derived from some naturally occurring species of wolves, perhaps dire wolves, but because they can talk, they must have been bred to be exceptionally intelligent or made to house some evil spirits. Perhaps they were sired by werewolves. 



wicked cool said:


> The boat at the end. How many of these are actually Tolkien creations?



In the legendarium, Elendil and Isildur do return to Middle-earth in three boats, but in that tale they are fleeing from the drowning of Númenor.


----------



## reelo

Just when I started to warm up and even look forward to the show, the showmakers take another dump on established canon. At every point of the history of Arda, the 3 Silmarilli are accounted for: After their theft by Morgoth they are all 3 in his iron crown until Beren steals one. That one goes to Thingol, then Dior, Elwing, Earendil.
The other 2 are taken from Morgoth by Eonwë (iirc) and are then stolen by Maedhros and Maglor. Since the jewels burn their hands, Maedhros throws himself into a fiery pit and Maglor throws his into the ocean. Thus, one stone is in the sky, one in the earth, and one in the sea. Elves would know this. The story with the tree, and the origin of Mithril is stupid, sorry.


----------



## wicked cool

Hriston said:


> No, not explicitly. It was an unnamed elf.
> 
> 
> We don't know. Elrond says it's believed to be apocryphal.
> 
> 
> I suppose you mean the people tracking the Stranger. I don't know who they are, but they seemed sinister to me rather than angelic. When you say "the same as Gandalf", I suppose you're asking if they're wizards? I don't know if the show writers have decided to have wizards exist in their version of the Second Age.
> 
> 
> In Tolkien's legendarium, the Enemy cannot create but can only corrupt and pervert to his will that which is in the world. So the wargs in origin must have been derived from some naturally occurring species of wolves, perhaps dire wolves, but because they can talk, they must have been bred to be exceptionally intelligent or made to house some evil spirits. Perhaps they were sired by werewolves.
> 
> 
> In the legendarium, Elendil and Isildur do return to Middle-earth in three boats, but in that tale they are fleeing from the drowning of Númenor.



Sorry angelic /sinister . Werent the wizards actually otherworldly beings


----------



## MarkB

reelo said:


> Just when I started to warm up and even look forward to the show, the showmakers take another dump on established canon. At every point of the history of Arda, the 3 Silmarilli are accounted for: After their theft by Morgoth they are all 3 in his iron crown until Beren steals one. That one goes to Thingol, then Dior, Elwing, Earendil.
> The other 2 are taken from Morgoth by Eonwë (iirc) and are then stolen by Maedhros and Maglor. Since the jewels burn their hands, Maedhros throws himself into a fiery pit and Maglor throws his into the ocean. Thus, one stone is in the sky, one in the earth, and one in the sea. Elves would know this. The story with the tree, and the origin of Mithril is stupid, sorry.



It surprises me that people are still being surprised by the showrunners taking liberties with established events. We know that they're doing this.

Note that it's not the power of the Silmaril itself that seeps down from the tree in this tale, but the combined powers that the elf and balrog were pouring into the tree. The Silmaril may still have ended up in the earth, sea or sky.

And also, this tale is obscure and apocryphal. It may turn out to be untrue within the show itself.


----------



## Maxperson

I hated the mithril creation story.  It takes Eru to create and a valar or maia working deliberately with power in order to make something change.  It doesn't just happen by accident.  I also concur with those who think the whole light of the elves fading unless they get mithril story is dumb.


----------



## Maxperson

Arilyn said:


> I'm pretty sure the mithral thing is a lie. "And they were all of them deceived."
> It's a con to get the rings in elven hands.



They were deceived by Sauron's fair visage and aid, not by some cockamamie story.  They made the rings in order to make their lands as beautiful as Valinor.  Elves love beauty.


----------



## billd91

MarkB said:


> It surprises me that people are still being surprised by the showrunners taking liberties with established events. We know that they're doing this.



It's less about surprised that they're taking liberties. We can all see that too. For me it's more of a question of the nature of the liberty being so... odd.



MarkB said:


> And also, this tale is obscure and apocryphal. It may turn out to be untrue within the show itself.



That doesn't necessarily make it any better since these are elves of significant intelligence and knowledge buying into it. Plus the idea of thousands of years of elves living through some pretty terrible wars with Morgoth and the damage he wrought to the environment, but they're suddenly facing extinction *now*?


----------



## Hriston

wicked cool said:


> Sorry angelic /sinister . Werent the wizards actually otherworldly beings



In origin, yes, they were Maiar, just like Sauron, who entered into the created world from the timeless halls of Ilúvatar at the beginning of time. In the Third Age, they were sent to Middle-earth from Valinor, which is also an "other world" of sorts, to aid the free peoples against the dark lord.


----------



## wicked cool

Hriston said:


> In origin, yes, they were Maiar, just like Sauron, who entered into the created world from the timeless halls of Ilúvatar at the beginning of time. In the Third Age, they were sent to Middle-earth from Valinor, which is also an "other world" of sorts, to aid the free peoples against the dark lord.



Ok so maybe these 3 are maiar


----------



## Ryujin

wicked cool said:


> Ok so maybe these 3 are maiar



They're all supposed to appear as older humans, but it's not like they haven't already gone off script for a lot of stuff.


----------



## Mallus

Maxperson said:


> I also concur with those who think the whole light of the elves fading unless they get mithril story is dumb.



This is a universe where a big spider eats the trees that are also the sun…

I like the idea the Elves think the light in mithril will help their fading from the world. It is presented as a desperate hope.


----------



## Maxperson

Mallus said:


> This is a universe where a big spider eats the trees that are also the sun…



I really dislike the argument that just because this fantasy thing happens, all fantasy things are okay.  THIS fantasy thing runs contrary to just about everything Tolkien wrote about the elves.  Eru didn't give them limited battery life.  They were eternal unless killed or they lost the will to live.


----------



## Hriston

wicked cool said:


> Ok so maybe these 3 are maiar



Maybe. They seemed more like devotees to me. There was something cultish about them.


----------



## Hriston

Ryujin said:


> They're all supposed to appear as older humans, but it's not like they haven't already gone off script for a lot of stuff.



Well, the wizards appeared that way. We’ve seen three of them in the Peter Jackson movies. The Stranger certainly appears to fit the mold. But other maiar might appear in different ways, including Sauron who was a shape shifter. As Annatar, however, he appeared as an emissary of the Valar, which is what the wizards actually were.


----------



## TheSword

Maxperson said:


> They were deceived by Sauron's fair visage and aid, not by some cockamamie story.  They made the rings in order to make their lands as beautiful as Valinor.  Elves love beauty.



I thought elves diminishing and going into the west was a theme?


----------



## Mercurius

Maxperson said:


> I really dislike the argument that just because this fantasy thing happens, all fantasy things are okay.  THIS fantasy thing runs contrary to just about everything Tolkien wrote about the elves.  Eru didn't give them limited battery life.  They were eternal unless killed or they lost the will to live.




Bezos Elves only bear slightly more resemblance to Tolkien Elves than Gygax Elves do (meaning, very little), that at this point it doesn't really matter. I don't even think they're trying to capture the vision of Tolkien, but rather just using his names and ideas to tell whatever story they are trying to tell. 

But yeah, the elves sort of essentialize just how far they're missing the mark - if the mark is to capture a Tolkien vibe - because elves were so central and dear to Tolkien, and these ain't them.


----------



## billd91

TheSword said:


> I thought elves diminishing and going into the west was a theme?



In the Third Age it is. The Second Age is more about the ones who stayed (after the big return to the West at the end of the First Age) picking up and establishing new lands and living in relative peace without the threat of Morgoth over them - for a while. The Second Age is far more about the deceptions and betrayals of Sauron and the corruption of men - thematically.


----------



## wicked cool

If the stranger is Sauron reborn are they taking a page out of dr who where sometimes the dr forgets who they are


----------



## Maxperson

TheSword said:


> I thought elves diminishing and going into the west was a theme?



In numbers. Not in light or power. They had been being killed off for millennia and made new elves slowly.


----------



## Hriston

wicked cool said:


> If the stranger is Sauron reborn are they taking a page out of dr who where sometimes the dr forgets who they are



It's more direct. They're taking a page from the LotR in which Gandalf the White forgets who he was when he was Gandalf the Grey.


----------



## Ryujin

wicked cool said:


> If the stranger is Sauron reborn are they taking a page out of dr who where sometimes the dr forgets who they are



Or a page out of the Lord of the Rings movies where Gandalf came back as Gandalf the White and needed a bit to remember who he was 

_EDIT_ - Damn. Have to remember to refresh the page


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Ryujin said:


> They're all supposed to appear as older humans, but it's not like they haven't already gone off script for a lot of stuff.



The Istari specifically appear as older humans when they are sent to help the people of middle earth in the 3rd age, to help with their diplomatic mission.


----------



## Morrus

reelo said:


> Just when I started to warm up and even look forward to the show, the showmakers take another dump on established canon. At every point of the history of Arda, the 3 Silmarilli are accounted for: After their theft by Morgoth they are all 3 in his iron crown until Beren steals one. That one goes to Thingol, then Dior, Elwing, Earendil.
> The other 2 are taken from Morgoth by Eonwë (iirc) and are then stolen by Maedhros and Maglor. Since the jewels burn their hands, Maedhros throws himself into a fiery pit and Maglor throws his into the ocean. Thus, one stone is in the sky, one in the earth, and one in the sea. Elves would know this. The story with the tree, and the origin of Mithril is stupid, sorry.



See, there's two potential audiences for this show, and you're in the wrong one.

I literally don't care whether a superhero movie matches the comics exactly, or the new Bond flick is a literal translation of the Fleming novel, or whether Game of Thrones was identical to the books. It just doesn't matter to me.

And it doesn't matter to me whether this adaption of a literary work is faithful to the original (expecially something I'm never going to read!), as long as it's good. And so far, I'm liking it.

Those who expect direct faithfulness to the original book/comic/whatever are sadly in for disappointment after disappointment when it comes to movies and TV, because they never are. And that's OK. Things get adapted, whether they're Tolkien, 007, Marvel, or anything else.


----------



## Mercurius

Morrus said:


> See, there's two potential audiences for this show, and you're in the wrong one.
> 
> I literally don't care whether a superhero movie matches the comics exactly, or the new Bond flick is a literal translation of the Fleming novel, or whether Game of Thrones was identical to the books. It just doesn't matter to me.
> 
> And it doesn't matter to me whether this adaption of a literary work is faithful to the original (expecially something I'm never going to read!), as long as it's good. And so far, I'm liking it.
> 
> Those who expect direct faithfulness to the original book/comic/whatever are sadly in for disappointment after disappointment when it comes to movies and TV, because they never are. And that's OK. Things get adapted, whether they're Tolkien, 007, Marvel, or anything else.



Using words and phrases like "exactly" and "direct faithfulness" implies more stringency than I've seen people asking for. Sure, some Tolkien fans want it to be as accurate as possible, but I think most just want it to _feel _like Tolkien - to be "in the spirit of" Tolkien, and to follow the lore in a general way. Like Peter Jackson's first trilogy. I think, for many/most serious Tolkien fans it is missing that mark widely - and as I said above, the elves particularly highlight that.

But yeah, I also hear a lot of critical reviews saying "I'd be happy enough if it was good, but it isn't." Meaning, criticisms of the show aren't only about how accurately it adapts Tolkien, but the merits of the show itself - the plotting, acting, dialogue, etc.

Now of course there's nothing wrong with people enjoying it, for whatever reasons they're enjoying it. But the reverse is true, also, and I wouldn't reduce their unhappiness with the show to being overly rigid about how faithfully it adapts Tolkien.


----------



## Morrus

Mercurius said:


> Now of course there's nothing wrong with people enjoying it, for whatever reasons they're enjoying it. But the reverse is true, also, and I wouldn't reduce their unhappiness with the show to being overly rigid about how faithfully it adapts Tolkien.



I mean, I was literally replying to a person who was talking about how it differed from Tolkien.


----------



## Mercurius

Morrus said:


> I mean, I was literally replying to a person who was talking about how it differed from Tolkien.



Yes, but there's the matter of degree. It is one thing to expect Rings of Power to be "exact" and quite another to hope it will at least be in the spirit of Tolkien's vision.


----------



## Rabulias

doctorbadwolf said:


> The Istari specifically appear as older humans when they are sent to help the people of middle earth in the 3rd age, to help with their diplomatic mission.



Maybe they appear differently in their mission in the Second Age (if this is them). I know everyone has said the Istari came to Middle Earth in the Third Age, but does anything say that was their _first_ visit to Middle Earth?


----------



## Morrus

Mercurius said:


> Yes, but there's the matter of degree. It is one thing to expect Rings of Power to be "exact" and quite another to hope it will at least be in the spirit of Tolkien's vision.



That's far too semantical a conversation for my interest. Pick a word more to your liking and pretend I said that.


----------



## Mercurius

Morrus said:


> That's far too semantical a conversation for my interest. Pick a word more to your liking and pretend I said that.



I always love the snark, Morrus. My apologies for trying to bring nuance and specificity to the conversation.


----------



## wicked cool

Mercurius said:


> Yes, but there's the matter of degree. It is one thing to expect Rings of Power to be "exact" and quite another to hope it will at least be in the spirit of Tolkien's vision.



Exactly it’s like captain America has a sword instead of a shield  or how blade runner was very different from the book. I am one whose not expecting an exact match but at the same time I want established lore to be recognizable. Right now we have people on these boards who are thoroughly confused on what’s going on. It’s fine that some are enjoying for what it is but for me it’s borderline what is this


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots

wicked cool said:


> Right now we have people on these boards who are thoroughly confused on what’s going on.



I'm not sure the show is confusing, so much as it has mysteries and when one brings book knowledge to the TV show, the clash of expectations is confusing.

It has become increasingly clear that the show isn't adhering to the timeline from LotR and that some characters have moved around. Coming to it fresh, as my wife has, it's been a pretty straightforward show, beyond intentional mysteries like the Stranger's identity and which of 10,000 candidates is Sauron. (My guess is none of them.)


----------



## reelo

Morrus said:


> I mean, I was literally replying to a person who was talking about how it differed from Tolkien.



There's literally an entire book about what happened to/with the Silmarils. They are one of the central elements of the First Age. This is not "changing some minor thing" like compressing the timeline.


----------



## Eric V

wicked cool said:


> *Exactly it’s like captain America has a sword instead of a shield*  or how blade runner was very different from the book. I am one whose not expecting an exact match but at the same time I want established lore to be recognizable. Right now we have people on these boards who are thoroughly confused on what’s going on. It’s fine that some are enjoying for what it is but for me it’s borderline what is this



!!!?

No, it really isn't...at least not to the 4 people living here who are watching this.  It feels suitably like it's got the "spirit of Tolkien's vision."  Not that that is hard to do, since that's a very ambiguous phrase in the first place.


----------



## Ryujin

reelo said:


> There's literally an entire book about what happened to/with the Silmarils. They are one of the central elements of the First Age. This is not "changing some minor thing" like compressing the timeline.



Indeed, there is. And that particular work of fiction, and its contents, are excluded from the material that they can use in making this show.


----------



## wicked cool

Eric V said:


> !!!?
> 
> No, it really isn't...at least not to the 4 people living here who are watching this.  It feels suitably like it's got the "spirit of Tolkien's vision."  Not that that is hard to do, since that's a very ambiguous phrase in the first place.



I’m not saying it’s a horrible show but does it really have the spirit of Tolkien. 
-we now have a new mysterious race of being hunting down a stranger who unlike gandolf  (when he came back grey/white) can’t talk and is using powers not seen on the Tolkien universe or mentioned
-mithril might now be basically medicine for elves . Never mentioned before and Gillis reaction to it made it sound like he had never seen it never mind nobody saying hey remember when the elves lied/told the truth about a miracle cure
-we have an evil elf. There is no recognition from another elf on who he could be

It almost feels like a property that’s gone public so they can call it lotr but would the original author approve? If they walked into
A coffee shop and we were talking would they even recognize what we were talking about


----------



## Mercurius

Hey folks, a suggestion. Why don't we take criticisms elsewhere? Here are a few options:

I Didn't Comment In Another Thread

House of Dragons vs. Rings of Power (poll)

House of Dragons vs Rings of Power (and a bit of Wheel of Time)

While I have my criticisms of the show (and have voiced them here a bit and elsewhere), I just want to be cognizant and respectful of the fact that this is supposed to be a (+) thread. Let's not muddy the pool for those who are enjoying the show.


----------



## billd91

Ryujin said:


> Indeed, there is. And that particular work of fiction, and its contents, are excluded from the material that they can use in making this show.



They cannot directly use that material, true. But they also can't egregiously contradict it, according to the showrunners. That said, I'm not sure what the recourse would be if the Tolkien estate thought that elements of the show egregiously did contradict something deemed sufficiently important.


----------



## Eric V

wicked cool said:


> I’m not saying it’s a horrible show but does it really have the spirit of Tolkien.
> -we now have a new mysterious race of being hunting down a stranger who unlike gandolf  (when he came back grey/white) can’t talk and is using powers not seen on the Tolkien universe or mentioned
> -mithril might now be basically medicine for elves . Never mentioned before and Gillis reaction to it made it sound like he had never seen it never mind nobody saying hey remember when the elves lied/told the truth about a miracle cure
> -we have an evil elf. There is no recognition from another elf on who he could be
> 
> It almost feels like a property that’s gone public so they can call it lotr but would the original author approve? If they walked into
> A coffee shop and we were talking would they even recognize what we were talking about



I don't know...there are no hard-and-fast rules about what, exactly, the Stranger can do, or his nature, so it feels weird saying this-or-that is inconsistent with the spirit of ME.  Mithril _might _be medicine for elves...or something else entirely.  I feel it's a bit early for any reaction to it.  I have no issues with evil elves, especially since there's that story that the original orcs were corrupted elves.

The grandeur, the suspicions between peoples, the subtle but living magic in the world...feels Tolkien to me.


----------



## reelo

Ryujin said:


> Indeed, there is. And that particular work of fiction, and its contents, are excluded from the material that they can use in making this show.



As billd91 already said







billd91 said:


> They cannot directly use that material, true. But they also can't egregiously contradict it, according to the showrunners. That said, I'm not sure what the recourse would be if the Tolkien estate thought that elements of the show egregiously did contradict something deemed sufficiently important.



...according to their own words, the showrunners are both forbidden to _use_ material from the Silmarillion AND to blatantly contradict it! I can understand that this is an uncomfortable situation for the writers to be in, but I think they've maneuvered themselves on thin ice.
At the very least they are stretching the definition of "contradicting" quite a bit, imho.


----------



## Ryujin

reelo said:


> As billd91 already said...according to their own words, the showrunners are both forbidden to _use_ material from the Silmarillion AND to blatantly contradict it! I can understand that this is an uncomfortable situation for the writers to be in, but I think they've maneuvered themselves on thin ice.
> At the very least they are stretching the definition of "contradicting" quite a bit, imho.



As I said previously, it's an impossible tightrope to walk. The only way that I can see them doing it is by being additive to the lore, rather than referencing it.


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots

Eric V said:


> Mithril _might _be medicine for elves...or something else entirely.  I feel it's a bit early for any reaction to it.



Yeah, even elf kings can be wrong. In fact, when you're talking about big mythic characters like these, the audience should _expect_ huge mistakes, as we're currently barreling toward in Numenor.

"Whoops, it's just a bitchin' mineral" wouldn't be a shocking turn of events, especially if it means enmity between dwarves and elves for millennia over a mistaken hunch. Now THAT's epic and mythic. (Remember: The Trojan War started with a cringe-worthy beauty contest.)


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots

reelo said:


> At the very least they are stretching the definition of "contradicting" quite a bit, imho.



The season and the series aren't over, and the estate apparently signed off on what they're doing. It's likely that things are more (and less) than what they seem at this point.


----------



## billd91

Ryujin said:


> As I said previously, it's an impossible tightrope to walk. The only way that I can see them doing it is by being additive to the lore, rather than referencing it.



Oh, I don't know that it's quite that hard. And yes, being additive would be one way to handle things - and they've certainly done that with events in the local communities around the lands that will become Mordor and with the migratory Harfoots. Dealing with known characters could be harder, but the Second Age is fairly undetailed except for names of Numenorean kings and a few bits on the timeline (which, I might add, has been pretty thoroughly tossed out the window). There's room for a LOT of non-contradictory detail and drama.

Edit: That wouldn't mean that all additions are good and not WTF/headscratch worthy. I've got a few of those going right now in certain plotlines of the show that are *REALLY *dragging it down, in my estimation, in ways that other additions are not.


----------



## MarkB

wicked cool said:


> I’m not saying it’s a horrible show but does it really have the spirit of Tolkien.
> -we now have a new mysterious race of being hunting down a stranger who unlike gandolf  (when he came back grey/white) can’t talk and is using powers not seen on the Tolkien universe or mentioned



Introducing new mysterious characters and having powerful characters showing unusual powers is very much in keeping with Tolkien storytelling. It happens all the time in The Lord of the Rings and The Hobbit.


wicked cool said:


> -mithril might now be basically medicine for elves . Never mentioned before and Gillis reaction to it made it sound like he had never seen it never mind nobody saying hey remember when the elves lied/told the truth about a miracle cure



Quite possibly factually contradictory, but contradictory to the spirit of Tolkien's work? Introducing a plot device that brings the mutual mistrust and divisiveness between elves and dwarves into sharp focus so that we can explore it within the course of a single show is good storytelling, and very reminiscent of the Arkenstone sharpening the divisiveness driving the disputes between dwarves, men and elves over the Lonely Mountain in The Hobbit.


wicked cool said:


> -we have an evil elf. There is no recognition from another elf on who he could be



Do all elves recognise each other by sight?


----------



## Ryujin

billd91 said:


> Oh, I don't know that it's quite that hard. And yes, being additive would be one way to handle things - and they've certainly done that with events in the local communities around the lands that will become Mordor and with the migratory Harfoots. Dealing with known characters could be harder, but the Second Age is fairly undetailed except for names of Numenorean kings and a few bits on the timeline (which, I might add, has been pretty thoroughly tossed out the window). There's room for a LOT of non-contradictory detail and drama.
> 
> Edit: That wouldn't mean that all additions are good and not WTF/headscratch worthy. I've got a few of those going right now in certain plotlines of the show that are *REALLY *dragging it down, in my estimation, in ways that other additions are not.



I'm thinking of it from the standpoint of having to know all the material that you can't use, so that you don't contradict it, but you also can't incorporate any of it in the final work. "Impossible" might be over stating it a bit, but not a lot.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Rabulias said:


> Maybe they appear differently in their mission in the Second Age (if this is them). I know everyone has said the Istari came to Middle Earth in the Third Age, but does anything say that was their _first_ visit to Middle Earth?



Not what I recall, but I’m sure someone with a less hole-ridden memory can tell us if there is anything.


----------



## Sepulchrave II

Rabulias said:


> Maybe they appear differently in their mission in the Second Age (if this is them). I know everyone has said the Istari came to Middle Earth in the Third Age, but does anything say that was their _first_ visit to Middle Earth?



In _Unfinished Tales_ Tolkien places the two Blue Wizards in the Third Age along with Gandalf, Saruman and Radagast. They are named Alatar and Pallando.

In _The Peoples of Middle-Earth_, Tolkien places the two Blue Wizards in the Second Age. This is from a later period of the evolution of the legendarium, but was published many years after _Unfinished Tales_ and so is, in some sense, less "canonical" - but in a different sense, more so. Their names are changed to Morinehtar and Rómestámo.


----------



## Zardnaar

Better episode this week I quite liked it. 

 With adaptions I don't like them contradicting big plot points bjust because. I do expect them to gloss over some things, drop other thing tweak dialogue, add new stuff etc.

 I'm not familiar with the source material (Bored of the Rings). Some of these episodes have been quite faithful in that aspect.

 Mountain go boom that's Mount Doom pre Mordor forming?


----------



## Ryujin

Zardnaar said:


> Better episode this week I quite liked it.
> 
> With adaptions I don't like them contradicting big plot points bjust because. I do expect them to gloss over some things, drop other thing tweak dialogue, add new stuff etc.
> 
> I'm not familiar with the source material (Bored of the Rings). Some of these episodes have been quite faithful in that aspect.
> 
> Mountain go boom that's Mount Doom pre Mordor forming?



There is, in fact, a parody called "Bored of the Rings." I once found a copy at a local library, but it has undoubtedly been out of print for a long time.









						Bored of the Rings - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org


----------



## Aeson

The fight between Arondir and the orc is a good example of STR vs DEX. If you're relying on dex don't let the strong guy get a hold of you.


----------



## Mallus

Maxperson said:


> I really dislike the argument that just because this fantasy thing happens, all fantasy things are okay.



That's not really what I meant. I thought the show's explanation of mithril seemed of a piece with Ungoliant, Telperion, Laurelin et al. Mythic. The sort of thing that wouldn't seem out of place in a Scandinavian saga. Sufficiently Tolkien-esque. 

I wouldn't feel the same way about the inclusion of, say, a Final Fantasy summon.


----------



## Maxperson

Mallus said:


> That's not really what I meant. I thought the show's explanation of mithril seemed of a piece with Ungoliant, Telperion, Laurelin et al. Mythic. The sort of thing that wouldn't seem out of place in a Scandinavian saga. Sufficiently Tolkien-esque.
> 
> I wouldn't feel the same way about the inclusion of, say, a Final Fantasy summon.



I still don't agree with you on this particular change, but thanks for the clarification.


----------



## wicked cool

This show has some good moments but once again just horrible story writing/special effects/plot holes
-the key. There’s no way it gets out of the village
-the strategy of giving up the keep for the village
-the water for mount doom. So every time it rains a volcano should blow?
-the acting of Galadriel wanting to murder all the orcs and then stops the king when at the same time the hunting elf talks to the boy about removing rage
-night time special effects. As bad at times as got was but then at times it’s good 
-the humans decide to build weapons after they destroy the keep?

Much more but this show could be so much better . This is zena Saturday night with a better budget


----------



## Rabulias

If Halbrand is not Sauron, they really are red herringing him heavily, IMO. His rage at Adar (assuming Adar's story is true) and his return as "king of the Southlands" just as Adar's plan for an orc homeland comes to pass are both additional points. On top of the fact that he is a smith, the Halbrand = "halfsword" bit, and the twisted irony of Galadriel (of all people) unwittingly facilitating his return.


----------



## MarkB

wicked cool said:


> This show has some good moments but once again just horrible story writing/special effects/plot holes
> -the key. There’s no way it gets out of the village



Why not? The Numenorians were hunting down orcs, not humans. It'd be easy for a single human to slip away in the chaos of their arrival.


wicked cool said:


> -the strategy of giving up the keep for the village



The villagers had no knowledge of any force coming to aid them, so being besieged in a keep was slow death even if the orcs didn't immediately break in. They couldn't outlast the orc army, they had to destroy it, and the self-destructing keep was the cheapest way to take out a huge portion of it.


wicked cool said:


> -the water for mount doom. So every time it rains a volcano should blow?



No - that was the whole point of what the orcs have been doing all this time. Digging the tunnels and trenches, not as a means of reaching the villagers with cover from the sun, but as a channel to direct a huge deluge of water directly into the lava chamber.


----------



## Tonguez

wicked cool said:


> This show has some good moments but once again just horrible story writing/special effects/plot holes
> -the water for mount doom. So every time it rains a volcano should blow?



a massive amount of water poured directly into lava will infact cause an explosion, that explosion then triggering an eruption is plausible given enough water. Rain tends not to reach lava chambers so suspension of disbeleif applies to the Orcs being able to dig a canal to carry enough water to do that predictably but not to the theory itself.

The bigger issue is how is Galadriel surviving being hit by a 1500 degree pyroclastic blast?

Also I like Adar, does anyone else feel some sympathy for his Uruk children? Sure they triggered mount doom to achieve it, but they’re just wanting to find a home like everyone else…


----------



## MarkB

Tonguez said:


> Also I like Adar, does anyone else feel some sympathy for his Uruk children? Sure they triggered mount doom to achieve it, but they’re just wanting to find a home like everyone else…



Taking a home is not the same as finding a home.


----------



## wicked cool

MarkB said:


> Why not? The Numenorians were hunting down orcs, not humans. It'd be easy for a single human to slip away in the chaos of their arrival.
> 
> The villagers had no knowledge of any force coming to aid them, so being besieged in a keep was slow death even if the orcs didn't immediately break in. They couldn't outlast the orc army, they had to destroy it, and the self-destructing keep was the cheapest way to take out a huge portion of it.
> 
> No - that was the whole point of what the orcs have been doing all this time. Digging the tunnels and trenches, not as a means of reaching the villagers with cover from the sun, but as a channel to direct a huge deluge of water directly into the lava chamber.



Ever see a keelgiven up before with a village full of peasants? They wouldn’t be thinking about long term food as you takes wagon and all your livestock

Also the ships were not big enough for a horse army 

Looked up lava and water real world explosions. Doesn’t do that

The artifact/key was not in his control and for him to switch out with an exact disguise was just not great


----------



## MarkB

wicked cool said:


> Ever see a keelgiven up before with a village full of peasants? They wouldn’t be thinking about long term food as you takes wagon and all your livestock



They were already thinking in those terms - they knew they were almost out of food, we'd had the whole desperately-scavenging-the-hills-and-town scenes in a previous episode. They were entirely aware that if they allowed themselves to become trapped in the tower they'd starve.


wicked cool said:


> Looked up lava and water real world explosions. Doesn’t do that



So it's lucky this isn't the real world, then. Honestly, are you expecting real-world engineering solutions for triggering volcanoes? Those aren't a thing.


wicked cool said:


> The artifact/key was not in his control and for him to switch out with an exact disguise was just not great



Huh? Adar had recovered the hilt, and the last thing he did before the cavalry arrived was to instruct Walgren to do something for him. Then he rides off with the fake hilt as a distraction, providing Walgren the perfect opportunity to slip away.


----------



## Olgar Shiverstone

I'm not following how it was night in the village and simultaneously just beyond dawn for the Numenoreans riding in from the West.

I'm thinking I preferred the Hobbit trilogy right about now.


----------



## wicked cool

MarkB said:


> They were already thinking in those terms - they knew they were almost out of food, we'd had the whole desperately-scavenging-the-hills-and-town scenes in a previous episode. They were entirely aware that if they allowed themselves to become trapped in the tower they'd starve.
> 
> So it's lucky this isn't the real world, then. Honestly, are you expecting real-world engineering solutions for triggering volcanoes? Those aren't a thing.
> 
> Huh? Adar had recovered the hilt, and the last thing he did before the cavalry arrived was to instruct Walgren to do something for him. Then he rides off with the fake hilt as a distraction, providing Walgren the perfect opportunity to slip away.



You have a point on the volcano and maybe the key but the defense of the village was poor. The elf would have known there were more orcs based on his time in the tunnels
It’s just not good writing. The elf had enough time to booby trap the entire keep but not to instruct the villagers to have weapons ready. He’s basically military so he would know


----------



## Tonguez




----------



## MarkB

wicked cool said:


> You have a point on the volcano and maybe the key but the defense of the village was poor. The elf would have known there were more orcs based on his time in the tunnels



Oh, he did, and he accounted for them. What he didn't account for was Adar's ruse of using the defector villagers as shock troops.


wicked cool said:


> It’s just not good writing. The elf had enough time to booby trap the entire keep but not to instruct the villagers to have weapons ready. He’s basically military so he would know



I'm pretty sure the tower always had that self-collapsing keystone mechanism built into it, as a last-ditch failsafe. All he had to rig was the block to shut the door.


----------



## Ryujin

Olgar Shiverstone said:


> I'm not following how it was night in the village and simultaneously just beyond dawn for the Numenoreans riding in from the West.
> 
> I'm thinking I preferred the Hobbit trilogy right about now.



Dawn comes fast in the mountains, when you're in a valley.


----------



## MarkB

So, what do we think was the significance of Arondir putting the seeds in Bronwyn's wounds? Just a makeshift healing salve, or is she going to get weird plant powers or side effects?

On that note, I thought it was an interesting detail that Adar, despite his departure from most Elven ways, still held to the tradition of planting seeds before the battle, just as Arondir did.


----------



## Tonguez

MarkB said:


> On that note, I thought it was an interesting detail that Adar, despite his departure from most Elven ways, still held to the tradition of planting seeds before the battle, just as Arondir did.




Yeah I did like that, maybe it feeds in to Adars comment when he first met Arondil the nature of the Orcs isnt what Arondil has been taught to believe - ie implying Elves and Uruk arent so different


----------



## Paul Farquhar

MarkB said:


> So, what do we think was the significance of Arondir putting the seeds in Bronwyn's wounds?



Ranger casts _Cure Wounds_ using a material component.

Is Arondir going to start changing into an orc now he has swallowed orc blood?

It seems unlikely that Adar was lying about backstabbing Sauron, but we also know Sauron's essence can reform. That points the finger directly at The Stranger.

Talking of lying, my insight check tells me Halbrand is lying about being the rightful king.

And Galadriel failed to mention she's married.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

MarkB said:


> Adar had recovered the hilt, and the last thing he did before the cavalry arrived was to instruct Baldric to do something for him. Then he rides off with the fake hilt as a distraction, providing Baldric the perfect opportunity to slip away.



A cunning plan!


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots

Paul Farquhar said:


> It seems unlikely that Adar was lying about backstabbing Sauron, but we also know Sauron's essence can reform. That points the finger directly at The Stranger.



Halband flat-out asked Adar if he recognized him, while furiously holding a spear at Adar's neck.

Sauron is either Halbrand or is riding him in a form of possession, which would explain both Halbrand's savagery back in Numenor (where Sauron was supposed to appear in a fair form) and why Halbrand seems tormented by some of the things he's done (under Sauron's influence).


----------



## Maxperson

Whizbang Dustyboots said:


> Halband flat-out asked Adar if he recognized him, while furiously holding a spear at Adar's neck.
> 
> Sauron is either Halbrand or is riding him in a form of possession, which would explain both Halbrand's savagery back in Numenor (where Sauron was supposed to appear in a fair form) and why Halbrand seems tormented by some of the things he's done (under Sauron's influence).



There exists the possibility that Halbrand was tortured and/or enslaved by Adar when he was younger or a child, and that's what he was referring to with that question.


----------



## Mallus

Maxperson said:


> There exists the possibility that Halbrand was tortured and/or enslaved by Adar when he was younger or a child, and that's what he was referring to with that question.



That’s how I read it.


----------



## RuinousPowers

The biggest problem with this episode is one that will never go away- there is never enough money to do the effects you want. They tried hard to make it a truly epic battle (as befitting the creation of Mount Doom/Mordor), but it looked more like an orc raid on a small village. 

Overall though, I am enjoying it more than the other fantasy options atm.


----------



## Tonguez

RuinousPowers said:


> The biggest problem with this episode is one that will never go away- there is never enough money to do the effects you want. They tried hard to make it a truly epic battle (as befitting the creation of Mount Doom/Mordor), but it looked more like an orc raid on a small village.
> 
> Overall though, I am enjoying it more than the other fantasy options atm.




Um it literally is an Orc raid on a small village, the only trained warrior is Arondil. We know now that even the Orcs are a rebel faction who escaped Sauron.

The only epicness was the cavalry charge and the volcano exploding - which was kinda epic. I’d have liked more from the dam bursting and flooding through the valley butoh well - It may be that we have become use to seeing big Hollywood spectacle that we arent getting from these TV series.

But yes I am enjoying it nonetheless


----------



## Paul Farquhar

Whizbang Dustyboots said:


> Halband flat-out asked Adar if he recognized him, while furiously holding a spear at Adar's neck.
> 
> Sauron is either Halbrand or is riding him in a form of possession, which would explain both Halbrand's savagery back in Numenor (where Sauron was supposed to appear in a fair form) and why Halbrand seems tormented by some of the things he's done (under Sauron's influence).



And in the same conversation, Adar taunts Halbrand about the fate of his family. I can't imagine Sauron ever having a family, let alone caring about their fate.

Also, Galadriel witnesses that entire conversation.

My view is Halbrand was a _servant_ of Sauron, possibly more loyal than Adar. I have become reasonably convinced that the internet theory that he will become the King of the Oathbreakers is correct. With the compressed timeline, he has already met Isildur!

The sigil/map appears to show TWO volcanoes. Mount Doom, and another somewhere in the White Mountains, presumably intended to cover future Gondor and Rohan in darkness. It could even be close to the location of Dimholt. The focus of Galadriel's party (including Halbrand and Isildur) will presumably switch to preventing this eruption.


----------



## RuinousPowers

Tonguez said:


> Um it literally is an Orc raid on a small village, the only trained warrior is Arondil. We know now that even the Orcs are a rebel faction who escaped Sauron.
> 
> The only epicness was the cavalry charge and the volcano exploding - which was kinda epic. I’d have liked more from the dam bursting and flooding through the valley butoh well - It may be that we have become use to seeing big Hollywood spectacle that we arent getting from these TV series.
> 
> But yes I am enjoying it nonetheless



So, your stance is that 100 orcs and a handful of slaves dug all those tunnels?


----------



## Ryujin

RuinousPowers said:


> So, your stance is that 100 orcs and a handful of slaves dug all those tunnels?



Maybe that's all that was left, after they had a keep dropped on them?


----------



## Paul Farquhar

RuinousPowers said:


> So, your stance is that 100 orcs and a handful of slaves dug all those tunnels?



They have been at it for centuries.


----------



## ART!

Paul Farquhar said:


> They have been at it for centuries.



It would take that long if all you had was 100 orcs.


----------



## ART!

Mallus said:


> That's not really what I meant. I thought the show's explanation of mithril seemed of a piece with Ungoliant, Telperion, Laurelin et al. Mythic. The sort of thing that wouldn't seem out of place in a Scandinavian saga. Sufficiently Tolkien-esque.



Yes, and it may be that _Someone_ has taken advantage of that mythic-level truth to manipulate some key elves. Elrond said out loud that the story was apocryphal, and he seemed super dubious about the whole thing.


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots

Maxperson said:


> There exists the possibility that Halbrand was tortured and/or enslaved by Adar when he was younger or a child, and that's what he was referring to with that question.



I think they're intentionally playing with that tension. But the juxtaposition of Adar saying he killed Sauron and Halbrand being _furious_ in a way we've never seen feels like something they want people to be picking up on.


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots

Paul Farquhar said:


> And in the same conversation, Adar taunts Halbrand about the fate of his family. I can't imagine Sauron ever having a family, let alone caring about their fate.



Adar doesn't know who it is he's talking to. He's just assuming, based on the fact that, yeah, he's killed a lot of families, and periodically, optimistic humans think they're going to kill him because of it.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

Whizbang Dustyboots said:


> Adar doesn't know who it is he's talking to. He's just assuming, based on the fact that, yeah, he's killed a lot of families, and periodically, optimistic humans think they're going to kill him because of it.



If that was the case, Halbrand wouldn't have reacted.


----------



## Maxperson

Whizbang Dustyboots said:


> I think they're intentionally playing with that tension. But the juxtaposition of Adar saying he killed Sauron and Halbrand being _furious_ in a way we've never seen feels like something they want people to be picking up on.



Yeah, but I think(I really hope) that Adar is lying and is just doing Sauron's bidding by saying that. He'd have as much chance of killing Sauron(even pre-ring) as I do of winning a fight against Mike Tyson in his prime.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

Maxperson said:


> Yeah, but I think(I really hope) that Adar is lying and is just doing Sauron's bidding by saying that. He'd have as much chance of killing Sauron(even pre-ring) as I do of winning a fight against Mike Tyson in his prime.



I suspect that you could have killed Mike Tyson had you stabbed him in the back.

And Adar isn't just some dude, he is one of the Noldor. He is on the same level as Galadriel, and she is pretty confident she can kick Sauron's butt if she can catch him.


----------



## Zaukrie

That was a great episode. For some reason, people seem to be looking for reasons, often ridiculously minor, not to like the show. That had nearly everything people ask for in a fantasy show. It also had that war is hell feel Tolkien went for with the mountain exploding.


----------



## Zaukrie

I'm curious.......for those of you that seem to hate the show, why do you keep watching it and posting about every little thing that is wrong about it?


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully

That was a good episode. Lots of twists and turns. Of course, also extremely furtious timing... But that's definitely LotR stuff, I'd say.


----------



## Ryujin

Mustrum_Ridcully said:


> That was a good episode. Lots of twists and turns. Of course, also extremely furtious timing... But that's definitely LotR stuff, I'd say.



Whatever would writers do for suspense, if they couldn't make the bomb stop with one second left on the timer?


----------



## MarkB

Mustrum_Ridcully said:


> That was a good episode. Lots of twists and turns. Of course, also extremely furtious timing... But that's definitely LotR stuff, I'd say.



It's only fortuitous timing for the handful of villagers that were left, the ones we've been shown and asked to care about. It was awful timing for everyone else in the entire region.


----------



## Ryujin

MarkB said:


> It's only fortuitous timing for the handful of villagers that were left, the ones we've been shown and asked to care about. It was awful timing for everyone else in the entire region.



Yup. All of the people from surrounding villages had either been killed or enslaved, with a few refugees making it to Tirharad. They were the last hold-outs.


----------



## Tonguez

RuinousPowers said:


> So, your stance is that 100 orcs and a handful of slaves dug all those tunnels?



Tolkien never specified how long Orcs live, but Adar had been with Morgoth in the first age. Tolkiens Orcs are also almost as good at digging as dwarfs - so I think that there were more Orcs but that the tunnels have been dug over generations (possibly for 1000 years) 

and as Ryujin said, many more were killed in the tower collapse


----------



## TheSword

I thought the reveals around Adar and him literally being the father of the orcs was very well done. We’re seeing a new side to Tolkein orcs that doesn’t in any way reduce the horror, but showing glimpses of pathos. In fact it increases the horror. Seeing that tortured elf/orc/uruk and knowing that the orcs were fathered… not bred. Is powerful.

The creation of mount doom was cool. I particularly like how the sword hilt when entered into the keyhole looks just like Barad Dur. The defense of the ancient keep and the damn was a nice detail. I’m really looking forward to how they finish things off… presumably reveals about the stranger who is clearly Sauron. I don’t know where people are getting the Halbrand-Sauron idea from - when it is so clear that he is the stranger.


----------



## RuinousPowers

TheSword said:


> I thought the reveals around Adar and him literally being the father of the orcs was very well done. We’re seeing a new side to Tolkein orcs that doesn’t in any way reduce the horror, but showing glimpses of pathos. In fact it increases the horror. Seeing that tortured elf/orc/uruk and knowing that the orcs were fathered… not bred. Is powerful.
> 
> The creation of mount doom was cool. I particularly like how the sword holy when entered into the keyhole looks just like Barad Dur. The defense of the ancient keep and the damn was a nice detail. I’m really looking forward to how they finish things off… presumably reveals about the stranger who is clearly Sauron. I don’t know where people are getting the Halbrand-Sauron idea from - when it is so clear that he is the stranger.



The only thing keeping me from thinking that is I inferred from Gandalf that 1. Sauron wasn't aware of hobbits, and 2. if he was, he would have enslaved or exterminated them a long time ago. So, I can't really see him hanging out with and breaking bread with hobbits.


----------



## Sepulchrave II

I think that Meteor Man is an _Ithron Luin_ - a Blue Wizard. At least, as far as the rights will permit this for Amazon.

I think that Sauron has yet to be revealed; we haven't seen the actor yet.

That said, often, I'm wrong.


----------



## Tonguez

Hey what if the Stranger is Tom Bombadil!


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots

Paul Farquhar said:


> If that was the case, Halbrand wouldn't have reacted.



You're projecting onto him what they want you to think is his reason for reacting. 

"Don't you know who I am?" or "this peon who can't even perceive who he's really looking at _killed me?!"_ would also provoke similar reactions.


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots

Tonguez said:


> Hey what if the Stranger is Tom Bombadil!



Boo! Boo this man!


----------



## Maxperson

Paul Farquhar said:


> I suspect that you could have killed Mike Tyson had you stabbed him in the back.



True, but then he wasn't an angel.


Paul Farquhar said:


> And Adar isn't just some dude, he is one of the Noldor. He is on the same level as Galadriel



No he isn't.  The only one who came close to matching her was Feanor.  Not even Fingolfin, Finarfin and the rest matched her power.  Adar was corrupted into an orc, which the Noldor easily killed by the tens and hundreds of thousands.  And the vast majority of the Noldor were nowhere near the named Noldor in power, let alone Galadriel who along with Feanor was at the top of the named pile.


Paul Farquhar said:


> and she is pretty confident she can kick Sauron's butt if she can catch him.



And she MIGHT be strong enough, and she might not.  Only the strongest of Noldor could face a Balrog and they died doing it.  Sauron was was Morgoth's lieutenant, so he was a stronger than a Balrog. That said, it took multiple Balrog's to take down Feanor and Fingolfin lasted long enough to wound Morgoth 8 times before he was killed by the weakened Valar.  She might be on his level.  

The only one we know was able to chase away Sauron was Luthien, and she was half-maia, half-elven and had as her mother one of the most powerful maia in existence.


----------



## Maxperson

Zaukrie said:


> I'm curious.......for those of you that seem to hate the show, why do you keep watching it and posting about every little thing that is wrong about it?



Because most of it is decent to good.  But when it's bad, it's bad.


----------



## Maxperson

RuinousPowers said:


> The only thing keeping me from thinking that is I inferred from Gandalf that 1. Sauron wasn't aware of hobbits, and 2. if he was, he would have enslaved or exterminated them a long time ago. So, I can't really see him hanging out with and breaking bread with hobbits.



That and Sauron was hiding out on Middle Earth somewhere during that time.  He wasn't somewhere else where he would have had to fall from the sky with no memory in order to get there.


----------



## ART!

TheSword said:


> I don’t know where people are getting the Halbrand-Sauron idea from - when it is so clear that he is the stranger.



I don't see that as being clear, but I do think the writers and directors are making a point of keeping us guessing.

I continue to think he's one of the five wizards, but which one? My thoughts:

_Gandalf_: I'd like to see a storyline where he slowly learns his powers and eventually uses them out of a desire to do good, but royally messes things up. He carries the simple decency of the Harfoots through this experience, and learns to be exceedingly cautious in his use of power, becoming the Gandalf we know and love. IIRC, he's the only one of the Istari who stuck to his mission to - carefully and cautiously - aid the peoples of MIddle-earth.

_Saruman_:  He tries to do good, but from the 2nd Age struggles with Sauron he learns...the wrong lessons.

_Radagast_: The trials of the 2nd Age are too much for him, so he abandons his mission to aid the peoples of M-e and just hangs out in the forest with animals.

The Blue Wizards: They have a lot more room to play around with these two.


----------



## Zardnaar

Maxperson said:


> Because most of it is decent to good.  But when it's bad, it's bad.



 Episode 3 or 4 was fairly bad as in boring. Last episode was quite good probably the best one. 

 Adar plotline probably the best one they have atm.


----------



## RuinousPowers

Maxperson said:


> That and Sauron was hiding out on Middle Earth somewhere during that time.  He wasn't somewhere else where he would have had to fall from the sky with no memory in order to get there.



I don't know if we can take that as fact. 

If the Stanger is Sauron, it could have been him returning to Middle Earth after leaving Eönwë to hide.

Sauron being "killed" is certainly something new, and we don't know how that's going to be handled. Personally, I would like Sauron to have not been on screen, and already working behind the scenes at the Elven court.


----------



## Ryujin

RuinousPowers said:


> Personally, I would like Sauron to have not been on screen, and already working behind the scenes at the Elven court.



Same. They're already setting up to build the forges in Eregion. Seems to me that there would be a purpose in mind for them, rather than just to make "stuff."


----------



## Maxperson

RuinousPowers said:


> I don't know if we can take that as fact.
> 
> If the Stanger is Sauron, it could have been him returning to Middle Earth after leaving Eönwë to hide.



He hid in Middle Earth.  He was on Middle Earth when he decided to run away to hide from Eonwe. 


RuinousPowers said:


> Sauron being "killed" is certainly something new, and we don't know how that's going to be handled. Personally, I would like Sauron to have not been on screen, and already working behind the scenes at the Elven court.



He may very well be.  Sauron is crafty enough to order Adar to say that he was killed to throw off suspicion.


----------



## RuinousPowers

Maxperson said:


> He hid in Middle Earth.  He was on Middle Earth when he decided to run away to hide from Eonwe.
> 
> He may very well be.  Sauron is crafty enough to order Adar to say that he was killed to throw off suspicion.



Maybe he hid by turning into a comet and erasing his memories? We'll have to see.

I think Adar is truthful, in that he hates Sauron and thinks he killed him. I don't think he is a minion of Sauron's.


----------



## Maxperson

RuinousPowers said:


> Maybe he hid by turning into a comet and erasing his memories?



Sauron was smart.  Way too smart to do something dumb like erase his own memories. 


RuinousPowers said:


> I think Adar is truthful, in that he hates Sauron and thinks he killed him.



Maybe.  He could also be a good actor.  This we will also have to see.


----------



## RuinousPowers

I never saw Sauron as particularly smart. More like tough to kill with a limitless army. He gets defeated multiple times, and his hubris and evil gives him such a giant blindspot (complete inability to think anyone would want to destroy the Ring) that leads to his ultimate defeat. I can't think of anything he did in LotR that was really clever.


Maxperson said:


> Sauron was smart.  Way too smart to do something dumb like erase his own memories.
> 
> Maybe.  He could also be a good actor.  This we will also have to see.


----------



## Maxperson

RuinousPowers said:


> I never saw Sauron as particularly smart. More like tough to kill with a limitless army. He gets defeated multiple times, and his hubris and evil gives him such a giant blindspot (complete inability to think anyone would want to destroy the Ring) that leads to his ultimate defeat. I can't think of anything he did in LotR that was really clever.



Morgoth also gets defeated multiple times.  

The thing with Sauron is that he is like Saruman.  He was a very skill maker who worked directly under Aule and was that valar's mightiest maia. Knowledge and crafting were his thing.  He may not have been Einstein, but he was smart enough to be able to help the elves craft artifacts.

Initially Sauron was a spy for Morgoth who fed him information on what the Valar were doing.  You don't make dumb people spies and you don't go undiscovered if you aren't pretty crafty.


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots

RuinousPowers said:


> Sauron being "killed" is certainly something new, and we don't know how that's going to be handled. Personally, I would like Sauron to have not been on screen, and already working behind the scenes at the Elven court.



I think there's a high likelihood that we'll find out in the final scene of this season.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

Maxperson said:


> That and Sauron was hiding out on Middle Earth somewhere during that time.  He wasn't somewhere else where he would have had to fall from the sky with no memory in order to get there.



He _was_ hiding out somewhere in Middle Earth - Forodwaith. Until Adar stabbed him in the back*. Then his essence had to reform, and he is "sent back**" as Gandalf was. Note that the meteorite came down in Rhovanion, on an almost direct line from Forodwaith to Mordor.




*Saruman died after being backstabbed by a perfectly normal human. He would have been able to reform if the Valar had allowed it.

**Given the lack of a Valar who would want to send him back, I think this most likely involved some contingency of his own manufacture.

I agree with you that Sauron is very smart, and I think the TV show will lean into that, rather than "powerful". Making him more like Palpatine or Xanatos. Smart villains play better on TV.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

RuinousPowers said:


> The only thing keeping me from thinking that is I inferred from Gandalf that 1. Sauron wasn't aware of hobbits, and 2. if he was, he would have enslaved or exterminated them a long time ago. So, I can't really see him hanging out with and breaking bread with hobbits.



The TV show is keen to stress that they are Harfoots, not hobbits. Maybe _are_ all enslaved or exterminated?


----------



## MarkB

RuinousPowers said:


> Personally, I would like Sauron to have not been on screen, and already working behind the scenes at the Elven court.



Better still would be someone we have seen on-screen, but have completely discounted because they haven't drawn any attention to him.


----------



## Maxperson

Paul Farquhar said:


> He _was_ hiding out somewhere in Middle Earth - Forodwaith. Until Adar stabbed him in the back*. Then his essence had to reform, and he is "sent back**" as Gandalf was. Note that the meteorite came down in Rhovanion, on an almost direct line from Forodwaith to Mordor.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Saruman died after being backstabbed by a perfectly normal human. He would have been able to reform if the Valar had allowed it.
> 
> **Given the lack of a Valar who would want to send him back, I think this most likely involved some contingency of his own manufacture.
> 
> I agree with you that Sauron is very smart, and I think the TV show will lean into that, rather than "powerful". Making him more like Palpatine or Xanatos. Smart villains play better on TV.



Saruman had been stripped of his power by Gandalf, so was weak enough to be killed by a simple stabbing. Gandalf on the other hand withstood a Balrog for days while they fought. I can't envision any way that a Maia could avoid that short of the One Ring binding him to Middle Earth and that hasn't happened yet. He would have appeared in the Halls of Mandos and Mandos would have been like, "Eru just invented Christmas and sent me a present!!!" 

I wouldn't put it past the show to have the Stranger be Sauron, but I think it just as likely that it's Gandalf come early.  They've played very fast and loose with the timeline and other fact, so anything is possible.  

We will just have to wait and see.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

Maxperson said:


> Saruman had been stripped of his power by Gandalf, so was weak enough to be killed by a simple stabbing



I think there is an assumption that Sauron is in a weakened condition at the start of the TV show. It is implied that Galadriel wants to find him before he can regain his strength.


----------



## Maxperson

Paul Farquhar said:


> I think there is an assumption that Sauron is in a weakened condition at the start of the TV show. It is implied that Galadriel wants to find him before he can regain his strength.



Hmm.  My take on it was that he vanished during the war and she wants to find him.  Others assume that he died, but she didn't.  I didn't gather any sort of weakened condition.  Maybe I'll go back and re-watch the first episode.


----------



## Tonguez

Paul Farquhar said:


> The TV show is keen to stress that they are Harfoots, not hobbits. Maybe _are_ all enslaved or exterminated?



The Hobbits of the Shire were primarily Harfoots though.

of course this particular clan of Harfoot wanderers could get exterminated (poor Nori)


----------



## Hriston

RuinousPowers said:


> The only thing keeping me from thinking that is I inferred from Gandalf that 1. Sauron wasn't aware of hobbits, and 2. if he was, he would have enslaved or exterminated them a long time ago. So, I can't really see him hanging out with and breaking bread with hobbits.



But then there is this quote from "The Hunt for the Ring" in _Unfinished Tales_:
Now Sauron had never paid heed to the "Halflings," even if he had heard of them, and he did not yet know where their land lay.​


----------



## Paul Farquhar

Hriston said:


> But then there is this quote from "The Hunt for the Ring" in _Unfinished Tales_:
> Now Sauron had never paid heed to the "Halflings," even if he had heard of them, and he did not yet know where their land lay.​



Which fits fine. These Harfoots have no homeland, and the area they migrate across will become the Brown Lands in the 3rd age, a dead wasteland.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

Maxperson said:


> Hmm.  My take on it was that he vanished during the war and she wants to find him.  Others assume that he died, but she didn't.  I didn't gather any sort of weakened condition.  Maybe I'll go back and re-watch the first episode.



Well, in order to assume someone has died (in obscurity), you must first believe they are not invulnerable.


----------



## Maxperson

Paul Farquhar said:


> Well, in order to assume someone has died (in obscurity), you must first believe they are not invulnerable.



They aren't, but it takes more than an Adar to kill a maia.  There were Valar, Maiar and elf lords in the batter to take down Morgoth.  She might think one of them killed him.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

Maxperson said:


> They aren't, but it takes more than an Adar to kill a maia.  There were Valar, Maiar and elf lords in the batter to take down Morgoth.  She might think one of them killed him.



It's Gil-Galad who suggests that Sauron might be dead, if I remember correctly.

And if you go through the folk who might could have killed him, well, Gil-Galad would know if it was him, Galadriel knows it wasn't her, and Glorfindel (AKA Sir Not-appearing-in-this-TV-show) would have presumably have mentioned it. Next rank of beings would be random balrogs (werewolves, vampires), and unknown quantities, such as Adar.

Or

Hercule Poirot: _"And where you on the night in question, Monsieur BOMBADIL?"_


----------



## Paul Farquhar

Maxperson said:


> They aren't, but it takes more than an Adar to kill a maia.  There were Valar, Maiar and elf lords in the batter to take down Morgoth.  She might think one of them killed him.



The same goes for them as does for Glorfindel, they couldn't kill Sauron without knowing, and they would report to Gil Galad. The only way for Sauron to be killed by one of those powerful beings and Gil Galad not to know for sure is if they were fellow servants of Morgoth. Which would put Adar squarely in the frame.

Galadriel doesn't think Sauron is dead, that is Gil Galad's theory, passed on through Elrond.


----------



## trappedslider

Are some of you guys taking this? At Signum University, we have created an entire concentration around Tolkien’s works and life.









						Concentrations - Signum University
					

In order to help students as they begin developing their thesis topics, we have created several course concentrations, allowing students to focus on areas of interest to them.




					signumuniversity.org


----------



## TheSword

There is a lot being discussed based what X said to Y. Lots of rules about this or that being included or not allowed to be included because of these conversations. When in fact how would Gandalf know that Sauron didn’t know or care about hobbits? Particularly if the ones Sauron interacted with are all dead. Characters can be wrong in the books or just plain confused.


----------



## MarkB

Tonguez said:


> The Hobbits of the Shire were primarily Harfoots though.
> 
> of course this particular clan of Harfoot wanderers could get exterminated (poor Nori)



The little echo of Bilbo's Aragorn poem in Poppy's walking song does at least suggest a direct line of cultural continuity between these particular harfoots and the hobbits of the Shire.


----------



## Hriston

Paul Farquhar said:


> Which fits fine. These Harfoots have no homeland, and the area they migrate across will become the Brown Lands in the 3rd age, a dead wasteland.



Yes, I agree. My point is that according to that quote he had (or could have) heard of them. He just didn't know where the Shire was which in the show, as you correctly point out, did not yet exist as a homeland for halflings.

ETA: I was responding to someone who said they didn't believe the Stranger could be Sauron because of what Gandalf says in the LotR. Not to mention that what Gandalf says is that the fact of their existence was "overlooked" by Sauron rather than being information to which he didn't have access. Also, that what Gandalf says is a statement of belief, rather than fact.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

TheSword said:


> There is a lot being discussed based what X said to Y. Lots of rules about this or that being included or not allowed to be included because of these conversations. When in fact how would Gandalf know that Sauron didn’t know or care about hobbits? Particularly if the ones Sauron interacted with are all dead. Characters can be wrong in the books or just plain confused.



Well, we (and Gandalf) know Sauron didn't know where the Shire was, because the black riders go round asking for directions.

The rest is just speculation.


----------



## TheSword

Paul Farquhar said:


> Well, we (and Gandalf) know Sauron didn't know where the Shire was, because the black riders go round asking for directions.
> 
> The rest is just speculation.



Well there’s knowing where something is - and knowing how to get there. I know Italy abuts the south eastern region of France but without directional signage and a say nav I might need directions to get there.

I think there is a lot of quoting unreliable narrators in Tolkeinism… and a whole lot of speculation and assumption. We should be more comfortable with the idea of the uncertain - allowing space for development.


----------



## RuinousPowers

Hriston said:


> But then there is this quote from "The Hunt for the Ring" in _Unfinished Tales_:
> Now Sauron had never paid heed to the "Halflings," even if he had heard of them, and he did not yet know where their land lay.​



If Sauron spent days pushing the Harfoot's wagon around and eating with them it will forever tarnish my view of him, and so I refuse to believe it.


----------



## Ryujin

RuinousPowers said:


> If Sauron spent days pushing the Harfoot's wagon around and eating with them it will forever tarnish my view of him, and so I refuse to believe it.



If, however, it was Gandalf pushing the wagon around for days and being welcomed by the Harfoots, then it would go a long way to explain his fondness for Hobbits in later years.

_EDIT_ - Not to mention that they grow the best weed in Middle Earth.


----------



## Hriston

RuinousPowers said:


> If Sauron spent days pushing the Harfoot's wagon around and eating with them it will forever tarnish my view of him, and so I refuse to believe it.



I have yet to watch the most recent episode due to the activities of a certain hurricane, so I may be lacking some relevant context, but I think where the show may be going with this is to show, in its own way, the full transition of the maia Mairon into Sauron, to explore the issue that he was in origin an essentially good creature. I think this makes sense of Adar's claim of having killed Sauron and of having him "reform" as an amnesiac "clean slate" a la Gandalf the White.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

On an unrelated note, who thinks that as Galadriel & Co. lead the survivors west across the mountains, they might encounter a certain Shelob with a bunch of her offspring?


----------



## Hriston

Paul Farquhar said:


> On an unrelated note, who thinks that as Galadriel & Co. lead the survivors west across the mountains, they might encounter a certain Shelob with a bunch of her offspring?



Indeed, in fact I've been wondering if the tower in which the people of Tirharad have taken shelter is not the later site of the Tower of Cirith Ungol. Undoubtedly, Shelob is already there.


----------



## Ryujin

Hriston said:


> Indeed, in fact I've been wondering if the tower in which the people of Tirharad have taken shelter is not the later site of the Tower of Cirith Ungol. Undoubtedly, Shelob is already there.



There are two giant spiders; Shelob, in Mirkwood, and Ungoliant, at the gates of Mordor. Ungoliant was Shlob's mother, if I remember correctly.


----------



## Maxperson

Paul Farquhar said:


> It's Gil-Galad who suggests that Sauron might be dead, if I remember correctly.
> 
> And if you go through the folk who might could have killed him, well, Gil-Galad would know if it was him, Galadriel knows it wasn't her, and Glorfindel (AKA Sir Not-appearing-in-this-TV-show) would have presumably have mentioned it. Next rank of beings would be random balrogs (werewolves, vampires), and unknown quantities, such as Adar.



Well, no.  Since Amazon is changing stuff left and right, it also could have been Eonwe, 1000 other nameless Maiar, the Valar, all the elf lords of Vanyar who came from Aman to fight in the War of Wrath, Gildor Inglorion and probably a few others.


Paul Farquhar said:


> Hercule Poirot: _"And where you on the night in question, Monsieur BOMBADIL?"_



LOL


----------



## Paul Farquhar

Ryujin said:


> There are two giant spiders; Shelob, in Mirkwood, and Ungoliant, at the gates of Mordor. Ungoliant was Shlob's mother, if I remember correctly.



Ungoliant was more of a demon in spider form. Immensely powerful.

Shelob is a spawn of Ungoliant. At the end of the 3rd age she lurks in Cirith Ungol. The spiders in Mirkwood are the spawn of Shelob.


----------



## Maxperson

Paul Farquhar said:


> The same goes for them as does for Glorfindel, they couldn't kill Sauron without knowing, and they would report to Gil Galad. The only way for Sauron to be killed by one of those powerful beings and Gil Galad not to know for sure is if they were fellow servants of Morgoth. Which would put Adar squarely in the frame.
> 
> Galadriel doesn't think Sauron is dead, that is Gil Galad's theory, passed on through Elrond.



The Valar, Maiar and Vanyar would not report anything to Gil-Galad. They don't work for him and tend to keep things to themselves over in Aman.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

Maxperson said:


> Well, no. Since Amazon is changing stuff left and right, it also could have been Eonwe, 1000 other nameless Maiar, the Valar, all the elf lords of Vanyar who came from Aman to fight in the War of Wrath, Gildor Inglorion and probably a few others.



I can't see any of them neglecting to inform Gil-galad "oh, BTW I whacked Sauron on my way home for tea".


----------



## Paul Farquhar

Maxperson said:


> The Valar, Maiar and Vanyar would not report anything to Gil-Galad. They don't work for him and tend to keep things to themselves over in Aman.



Gil-galad was the leader of the elven forces they were allied with. They would not have withheld critical strategic information.

But there where many Maiar working for Morgoth, plus at least one elf lord as of this TV show.


----------



## reelo

Ryujin said:


> There are two giant spiders; Shelob, in Mirkwood, and Ungoliant, at the gates of Mordor. Ungoliant was Shlob's mother, if I remember correctly.



No, Shelob is in the Cirith Ungol (Mordor) as her mother, Ungoliant has, so it is told, devoured herself to satiate her own hunger. The spiders in Mirkwood are offspring of Shelob.


----------



## Ryujin

reelo said:


> No, Shelob is in the Cirith Ungol (Mordor) as her mother, Ungoliant has, so it is told, devoured herself to satiate her own hunger. The spiders in Mirkwood are offspring of Shelob.



Yup, you've got me there. Getting my Silmarillion and Lord of the Rings crossed up again.


----------



## Maxperson

Paul Farquhar said:


> Gil-galad was the leader of the elven forces they were allied with. They would not have withheld critical strategic information.
> 
> But there where many Maiar working for Morgoth, plus at least one elf lord as of this TV show.



They withheld critical information for millennia while the Noldor struggled against Morgoth and the others.  They only came to clean up their mess Morgoth, not run errands to inform the elves of who died and who did not.  Or do you think that they ran a list of dead Balrogs and other Maiar over to Gil-galad as well?  If they did, Gil-galad should have known about the Balrog of Moria still being alive.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

Maxperson said:


> They withheld critical information for millennia while the Noldor struggled against Morgoth and the others.  They only came to clean up their mess Morgoth, not run errands to inform the elves of who died and who did not.  Or do you think that they ran a list of dead Balrogs and other Maiar over to Gil-galad as well?  If they did, Gil-galad should have known about the Balrog of Moria still being alive.



He probably does, given that it's probably the same balrog that featured in his Mithril origin story, and will probably make a personal experience at the end of the next episode.


----------



## Mercurius

TheSword said:


> Well there’s knowing where something is - and knowing how to get there. I know Italy abuts the south eastern region of France but without directional signage and a say nav I might need directions to get there.
> 
> I think there is a lot of quoting unreliable narrators in Tolkeinism… and a whole lot of speculation and assumption. We should be more comfortable with the idea of the uncertain - allowing space for development.



Except Tolkien didn't really employ unreliable narrators - especially Gandalf. And I don't see a world in which a gap in his books is filled out by a tv show ("space for development"). Anything the tv show adds is akin to Star Wars' Extended Universe...it isn't canonical to Tolkien's Legendarium (although certainly could be "canon" in an individual's version of Middle-earth).


----------



## Hriston

Ryujin said:


> There are two giant spiders; Shelob, in Mirkwood, and Ungoliant, at the gates of Mordor. Ungoliant was Shlob's mother, if I remember correctly.



Not to pile on, but there are lots of (more than two) giant spiders described in Tolkien's legendarium. Ungoliant is the first. She is described as a primeval spirit of the Void who takes the form of an immense spider and allies with Morgoth, helping him destroy the Two Trees. Afterwards, she inhabits for a time a mountainous area called Ered Gorgoroth, where she spawns a race of giant spiders. I believe Shelob is one of these who escapes the destruction at the end of the War of Wrath and eventually ends up inhabiting the pass of Cirith Ungol into Mordor. It is said that her presence there is one of the reasons Sauron found Mordor attractive as a home base. Then there are the giant spiders encountered by Bilbo and Co. in Mirkwood.


----------



## Mercurius

The idea of the Valar "withholding critical information" from Gil-galad implies that they are allies within a shared conflict. That's not really how things worked. Even the war vs Morgoth wasn't really participated in by the Valar. A few Maiar joined the fray, or at least lived in Middle-earth (e.g. Melian), but it was a war between the Elves and their allies and Morgoth, and one that wasn't particularly approved of by the Valar, at least initially. The Valar only interceded at the very end.

This is even more true of the Second Age and later. The Valar helped combat Sauron through sending the Istari, but that's pretty much it. We can speculate on whether they would have intervened again if Sauron won the War of the Ring, but it is just speculation.

I think the reason the Valar didn't intervene is related to why Gandalf and Galadriel both refused the One Ring: core to Tolkien's philosophy is that evil and control over others and their fate are synonymous, or at least isomorphic. Elves and Humans are free people and intended to make their own way. Thus, the Valar kept out of things, for the most part. Thus G&G refused the ring, because they knew that even if they used it for good, the very act of using it--as power over others--was evil. 

I mean, there's no reason that the Valar couldn't have jumped in at any time and found Sauron and brought him back to Valinor in chains. There's no way Sauron could have withstood their combined might. Even at his most powerful, he probably wasn't equal to Morgoth (except _maybe _when he had the One Ring); plus, Morgoth had dragons and Balrogs. But they didn't, because the Valar were servants of Iluvatar, and essentially told not to intervene in the fates of Iluvatar's children (Elves and Men).

The point being, the Valar did not directly engage in the conflicts of Middle-earth--and barely even indirectly, and only through intermediaries. They weren't "headquarters" for the good guys; they were largely above/beyond/outside the various conflicts.


----------



## Maxperson

Mercurius said:


> The point being, the Valar did not directly engage in the conflicts of Middle-earth--and barely even indirectly, and only through intermediaries. They weren't "headquarters" for the good guys; they were largely above/beyond/outside the various conflicts.



Right, and the forces they did send during the War of Wrath wouldn't have stopped to give an enemy casualty report to Gil-galad and the others.


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots

Paul Farquhar said:


> Hercule Poirot: _"And where you on the night in question, Monsieur BOMBADIL?"_



No! Out! Bad Bombadil, bad!


----------



## reelo

To add to what @Mercurius was saying, the Valar were loathe to intervene because whenever they did, it had disastrous consequences for Arda itself.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

Mercurius said:


> Except Tolkien didn't really employ unreliable narrators - especially Gandalf.



He does, especially with regard to the 1st edition of the Hobbit. He makes Bilbo explicitly an unreliable narrator with regards to how he acquired the ring. And at the same time, invented the retcon.

And in the appendix, he uses the conceit that The Hobbit and LotR were "translated" from the Red Book of Westmarch, which had begun life as Bilbo, Frodo, and Sam's memoir. He was enough of a historian to be well aware that source material is unreliable and subject to interpretation, especially in translation.

But it's also fair to say that Gandalf is an authorial insert character, and views Gandalf expresses are those of the author.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

Whizbang Dustyboots said:


> No! Out! Bad Bombadil, bad!



Oh, just one more thing. I almost forgot, there is something I would like you to take a look at [rummages through pockets]. See this tiny scrap of leather? This was found at the crime scene. Notice the unusual colour? Can I take a look at your _boots_, Mr Bombadil?


----------



## Dioltach

Just caught up after a few weeks. One thing I don't think has been discussed here yet: the Dwarven mine collapse. Is that foreshadowing the Dwarves waking the Balrog?


----------



## MarkB

Dioltach said:


> Just caught up after a few weeks. One thing I don't think has been discussed here yet: the Dwarven mine collapse. Is that foreshadowing the Dwarves waking the Balrog?



Quite possibly, though that would be pushing up the timetable for that event. I think it's established within LotR canon that the events leading to the abandonment of Moria didn't take place until well after Durin's death.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

MarkB said:


> Quite possibly, though that would be pushing up the timetable for that event. I think it's established within LotR canon that the events leading to the abandonment of Moria didn't take place until well after Durin's death.



Compressed timeline.

I bet a million internets they Balrog gets woken up on Friday.


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots

MarkB said:


> Quite possibly, though that would be pushing up the timetable for that event. I think it's established within LotR canon that the events leading to the abandonment of Moria didn't take place until well after Durin's death.



But it does reinforce the general idea that the dwarves, despite their obvious engineering prowess, get reckless and cut corners at times.


----------



## Ryujin

Paul Farquhar said:


> Compressed timeline.
> 
> I bet a million internets they Balrog gets woken up on Friday.



... and that Durin dies by Balrog.


----------



## Dioltach

Let's not forget that the Dwarves are said to have woken the Balrog because they got too greedy mining explicitly for mithril.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

Dioltach said:


> Let's not forget that the Dwarves are said to have woken the Balrog because they got too greedy mining explicitly for mithril.



Which now looks like elven propaganda. They are motivated by trying to save the elves, not greed.


----------



## Ryujin

Paul Farquhar said:


> Which now looks like elven propaganda. They are motivated by trying to save the elves, not greed.



And if the Elves push the Dwarves to mine massive amounts of mithril for their "cure", awakening the Balrog, then it gives reason for thousands of years of hatred between the two.


----------



## RuinousPowers

Paul Farquhar said:


> Compressed timeline.
> 
> I bet a million internets they Balrog gets woken up on Friday.



I hope not! It would kind of stink if the Balrog was released and the dwarves were written off for the next 4 seasons.


----------



## Ryujin

RuinousPowers said:


> I hope not! It would kind of stink if the Balrog was released and the dwarves were written off for the next 4 seasons.



They wouldn't be. They would become refugees.


----------



## RuinousPowers

Ryujin said:


> They wouldn't be. They would become refugees.



And do what? Show up for the Last Alliance of Elves and Men, Now With  Dwarves?


----------



## Ryujin

RuinousPowers said:


> And do what? Show up for the Last Alliance of Elves and Men, Now With  Dwarves?



Be made to carve out a new homeland, after having been ousted from theirs.


----------



## Morrus

Ryujin said:


> ... and that Durin dies by Balrog.



Not _this_ Durin, though, right? It's a Durin a couple thousand years later?


----------



## RuinousPowers

Morrus said:


> Not _this_ Durin, though, right? It's a Durin a couple thousand years later?



Pretty sure it will be this Durin. Collapsed timelines, don't ya know?


----------



## Ryujin

RuinousPowers said:


> Pretty sure it will be this Durin. Collapsed timelines, don't ya know?



Just what I was going to say.


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots

Ryujin said:


> And if the Elves push the Dwarves to mine massive amounts of mithril for their "cure", awakening the Balrog, then it gives reason for thousands of years of hatred between the two.



Honestly, the elves are pretty tiresome, in the books, movies and show. I'm not sure how much of a push anyone needs to be over them.


----------



## RuinousPowers

I guess we're just going to skip over Anor entirely, which is a shame as the Witchking's campaign there was always interesting to me.


----------



## Rabulias

Morrus said:


> Not _this_ Durin, though, right? It's a Durin a couple thousand years later?



We have two Durins (Durin III and Durun IV), so it will be one of them.


----------



## trappedslider

Netflix and HBO Reportedly Pitched 'Lord of the Rings' TV Show
					

In recent details highlighted by The Hollywood Reporter, Netflix and HBO were initially in the...




					www.yahoo.com


----------



## RuinousPowers

trappedslider said:


> Netflix and HBO Reportedly Pitched 'Lord of the Rings' TV Show
> 
> 
> In recent details highlighted by The Hollywood Reporter, Netflix and HBO were initially in the...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com



The HBO one might have been interesting, but would probably have the same budget problems RoP has. I wouldn't want to see 100 orcs attacking Helm's Deep.


----------



## Hriston

Okay, so I was wrong about Halbrand being Theo's dad or having anything to do with the sword it seems.


----------



## Sepulchrave II

The idea of Gil-galad believing Sauron "dead" stretches plausibility somewhat - being aware of Sauron's nature, and of his (albeit temporary) submission to Eonwe at the end of the First Age. Maybe it's more of a "fled" or "no longer a threat" - nothing to see here, move along, good for morale. But we haven't really seen much of anything of Gil-galad's motivations.

I tend to agree that they'll collapse the Durins, and that the Balrog is too juicy a fruit for Amazon to ignore.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

RuinousPowers said:


> And do what? Show up for the Last Alliance of Elves and Men, Now With  Dwarves?



The dwarves now have good reason not to join the Last Alliance.

We know where they go next - the Lonely Mountain.


----------



## reelo

Paul Farquhar said:


> The dwarves now have good reason not to join the Last Alliance.
> 
> We know where they go next - the Lonely Mountain.



The Lonely Mountain is only colonized in 1999 Third Age, with Thráin I being the first "King under the Mountain".


----------



## Paul Farquhar

reelo said:


> The Lonely Mountain is only colonized in 1999 Third Age, with Thráin I being the first "King under the Mountain".



Compressed Timeline.


----------



## reelo

Paul Farquhar said:


> Compressed Timeline.



But does that apply to 3rd Age events also? I was under the impression it would only apply to 2nd Age events. Compressing is one thing, but completely jumbling, thats another thing alltogether!


----------



## Paul Farquhar

reelo said:


> But does that apply to 3rd Age events also?



Yes, why would you think it would make a difference?


----------



## reelo

Paul Farquhar said:


> Yes, why would you think it wouldn't?



Because this is a show about the 2nd Age, as far as I'm aware. The show has depicted the entrance of (what will become) Moria as not yet having the Ithildin-encrusted gates crafted by Narvi and Celebrimbor during the height of the elven kingdom of Eregion.
If the Balrog devastates Khazad-Dûm already now, the whole period of peaceful and mutually beneficial friendship between both people (until Sauron sacks Eregion, AFTER the crafting of the Great Rings) is difficult to explain.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

reelo said:


> Because this is a show about the 2nd Age, as far as I'm aware.



No, it's "based on the appendices", not a specific age.


> The show has depicted the entrance of (what will become) Moria as not yet having the Ithildin-encrusted gates crafted by Narvi and Celebrimbor during the height of the elven kingdom of Eregion.
> If the Balrog devastates Khazad-Dûm already now, the whole period of peaceful and mutually beneficial friendship between both people (until Sauron sacks Eregion, AFTER the crafting of the Great Rings) is difficult to explain.



I expect they will think of a way to fit this into an episode. But the Balrog is too good for TV not to use (a huge CGI monster is much easier/cheaper to do than huge CGI armies), and once the Balrog is out it doesn't matter how long after the Loney Mountain is colonised. It's the resolution of that plot thread and hence will be in the show. Dates really don't matter on TV.


----------



## Tonguez

the ones that made their dex save for half damage vs Volcano certainly were lucky, amazing that a little ash can keep the skin from even a little singe


----------



## TheSword

Well the Balrog got paid for the last episode. A nice little cameo.

Also is anyone else thinking that maybe the reason hobbits have such resistance to the power of the ring is that Sauron might have a little soft spot for the Harfoots? Maybe he doesn’t hate them quite as much as the other peoples of middle earth and so his malice doesn’t affect them quite as much?


----------



## wicked cool

Good episode
Does Gondor exist at this point? I’m assuming  not and I’m assuming isildur  is the same from the novels? Isn’t his place in this story off  by over a 1000 years?


----------



## Paul Farquhar

wicked cool said:


> Good episode
> Does Gondor exist at this point?



No.


wicked cool said:


> I’m assuming  not and I’m assuming isildur  is the same from the novels?



Yes.


wicked cool said:


> Isn’t his place in this story off  by over a 1000 years?



Everyone's story is "off".


----------



## Ryujin

Theo.

Theoden.

< Smacks self in head. >
Yes, I know that we're thousands of years off that and there weren't any kings with similar names that preceded him, but it tracks from a purely LotR point of view.


----------



## Hriston

I like the idea of Adar being an orc. I thought a couple things about his conversation with Galadriel were interesting. The first is when Adar asserts the personhood of orcs, Galadriel's response is to advocate for their genocide. This is not a good look for her, but it puts a twist on the paradox of tolerance by raising the question: what right does a "People of Hate", intolerant in its essence, have to exist? 

The second is that Adar implies he believes in "The One", Eru Ilúvatar, which seems distinctly non-orcish. One of the defining characteristics of an orc is worship of the Dark Lord as God. We can see this in Sauron's promotion of his worship among his followers in the Third Age in the guise of Morgoth, with the attendant doctrine that Morgoth is the one true god. Adar's followers, likewise, seem to worship him, and his name/title, "Father", seems to appropriate Eru's title, "All-father". This highlights the inherently hypocritical position of one who aspires, as Adar, to become a dark lord.


----------



## Dioltach

Ryujin said:


> Theo.
> 
> Theoden.
> 
> < Smacks self in head. >
> Yes, I know that we're thousands of years off that and there weren't any kings with similar names that preceded him, but it tracks from a purely LotR point of view.



That one struck me just now too.

As for Balrog speculation, well ...


----------



## wicked cool

Why is Saruman not mentioned as possibly being the stranger?


----------



## Hriston

The identity of the three travelers from Rhûn has become even more puzzling in the recent episode. They're clearly supernatural, probably maiar, but they don't seem like wizards to me, at least not the good kind. Their control of fire suggests balrogs.


----------



## Hriston

wicked cool said:


> Why is Saruman not mentioned as possibly being the stranger?



By whom? He has been mentioned in this very thread.


----------



## Ryujin

Hriston said:


> The identity of the three travelers from Rhûn has become even more puzzling in the recent episode. They're clearly supernatural, probably maiar, but they don't seem like wizards to me, at least not the good kind. Their control of fire suggests balrogs.



I'm not as quick to jump to Balrog. After all, The Stranger has been accused of using sympathetic magic as well, when the tent pole fell. I would agree with the general air of "not good" though, as leaving an entire village homeless for a toothless threat doesn't really smack of good.


----------



## Hriston

wicked cool said:


> Good episode
> Does Gondor exist at this point?



No, but Pelargir was mentioned as a destination for the refugees from Mordor, and it was stated to be an abandoned colony of Númenor, I think. Pelargir is later the chief port of Gondor.



wicked cool said:


> I’m assuming  not and I’m assuming isildur  is the same from the novels?



Yes, it is meant to be the same character, but as far as I know he is only mentioned in one novel, the LotR.



wicked cool said:


> Isn’t his place in this story off  by over a 1000 years?



Not necessarily. Pelargir was founded in SA 2350. Obviously, we're sometime after that if the city has since been abandoned. Isildur was born in SA 3209 and co-founded Gondor in SA 3320, so the chronology works out just fine with respect to those details.

ETA: Oh, look at that! Isil was eleventy-one when he founded Gondor!


----------



## Hriston

Ryujin said:


> I'm not as quick to jump to Balrog. After all, The Stranger has been accused of using sympathetic magic as well, when the tent pole fell. I would agree with the general air of "not good" though, as leaving an entire village homeless for a toothless threat doesn't really smack of good.



Sure, I think _balrog_ is grasping. I can think of two possibilities, assuming the Stranger is Sauron. Either they're heretofore unknown supporters of Sauron who are trying to find him to remind him of who he is, in which case they could be maiar formerly allied to him, or they're Sauron hunters (istari) who are trying to find him so he can be contained in some way. I actually kind of like the idea of a trio of Second Age female wizards who aren't restricted, as the Third Age wizards were, from confronting Sauron directly, or who have gone rogue, ignoring the limitations the Valar placed on their mission.

Of course, if the Stranger isn't Sauron, or is himself a wizard, then they could other wizards (which doesn't seem likely given their treatment of the harfoots) or followers of Sauron sent to neutralize the newly fallen wizard.


----------



## Rabulias

Hriston said:


> By whom? He has been mentioned in this very thread.



As has Radagast, who the Stranger's ties to nature and his befuddlement seem to be pointing for me.


----------



## Ryujin

Rabulias said:


> As has Radagast, who the Stranger's ties to nature and his befuddlement seem to be pointing for me.



I would say that Gandalf, Sauruman, and Sauron are the leading possibilities. Gandalf, because he's a beloved character. Sauruman because, if I'm remembering correctly, he was the titular leader of the Istari, so being the first in-country would be reasonable. Sauron, because drama and misdirection.


----------



## wicked cool

Rabulias said:


> As has Radagast, who the Stranger's ties to nature and his befuddlement seem to be pointing for me.



Sorry about that. I didn’t see that


----------



## Olgar Shiverstone

Celeborn dead? Or just missing/prisoner? Something doesn't track.


----------



## MarkB

I really liked the Harfoots in this episode. An entire clan giving a collective Sam Gamgee speech is quite a sight to see.

And they directed the Stranger to Greenwood the Great, so I guess they're following him into proto-Mirkwood.


----------



## RuinousPowers

MarkB said:


> I really liked the Harfoots in this episode. An entire clan giving a collective Sam Gamgee speech is quite a sight to see.
> 
> And they directed the Stranger to Greenwood the Great, so I guess they're following him into proto-Mirkwood.



This is obviously where The Stranger aka Gandalf befriends Treebeard.


----------



## Hriston

Rabulias said:


> As has Radagast, who the Stranger's ties to nature and his befuddlement seem to be pointing for me.



Well, Yavanna is the spouse of Aulë, so the distance between Radagast and Sauron might not be too great. After all, Radagast was chosen to be the companion of Saruman, another student of Aulë.

Personally, I prefer the Man in the Moon theory to the idea that the Stranger might be any of the Third Age wizards.


----------



## Hriston

Olgar Shiverstone said:


> Celeborn dead? Or just missing/prisoner? Something doesn't track.



Perhaps he will be reembodied by the Valar and sent back to Middle-earth in a later season.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

Hriston said:


> The identity of the three travelers from Rhûn has become even more puzzling in the recent episode. They're clearly supernatural, probably maiar, but they don't seem like wizards to me, at least not the good kind. Their control of fire suggests balrogs.



Tolkien does refer to evil maiar who take forms other than balrogs, werewolves or vampires.

But he also mentions mortal necromancers and the like. Such as the one the White Council mistakenly think is living in Dol Guldur.

In case anyone didn't notice, they were carrying a staff headed with an eye symbol, which gave the episode its name.


Could an eye be considered a type of knob? If the staff has a knob on the end, it would clearly make them wizards.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

Olgar Shiverstone said:


> Celeborn dead? Or just missing/prisoner? Something doesn't track.



Given that this TV series is supposed to be a prequel to the movie, in which Celeborn is alive and well, I'm pretty sure he will turn out to be a prisoner.

They might give him a version of Celebrian's storyline.


----------



## John R Davis

RuinousPowers said:


> And do what? Show up for the Last Alliance of Elves and Men, Now With  Dwarves?



I always thought they were dwarves in those wars?


----------



## Paul Farquhar

Hriston said:


> Personally, I prefer the Man in the Moon theory



He could be the inspiration for the halfing version of "Hey Diddle Diddle" that Frodo sings, and also be Sauron or a wizard.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

MarkB said:


> I really liked the Harfoots in this episode. An entire clan giving a collective Sam Gamgee speech is quite a sight to see.
> 
> And they directed the Stranger to Greenwood the Great, so I guess they're following him into proto-Mirkwood.



I wounder if we will see a surge in halfing PCs in D&D with people being given character ideas?

Female dwarves may get a popularity boost too.


----------



## MarkB

RuinousPowers said:


> This is obviously where The Stranger aka Gandalf befriends Treebeard.



Or where the Stranger aka Radagast picks out a nice place to build a cottage.


----------



## Hriston

Paul Farquhar said:


> Tolkien does refer to evil maiar who take forms other than balrogs, werewolves or vampires.



Yes, there is something wolf-like about them. Especially their leader with the light eyes. Maybe they are werewolves (or vampires) that work for Sauron.



Paul Farquhar said:


> But he also mentions mortal necromancers and the like. Such as the one the White Council mistakenly think is living in Dol Guldur.



Yes, they could be mortal. I was beginning to think they are not, but anything's possible .



Paul Farquhar said:


> In case anyone didn't notice, they were carrying a staff headed with an eye symbol, which gave the episode its name.



I'd missed that. It definitely resembles an eye, although it could also be a solar disk tilted at an angle away from the camera which would support their being maiar associated with fire like Arien, the maia who guides the sun. I also noticed that their leader, to whom the staff seems to belong, has a hand blackened with soot. If it is an eye then either they work for Sauron who has already taken on the eye as his symbol or the eye is a mantle he expropriates at a later time.



Paul Farquhar said:


> Could an eye be considered a type of knob? If the staff has a knob on the end, it would clearly make them wizards.



There is something of the Three Magi about them. They travel from the east, following a (shooting) star. But they only have one staff. Does that make only one of them a wizard?


----------



## Hriston

Paul Farquhar said:


> He could be the inspiration for the halfing version of "Hey Diddle Diddle" that Frodo sings, and also be Sauron or a wizard.



Yes, this is true. By "Man in the Moon theory", however, I meant the theory that he actually _is _the Man in the Moon.


----------



## Sepulchrave II

Hriston said:


> Yes, this is true. By "Man in the Moon theory", however, I meant the theory that he actually _is _the Man in the Moon.



The Man in the Moon is Tilion, a Maia.


----------



## Hriston

Sepulchrave II said:


> The Man in the Moon is Tilion, a Maia.



That is correct.


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots

Hriston said:


> Okay, so I was wrong about Halbrand being Theo's dad or having anything to do with the sword it seems.



On the other hand, he's going back to Numenor as something of a hero, which should give him a lot of influence there.


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots

TheSword said:


> Well the Balrog got paid for the last episode. A nice little cameo.



He even got a line, so he can get his SAG card now.


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots

Tonguez said:


> the ones that made their dex save for half damage vs Volcano certainly were lucky, amazing that a little ash can keep the skin from even a little singe



There was a real "I'm level 15; I don't need to run out of the way of this" energy from Galadriel. Sucked for all the Tier 1 characters, though.


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots

Hriston said:


> Of course, if the Stranger isn't Sauron, or is himself a wizard, then they could other wizards (which doesn't seem likely given their treatment of the harfoots) or followers of Sauron sent to neutralize the newly fallen wizard.



My assumption is that he's either Gandalf (not my preference) or a Blue Wizard and they're agents of Sauron sent to take back him off the board.


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots

Paul Farquhar said:


> If the staff has a knob on the end, it would clearly make them wizards.



Nanny Ogg approves.


----------



## Hriston

Whizbang Dustyboots said:


> On the other hand, he's going back to Numenor as something of a hero, which should give him a lot of influence there.



Huh? He's riding to Lindon with Galadriel to get some elvish healing for his wounds, which honestly makes no sense to me, that he could ride all that way while losing blood.


----------



## MarkB

Hriston said:


> Huh? He's riding to Lindon with Galadriel to get some elvish healing for his wounds, which honestly makes no sense to me, that he could ride all that way while losing blood.



Clearly it's a very specific level of injured.


----------



## RuinousPowers

John R Davis said:


> I always thought they were dwarves in those wars?



Dwarves fought on both sides, but not in great enough numbers to be included in the name, apparently.


----------



## Hriston

Whizbang Dustyboots said:


> My assumption is that he's either Gandalf (not my preference) or a Blue Wizard and they're agents of Sauron sent to take back him off the board.



Although the Stranger displays many similarities with Gandalf, who was an emissary of the Valar, the guise Sauron takes in the Second Age, as Annatar, Lord of Gifts, is exactly that, an emissary of the Valar. The eye on the staff carried by the travelers would indicate that, yes, they are sympathetic to Sauron.


----------



## MarkB

Hriston said:


> Although the Stranger displays many similarities with Gandalf, who was an emissary of the Valar, the guise Sauron takes in the Second Age, as Annatar, Lord of Gifts, is exactly that, an emissary of the Valar. The eye on the staff carried by the travelers would indicate that, yes, they are sympathetic to Sauron.



So, does Sauron's eye symbol pre-date him becoming a literal giant flaming eyeball?


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots

Hriston said:


> Huh? He's riding to Lindon with Galadriel to get some elvish healing for his wounds, which honestly makes no sense to me, that he could ride all that way while losing blood.



Shows what I get for watching it on five hours of sleep.

Still, this is Halbrand now being welcomed into powerful courts in a fair form. (My money is still on him not ultimately being a good guy.)


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots

Boy, this finale trailer promises a lot while being 99% old clips.


----------



## Hriston

MarkB said:


> So, does Sauron's eye symbol pre-date him becoming a literal giant flaming eyeball?



As far as I know, Sauron didn't adopt the Great Eye as his symbol until he declared himself openly in TA 2951, ten years after being driven out of Dol Guldur by the White Council. It's debatable whether the "Eye" glimpsed by Sam and Frodo atop Barad-dûr was a physical manifestation of Sauron.


----------



## Hriston

Whizbang Dustyboots said:


> Shows what I get for watching it on five hours of sleep.
> 
> Still, this is Halbrand now being welcomed into powerful courts in a fair form. (My money is still on him not ultimately being a good guy.)



We'll see if he's welcomed in Lindon. Sauron wasn't. Gil-galad and Elrond were suspicious of "Annatar" and wouldn't admit him. He was welcomed in Eregion, though, even though Gil-galad warned them and though Galadriel had suspicions of her own.


----------



## Hriston

Whizbang Dustyboots said:


> Boy, this finale trailer promises a lot while being 99% old clips.



Notable that strange female-sounding voices can be heard saying, in unison, "You will be known at last for who you truly are. For you are Lord Sauron," at the same time the three travelers from Rhûn can be seen on-screen. Assuming it's them, to whom do you suppose they're saying this, and do you think they're mistaken?


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots

Hriston said:


> Notable that strange female-sounding voices can be heard saying, in unison, "You will be known at last for who you truly are. For you are Lord Sauron," at the same time the three travelers from Rhûn can be seen on-screen. Assuming it's them, to whom do you suppose they're saying this, and do you think they're mistaken?



I assume it's the creepy three finally speaking. 

I would guess it's either someone in Lindon putting the idea of magic rings in folks' heads, or Halbrand.


----------



## Hriston

Whizbang Dustyboots said:


> I assume it's the creepy three finally speaking.
> 
> I would guess it's either someone in Lindon putting the idea of magic rings in folks' heads, or Halbrand.



I think Celebrimbor already has the idea of rings of power in his head, --that's what the forge is for-- but I'm pretty sure he's not Sauron. I think it's unlikely that the creepy three encounter any of the major characters in the next episode other than the Stranger, Nori, Poppy, Marigold, and Sadoc. No one else is anywhere near Mirkwood which is where the Stranger, who they're following, is headed.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

MarkB said:


> So, does Sauron's eye symbol pre-date him becoming a literal giant flaming eyeball?



This is a movie thing.

In the novel the Great Eye is a psychic projection, only visible to ringbearers, not a physical manifestation that anyone can see. Sauron has no physical form (he needs the Ring in order to make a new one).


----------



## Paul Farquhar

Hriston said:


> Notable that strange female-sounding voices can be heard saying, in unison, "You will be known at last for who you truly are. For you are Lord Sauron," at the same time the three travelers from Rhûn can be seen on-screen. Assuming it's them, to whom do you suppose they're saying this, and do you think they're mistaken?



I think they just wandered into the wrong story.

_"Middle Earth? Bugger, we thought this was Scotland!"_ [Exit in search of a blasted heath].


----------



## MarkB

Paul Farquhar said:


> This is a movie thing.
> 
> In the novel the Great Eye is a psychic projection, only visible to ringbearers, not a physical manifestation that anyone can see. Sauron has no physical form (he needs the Ring in order to make a new one).



But he does get described as such by others. I think it's Saruman who talks about "a great eye, lidless and unsleeping" peering out from Mordor, and Aragorn speaks in terms of "keeping his Eye fixed on Gondor" to distract him from Sam and Frodo. And the Ringbearers include the Nine, so that manifestation would be well known to the forces of Mordor, thus their use of the symbol on banners and armour.

I'm just not aware of any reason why he'd have been using that symbol back when he still had a body.


----------



## MarkB

Hriston said:


> I think Celebrimbor already has the idea of rings of power in his head, --that's what the forge is for-- but I'm pretty sure he's not Sauron. I think it's unlikely that the creepy three encounter any of the major characters in the next episode other than the Stranger, Nori, Poppy, Marigold, and Sadoc. No one else is anywhere near Mirkwood which is where the Stranger, who they're following, is headed.



Our initial assumption is that the Forge is intended to be used to make the Rings, but in light of later episodes isn't it more likely that its intended usage is to work mithril?


----------



## Stalker0

Hriston said:


> Huh? He's riding to Lindon with Galadriel to get some elvish healing for his wounds, which honestly makes no sense to me, that he could ride all that way while losing blood.



They mentioned that the wound has "turned sour", aka its infected. Apparently elves have anti-biotics


----------



## Sepulchrave II

Hriston said:


> As far as I know, Sauron didn't adopt the Great Eye as his symbol until he declared himself openly in TA 2951, ten years after being driven out of Dol Guldur by the White Council. It's debatable whether the "Eye" glimpsed by Sam and Frodo atop Barad-dûr was a physical manifestation of Sauron.



It's my understanding that the Eye is only a kind of metaphysical manifestation of Sauron, which is perceived by the Wise, or those who wear rings in the right circumstances (on Amon Hen, in Mordor etc.), or when facilitated by some other magic - such as a palantir, the Mirror of Galadriel etc. It is also his symbol, of course.

It seems that Sauron spent the first part of the Third Age forming a corporeal body. Deprived of the ring, this took much longer than after the downfall of Numenor. By the end of the Third Age, he seems to have had a body, though. According to Gollum, who was personally interrogated by Sauron, "there are four fingers on the Black Hand," suggesting his physical form was now maimed (c.f Morgoth's wounds dealt by Fingolfin). Denethor tells Pippin "He will not come save only to triumph over me when all is won." 

Appendices, LotR


> 2060





> The power of Dol Guldur grows. The Wise fear that it may be Sauron taking shape again.



Appendices, LotR


> It was the Shadow of Sauron and the sign of his return. For coming out of the wastes of the East he took up his abode in the south of the forest, and slowly he grew and took shape there again; in a dark hill he made his dwelling and wrought there his sorcery, and all folk feared the Sorcerer of Dol Guldur, and yet they knew not at first how great was their peril.



Of The Rings of Power and the Third Age, Silmarillion


> 'True, alas, is our guess. This is not one of the Úlairi, as many have long supposed. It is Sauron himself who has taken shape again and now grows apace; and he is gathering again all the Rings to his hand; and he seeks ever for news of the One, and of the Heirs of Isildur, if they live still on earth.’



In Letter 246 Tolkien describes Sauron's physical appearance in the Third Age.



> In his actual presence none but very few of equal stature could have hoped to withhold it [the Ring] from him. Of 'mortals' no one, not even Aragorn. In the contest with the Palantír Aragorn was the rightful owner. Also the contest took place at a distance, and in a tale which allows the incarnation of great spirits in a physical and destructible form their power must be far greater when actually physically present. Sauron should be thought of as very terrible. The form that he took was that of a man of more than human stature, but not gigantic. In his earlier incarnation he was able to veil his power (as Gandalf did) and could appear as a commanding figure of great strength of body and supremely royal demeanour and countenance.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

MarkB said:


> I think it's Saruman who talks about "a great eye, lidless and unsleeping" peering out from Mordor



Saruman is a wizard, he "sees" this with his mind*, not his eyes.

*Technically, with the Palantir.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

Stalker0 said:


> They mentioned that the wound has "turned sour", aka its infected. Apparently elves have anti-biotics



In which case he would have a high fever, which would make him unable to ride a horse.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

MarkB said:


> I'm just not aware of any reason why he'd have been using that symbol back when he still had a body.



There is no reason why he wouldn't, either. There is no record of when or why Sauron started using that iconography. There is never any suggestion that his form only has one eye. His helmet (movies/TV show) has two eye slits.


----------



## Rabulias

Paul Farquhar said:


> In which case he would have a high fever, which would make him unable to ride a horse.



I doubt that he would be unable to ride. It might make it more difficult, but certainly not impossible, unless the fever is very high.


----------



## Hriston

Paul Farquhar said:


> I think they just wandered into the wrong story.
> 
> _"Middle Earth? Bugger, we thought this was Scotland!"_ [Exit in search of a blasted heath].



Yup, I've actually been suppressing the urge to refer to them as the "Weird Sisters", and I think the comparison to _Macbeth _is apt in that their statement is on the form of a prediction. Thus, their purpose seems to be to reveal the true identity of the person they're following.


----------



## Hriston

MarkB said:


> Our initial assumption is that the Forge is intended to be used to make the Rings, but in light of later episodes isn't it more likely that its intended usage is to work mithril?



I don't think so. Celebrimbor keeps talking about "power" as he does in the season finale trailer when he says, "We are on the cusp of crafting a new kind of power."


----------



## Hriston

Stalker0 said:


> They mentioned that the wound has "turned sour", aka its infected. Apparently elves have anti-biotics



I don't know much about infected wounds, but I just thought it was odd that Halbrand looks like he's on his deathbed and Galadriel's proposed solution is to make a journey on horseback of over 1,300 miles to Lindon. Now, I suppose if the only way to stop the infection is to get help from the elves that it makes sense to ride, and perhaps they will head to Eregion instead, which there's a scene in the new trailer of two riders approaching, and which would only be a journey of maybe 800 miles.


----------



## Hriston

Sepulchrave II said:


> It's my understanding that the Eye is only a kind of metaphysical manifestation of Sauron, which is perceived by the Wise, or those who wear rings in the right circumstances (on Amon Hen, in Mordor etc.), or when facilitated by some other magic - such as a palantir, the Mirror of Galadriel etc. It is also his symbol, of course.



I agree with you that there is a metaphysical Eye described in the books, but many people cite this passage (bolding mine) from Book Six of the LotR as support for the idea that there was also a physical Eye atop Sauron's tower that could in some way be identified with his will:
Far off the shadows of Sauron hung; but torn by some gust of wind out of the world, or else moved by some great disquiet within, the mantling clouds swirled, and for a moment drew aside; and then he saw, rising black, blacker and darker than the vast shades amid which it stood, the cruel pinnacles and iron crown of the topmost tower of Barad-dûr. *One moment only it stared out, but as from some great window immeasurably high there stabbed northward a flame of red, the flicker of a piercing Eye*; and then the shadows were furled again and the terrible vision was removed.​That is why I said it's debatable, although I agree with you. I think what is seen in this passage is more of a beacon or a search light than an actual eye.



Sepulchrave II said:


> It seems that Sauron spent the first part of the Third Age forming a corporeal body. Deprived of the ring, this took much longer than after the downfall of Numenor. By the end of the Third Age, he seems to have had a body, though. According to Gollum, who was personally interrogated by Sauron, "there are four fingers on the Black Hand," suggesting his physical form was now maimed (c.f Morgoth's wounds dealt by Fingolfin). Denethor tells Pippin "He will not come save only to triumph over me when all is won."



It's equally possible that Gollum's "black hand" is a metaphysical hand just as the Eye is metaphysical.



Sepulchrave II said:


> Appendices, LotR
> 
> 
> Appendices, LotR
> 
> Of The Rings of Power and the Third Age, Silmarillion



The interpretation of these passages depends on what is meant by "taking shape" and "growing" which isn't entirely clear. It could mean that his power is manifesting and growing in the world through political alliances and the like.



Sepulchrave II said:


> In Letter 246 Tolkien describes Sauron's physical appearance in the Third Age.



This passage is different and is, I think, the best evidence for Sauron taking a physical humanoid form in the Third Age, although it suffers from having a lesser degree of canonicity.


----------



## Hriston

Of course there is this quote from the Silmarillion which speaks of the Eye of Sauron being a thing in the last days of the Second Age following the Downfall of Númenor:
But Sauron was not of mortal flesh, and though he was robbed now of that shape in which had wrought so great an evil, so that he could never again appear fair to the eyes of Men, yet his spirit arose out of the deep and passed as a shadow and a black wind over the sea, and came back to Middle-earth and to Mordor that was his home. There he took up again his great Ring in Barad-dur, and dwelt there, dark and silent, until he wrought himself a new guise, an image of malice and hatred made visible; and the Eye of Sauron the Terrible few could endure.​


----------



## Sepulchrave II

Hriston said:


> Of course there is this quote from the Silmarillion which speaks of the Eye of Sauron being a thing in the last days of the Second Age following the Downfall of Númenor:
> But Sauron was not of mortal flesh, and though he was robbed now of that shape in which had wrought so great an evil, so that he could never again appear fair to the eyes of Men, yet his spirit arose out of the deep and passed as a shadow and a black wind over the sea, and came back to Middle-earth and to Mordor that was his home. There he took up again his great Ring in Barad-dur, and dwelt there, dark and silent, until he wrought himself a new guise, an image of malice and hatred made visible; and the Eye of Sauron the Terrible few could endure.​



That's fair. I suspect that this ambiguity from Tolkien is also intentional; he emphasizes the supernatural aspects of Sauron: his ability to act at a great distance; dominate minds; control the snows of Caradhras (possibly); cause Orodruin to erupt; blanket the lands with darkness etc. In that sense, the Eye is also a cipher for Sauron's capacity to effect his power; to assert his will upon the world.

I think the reason that we never see a fully reified Sauron, and that this (physical form) is only ever alluded to, is precisely to convey this mysterious, tremendous power which is beyond the ability of mortals to grasp.


----------



## Ryujin

Sepulchrave II said:


> That's fair. I suspect that this ambiguity from Tolkien is also intentional; he emphasizes the supernatural aspects of Sauron: his ability to act at a great distance; dominate minds; control the snows of Caradhras (possibly); cause Orodruin to erupt; blanket the lands with darkness etc. In that sense, the Eye is also a cipher for Sauron's capacity to effect his power; to assert his will upon the world.
> 
> I think the reason that we never see a fully reified Sauron, and that this (physical form) is only ever alluded to, is precisely to convey this mysterious, tremendous power which is beyond the ability of mortals to grasp.



In the series, however, that would appear to be his physical form at the 51 second mark of the season finale trailer.

Remember, The Silmarillion and any materials beyond LOTR and its appendices aren't usable in the series.


----------



## reelo

Hriston said:


> I don't know much about infected wounds, but I just thought it was odd that Halbrand looks like he's on his deathbed and Galadriel's proposed solution is to make a journey on horseback of over 1,300 miles to Lindon. Now, I suppose if the only way to stop the infection is to get help from the elves that it makes sense to ride, and perhaps they will head to Eregion instead, which there's a scene in the new trailer of two riders approaching, and which would only be a journey of maybe 800 miles.



Yeah, it'll be like GoT where 800 (or even 1,3k) miles of travel will take a couple days at best.


----------



## Stalker0

Hriston said:


> I don't know much about infected wounds, but I just thought it was odd that Halbrand looks like he's on his deathbed and Galadriel's proposed solution is to make a journey on horseback of over 1,300 miles to Lindon. Now, I suppose if the only way to stop the infection is to get help from the elves that it makes sense to ride, and perhaps they will head to Eregion instead, which there's a scene in the new trailer of two riders approaching, and which would only be a journey of maybe 800 miles.



And when we are talking riding 800 miles....or death....I think most people would suck it up and make the attempt

I'm sure Halbrand will be near death by the time he makes it of course, it will be a "test" of sorts for him.


----------



## RuinousPowers

Rabulias said:


> I doubt that he would be unable to ride. It might make it more difficult, but certainly not impossible, unless the fever is very high.



If you have an infected gut injury that "only the elves can heal", then you wouldn't be riding a horse anywhere. Even transporting you in a cart wouldn't be a good idea. But Hollywood treats wounds as either instantly fatal, or just a red stain on a shirt. A lot like D&D.


----------



## Morrus

RuinousPowers said:


> If you have an infected gut injury that "only the elves can heal", then you wouldn't be riding a horse anywhere. Even transporting you in a cart wouldn't be a good idea. But Hollywood treats wounds as either instantly fatal, or just a red stain on a shirt. A lot like D&D.



I mean, if _only the elves_ can cure it you have only two choices: stay and definitely die, or travel to the elves and probably die en route. I guess you take the 1% rather than the 0%.


----------



## Hriston

Sepulchrave II said:


> That's fair. I suspect that this ambiguity from Tolkien is also intentional; he emphasizes the supernatural aspects of Sauron: his ability to act at a great distance; dominate minds; control the snows of Caradhras (possibly); cause Orodruin to erupt; blanket the lands with darkness etc. In that sense, the Eye is also a cipher for Sauron's capacity to effect his power; to assert his will upon the world.
> 
> I think the reason that we never see a fully reified Sauron, and that this (physical form) is only ever alluded to, is precisely to convey this mysterious, tremendous power which is beyond the ability of mortals to grasp.



Right, in my past readings of the LotR, I've never gotten a sense of Sauron as having an actual physical form and conceived of him as more of something like a malevolent undead spirit, but after having read the letter from which you posted a passage, I can see that JRRT's conception was that Sauron had taken on the physical form of a man at the end of the Third Age.


----------



## Hriston

Ryujin said:


> In the series, however, that would appear to be his physical form at the 51 second mark of the season finale trailer.
> 
> Remember, The Silmarillion and any materials beyond LOTR and its appendices aren't usable in the series.



I'm not @Sepulchrave II, but I'm not sure I understand this response. The clip in the trailer is from the first episode where we see Sauron presumably in the First Age as the lieutenant of Morgoth. The post to which you were responding was about how Sauron is depicted in the LotR.


----------



## Hriston

reelo said:


> Yeah, it'll be like GoT where 800 (or even 1,3k) miles of travel will take a couple days at best.



Unless they're changing horses, 800 miles should take more than three weeks!


----------



## RuinousPowers

Morrus said:


> I mean, if _only the elves_ can cure it you have only two choices: stay and definitely die, or travel to the elves and probably die en route. I guess you take the 1% rather than the 0%.



Sure. But he wouldn't be riding a horse there. Even if he could physically do it without ripping open whatever stitches he has, the delirium and hallucinations from the high fever would make staying mounted nearly impossible. 

But, it's a show, and these failings are hardly unique to it.


----------



## Ryujin

Hriston said:


> I'm not @Sepulchrave II, but I'm not sure I understand this response. The clip in the trailer is from the first episode where we see Sauron presumably in the First Age as the lieutenant of Morgoth. The post to which you were responding was about how Sauron is depicted in the LotR.



If that was from earlier on then consider that Sauron had a physical form from which the ring could be cut, at Barad-dur. He has to become solid at some point.


----------



## Hriston

Ryujin said:


> If that was from earlier on then consider that Sauron had a physical form from which the ring could be cut, at Barad-dur. He has to become solid at some point.



That isn't in question. The physical body that was destroyed in SA 3441 when Isildur cut the Ring from his finger was made by Sauron following the Downfall of Númenor in SA 3319, as is described in the passage from the Silmarillion I posted up-thread.


----------



## Ryujin

Hriston said:


> That isn't in question. The physical body that was destroyed in SA 3441 when Isildur cut the Ring from his finger was made by Sauron following the Downfall of Númenor in SA 3319, as is described in the passage from the Silmarillion I posted up-thread.



Sure but as I've said several times in this thread, the Silmarillion isn't represented in this show.


----------



## Hriston

Ryujin said:


> Sure but as I've said several times in this thread, the Silmarillion isn't represented in this show.



It doesn't need to be in this case. The appendices cover the same period of time. I'm not sure what your point is actually.


----------



## trappedslider

Hriston said:


> It doesn't need to be in this case. The appendices cover the same period of time. I'm not sure what your point is actually.



His point is unless it's written in the appendices it can't be used.


----------



## Hriston

trappedslider said:


> His point is unless it's written in the appendices it can't be used.



Well, that's a demonstrably false assertion. This show has invented and used loads of details that aren't written anywhere in the appendices.


----------



## Maxperson

Dioltach said:


> Just caught up after a few weeks. One thing I don't think has been discussed here yet: the Dwarven mine collapse. Is that foreshadowing the Dwarves waking the Balrog?



It looks like the are rushing that, too.  If the leaf could reach the balrog with such a short fall, as soon as they start mining it will know that they are there and come.  They aren't going to  have time to mine enough to save the elves, forge mithril mail for a young elf prince for Bilbo to be given, and so on.  The dwarves traded mithril to other races for a long time before they delved too deeply.


----------



## trappedslider

Hriston said:


> Well, that's a demonstrably false assertion. This show has invented and used loads of details that aren't written anywhere in the appendices.



 Amazon's rights to Tolkien's work are the same rights that producer Saul Zaentz bought in the 1970s, leading both to Ralph Bakshi's animated _Lord Of the Rings_ and eventually to Peter Jackson's films. These rights only include material from _The Lord Of The Rings_ and _The Hobbit._ So anything that's mentioned in those books (including _Lord Of the Rings'_ lengthy appendices) is fair game, but anything exclusive to _The Silmarillion, Unfinished Tales,_ or Christopher Tolkien's 12-volume _History of Middle Earth,_ is off limits. So the Amazon series probably can't touch _The Fall of Gondolin,_ for example. 

_"As long as we’re painting within those lines and not egregiously contradicting something we don’t have the rights to, there’s a lot of leeway and room to dramatize and tell some of the best stories that [Tolkien] ever came up with.” - showrunner McKay_

So, they have some leeway to do stuff but not a lot. 

TBF, since it was never really finished even by Christopher, it's all fan fiction.


----------



## Maxperson

Paul Farquhar said:


> Compressed timeline.
> 
> I bet a million internets they Balrog gets woken up on Friday.



Poor Bilbo is never going to get his mail, which means Frodo died in Moria when the spear hit him.  They just doomed Middle Earth!


----------



## Tonguez

Hriston said:


> Well, that's a demonstrably false assertion. This show has invented and used loads of details that aren't written anywhere in the appendices.



Yeah at this point its pretty clear that Rings of Power is big budget LotR Fanfic, using the basic timeline as inspiration but filling in their own details


----------



## Maxperson

Ryujin said:


> And if the Elves push the Dwarves to mine massive amounts of mithril for their "cure", awakening the Balrog, then it gives reason for thousands of years of hatred between the two.



They don't need that.  Dwarves murdered the elven king Thingol for his Silmaril and the Nauglamír. They also went to war with the elves over false pretenses and sacked an elven city.  The hatred was moving along just fine before this point in Middle Earth history.


----------



## Maxperson

Paul Farquhar said:


> Could an eye be considered a type of knob? If the staff has a knob on the end, it would clearly make them wizards.



They could be orc(the same as Adar) spellcasters.


----------



## Maxperson

Whizbang Dustyboots said:


> Still, this is Halbrand now being welcomed into powerful courts in a fair form. (My money is still on him not ultimately being a good guy.)



If he suddenly knows the secrets of ring making after Galadriel finds him as a human smith from the south lands, I'm going to do a literal facepalm. And that's before the elves fall for such an obvious trap.


----------



## Maxperson

Stalker0 said:


> They mentioned that the wound has "turned sour", aka its infected. Apparently elves have anti-biotics



Which would be very odd for a race with perfect health.  Plus the elves, especially the old elf lords like Galadriel, have songs of power which can be used to heal.  She could have healed him on the spot.


----------



## Tonguez

Maxperson said:


> They could be orc(the same as Adar) spellcasters.



members of the Cult of Melkor? and more corrupted Elfs?


----------



## RuinousPowers

Tonguez said:


> Yeah at this point its pretty clear that Rings of Power is big budget LotR Fanfic, using the basic timeline as inspiration but filling in their own details



They kind of have to. To tell the story they want would need an unreasonable number of time shifts otherwise.


----------



## Hriston

trappedslider said:


> So, they have some leeway to do stuff but not a lot.



That's quite a different assertion than saying that all material for the show must be derived from the appendices.


----------



## trappedslider

not worth it


----------



## Hriston

Tonguez said:


> Yeah at this point its pretty clear that Rings of Power is big budget LotR Fanfic, using the basic timeline as inspiration but filling in their own details



They’re not really even using the timeline. I mean, they’ve taken some series of events they want to use from the appendices — basically any events they want to use that happened before The Hobbit — and they’re having them all happen at the same time along with a bunch of other stuff that’s been made up out of whole cloth. The effect is more of a Tolkienesque show with bizarre cameos by a few characters from Tolkien’s actual works.


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots

RuinousPowers said:


> They kind of have to. To tell the story they want would need an unreasonable number of time shifts otherwise.



House of the Dragon is trying that, with mostly successful results. It's not hard to imagine another version of Rings of Power where each season is one era and then the next season jumps several centuries. We have dwarves and elves who could be constants throughout.


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots

Hriston said:


> They’re not really even using the timeline. I mean, they’ve taken some series of events they want to use from the appendices — basically any events they want to use that happened before The Hobbit — and they’re having them all happen at the same time along with a bunch of other stuff that’s been made up out of whole cloth. The effect is more of a Tolkienesque show with bizarre cameos by actual characters from Tolkien’s works.



Think of it as an expensive actual play of someone's The One Ring campaign, few of which will adhere strictly to canon.


----------



## Tonguez

Whizbang Dustyboots said:


> House of the Dragon is trying that, with mostly successful results. It's not hard to imagine another version of Rings of Power where each season is one era and then the next season jumps several centuries. We have dwarves and elves who could be constants throughout.




Not really, Tolkiens dwarfs live maybe 400 yrs whereas Elfs live Thousands. Theyll be skipping a couple of Dwarf generations and 8 or so humans each time shift, imagine trying to keep track of all those. At least with HotD its the same character just at different ages


----------



## Maxperson

Tonguez said:


> Not really, Tolkiens dwarfs live maybe 400 yrs whereas Elfs live Thousands. Theyll be skipping a couple of Dwarf generations and 8 or so humans each time shift, imagine trying to keep track of all those. At least with HotD its the same character just at different ages



The elves are immortal.  They don't age or die unless they are killed by violence or lose the will to live on, which is very rare.


----------



## John R Davis

Yeah and the 1st HOTD time skip was confusing for a while


----------



## Paul Farquhar

Hriston said:


> Yup, I've actually been suppressing the urge to refer to them as the "Weird Sisters", and I think the comparison to _Macbeth _is apt in that their statement is on the form of a prediction. Thus, their purpose seems to be to reveal the true identity of the person they're following.



You treat my joke with far more gravitas than it deserves!

But Shakespeare drew on classical sources, and whilst we are probably more familiar with the Graeae from Greek myth (also see: Furies, Fates, Gorgons), the term "wyrd sisters" that Shakespeare used refers the Norns of Scandinavian myth. Wyrd meaning fate. Given Tolkien's fondness for northern European myth, is doesn't seem inappropriate to draw upon this when expanding on his work.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

Ryujin said:


> In the series, however, that would appear to be his physical form at the 51 second mark of the season finale trailer.
> 
> Remember, The Silmarillion and any materials beyond LOTR and its appendices aren't usable in the series.



That's the nature of the medium. Until someone invents Spirit-o-Vision(tm) things that can be spiritual/metaphysical/ambiguous in print have to be physical on film.

In some ways the novel is still a superior medium.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

Maxperson said:


> Poor Bilbo is never going to get his mail, which means Frodo died in Moria when the spear hit him.  They just doomed Middle Earth!



I'm pretty sure they will explain the mail. Because on TV every detail has to have an elaborate backstory.


----------



## Maxperson

Paul Farquhar said:


> I'm pretty sure they will explain the mail. Because on TV every detail has to have an elaborate backstory.



Right now they have only a couple nuggets of the stuff and if the Balrog shows next session, I doubt they will have enough mined to save the elves and make a luxury suit of mail for a child elf prince.  They might explain it, but if they do, it seems like there's a fair chance that the explanation is going to be pretty weak.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

Maxperson said:


> Right now they have only a couple nuggets of the stuff and if the Balrog shows next session, I doubt they will have enough mined to save the elves and make a luxury suit of mail for a child elf prince.  They might explain it, but if they do, it seems like there's a fair chance that the explanation is going to be pretty weak.



My guess would be Disa will make it for Durin V.


----------



## Maxperson

Paul Farquhar said:


> My guess would be Disa will make it for Durin V.



Dwarves are broader than hobbits.  I doubt a dwarf child would fit Bilbo the way an child elf prince would.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

Maxperson said:


> Dwarves are broader than hobbits.  I doubt a dwarf child would fit Bilbo the way an child elf prince would.



As you said, explanation weak. But I doubt it would make much difference to fitting an adult hobbit. If it's the right width is might be a little short, but if it was originally intended to cover the groin it would just make it shirt length.


----------



## Sepulchrave II

Paul Farquhar said:


> You treat my joke with far more gravitas than it deserves!
> 
> But Shakespeare drew on classical sources, and whilst we are probably more familiar with the Graeae from Greek myth (also see: Furies, Fates, Gorgons), the term "wyrd sisters" that Shakespeare used refers the Norns of Scandinavian myth. Wyrd meaning fate. Given Tolkien's fondness for northern European myth, is doesn't seem inappropriate to draw upon this when expanding on his work.



If these three





Are the same as these three





Then it would be cool, given Sauron's previous association with werewolves.


----------



## Cleon

FitzTheRuke said:


> Are you saying that you can tell the difference between a Canadian accent and an American one? I'm not sure I believe it. (I mean, I can see you being able to tell the difference between a Toronto accent and a Brooklyn accent, say, because frankly _everyone_ can (though they might not know that that is what they are) but a general US/CAN average accent?
> 
> I'm from Vancouver, and while visiting Japan, I met some Americans who said, "You're Canadian? But you have no accent!", to which I responded "You're just saying that because I sound like people on TV. That's because most people you see on TV are from Vancouver."
> 
> It's an exaggeration with some small truth to it.





Ryujin said:


> You would be quite surprised, if you knew the whole truth. Don't tell anyone...




Darn it, keep quiet about it!

Not that it matters, it's aboot four decades too late for those Americans to stop us…


----------



## Hriston

Whizbang Dustyboots said:


> Think of it as an expensive actual play of someone's The One Ring campaign, few of which will adhere strictly to canon.



I’m quite liking the show on its own merits, actually. And I wouldn’t expect an actual play to focus on canonical characters and events the way the show does. I think a show focused on the non-canonical characters Arondir, Bronwyn, Theo, and Adar in the "Southlands" and Nori and the other harfoots encountering "the Stranger" might be better and feel less forced, though.


----------



## Hriston

Paul Farquhar said:


> You treat my joke with far more gravitas than it deserves!
> 
> But Shakespeare drew on classical sources, and whilst we are probably more familiar with the Graeae from Greek myth (also see: Furies, Fates, Gorgons), the term "wyrd sisters" that Shakespeare used refers the Norns of Scandinavian myth. Wyrd meaning fate. Given Tolkien's fondness for northern European myth, is doesn't seem inappropriate to draw upon this when expanding on his work.



Agreed. I think it's notable that the Norns of Scandinavian myth were also said to visit newborn children to determine their destinies, similar again to the biblical Magi.


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots

Paul Farquhar said:


> I'm pretty sure they will explain the mail. Because on TV every detail has to have an elaborate backstory.



This is what happens when a generation of TV writers grow up reading Star Wars novels.


----------



## OB1

Regarding the Balrog shown at the end of the episode, I'd guess that it will be confronted (likely with help from the elves or perhaps from the Stranger, perhaps that's how Sauron get's into the good graces of everyone) and pushed deeper and sealed in mountain, allowing the mine we saw in this episode (and in Fellowship) to be opened.  Millenia later, when those mines are exhausted, the Dwarves begin looking for a new vein, go too deep, and bring about the end of their kingdom.

Regarding the timeline of the 2nd age in general, it appears that much is being compressed into 10-20 years that we'll see in the show (based on the current age of Isilldur, if nothing else).  If I had to guess, we'll see the forging of the rings next season, a 'golden age' of the rings in the third (where elves, dwarves and humans all create great works in a short time with the power of their rings), Sauron's deception revealed in the 4th, and the last alliance of elves and men fighting Sauron in the 5th.  It's a story inspired by Tolkien and meant as a prequel to the films.

Finally, I love what this show is doing (again, I don't have any Similarian background and have only ever read the novels once) and have been massively enjoying it.  It's using the medium well and the storytelling is wonderfully functional in a way that a lot of modern shows have forgotten how to do.  I know who the characters are, as well as what they want and what is in conflict in any given scene.


----------



## ART!

trappedslider said:


> Amazon's rights to Tolkien's work are the same rights that producer Saul Zaentz bought in the 1970s, leading both to Ralph Bakshi's animated _Lord Of the Rings_ and eventually to Peter Jackson's films. These rights only include material from _The Lord Of The Rings_ and _The Hobbit._ So anything that's mentioned in those books (including _Lord Of the Rings'_ lengthy appendices) is fair game, but anything exclusive to _The Silmarillion, Unfinished Tales,_ or Christopher Tolkien's 12-volume _History of Middle Earth,_ is off limits. So the Amazon series probably can't touch _The Fall of Gondolin,_ for example.
> 
> _"As long as we’re painting within those lines and not egregiously contradicting something we don’t have the rights to, there’s a lot of leeway and room to dramatize and tell some of the best stories that [Tolkien] ever came up with.” - showrunner McKay_
> 
> So, they have some leeway to do stuff but not a lot.
> 
> TBF, since it was never really finished even by Christopher, it's all fan fiction.



If they wanted to negotiate limited use of things from works outside TLOTR & TH, they could. For instance, if character X isn't mentioned in those but they want to use just the name but not that character's story, that is a thing that could theoretically be worked out. 


Sepulchrave II said:


> If these three
> View attachment 263655
> 
> Are the same as these three
> 
> View attachment 263656
> 
> Then it would be cool, given Sauron's previous association with werewolves.



This is very cool, even if it's not the case!

My theory is that these three are cultists of one of the blue wizards - or maybe the leader of these three _is_ one of the blue wizards. The Harfoots are east of Greenwood the Great (what will be called Mirkwood), which works for the blue wizards.


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots

ART! said:


> My theory is that these three are cultists of one of the blue wizards - or maybe the leader of these three _is_ one of the blue wizards. The Harfoots are east of Greenwood the Great (what will be called Mirkwood), which works for the blue wizards.



Hmm, I tend to think of the wizards as being charismatic, but I guess that's really only true for Gandalf and Saruman. Weird creeps as wizards certainly is possible. The casual, pointless cruelty to the harfoots would be disappointing as hell for wizards, though.


----------



## Hriston

Whizbang Dustyboots said:


> Hmm, I tend to think of the wizards as being charismatic, but I guess that's really only true for Gandalf and Saruman. Weird creeps as wizards certainly is possible. The casual, pointless cruelty to the harfoots would be disappointing as hell for wizards, though.



Not that Saruman didn't turn out to be disappointing for a wizard, but he did a lot worse.


----------



## ThrorII

Tonguez said:


> Not really, Tolkiens dwarfs live maybe 400 yrs whereas Elfs live Thousands. Theyll be skipping a couple of Dwarf generations and 8 or so humans each time shift, imagine trying to keep track of all those. At least with HotD its the same character just at different ages



Tolkien's Dwarves lived for an average of 250 years.


----------



## TheSword

I have to laugh at the dismissive calling it fan-fic.

You could say the same about lots of products. As has been discussed the source material (appendixes) isn’t exactly riveting stuff.

It’s possible for the writers to conceive of the series in relation to the Silmarillion and other works without actually using the protected elements. They actually have a huge amount of lee way if the owners of that IP aren’t fussed about the usage… particularly if interest in the series raises interest in their own IP. They are free therefore to allude and fill in the spaces.


----------



## Maxperson

OB1 said:


> Regarding the Balrog shown at the end of the episode, I'd guess that it will be confronted (likely with help from the elves or perhaps from the Stranger, perhaps that's how Sauron get's into the good graces of everyone) and pushed deeper and sealed in mountain, allowing the mine we saw in this episode (and in Fellowship) to be opened.  Millenia later, when those mines are exhausted, the Dwarves begin looking for a new vein, go too deep, and bring about the end of their kingdom.



That's a possibility for this show.  It really wouldn't make sense for them to delve too deeply and awaken something like a Balrog if they knew it was there, but it's a better idea than any other that I've seen so far.


----------



## RuinousPowers

OB1 said:


> Regarding the Balrog shown at the end of the episode, I'd guess that it will be confronted (likely with help from the elves or perhaps from the Stranger, perhaps that's how Sauron get's into the good graces of everyone) and pushed deeper and sealed in mountain, allowing the mine we saw in this episode (and in Fellowship) to be opened.  Millenia later, when those mines are exhausted, the Dwarves begin looking for a new vein, go too deep, and bring about the end of their kingdom.
> 
> Regarding the timeline of the 2nd age in general, it appears that much is being compressed into 10-20 years that we'll see in the show (based on the current age of Isilldur, if nothing else).  If I had to guess, we'll see the forging of the rings next season, a 'golden age' of the rings in the third (where elves, dwarves and humans all create great works in a short time with the power of their rings), Sauron's deception revealed in the 4th, and the last alliance of elves and men fighting Sauron in the 5th.  It's a story inspired by Tolkien and meant as a prequel to the films.
> 
> Finally, I love what this show is doing (again, I don't have any Similarian background and have only ever read the novels once) and have been massively enjoying it.  It's using the medium well and the storytelling is wonderfully functional in a way that a lot of modern shows have forgotten how to do.  I know who the characters are, as well as what they want and what is in conflict in any given scene.



Unless there is a planned, but unannounced, time shift this Durin's Bane will refer to this Durin. There isn't going to be a millennia wait.  But I do hope it doesn't happen next episode. But why show the balrog if you aren't going to use it.


----------



## OB1

Maxperson said:


> That's a possibility for this show.  It really wouldn't make sense for them to delve too deeply and awaken something like a Balrog if they knew it was there, but it's a better idea than any other that I've seen so far.



I think it could be explained why the Dwarves several millennia later started digging again via the same line describing how the One Ring was forgotten about.  To turn a phrase, "And some things that should not have been forgotten were lost. History became legend. Legend became myth. And for two and a half thousand years, the *Balrog* passed out of all knowledge."

While the second age timeline is being compressed, I don't think they're going to retcon the thousands of years that the film established passed between Sauron's defeat and the ring being discovered again, so it seems likely that the dwarves ended up forgetting (or ignoring) the old tale and re-awakened it.  

Again, I have no idea how this all ties in with Tolkien's intent or writings, but it would make sense in the world of the film/show.


----------



## Rabulias

RuinousPowers said:


> But why show the balrog if you aren't going to use it.



Heh. Chekhov's balrog.


----------



## ART!

Whizbang Dustyboots said:


> Hmm, I tend to think of the wizards as being charismatic, but I guess that's really only true for Gandalf and Saruman. Weird creeps as wizards certainly is possible. The casual, pointless cruelty to the harfoots would be disappointing as hell for wizards, though.



IIRC, Tolkien had two notions about the two blue wizards*. In both cases, they went east - east of Greenwood/Mirkwood the Great, east of Rhun, east of Mordor:

1. They went east and went bad, directly or indirectly contributing to the forces that joined Sauron. 
2. They went east and did good, without which the forces from the east that joined Sauron would have been much greater. 

* (He wrote about Middle-earth for about 60 years, and kept revising and rethinking thinks, so talk of Tolkien's canon beyond _The Hobbit_ and _LOTR_ is a dicey proposition. It was Christopher Tolkien who cobbled together the Silmarillion and everything since.)


----------



## Hriston

ART! said:


> IIRC, Tolkien had two notions about the two blue wizards*. In both cases, they went east - east of Greenwood/Mirkwood the Great, east of Rhun, east of Mordor:
> 
> 1. They went east and went bad, directly or indirectly contributing to the forces that joined Sauron.
> 2. They went east and did good, without which the forces from the east that joined Sauron would have been much greater.
> 
> * (He wrote about Middle-earth for about 60 years, and kept revising and rethinking thinks, so talk of Tolkien's canon beyond _The Hobbit_ and _LOTR_ is a dicey proposition. It was Christopher Tolkien who cobbled together the Silmarillion and everything since.)



My recollection of your (1.) is more of a "going astray" in the mode of Radagast. It is said they founded magical traditions. I don't recall reading anything that suggested they actually joined Sauron's cause. 

Also, "cobbled together" is a fair description of the Silmarillion, but not of the Unfinished Tales or History of Middle-earth. Those books presented the extant texts individually with copious painstaking notes on revisions and emendations that were made to them over the years. The result gives the impression of a body of work that has been spared the process of any cobbling together.


----------



## Mercurius

My understanding of the The Silmarillion is that Christopher Tolkien tried to present a representation of his father's overall work, so the versions within it are the latest that JRR had developed. So it isn't as much "cobbled" as it is a "representative anthology." It isn't complete, but it also isn't in contradiction with any of JRR's later understandings of Middle-earth.


----------



## ART!

Hriston said:


> My recollection of your (1.) is more of a "going astray" in the mode of Radagast. It is said they founded magical traditions. I don't recall reading anything that suggested they actually joined Sauron's cause.
> 
> Also, "cobbled together" is a fair description of the Silmarillion, but not of the Unfinished Tales or History of Middle-earth. Those books presented the extant texts individually with copious painstaking notes on revisions and emendations that were made to them over the years. The result gives the impression of a body of work that has been spared the process of any cobbling together.



I think you're right on both counts. 

I probably have warped "gone astray" in my head into "went bad". However, going astray from their mission effectively helps Sauron, so...?


----------



## embee

wicked cool said:


> Good episode
> Does Gondor exist at this point? I’m assuming  not and I’m assuming isildur  is the same from the novels? Isn’t his place in this story off  by over a 1000 years?



Maybe it's not Isildur. 

Like maybe it's Isildur Franklin and years down the road there's an Isildur Johannson. We don't know his last name.


----------



## reelo

Mercurius said:


> It isn't complete, but it also isn't in contradiction with any of JRR's later understandings of Middle-earth.




Some of it is. Like the ancestry of Orcs. In the Silmarillion (and this show) it's Elves, but later in his life, Tolkien meant to change that to Humans. Because the implications of them having been Elves are.... numerous.

Also, the lineage of Gil-Galad. If he had been the son of Fingon, Noldorin kingship would have gone to him after the death of Fingon. But it went to Turgon first. In some late writings, Tolkien changed Gil-Galad's lineage to him being the son of Orodreth, who in turn was changed from being a son of Finarfin to being the son of Angrod. This was, it appears, Tolkien's last stance on that matter, and if that had been maintained in the Silmarillion and the show, it would make Galadriel Gil-Galad's great-aunt.


----------



## Mercurius

reelo said:


> Some of it is. Like the ancestry of Orcs. In the Silmarillion (and this show) it's Elves, but later in his life, Tolkien meant to change that to Humans. Because the implications of them having been Elves are.... numerous.
> 
> Also, the lineage of Gil-Galad. If he had been the son of Fingon, Noldorin kingship would have gone to him after the death of Fingon. But it went to Turgon first. In some late writings, Tolkien changed Gil-Galad's lineage to him being the son of Orodreth, who in turn was changed from being a son of Finarfin to being the son of Angrod. This was, it appears, Tolkien's last stance on that matter, and if that had been maintained in the Silmarillion and the show, it would make Galadriel Gil-Galad's great-aunt.



OK, fair enough. Relatively minor fare, though. And I'm not sure if Tolkien was certain about the humans > orcs lineage, or if he was just considering it. Having read his Letters a couple times, I was struck by how he endlessly fiddled with stuff until his last years. I mean, well, that's world-building for you!


----------



## Mercurius

A bit more on the The Silmarillion. In many ways, it truly is the "Bible of Middle-earth." Not just because it presents the mythology, but because it is a limited slice of a much larger body of stories.

I'm not a Biblical historian, but as far as I understand it, both the Old and New Testament are just selections of stories - the former just a fraction of Hebrew sacred literature and apocrypha, and the latter just some of the gospels and stories of Jesus, with the Gnostic Gospels essentially being selected out (e.g. Thomas, Mary Magdelene, etc). The Bible as we know it was selected to present a coherent sacred text, yet also one that served the political purposes of the early Catholic Church. So, for instance, they didn't include the story of Lilith, the first wife of Adam who left him because she wanted to be his equal, or the Book of Enoch, which describes angels copulating with women and creating the nephilim (giants), which the Ancient Aliens crowd has latched onto (I mean, how cool is that?!).

But there is a crucial difference: the Bible was compiled with a socio-political agenda in mind, whereas the Silmarillion was not. Meaning, Christopher Tolkien didn't exclude stories about the Maiar having sex with humans and breeding them to be cute hobbits, or Elves genociding dwarves, etc. He tried to create a comprehensive picture of the First Age, in particular, and the total arc of Tolkien's great story, from the Song of the Ainur to the Fourth Age.


----------



## Sepulchrave II

Mercurius said:


> A bit more on the The Silmarillion. In many ways, it truly is the "Bible of Middle-earth." Not just because it presents the mythology, but because it is a limited slice of a much larger body of stories.



I think this is true on many levels. Tolkien was quite cognizant of the way that stories are transmitted, and how tales tend to morph with time. There are many layers of "unreliable narration," both within (our) primary world - Christopher and JRR both having a moving set of goalposts in this regard -  but also within the secondary world, with the Red Book of Westmarch (especially _Translations from the Elvish_).

So when we read the _Music of the Ainur_, we aren't seeing a true account of the Creation of Arda, we are seeing an account delivered by the Valar to the Eldar in Aman in terms which they find comprehensible (music), refracted through Bilbo's translation, imagined by Tolkien, and edited by Christopher. These multiple levels of (sometimes conflicting) tradition map quite well to something like what would become the _Tanakh_ - where the literary task of assembling those stories in the 3rd Century BCE in Alexandria, has a parallel with Christopher's role as editor.


----------



## damiller

Sepulchrave II said:


> I think this is true on many levels. Tolkien was quite cognizant of the way that stories are transmitted, and how tales tend to morph with time. There are many layers of "unreliable narration," both within (our) primary world - Christopher and JRR both having a moving set of goalposts in this regard -  but also within the secondary world, with the Red Book of Westmarch (especially _Translations from the Elvish_).
> 
> So when we read the _Music of the Ainur_, we aren't seeing a true account of the Creation of Arda, we are seeing an account delivered by the Valar to the Eldar in Aman in terms which they find comprehensible (music), refracted through Bilbo's translation, imagined by Tolkien, and edited by Christopher. These multiple levels of (sometimes conflicting) tradition map quite well to something like what would become the _Tanakh_ - where the literary task of assembling those stories in the 3rd Century BCE in Alexandria, has a parallel with Christopher's role as editor.



In one game of The One Ring I ran, we had some changes to the cannon. I explained it via manuscript traditions, but my player insisted on their being only one true/factual way it happened. And didn't like our campaigns changing that. We didn't get too deep into that discussion, but it was fun. Fans are always nitpicky about the details - whether Tolkien or Biblical.


----------



## Mercurius

Sepulchrave II said:


> I think this is true on many levels. Tolkien was quite cognizant of the way that stories are transmitted, and how tales tend to morph with time. There are many layers of "unreliable narration," both within (our) primary world - Christopher and JRR both having a moving set of goalposts in this regard -  but also within the secondary world, with the Red Book of Westmarch (especially _Translations from the Elvish_).
> 
> So when we read the _Music of the Ainur_, we aren't seeing a true account of the Creation of Arda, we are seeing an account delivered by the Valar to the Eldar in Aman in terms which they find comprehensible (music), refracted through Bilbo's translation, imagined by Tolkien, and edited by Christopher. These multiple levels of (sometimes conflicting) tradition map quite well to something like what would become the _Tanakh_ - where the literary task of assembling those stories in the 3rd Century BCE in Alexandria, has a parallel with Christopher's role as editor.



I think this is true to a point, though I don't think Tolkien ever implied that the Valar were unreliable in their depiction of creation, or that the stories of the Silmarillion were just versions of what happened.

I mean, I can see a One Ring campaign taking that approach, but if one reads the Silmarillion with that in mind, it diverges quite far from Tolkien's intent, imo.

Or to put it another way, I wouldn't equate Bilbo with the Valar, in terms of the reliability of narration! 

And as far as canon goes, whatever Tolkien wrote is canon. Everything else is fan fiction and/or material used for individual games, be it Rings of Power or the One Ring. End of story. It is Tolkien's world, his story. 

But this also works both ways: Once we buy a game and run a campaign, that campaign is no longer Tolkien's but ours, and we can do whatever we want. For example, it could be fun to play a One Ring campaign in which the Silmarillion is distorted propaganda, and the truth of it - what PCs realize over time - is that Manwe is a malefic demiurge, and Melkor a misunderstood dissident. Perhaps orcs are actually elves who were punished by Manwe for rebelling, and Melkor took them under wing. Etc etc.


----------



## Hriston

ART! said:


> I think you're right on both counts.
> 
> I probably have warped "gone astray" in my head into "went bad". However, going astray from their mission effectively helps Sauron, so...?



At least one website, <tolkiengateway.net>, says of the Blue Wizards, "some held that they fell into evil and became servants of Sauron", and provides a reference to "The Istari" in _Unfinished Tales _of which I don't have a copy at the moment, but I haven't seen the original text from which this conclusion seems to have been drawn.

ETA: Radagast, for example, unwittingly helped Saruman to lure Gandalf to Orthanc, but I don't think anyone would say that made him evil.


----------



## John R Davis

I have decided the three entities in white are all Sauron. And one day soon they will merge as one.


----------



## Ryujin

John R Davis said:


> I have decided the three entities in white are all Sauron. And one day soon they will merge as one.



"I am Sauron of Christmas Past."


----------



## John R Davis

Yeah, each bit represents a certain feature 

And I hope they  introduce Glorfindel in season 2 as I think he returns round about the time the rings are forged?
I'm assuming he was the elf in the elf-balrog-tree bit


----------



## eyeheartawk

I'm finally caught up and I just want to address the main criticism that people have with the show. That is, that it's slow and boring and that nothing happens for ages. 

To which I would say; that's all very accurate to the books.

My abiding memory of the LotR was chapters upon chapters of people jogging across grassy fields and then camping. It's all very on-brand.


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots

eyeheartawk said:


> My abiding memory of the LotR was chapters upon chapters of people jogging across grassy fields and then camping. It's all very on-brand.



Be fair.

There's also a lot of singing.


----------



## ART!

Mercurius said:


> I think this is true to a point, though I don't think Tolkien ever implied that the Valar were unreliable in their depiction of creation, or that the stories of the Silmarillion were just versions of what happened.
> 
> I mean, I can see a One Ring campaign taking that approach, but if one reads the Silmarillion with that in mind, it diverges quite far from Tolkien's intent, imo.
> 
> Or to put it another way, I wouldn't equate Bilbo with the Valar, in terms of the reliability of narration!
> 
> And as far as canon goes, whatever Tolkien wrote is canon. Everything else is fan fiction and/or material used for individual games, be it Rings of Power or the One Ring. End of story. It is Tolkien's world, his story.
> 
> But this also works both ways: Once we buy a game and run a campaign, that campaign is no longer Tolkien's but ours, and we can do whatever we want. For example, it could be fun to play a One Ring campaign in which the Silmarillion is distorted propaganda, and the truth of it - what PCs realize over time - is that Manwe is a malefic demiurge, and Melkor a misunderstood dissident. Perhaps orcs are actually elves who were punished by Manwe for rebelling, and Melkor took them under wing. Etc etc.



I agree, although as has been pointed out, Tolkien rewrote and reimagined a lot of things, so even if you go with the last version he wrote of X, you'll still run into problems with how the new X jibes with the ripple effects of the old version of X.


----------



## ART!

eyeheartawk said:


> I'm finally caught up and I just want to address the main criticism that people have with the show. That is, that it's slow and boring and that nothing happens for ages.



I think one of the things going on here is that there are 4 storylines and it's not until several episodes in that only two of them converge. And honestly it's not even clear that most of them are related, again until several episodes in. One would _assume_ they are, but the showrunners are playing such a long game that the connections aren't clear, for the most part.


----------



## Ryujin

ART! said:


> I agree, although as has been pointed out, Tolkien rewrote and reimagined a lot of things, so even if you go with the last version he wrote of X, you'll still run into problems with how the new X jibes with the ripple effects of the old version of X.



People are going to have to start asking, "So are you Tolkien, Orthodox Tolkien, or Reformed Tolkien?"


----------



## Mercurius

ART! said:


> I agree, although as has been pointed out, Tolkien rewrote and reimagined a lot of things, so even if you go with the last version he wrote of X, you'll still run into problems with how the new X jibes with the ripple effects of the old version of X.



I think the issue I have is the idea that anyone other than JRR can make canonical LotR. They can't. It is his world, his creation. I'm not suggested that you are saying otherwise, though I've seen elements of this thread's discussion veer into places where new elements of Rings of Power are being talked about as if they are "new canon" because they fill out gaps in Tolkien's work. That somehow seems....sacrilegious, especially when the show is so divergent from Tolkien's original works. 

This isn't Star Wars or Star Trek, or the MCU - all essentially shared worlds (or universes). Although even then, there's a marked tonal difference between Lucas' Star Wars and Roddenberry's Trek and what came after (especially so with more recent Trek offerings like Discovery and Picard).


----------



## Morrus

Mercurius said:


> I think the issue I have is the idea that anyone other than JRR can make canonical LotR. They can't. It is his world, his creation.



I completely disagree. It's no different to George Lucas, Ed Greenwood, Siegel and Shuster, Ian Fleming, Stan Lee, whoever came up with Robin Hood and King Arthur. IP outlives its creators and passes on to new custodians, and it's all valid.



> That somehow seems....sacrilegious, especially when the show is so divergent from Tolkien's original works.




That word has no place in this discussion, for me. We're talking about entertainment. A fantasy book written 70 years ago. It's loved by many, sure, but it's just pop culture. Tolkien was a fiction author, not some kind of prophet.

In a hundred years there will be as many interpretations of Middle Earth as there currently are of Batman. Some will be good, some not so good, some will be remembered and others forgotten, but that's just how it works.


----------



## Rabulias

Mercurius said:


> I think the issue I have is the idea that anyone other than JRR can make canonical LotR. They can't. It is his world, his creation.



So what happens when his own writings contradict each other on certain points?


----------



## Mercurius

Morrus said:


> I completely disagree. It's no different to George Lucas, Ed Greenwood, Siegel and Shuster, Ian Fleming, Stan Lee, whoever came up with Robin Hood and King Arthur. IP outlives its creators and passes on to new custodians, and it's all valid.
> 
> 
> 
> That word has no place in this discussion, for me. We're talking about entertainment. A fantasy book written 70 years ago. It's loved by many, sure, but it's just pop culture. Tolkien was a fiction author, not some kind of prophet.
> 
> In a hundred years there will be as many interpretations of Middle Earth as there currently are of Batman. Some will be good, some not so good, some will be remembered and others forgotten, but that's just how it works.



So I guess you don't believe that art is anything other than entertainment? Or that an artist's creation isn't their own, but somehow turns into pop culture? Sure, there are many interpretations of Starry Night or Beethoven's 9th, but there is only one "true" (or canonical) Starry Night or Beethoven's 9th. It doesn't make later interpretations un-entertaining or not worthy of our enjoyment, but it isn't the same thing as the original.

For example, we have this and then we have this. Both are great, but the former is the "canonical" version of Blue Monday.

Note also that Lucas, Greenwood, etc licensed those properties out to be further developed. Tolkien didn't. Even if the Tolkien estate licenses someone to write a sequel, it will never be "canon" - just some authors story that uses words and ideas from Tolkien.

So for me, there is Tolkien and then there are interpretations of Tolkien - that includes Bakshi, Jackson, and the Rings of Power. They aren't the same. To use Tolkien's terminology, if his Middle-earth is a "secondary world," all further interpretations are "tertiary worlds" (a term he didn't use, but I think it works for this context).

p.s. Re: sacrilegious. I wouldn't get too hung up on the word - I don't mean it in a religious sense, but more in terms of artistic fidelity. But if you can't separate that word from its religious context, replace it with "dishonoring" or "disrespectful" - that is, of the artist's creation.


----------



## Mercurius

Rabulias said:


> So what happens when his own writings contradict each other on certain points?



Well, it depends upon what you're talking about. As I said, there's Tolkien, then there's our own individual reading of Tolkien - our own version, be it a One Ring campaign or our own imagination when we're reading it (e.g. what the Balrog looks like to me might differ from what it looks like to you, and neither of us are "wrong"). And a third category: a cinematic version of Tolkien, which is essentially the filmmakers' version of Tolkien.

But I have no problem with ambiguity. Having engaged in my own process of building a singular world over about 30 years, I know that there are countless numbers of things that I don't know, or am uncertain of, and things are always changing. My understanding of the world increases over time, but sometimes I shift something so that my current view contradicts an earlier view. I suspect the same was true of Tolkien. If he had lived another 20 years, Middle-earth would have developed and changed further (though I think over the years, it changed less and less, and most later changes were fine-tunings and fleshing out details).


----------



## Paul Farquhar

Mercurius said:


> I think the issue I have is the idea that anyone other than JRR can make canonical LotR.



No one is calling the TV series (or indeed the movies) _canon_.


----------



## damiller

Mercurius said:


> So I guess you don't believe that art is anything other than entertainment? Or that an artist's creation isn't their own, but somehow turns into pop culture? Sure, there are many interpretations of Starry Night or Beethoven's 9th, but there is only one "true" (or canonical) Starry Night or Beethoven's 9th. It doesn't make later interpretations un-entertaining or not worthy of our enjoyment, but it isn't the same thing as the original.
> 
> For example, we have this and then we have this. Both are great, but the former is the "canonical" version of Blue Monday.
> 
> Note also that Lucas, Greenwood, etc licensed those properties out to be further developed. Tolkien didn't. Even if the Tolkien estate licenses someone to write a sequel, it will never be "canon" - just some authors story that uses words and ideas from Tolkien.
> 
> So for me, there is Tolkien and then there are interpretations of Tolkien - that includes Bakshi, Jackson, and the Rings of Power. They aren't the same. To use Tolkien's terminology, if his Middle-earth is a "secondary world," all further interpretations are "tertiary worlds" (a term he didn't use, but I think it works for this context).
> 
> p.s. Re: sacrilegious. I wouldn't get too hung up on the word - I don't mean it in a religious sense, but more in terms of artistic fidelity. But if you can't separate that word from its religious context, replace it with "dishonoring" or "disrespectful" - that is, of the artist's creation.



This is almost the kind of discussion we had in the One Ring game I mentioned upthread.

Its why I referred the problem to manuscript traditions. In New Testament scholarship, for example, there is no one verifiable text. There a multitude of manuscripts ALL with differences. (In fact noted biblical scholar Bart Ehrman suggests that there are more variations in text of the new testament then their are words in the new testament; though he does say most of those changes are insignificant to the text) What that means is there is no "canon". What you have a body of manuscripts that give you a general outline, the details are debatable.

Take for example just the crucifixion narrative. The details don't all match up very well. But the general outline remains.

And then the other non canon books of the new testament simply emphasize things that the canon books don't. John's gospel is generally recognized, for example, as kinda gnostic, but not gnostic as things like the gospel of thomas.

So, in my campaign, the idea that there is only one way to understand, interpret, or even experience the text is silly. It didn't work that way.

And more to your point:

If it is a work of art. Then at its core art is a subjective , not a objective . Which for me means any attempt to say "this is" and "that is not" is antithetical to art. because interpretation is part of the art.


----------



## Morrus

Mercurius said:


> So I guess you don't believe that art is anything other than entertainment?



That would be a bad guess! I think art can be different things to different people.


----------



## RuinousPowers

The Stranger will end up being Tom Bombadil and the second season is going to go full on musical and poetry slam.


----------



## eyeheartawk

RuinousPowers said:


> The Stranger will end up being Tom Bombadil and the second season is going to go full on musical and poetry slam.



I refuse to believe that any Tolkien adaption will every feature Tom Bombadil. 

Every adaption always chickens out on this point. 

The easiest way to never get your dreams crushed is to never dream at all.


----------



## Dioltach

My guess is the Stranger will shampoo his hair and turn out to be Legolas.


----------



## Mercurius

damiller said:


> This is almost the kind of discussion we had in the One Ring game I mentioned upthread.
> 
> Its why I referred the problem to manuscript traditions. In New Testament scholarship, for example, there is no one verifiable text. There a multitude of manuscripts ALL with differences. (In fact noted biblical scholar Bart Ehrman suggests that there are more variations in text of the new testament then their are words in the new testament; though he does say most of those changes are insignificant to the text) What that means is there is no "canon". What you have a body of manuscripts that give you a general outline, the details are debatable.
> 
> Take for example just the crucifixion narrative. The details don't all match up very well. But the general outline remains.
> 
> And then the other non canon books of the new testament simply emphasize things that the canon books don't. John's gospel is generally recognized, for example, as kinda gnostic, but not gnostic as things like the gospel of thomas.
> 
> So, in my campaign, the idea that there is only one way to understand, interpret, or even experience the text is silly. It didn't work that way.
> 
> And more to your point:
> 
> If it is a work of art. Then at its core art is a subjective , not a objective . Which for me means any attempt to say "this is" and "that is not" is antithetical to art. because interpretation is part of the art.



I don't disagree, though would mention that there is a difference between the Bible and Tolkien's works. The former is a compilation of thousands of years of stories, while the latter is the creation of a single author.

But I completely agree that what we do with Tolkien's work/art - be it within our imagination as we read it, what we do with it in a game, or even how we present it on film - is entirely up to us, and subjective. There is no "wrong" way to imagine it or play it, or even depict it on film. There are, of course, different degrees of closeness to the original spirit and lore of Tolkien.

Tolkien and Middle-earth is still in a fundamentally different category than, say, Star Wars or Star Trek. Middle-earth, in terms of canon, is complete - unless the Tolkien estate reveals an unpublished manuscript, there is no further Middle-earth canon - it is an artifact. Star Wars or Trek - as not being the work of singular authors - is ever-developing, with new canon being established.


----------



## Mercurius

Paul Farquhar said:


> No one is calling the TV series (or indeed the movies) _canon_.



Not overtly, no, though I think some of the discussion has veered in that direction, as if Middle-earth is just another property that is being developed in a similar way as Star Wars or Star Trek (see the post above for my differentiation). That said, I do see some similarity to the Star Wars expanded universe, which never set out to be canonical, just new stories set in the same setting. So I suppose Rings of Power is a bit like that.

But some are taking issue with Rings of Power being called fan-fiction, while I see it as an apt description. There's nothing inherently wrong with fan-fiction, and I understand that it often has pejorative connotations. But the reason I find it _more "_fan-fictiony" than Jackson's films (at least LotR) is not only because it is creating new stories and characters, but because the show-runners seem more prone to inject their own philosophical, aesthetic and cultural sensibilities into it, whereas Jackson explicitly tried to avoid that (as he has said interviews).


----------



## Paul Farquhar

Mercurius said:


> Not overtly, no, though I think some of the discussion has veered in that direction, as if Middle-earth is just another property that is being developed in a similar way as Star Wars or Star Trek (see the post above for my differentiation). That said, I do see some similarity to the Star Wars expanded universe, which never set out to be canonical, just new stories set in the same setting. So I suppose Rings of Power is a bit like that.
> 
> But some are taking issue with Rings of Power being called fan-fiction, while I see it as an apt description. There's nothing inherently wrong with fan-fiction, and I understand that it often has pejorative connotations. But the reason I find it _more "_fan-fictiony" than Jackson's films (at least LotR) is not only because it is creating new stories and characters, but because the show-runners seem more prone to inject their own philosophical, aesthetic and cultural sensibilities into it, whereas Jackson explicitly tried to avoid that (as he has said interviews).



The idea that "canon" matters, or even exists, in fiction, is silly. It matters in holy books, because they are supposed to be true. But fiction is, by definition, untrue. There is no "true" version of the story, and stories continually change to suit the teller and the audience. This is a strength. To try and freeze a story in amber is to diminish it.


----------



## Sepulchrave II

Canonicity is a funny thing, and - aside from "canonical" itself being a rather fuzzy word - different people will regard different works as belonging to canon. Not to belabour the biblical parallels, but the Catholic, Coptic, Syriac, Armenian etc. etc. churches all have different canons.

I suppose in the strictest sense ("Orthodox," if you will), only _The Hobbit_ and _The Lord of the Rings_ should be considered canonical, as they were published during Tolkien's lifetime. _The Silmarillion_ is, in a sense, Deuterocanonical, as Christopher's editorial and redactional fingerprints are over it; _Unfinished Tales_ veers into Apocryphal territory; and later volumes in _The History of Middle-Earth_ are full-on Apocrypha.

I mean, we _trust_ that Christopher faithfully represented his father's work, but we don't really _know_. We can't really disentangle the editor from _The Silmarillion_.


----------



## Dioltach

Mercurius said:


> Not overtly, no, though I think some of the discussion has veered in that direction, as if Middle-earth is just another property that is being developed in a similar way as Star Wars or Star Trek (see the post above for my differentiation).



But it *is* just another property. The original creators of SW and ST aren't involved in those properties anymore, so what sets ME apart as being "complete" while the others aren't?

You know, we might as well be complaining that New Zealand isn't actually Middle Earth. Or that Morfydd Clark isn't actually Galadriel. It's all just a retelling, adapted for a new medium and a new age, like people have always retold and adapted stories. There were probably people who disagreed with the Iliad and the Odyssee being written down, because it destroyed the freedom that reciting it offered. Or who complained bitterly that Chrétien de Troyes had butchered the themes of Peredur Son of Efrawg, or Wolfram von Eschenbach describing the grail as a jewel, or even the fact that Chrétien described a grail where the tale of Peredur has a screaming skull - and that since then the focus of the story has been on the grail, with its Christian connotations, instead of the unmanned Fisher King and his inability to keep his land alive.

My point is that stories evolve and change with every retelling. Just try to enjoy it for what it is, and otherwise just stick to your preferred version.


----------



## Mercurius

Paul Farquhar said:


> The idea that "canon" matters, or even exists, in fiction, is silly. It matters in holy books, because they are supposed to be true. But fiction is, by definition, untrue. There is no "true" version of the story, and stories continually change to suit the teller and the audience. This is a strength. To try and freeze a story in amber is to diminish it.



What you say here sounds good on face value, at least at first, but ignores the reality of the artist, and the relationship of the artist and their art - that someone created something out of their own imagination. For an artist, their work is an extension and expression of themselves - of their identity.

I wouldn't just squash this with a relativistic brush (i.e. "there is no true version of the story"), as if all versions of a story are equally true or valid. Authors and artists exist. 

Again, nothing wrong with writing or telling new stories in Middle-earth, but let's not brush aside the difference between those told by the actual creator of Middle-earth and those created by others. In a similar sense, no one knows Middle-earth like JRR Tolkien did because Middle-earth _is _JRR Tolkien. It is an expression of his mind. We can create our own versions of Middle-earth that are valid for ourselves, but they are only ever going to be our own versions of something that originated in Tolkien's imagination.


----------



## OB1

What fascinates me about the 'canon' discussion is that for thousands and thousands of years of human history, storytelling was an oral tradition that allowed stories to evolve and change from storyteller to storyteller and generation to generation.  Recorded language short circuits that process, and while it is wonderful to be able to preserve one storyteller's vision of a story, it shouldn't take anything away from another storyteller evolving and changing that story for a new audience.  If it's done well, it will be remembered.  It can resonate and be important to a new generation in a way that the original may not be.  A new take on an old story doesn't diminish the original work.  

RoP should be judged on its own merits, just as Tolkien's work should be.  Jackson's films are a prime example of this.  It changed much, both because of the medium it was being told in and the time it was being told for, but because it was done well, it remains beloved 20 years later.  Time will tell if RoP follows that path.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

Mercurius said:


> What you say here sounds good on face value, at least at first, but ignores the reality of the artist, and the relationship of the artist and their art - that someone created something out of their own imagination. For an artist, their work is an extension and expression of themselves - of their identity.



The artist is dead, both figuratively, and in this case literally. And stories are not paintings. The vast majority of Shakespeare's plays are based on older, less well-known stories. Only a few of the comedies are "original IP". And they have been retold in a multitude of different forms, from operas, to movies, to novels, to comic books to science fiction comedy musicals. Like Shakespeare, Tolkien did not create Middle Earth out of thin air. It is based on Saxon mythology, as it might have evolved in the mid twentieth century had the Normans not crushed the culture in the eleventh.


Mercurius said:


> I wouldn't just squash this with a relativistic brush (i.e. "there is no true version of the story"), as if all versions of a story are equally true or valid. Authors and artists exist.



There only thing that is TRUE is that there is no true version of a story. And in that sense, they are all equally true (as in not true at all). What do you mean by "valid"? Certainly not all retellings are of equal quality, and not all are of equal legality. But how can you measure "validity" of something that is inherently false?


Mercurius said:


> Again, nothing wrong with writing or telling new stories in Middle-earth, but let's not brush aside the difference between those told by the actual creator of Middle-earth and those created by others



Who is the "original creator"? All stories are based on older stories, as I'm sure Tolkien would explain in one of his lectures (e.g. The Hobbit is a retelling of the 3rd part of Beowulf). You cannot give special kind of status to some "original teller" of a story, because no one know who that is.


Mercurius said:


> no one knows Middle-earth like JRR Tolkien did because Middle-earth _is _JRR Tolkien.



Which is irrelevant. We can't ask him because he's dead. The various versions of Middle Earth that existed in his mind are gone forever. But that doesn't matter. When you write you don't share what is in your mind, you put something into your reader's mind. It's their imagination that generates the pictures, the voices, and the meanings.


----------



## Hriston

Perhaps interestingly, according to Wikipedia, the second part of the name of the Slavic god Radogost, from whom JRRT seems to have cribbed the name of the brown wizard, contains the noun _gost _"guest" which is cognate with the Latin _hostis _"stranger".

ETA: I still think he's Sauron.


----------



## TheSword

Mercurius said:


> Not overtly, no, though I think some of the discussion has veered in that direction, as if Middle-earth is just another property that is being developed in a similar way as Star Wars or Star Trek (see the post above for my differentiation). That said, I do see some similarity to the Star Wars expanded universe, which never set out to be canonical, just new stories set in the same setting. So I suppose Rings of Power is a bit like that.
> 
> But some are taking issue with Rings of Power being called fan-fiction, while I see it as an apt description. There's nothing inherently wrong with fan-fiction, and I understand that it often has pejorative connotations. But the reason I find it _more "_fan-fictiony" than Jackson's films (at least LotR) is not only because it is creating new stories and characters, but because the show-runners seem more prone to inject their own philosophical, aesthetic and cultural sensibilities into it, whereas Jackson explicitly tried to avoid that (as he has said interviews).



Fan-fic implies amateur work, without licence, shared on little-read forums. It is undeniably derogatory to refer to professional writers that have the rights to use the IP as making fan fic. They are making a TV adaption for cripes sake. It isn’t the same medium.

RoP is definitely the best thing I’m watching at the moment. Up there with Yellowstone!


----------



## Mercurius

Dioltach said:


> But it *is* just another property. The original creators of SW and ST aren't involved in those properties anymore, so what sets ME apart as being "complete" while the others aren't?



Again, they are different for a variety of reasons, some of which I mentioned above. But another key difference: the Peter Jackson films are _adaptations _of literary works; Rings of Power is one step further removed, as not only adaptations, but new creations.

And furthermore, the creators of SW and ST licensed their work for further development. JRR Tolkien did not.

Again, I'm not suggesting that people shouldn't create new stories set in Middle-earth, but that they can never really be anything other than "extended universe" (at most) and fan-fiction.



Dioltach said:


> You know, we might as well be complaining that New Zealand isn't actually Middle Earth. Or that Morfydd Clark isn't actually Galadriel. It's all just a retelling, adapted for a new medium and a new age, like people have always retold and adapted stories. There were probably people who disagreed with the Iliad and the Odyssee being written down, because it destroyed the freedom that reciting it offered. Or who complained bitterly that Chrétien de Troyes had butchered the themes of Peredur Son of Efrawg, or Wolfram von Eschenbach describing the grail as a jewel, or even the fact that Chrétien described a grail where the tale of Peredur has a screaming skull - and that since then the focus of the story has been on the grail, with its Christian connotations, instead of the unmanned Fisher King and his inability to keep his land alive.
> 
> My point is that stories evolve and change with every retelling. Just try to enjoy it for what it is, and otherwise just stick to your preferred version.



Yes, but you're comparing Tolkien's work to stuff that is hundreds--even thousands--of years old, some with no clear original author. 

But the same applies to the Iliad - there is an original version, and then re-tellings. Nothing wrong with that, but I don't see why there's an issue with pointing out that A) There's a difference between the original and re-tellings/re-creations, and B) When discussing the work of a distinct, singular--and known--author, anything written or created by anyone else, unless it is with the approval of the original author, is "fan-fiction" to some degree or another.

I mean, let me put it this way. It is one thing for von Eschenbach to imagine the Grail--which was not created by anyone, nor originated from any known singular author--as a jewel, quite another for some new author or show-runner to re-imagine the Silmarils as cell-phones left by the Valar, who are actually ETs, and then see that scifi as equally valid or canonical as Tolkien.


----------



## Hriston

The Urban Dictionary definition of _canon _is not very useful for discussion because it is entirely subjective what counts as official and what constitutes fanfic. 

As it relates to JRRT, _canon _can only mean one thing: the body of his written work. That's Tolkien's canon.


----------



## Mercurius

Paul Farquhar said:


> The artist is dead, both figuratively, and in this case literally. And stories are not paintings. The vast majority of Shakespeare's plays are based on older, less well-known stories. Only a few of the comedies are "original IP". And they have been retold in a multitude of different forms, from operas, to movies, to novels, to comic books to science fiction comedy musicals. Like Shakespeare, Tolkien did not create Middle Earth out of thin air. It is based on Saxon mythology, as it might have evolved in the mid twentieth century had the Normans not crushed the culture in the eleventh.



I had a feeling someone would cite "the artist is dead" (aka death of the author). But need I remind you, it is a literary concept, not fact. It might be accepted by a majority in the circles of literary criticism, but that doesn't make it something that is somehow sacrosanct and unquestionable.

But I'm not sure what you are arguing here, other than to say that...Tolkien had influences? 


Paul Farquhar said:


> There only thing that is TRUE is that there is no true version of a story. And in that sense, they are all equally true (as in not true at all). What do you mean by "valid"? Certainly not all retellings are of equal quality, and not all are of equal legality. But how can you measure "validity" of something that is inherently false?



Again, I just disagree with this - that "all stories are equally true" when we have a clear and distinct author and work in mind. That would be like me writing Legolas as an MCU character and saying it s equally true as the Legolas of Tolkien's work. 

Now that doesn't mean that Marvel Legolas couldn't be valid (if a bit silly) in the context of the MCU. But it would always be an alternate.

Also, I wouldn't call a story "inherently false." Sure, Middle-earth is not (afaik!) literally true, but that doesn't make it "false." That is a duality--true vs. false--that only applies to a literal interpretation, as if truth can be reduced to what is factual. Or as Ursula Le Guin said, "Fantasy isn't factual, but it is true." To understand what she meant, check out her seminal essay "Why Are Americans Afraid of Dragons?"



Paul Farquhar said:


> Who is the "original creator"? All stories are based on older stories, as I'm sure Tolkien would explain in one of his lectures (e.g. The Hobbit is a retelling of the 3rd part of Beowulf). You cannot give special kind of status to some "original teller" of a story, because no one know who that is.



This seems to be a bit of mental gymnastics. Again, it goes without saying that Tolkien had influences, that all artists have influences. But each artist work is unique and original. 


Paul Farquhar said:


> Which is irrelevant. We can't ask him because he's dead. The various versions of Middle Earth that existed in his mind are gone forever. But that doesn't matter. When you write you don't share what is in your mind, you put something into your reader's mind. It's their imagination that generates the pictures, the voices, and the meanings.



Again, I'm not sure what your point is here - I don't disagree, as I have stated several times that we all have our own versions of Middle-earth in our imaginations. I'm not sure why you resist any kind of differentiation, as if Rings of Power (or Peter Jackson, for that matter) is an equally true expression of Middle-earth as Tolkien's books are. 

So in that sense, it _is _relevant because Tolkien is the creator of Middle-earth. Why is that controversial? It doesn't mean we can't make new stories, just that they can never be as "true" as Tolkien's own works. They can be written better, be better stories, and great new ideas, but will never be the original. So yes, I am saying that--at least in this context--original = true. Everything else are just versions and variants.

Or rather, why must we insist on killing Tolkien and taking his stuff?


----------



## Mercurius

TheSword said:


> Fan-fic implies amateur work, without licence, shared on little-read forums. It is undeniably derogatory to refer to professional writers that have the rights to use the IP as making fan fic. They are making a TV adaption for cripes sake. It isn’t the same medium.
> 
> RoP is definitely the best thing I’m watching at the moment. Up there with Yellowstone!



I'm making no statement as to whether Rings of Power is of quality or not, whether it is amateurish or masterful. But I also don't think that a license or identification as "professional" automatically equates with quality or masterful work. A big budget production can still seem "fan-fiction-y," especially if it diverges significantly from the original work.

And you are right, it isn't fan-fic in that it _is _licensed - at least legally, by the Tolkien estate (if not Tolkien himself). But what I mean, and what I think others mean, when they describe it as fan-fiction (or, as "fan-fictiony") is that it feels less like an adaptation ala the original Peter Jackson trilogy--that was a clear attempt to depict Middle-earth as faithfully to Tolkien as possible--and more like someone telling new stories set in a version of Middle-earth that veers a bit further from Tolkien's original works, certainly than Jackson's films did. A lot of people find this jarring. 

Again, there's nothing inherently wrong with that unless, of course, it is presenting itself as a faithful adaptation. It is done all the time in the artistic and literary world. But I'd also put forth that there's nothing wrong with suggesting that it feels like fan-fiction. Opinions may differ on such things.


----------



## Dioltach

We're getting bogged down in the "This is/isn't Tolkien" discussion again. The fact is that it's been licensed and approved by the Tolkien Estate, and they're really the only ones with any authority to make that distinction.

How about we talk about the show on its own merits? And anyone who wants to can start a new thread about the legitimacy of altering an author's vision. Perhaps they can start with Dennis L. McKiernan's awful _Iron Tower _trilogy.


----------



## vilainn6

Dioltach said:


> We're getting bogged down in the "This is/isn't Tolkien" discussion again. The fact is that it's been licensed and approved by the Tolkien Estate, and they're really the only ones with any authority to make that distinction.
> 
> How about we talk about the show on its own merits? And anyone who wants to can start a new thread about the legitimacy of altering an author's vision. Perhaps they can start with Dennis L. McKiernan's awful _Iron Tower _trilogy.



The Estate must be just interested by the big check given by Amazon because no one respecting Tolkien work would have agreed on the terrible writting in the show


----------



## Mercurius

Dioltach said:


> We're getting bogged down in the "This is/isn't Tolkien" discussion again. The fact is that it's been licensed and approved by the Tolkien Estate, and they're really the only ones with any authority to make that distinction.



All they really have is legal authority - that is, who can use the names and concepts of Tolkien, not the authority to decide what "is" Tolkien.  That said...


Dioltach said:


> How about we talk about the show on its own merits? And anyone who wants to can start a new thread about the legitimacy of altering an author's vision. Perhaps they can start with Dennis L. McKiernan's awful _Iron Tower _trilogy.



...I hear you (oh, and read the first book of that trilogy some 30ish years ago...I remember thinking, "This makes _Sword of Shannara _seem original"). 

The only point I'll add is that considering Rings of Power as fan-fiction--or at least, re-affirming in my mind that this is not Tolkien, but the show-runners' depiction of Tolkien--has actually allowed me to better enjoy it on its own merits. Meaning, when I stopped looking it at as JRR Tolkien's Second Age adapted for film, and more as _Payne & McKay's Rings of Power, _I've been better able to enjoy it for what it is.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

Mercurius said:


> Again, I just disagree with this - that "all stories are equally true" when we have a clear and distinct author and work in mind.



Fiction is, by definition, not true. Three is a number. There are lots of other numbers, and all of them are not three. They are all equally not three. There are not varying degrees of not-threeness.


Mercurius said:


> But I'm not sure what you are arguing here, other than to say that...Tolkien had influences?



I'm arguing that Tolkien is _not_ the original creator of Middle Earth (AKA Midgard), nor would he claim to be. He would be pleased that people continue to adapt what he wrote, just as he adapted what others wrote.


Mercurius said:


> That would be like me writing Legolas as an MCU character and saying it s equally true as the Legolas of Tolkien's work.



Which is correct. Legolas is a fictional character. Legolas does not exist. Legolas equally does not exist irrespective of who is telling stories about them.


Mercurius said:


> All they really have is legal authority



"All"? What authority is there apart from that defined by legal statute?


----------



## Zardnaar

My take on canon is something like this. 

 Author writes original work. Could be a book, play, movie or whatever. 

 You should at least be somewhat faithful to the original material. If you're not expect backlash. That backlash might sink your project financially. 

 New stories fine retcons not so much (expect more backlash basically). 

 Changing mediums expect some changes eg book to movie adaptations. You want to hit the major points of the plot imho. Expect changes to dialogue etc.

Flesh out said world don't contradict it. If you do contradict it expect said backlash. If it sinks your project that's on you. 

 Ultimately it's about what works or not. Your tale might be good might be crap or somewhere in the middle.

  There's a few trigger warnings likely to intensify any backlash and they're fairly predictable eg retcons, contradicting the original, rushing/condensing things to much.


----------



## Tonguez

TheSword said:


> Fan-fic implies amateur work, without licence, shared on little-read forums. It is undeniably derogatory to refer to professional writers that have the rights to use the IP as making fan fic. They are making a TV adaption for cripes sake. It isn’t the same medium.
> 
> RoP is definitely the best thing I’m watching at the moment. Up there with Yellowstone!



I used the term fanfic and it wasnt intended as derogatory, any derived work is imho fanfic, think of it as a synonym of Pastiche.  Fritz Leiber or Philip Jose Farmer writing Tarzan pastiche or Robert Jordan or Steve Perry doing a Conan pastiche is also fanfic.


----------



## TheSword

Tonguez said:


> I used the term fanfic and it wasnt intended as derogatory, any derived work is imho fanfic, think of it as a synonym of Pastiche.  Fritz Leiber or Philip Jose Farmer writing Tarzan pastiche or Robert Jordan doing a Conan pastiche is also fanfic.



It might not be intended as derogatory but nevertheless it is derogatory and received that way. You might have your own ideas of what fan fiction is but I stand by my point that the common understanding is amateurish and unlicensed by definition. Use the term or not, I’ve just explained why it gets people backs up.

Most people wouldn’t consider fan-fic a suitable description of Robert Jordan’s Tarzan. It’s just Robert Jordan’s Tarzan. In the same vein Brandon Sanderson wasn’t writing fan fiction when he finished the Wheel of Time Series he was continuing the story in his own words.


----------



## Galandris

I've very much enjoyed this Circles of Electricity show about the poor hard-working, disenfranchised uruks doing great works of engineering despite their obvious disabilities (they can't stand the sun AND they need torches at night...) to try to make a land suitable for themselves, while being harrassed by the evil elf-lady who'd like to keep their chief alive to see everyone of them killed. She's a very badass BBEG and I really thought she'd manage to kill that uruk-dad Adar.

On the minus side, I really don't understand why the show was always interrupted by extended scenes of those really mean children on their scout troop trip helping the creepy old guy (while being ready to abandon their friends to die in the wilderness if they can't keep up, which I think will void any badge they could claim for helping a stranger in need). I hope it will be explained in the last two episodes I have to watch.

I much preferred the interruption about the scheming elf trying to acquire reverse-kryptonite from the dwarves. A nice plot twist would be if those poor and decent dwarves, prompted to save the evil elves and mining mucho silmaril-metal dripping from the root of the tree, encountered some kind of hiccup on the way. I'm sure those elves (especially the politician one) would try to avoid responsability and shift the blame on the dwarves. TBH, the scheming elf plot was very good, feigning to be manipulated by his elders (the other elves, Celerity and Gilette) to convince the dwarf-prince to help in earnest... He really has a place among my favourite villains, right besides Agent Smith.


----------



## ART!

One thing I'm really liking about this show is Bear McCreary score. More specifically, I can't stop listening to his themes, especially _Galadriel_, _The Stranger_, _Numenor_, _Valinor_, and _Elendil & Isildu_r. They're really strong, I think, and distinctive. I love the Mediterranean/Middle-Eastern/North-African sound of the Numenor theme, and _The Stranger_ reminds me of Bedrich Smetana's _Vltava._


----------



## Mercurius

Paul Farquhar said:


> Fiction is, by definition, not true. Three is a number. There are lots of other numbers, and all of them are not three. They are all equally not three. There are not varying degrees of not-threeness.
> 
> I'm arguing that Tolkien is _not_ the original creator of Middle Earth (AKA Midgard), nor would he claim to be. He would be pleased that people continue to adapt what he wrote, just as he adapted what others wrote.
> 
> Which is correct. Legolas is a fictional character. Legolas does not exist. Legolas equally does not exist irrespective of who is telling stories about them.
> 
> "All"? What authority is there apart from that defined by legal statute?



I think we're too far apart to have a meaningful conversation about this. Just some basic, fundamental differences in our views about the nature of art and story, the relationship of an artist and their work, etc.

To address one thing, though: I'm not sure how much you know about Tolkien, but I'm reasonably certain he would have greatly disliked even Peter Jackson's films, and would have absolutely detested Rings of Power. So no, I don't think he'd be at all happy about the various adaptations of his stories, or at least disowned them as having no relation to his work beyond names and basic concepts.


----------



## TheSword

Mercurius said:


> I think we're too far apart to have a meaningful conversation about this. Just some basic, fundamental differences in our views about the nature of art and story, the relationship of an artist and their work, etc.
> 
> To address one thing, though: I'm not sure how much you know about Tolkien, but I'm reasonably certain he would have greatly disliked even Peter Jackson's films, and would have absolutely detested Rings of Power. So no, I don't think he'd be at all happy about the various adaptations of his stories, or at least disowned them as having no relation to his work beyond names and basic concepts.



I think at this point it’s worth mentioning that this is a + thread and it’s not supposed to be about people trashing the show. I mean you might be right, maybe not but you’ll never prove it.


----------



## TheSword

Incidentally the Sauron question has been answered, and even though I was wrong I really liked it!

Truly I was deceived.


----------



## reelo

What a disappointement this show has been.
If they placed magnets around Tolkien's coffin, Europe's energy crisis for the coming winter would be solved.


----------



## Tonguez

reelo said:


> What a disappointement this show has been.
> If they placed magnets around Tolkien's coffin, Europe's energy crisis for the coming winter would be solved.




personally I’ve liked it for what it is, but one has to accept it isnt Tolkien and the writers have some story of their own they’re wanting to tell.


----------



## Umbran

*Mod Note:*
At this time I'd like to remind folks that this is a (+) thread.  

If you want to start a discussion about how absolutely craptastic the show is, by all means you may do so.  But this thread is dedicated to discussion among folks who are generally supportive of the show.


----------



## Ryujin

TheSword said:


> Incidentally the Sauron question has been answered, and even though I was wrong I really liked it!
> 
> Truly I was deceived.



Had it stuck in my head that he needed to be a pointy-eared sod, so they faked me out on that one. Think I was right about the bearded guy though.


----------



## wicked cool

I saw the fake coming once they started spinning him (Saruman from the movies). Is he gandolf but they just can’t say it?
I’m going to abide by the moderators note and not bash but I would like to ask questions

So Sauron died and came back? But morgoth can’t? I wonder  if the 3 servants can also come back
Did the blue wizards arrive before gandolf or with him? Wasn’t sauroman the leader of the wizards?
Those who wear the rings at some point become wraiths to the one ring? Was that already created

Galadriel has magic? Wasn’t she more powerful than gandolf? Didn’t she use magic in the battle with gandolf etc against the necromancer?


----------



## Rabulias

Rabulias said:


> If Halbrand is not Sauron, they really are red herringing him heavily, IMO. His rage at Adar (assuming Adar's story is true) and his return as "king of the Southlands" just as Adar's plan for an orc homeland comes to pass are both additional points. On top of the fact that he is a smith, the Halbrand = "halfsword" bit, and the twisted irony of Galadriel (of all people) unwittingly facilitating his return.



Called it! (Not that I was the only one!) And I loved Halbrand's/Sauron's attempts to entice Galadriel to the dark side with high-minded sounding promises, but making the mistake of using her brother's image. And the insult/threat veiled as gratitude "...you believed in me. You saw strength in me. You pushed me to heights that no one else could have. I will never forget that. And I'll see to it that no one else does either." That was a delicious twist of the knife.

Though I did think Celebrimbor echoing Adar's words, and "the key that unlocked the dam" was a bit much.


----------



## MarkB

A fine finale. While I've enjoyed all the storylines this season, the harfoots have been an unexpected and welcome pleasure throughout, very much my favourite storyline, and I loved the conclusion to this arc of their story.

And hey, the show delivered on its title. We get actual Rings of Power by the end of the first season.


----------



## TheSword

wicked cool said:


> I saw the fake coming once they started spinning him (Saruman from the movies). Is he gandolf but they just can’t say it?
> I’m going to abide by the moderators note and not bash but I would like to ask questions
> 
> So Sauron died and came back? But morgoth can’t? I wonder  if the 3 servants can also come back
> Did the blue wizards arrive before gandolf or with him? Wasn’t sauroman the leader of the wizards?
> Those who wear the rings at some point become wraiths to the one ring? Was that already created
> 
> Galadriel has magic? Wasn’t she more powerful than gandolf? Didn’t she use magic in the battle with gandolf etc against the necromancer?



Yes the spinning was definitely a nod… as was ‘follow your nose’.

I guess they haven’t had to consider how Sauron comes back as even if they died isn’t addressed in the series. I got the impression that Mystics were wraiths though and always have been so I presume they are not destroyed. They did appear to be flying away as moths. One actually screamed like a Ringwraith when it was stabbed by the Harfoots.

Saruman is presumably somewhere… maybe. Just not here. Or maybe he hasn’t arrived yet. Clearly the transition is confusing for the Istari. I guess it isn’t relevant to the story yet.

I don’t think the one ring is made. Or the others. Just the elven rings. I’m guessing that will be a big part of the next season. Particularly as the Halbrand actor said he is keen to have some scenes with dwarves.

Maybe she can use magic but I’m not sure at what point she was supposed to use it on Sauron, there wasn’t really that kind of opportunity. I’m ok with that.


----------



## Ryujin

Rabulias said:


> Called it! (Not that I was the only one!) And I loved Halbrand's/Sauron's attempts to entice Galadriel to the dark side with high-minded sounding promises, but making the mistake of using her brother's image. And the insult/threat veiled as gratitude "...you believed in me. You saw strength in me. You pushed me to heights that no one else could have. I will never forget that. And I'll see to it that no one else does either." That was a delicious twist of the knife.
> 
> Though I did think Celebrimbor echoing Adar's words, and "the key that unlocked the dam" was a bit much.



It's always obvious in retrospect. If I hadn't been so fixated on him not having pointy ears, I'd likely have seen it to. As it was, I enjoyed the reveal. Little innocent seeming comments that steered Celebrimbor, rather than outright stepping in and doing it for him.


MarkB said:


> A fine finale. While I've enjoyed all the storylines this season, the harfoots have been an unexpected and welcome pleasure throughout, very much my favourite storyline, and I loved the conclusion to this arc of their story.
> 
> And hey, the show delivered on its title. We get actual Rings of Power by the end of the first season.



Having so many high & mighty folk about always seems to make the regular folk, just going about their business, real stand-outs.


----------



## Ryujin

TheSword said:


> Yes the spinning was definitely a nod… as was ‘follow your nose’.
> 
> I guess they haven’t had to consider how Sauron comes back as even if they died isn’t addressed in the series. I got the impression that Mystics were wraiths though and always have been so I presume they are not destroyed. They did appear to be flying away as moths. One actually screamed like a Ringwraith when it was stabbed by the Harfoots.
> 
> Saruman is presumably somewhere… maybe. Just not here. Or maybe he hasn’t arrived yet. Clearly the transition is confusing for the Istari. I guess it isn’t relevant to the story yet.
> 
> I don’t think the one ring is made. Or the others. Just the elven rings. I’m guessing that will be a big part of the next season. Particularly as the Halbrand actor said he is keen to have some scenes with dwarves.
> 
> Maybe she can use magic but I’m not sure at what point she was supposed to use it on Sauron, there wasn’t really that kind of opportunity. I’m ok with that.



And while Galadriel is ancient and powerful in her own right, she didn't yet have one of the three Elven Rings. That's a serious power boost.


----------



## MarkB

TheSword said:


> I guess they haven’t had to consider how Sauron comes back as even if they died isn’t addressed in the series. I got the impression that Mystics were wraiths though and always have been so I presume they are not destroyed. They did appear to be flying away as moths. One actually screamed like a Ringwraith when it was stabbed by the Harfoots.



I don't think the turning-into-moths bit was their idea. I think that's what was done to them, and that it's another thematic link between the Stranger and the Gandalf we know.

That being the case, I don't think they're coming back.


----------



## TheSword

MarkB said:


> I don't think the turning-into-moths bit was their idea. I think that's what was done to them, and that it's another thematic link between the Stranger and the Gandalf we know.
> 
> That being the case, I don't think they're coming back.



You don’t think it’s possible they may end up as some of the nine?


----------



## Ryujin

TheSword said:


> Yes the spinning was definitely a nod… as was ‘follow your nose’.
> 
> I guess they haven’t had to consider how Sauron comes back as even if they died isn’t addressed in the series. I got the impression that Mystics were wraiths though and always have been so I presume they are not destroyed. They did appear to be flying away as moths. One actually screamed like a Ringwraith when it was stabbed by the Harfoots.
> 
> Saruman is presumably somewhere… maybe. Just not here. Or maybe he hasn’t arrived yet. Clearly the transition is confusing for the Istari. I guess it isn’t relevant to the story yet.
> 
> I don’t think the one ring is made. Or the others. Just the elven rings. I’m guessing that will be a big part of the next season. Particularly as the Halbrand actor said he is keen to have some scenes with dwarves.
> 
> Maybe she can use magic but I’m not sure at what point she was supposed to use it on Sauron, there wasn’t really that kind of opportunity. I’m ok with that.



I don't have the books with me but I think that even in the appendices the Elven Rings were supposed to be made after The One and all of the others, which is why they weren't under Sauron's control. We may find out that Sauron has already made the others and has distributed them, next season.


----------



## Rabulias

MarkB said:


> That being the case, I don't think they're coming back.



I agree, and this would maintain later Sauron's ignorance of the harfoots/hobbits. If the three reformed and joined the real Sauron, they would surely report on their experiences, including the presence of an Istari among these short creatures.


TheSword said:


> You don’t think it’s possible they may end up as some of the nine?



The nine are human lords/kings corrupted by the control of the One Ring, IIRC. Since the One Ring is not made yet, and the three are not human, I don't see this as possible. Not to mention that the nine were all men, underlining Eowyn's victory.


----------



## TheSword

Rabulias said:


> I agree, and this would maintain later Sauron's ignorance of the harfoots/hobbits. If the three reformed and joined the real Sauron, they would surely report on their experiences, including the presence of an Istari among these short creatures.
> 
> The nine are human lords/kings corrupted by the control of the One Ring, IIRC. Since the One Ring is not made yet, and the three are not human, I don't see this as possible. Not to mention that the nine were all men, underlining Eowyn's victory.



Good point about them being men. These were maybe proto-wraiths of some kind. Servants of Morgoth or Sauron before his defeat.


----------



## Mercurius

TheSword said:


> I think at this point it’s worth mentioning that this is a + thread and it’s not supposed to be about people trashing the show. I mean you might be right, maybe not but you’ll never prove it.



I'm not trashing the show, at least not in this thread. Meaning, saying Tolkien wouldn't like it does not equate with trashing the show. But I hear and take the general point.


----------



## Mercurius

wicked cool said:


> So Sauron died and came back? But morgoth can’t? I wonder  if the 3 servants can also come back
> Did the blue wizards arrive before gandolf or with him? Wasn’t sauroman the leader of the wizards?
> Those who wear the rings at some point become wraiths to the one ring? Was that already created
> 
> Galadriel has magic? Wasn’t she more powerful than gandolf? Didn’t she use magic in the battle with gandolf etc against the necromancer?



All I can do is answer from as I understand Tolkien's lore. Whether or not the show will diverge (or how much) is anyone's guess.

*Sauron and Morgoth. *Morgoth was defeated at the end of the First Age and cast out into the Void. He isn't dead, per se, just outside of creation, and can't come back in. That said, at one point Tolkien posited a prophesy that Morgoth would return in a Ragnarok-like Dagor Dagorath, or "Battle of All Battles." But he didn't develop this further, at least in his published notes.

Sauron didn't die at the end of the First Age, but instead hid in Middle-earth before gradually gathering power during the Second Age. He tried to sway the Elves by appearing to them as Annatar, "Lord of Gifts," and helped them forge the rings. Eventually the elves rejected him and war ensued. Later, he gave himself up to the Numenoreans and was taken to Numenor, where he quickly went from prisoner to advisor to the king. He eventually convinced Ar-Pharazon to sail west and attack the Valar. It didn't go well, Numenor was sunk, and Sauron did die - his body, at least. His spirit returned to Mordor and he rebuilt himself. Centuries later, he was again killed (physically) by Isildur, as depicted in the prologue to Peter Jackson's trilogy.

Or to summarize, Sauron didn't die at the end of the First Age. He died three times (that I can remember) - twice in the Second Age, and once--and supposedly a final time--at the end of the Third Age, with the destruction of the One Ring. Morgoth, on the other hand, was never killed, just banished outside of creation.

*The Istari. *A thousand years into the Third Age, when the Valar learned that Sauron was rising again, they sent the Istari, or five Wizards, to MIddle-earth to help. I believe Saruman (the leader) and one of the blue wizards went first, then were joined by Gandalf, Radagast, and the other blue wizard. The two blue wizards went east to combat Sauron's influence there, and disappeared from the story. Supposedly they gave rise to various esoteric orders (and thus may be Tolkien's origin story of various esoteric and occult orders, and/or Eastern mysticism).

*The Rings. *When the elves were forging the rings in Eregion (Second Age), Sauron secretly made the One Ring to control them. The Men were corrupted and became the Nazgul, but the Elves sensed his treachery and took theirs off and hid them. Dwarves were given seven rings and proved to be too strong-willed to be dominated by Sauron, using them to gain great wealth, though also became increasingly greedy. I believe their rings were either destroyed or stolen by Sauron. So to answer your question, only the nine men became wraiths - the seven Dwarf-lords and three elves did not. During the LotR, Galadriel, Elrond, and Gandalf wore the elven rings. I believe at one point Cirdan the Shipwright wore a ring, but gave his to Gandalf.

*Magic (and Galadriel). *Magic is very understated in Tolkien's stories, so it is hard to say how it is used beyond relatively minor effects done by Gandalf. For instance, he used a sword in his battle against the Balrog, and so you can say that Gandalf was "magic-infused," but not casting D&D-esque spells.

Galadriel was an ancient Eldar elf (meaning, she had lived in Valinor), some of whom were close in power to the Maiar - among whose number are Gandalf and the other wizards. So while I don't think you can really rank Middle-earth characters in terms of power, there is a rough hierarchy. Another elf of great power was Glorfindel, who died fighting (and killing) a Balrog in the First Age, but was brought back to life and went to Middle-earth, and lived in Rivendell. He was considered to be about as powerful as a Maiar, I believe.


----------



## Ryujin

Can't remember where I read it but in the Third Age, at least, there was a warning that powerful magic shouldn't be used for fear of attracting the unwanted attention of powerful (and evil) beings.


----------



## Tonguez

TheSword said:


> .
> 
> I don’t think the one ring is made. Or the others. Just the elven rings. I’m guessing that will be a big part of the next season. Particularly as the Halbrand actor said he is keen to have some scenes with dwarves.
> 
> Maybe she can use magic but I’m not sure at what point she was supposed to use it on Sauron, there wasn’t really that kind of opportunity. I’m ok with that.



yeah the three elven rings go to Galadrial (silver) Elrond (blue) and Gil-galad (later Gandalf) (red) they were made first, then Sauron goes off and forges the One Ring in Mt Doom - which I assume is where Halbrand is going off to do in season 2. Not sure when the Dwarf rings get made

its only the nine rings that go to humans that turn the wearer into Ring-Wraiths



			
				Mercurius said:
			
		

> I believe their rings were either destroyed or stolen by Sauron. So to answer your question, only the nine men became wraiths - the seven Dwarf-lords and three elves did not. During the LotR, Galadriel, Elrond, and Gandalf wore the elven rings. I believe at one point Cirdan the Shipwright wore a ring, but gave his to Gandalf.




Sauron was only able to get three of the Dwarf rings, Gandalf claims that the other four were eaten by dragons
.


----------



## reelo

Tonguez said:


> yeah the three elven rings go to Galadrial (silver) Elrond (blue) and Gil-galad (later Gandalf) (red) they were made first, then Sauron goes off and forges the One Ring in Mt Doom - which I assume is where Halbrand is going off to do in season 2. Not sure when the Dwarf rings get made.




In _canon_ the 3 elven rings were actually made last, except for the One Ring.
The 16 others (along with other, "lesser" rings) were crafted before that by the Gwaith-i-Mírdain (Celebrimbor&Co) and Annatar together.

Then, Annatar left Eregion (presumably to craft the One) and the elves, having "learned" the craft from him, forged the Three alone, without his involvement.

So this is actually a non-trivial change.


----------



## Zardnaar

Just finished the latest episode. 

 Last three episodes were quite good. Had various issues before that around pacing and character development. 

 The setup of the world is kinda interesting but there's no stand out characters to care about that much at this point. 

 Sliw paced and event driven vs character.


----------



## Ryujin

reelo said:


> In _canon_ the 3 elven rings were actually made last, except for the One Ring.
> The 16 others (along with other, "lesser" rings) were crafted before that by the Gwaith-i-Mírdain (Celebrimbor&Co) and Annatar together.
> 
> Then, Annatar left Eregion (presumably to craft the One) and the elves, having "learned" the craft from him, forged the Three alone, without his involvement.
> 
> So this is actually a non-trivial change.



I thought that I remembered that the three Elven rings were made in secret, after The One, so that they wouldn't fall under Sauron's sway. Weird that they would change that bit, that seems fairly central to the theme. Like I said up-thread, hopefully everything else has already been made an distributed before he went to the Elven forges.


----------



## Parmandur

I am a major Tolkien superfanread all of the HoME stuff when I was a teenager, learned Elvish (hence using my Elf name for this forum), the whole deal. Have mixed feelings about JacksonLotR movies, though I think they are a bit of a triumph, _hate_ the Jackson Hobvit "trilogy."

I have no binged Rings of Power through the Finale this week, and can render my informed judgement: this is _excellent_, every bit of the production is exquisite and the writers actually get Tolkien's themes on a fundamental level. The things they add fit in well and are very smart, and for the purposes of these artists telling their story, I don't really care about the creative licenses they took, because they work in themselves as part of a coherent narrative. Tolkien wrote multiple deeply contradictory versions of all his stories, so as long as the work is _good_, "canon" is irrelevant.


----------



## damiller

Parmandur said:


> I am a major Tolkien superfanread all of the HoME stuff when I was a teenager, learned Elvish (hence using my Elf name for this forum), the whole deal. Have mixed feelings about JacksonLotR movies, though I think they are a bit of a triumph, _hate_ the Jackson Hobvit "trilogy."
> 
> I have no binged Rings of Power through the Finale this week, and can render my informed judgement: this is _excellent_, every bit of the production is exquisite and the writers actually get Tolkien's themes on a fundamental level. The things they add fit in well and are very smart, and for the purposes of these artists telling their story, I don't really care about the creative licenses they took, because they work in themselves as part of a coherent narrative. Tolkien wrote multiple deeply contradictory versions of all his stories, so as long as the work is _good_, "canon" is irrelevant.



And the interesting thing about real world mythology is just that: its contradictory.

In some ways, thats what makes it true.

Cause life is contradictory.


----------



## Zardnaar

Parmandur said:


> I am a major Tolkien superfanread all of the HoME stuff when I was a teenager, learned Elvish (hence using my Elf name for this forum), the whole deal. Have mixed feelings about JacksonLotR movies, though I think they are a bit of a triumph, _hate_ the Jackson Hobvit "trilogy."
> 
> I have no binged Rings of Power through the Finale this week, and can render my informed judgement: this is _excellent_, every bit of the production is exquisite and the writers actually get Tolkien's themes on a fundamental level. The things they add fit in well and are very smart, and for the purposes of these artists telling their story, I don't really care about the creative licenses they took, because they work in themselves as part of a coherent narrative. Tolkien wrote multiple deeply contradictory versions of all his stories, so as long as the work is _good_, "canon" is irrelevant.




 Show just has to be coherent with itself. A few shows fail that standard RoP isn't one of them. 

 Probably do a rewatch, polish off some Bond movies and cancel Amazon Prime until some new shows/seasons land.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

Pretty visuals, pretty sets, pretty people. But there is so much messed up or moved around from the original story/timeline that this would be more enjoyable if the Lord of the Rings name were removed from it and all the character and location names changed.


----------



## Parmandur

Enevhar Aldarion said:


> Pretty visuals, pretty sets, pretty people. But there is so much messed up or moved around from the original story/timeline that this would be more enjoyable if the Lord of the Rings name were removed from it and all the character and location names changed.



To be honest, you have to be a gigantic lore afficiando to know that they changed, and how. Most people who even read the books wouldn't know the difference. The important part is internal cohesion to the shows own lore, which is pulled off very, very well while maintaining respect for the original canon. Which, again, was all in Flux throughout Tolkien's lifetime: final "canon" is a creation of Guy Gavriel Kay and Christopher Tolkien making editorial decisions, not Holy Writ delivered on stone tablets by lighting on Mt. Sinai.

I knew every change they made, and I didn't mind because they were smart changes for the story at hand.


----------



## Vael

I think that my main concern with the season was that they were playing the "Who's Sauron" game for too long. It made the earlier episodes drag out, though I will confess that the finale did pay back the investment. Overall, I'm in for a second season. Surprised we didn't get any Isildur or anything from the Southlanders.


----------



## Hriston

So, the guy who seemed like a wizard turned out to be... a wizard.

And the rough looking scoundrel's story about really being a king? Fake. Who'd have thunk it?

And the subtle hints and not so subtle plot devices turned out to be so much misdirection to get you to think the obvious wasn't going to happen. But then it did.

I wanted to like this show, but the recent episode has brought home the fact that this type of storytelling is not for me.


----------



## Zardnaar

The stranger as Sauron was to obvious. Second last episode hinted it wasn't him. 

  Halfand was the only other character that was viable based on screentime. Maybe that sea xaorain who rescued Galadriel so it wasn't a big suspects list and essentially 50/50.


----------



## Parmandur

Zardnaar said:


> The stranger as Sauron was to obvious. Second last episode hinted it wasn't him.
> 
> Halfand was the only other character that was viable based on screentime. Maybe that sea xaorain who rescued Galadriel so it wasn't a big suspects list and essentially 50/50.



I knew the Stranger was Gandalf the moment one of the Harfoots sang "not all who wonder or wander are lost." Instant giveaway. Halbrand, I thought they were building up to be Witch King of Angmar, but now I think that's probably Theo, we'll see.

The moment when "Halbrand" let's his mask drop at last was...very chilling. Charlie Vickers was talking in an interview about how he views Sauron as a supreme cosmoc method actor who wasn't just being deceitful, but climbed into his role "like Daniel Day-Lewis or something" and lived his chosen role with absolute conviction. And Halbrand never, ever, not once, actually lies in the season. He always tells the truth...but uses the truth as a weapon.


----------



## Sepulchrave II

Parmandur said:


> every bit of the production is exquisite and the writers actually get Tolkien's themes on a fundamental level.



I think it might be rather too early to make that judgement, as - for me, at least - the _fudamental_ themes of Tolkien are about providence and surrender to the will of God/Eru.

That said, I agree that some of the deeper motifs have been articulated well, namely:


Sauron's role as _deceiver_, and his (possibly genuine; probably not) desire for repentance. This is framed as an appeal to Galadriel in the show, but has echoes of his partial submission to Eonwe at the end of the First Age. In a sense, Sauron _is_ a victim of Morgoth, and as much as we might revile him, he lost any true autonomy ages before.
Halbrand-Sauron's nudging of Celebrimbor, being sufficient to arouse Galadriel's suspicion.
The fact that the Elven rings are designed primarily to _prevent decay_. I found the mithril subplot a bit extraneous to this, but understand its inclusion.

I'm not sure how they are going to proceed with the Seven and the Nine, unless Galadriel either cannot convince, or does not reveal, Sauron's identity to Celebrimbor.

We may not learn the name of the Stranger, although his identity as a Blue Wizard "Going into the East" would definitely comport with Tolkien's later vision, and I have no problem with his arrival via meteor in the Second Age. I think it would be a mistake to make him Gandalf ("To the East, I go not."), but I suppose we'll see.

Overall, a mixed bag, but I feel it started to cohere within its own framework as the show progressed and the actors relaxed into their roles. Felt bad for Lenny Henry. Looking forward to Season 2.


----------



## Parmandur

Sepulchrave II said:


> I think it might be rather too early to make that judgement, as - for me, at least - the _fudamental_ themes of Tolkien are about providence and surrender to the will of God/Eru.



That is one of Tolkien's most fundamental themes, and frankly one I think they nailed here, hard.



Sepulchrave II said:


> I'm not sure how they are going to proceed with the Seven and the Nine, unless Galadriel either cannot convince, or does not reveal, Sauron's identity to Celebrimbor.



Well, per the Appendixes of RotK, Galadriel does end up getting kicked out of Eregion for getting between Celebrimvor and his bromantic pursuit of power with Sauron. I think there will be political roadblocks to her being able to hold Sauron back, which can be a good engine for TV drama. Giving them an actual friendship, that seems to be not entirely artificial on Sauron's part (tying into the very Tolkienien theme of nobody being simply or fully "Evil") is kind of brilliant in my book. This show will not suffer from the "Big Angry Eye" antagonist problem.


----------



## TheSword

We never knew for certain we would get the Sauron reveal so I didn’t think it would be Halbrand. Though now the smithing elements do fit. It was interesting how Halbrand changed his demeanor when with Celebrimbor to best engage with him, and only when Galadriel was there too did it become jarring. I thought it was well done.

I will definitely now go back and watch the series again with that hindsight. There aren’t many series that I would want to do that for.

I also really like the characters, Bronwyn, Adar, the Harfoots, Halbrand, Arondir, Elrond, Galadriel, Elendil, the Stranger were all strong characters that I wanted to watch. I don’t get this dismissal of Galadriel, I think she was a brilliant character.


----------



## Zardnaar

Parmandur said:


> I knew the Stranger was Gandalf the moment one of the Harfoots sang "not all who wonder or wander are lost." Instant giveaway. Halbrand, I thought they were building up to be Witch King of Angmar, but now I think that's probably Theo, we'll see.
> 
> The moment when "Halbrand" let's his mask drop at last was...very chilling. Charlie Vickers was talking in an interview about how he views Sauron as a supreme cosmoc method actor who wasn't just being deceitful, but climbed into his role "like Daniel Day-Lewis or something" and lived his chosen role with absolute conviction. And Halbrand never, ever, not once, actually lies in the season. He always tells the truth...but uses the truth as a weapon.




 Well the stranger was to obvious to be Sauron left one option. I didn't get the song clue.


----------



## Zardnaar

TheSword said:


> We never knew for certain we would get the Sauron reveal so I didn’t think it would be Halbrand. Though now the smithing elements do fit. It was interesting how Halbrand changed his demeanor when with Celebrimbor to best engage with him, and only when Galadriel was there too did it become jarring. I thought it was well done.
> 
> I will definitely now go back and watch the series again with that hindsight. There aren’t many series that I would want to do that for.
> 
> I also really like the characters, Bronwyn, Adar, the Harfoots, Halbrand, Arondir, Elrond, Galadriel, Elendil, the Stranger were all strong characters that I wanted to watch. I don’t get this dismissal of Galadriel, I think she was a brilliant character.




 Galadriel is fully formed as is and has not much character development. She gets a backstory. 

 She's the same character essentially end of the season vs the start. 

 cf HotD or GoT S1.


----------



## TheSword

Zardnaar said:


> Galadriel is fully formed as is and has not much character development. She gets a backstory.
> 
> She's the same character essentially end of the season vs the start.
> 
> cf HotD or GoT S1.



Well there is plenty to go. It’s a marathon not a sprint.

Nonetheless I think she genuinely did like Halbrand and was betrayed. She also spared Adar because of Halbrand.


----------



## Sepulchrave II

Zardnaar said:


> Galadriel is fully formed as is and has not much character development. She gets a backstory.
> 
> She's the same character essentially end of the season vs the start.
> 
> cf HotD or GoT S1.



Yeah, well that's what you get for being 5000 years old.

 I imagine she'll mellow as the show progresses.


----------



## Zardnaar

TheSword said:


> Well there is plenty to go. It’s a marathon not a sprint.
> 
> Nonetheless I think she genuinely did like Halbrand and was betrayed. She also spared Adar because of Halbrand.




 Adar and Halbeand are more interesting

  One of the weakness of the show though no particular stand out characters. There's a few likeable/interesting ones. 

 4/5 fantasy shows not bad. The other one is WoT.


----------



## Zardnaar

Sepulchrave II said:


> Yeah, well that's what you get for being 5000 years old.
> 
> I imagine she'll mellow as the show progresses.




 Yeah there's nothing wrong with her backstory or anything like that.

 Started out alright, couple of dud episodes in the middle, picked up final 3. Not the best character building could be a lot worse though.


----------



## Tonguez

TheSword said:


> I also really like the characters, Bronwyn, Adar, the Harfoots, Halbrand, Arondir, Elrond, Galadriel, Elendil, the Stranger were all strong characters that I wanted to watch. I don’t get this dismissal of Galadriel, I think she was a brilliant character.




to me it was the non-Tolkien characters - Nori and Lenny Henry, Bronwyn, Arondir, Adar who were the most interesting and there stories most compelling. 
The Elrond-Durin Mithril story seemed a little superfluous in the end.

I think Galadriel being both a POV character and very competent from the start may have had her coming across as Mary-sue or DMPC. She was there to drive the high level plot while the other characters had smaller stories where they could just focus on their space.
Galadriels flaws made her interesting but the mystery was tied up on who is Halbrand and where is Sauron rather than ‘_whats next from Galadriel_’


----------



## Zardnaar

Tonguez said:


> to me it was the non-Tolkien characters - Nori and Lenny Henry, Bronwyn, Arondir, Adar who were the most interesting and there stories most compelling.
> The Elrond-Durin Mithril story seemed a little superfluous in the end.
> 
> I think Galadriel being both a POV character and very competent from the start may have had her coming across as Mary-sue or DMPC. She was there to drive the high level plot while the other characters had smaller stories where they could just focus on their space.
> Galadriels flaws made her interesting but the mystery was tied up on who is Halbrand and where is Sauron rather than ‘_whats next from Galadriel_’




 Galadriel isn't a Mary Sue. Her skills make sense in world, and she's an elf they're just better in world. 5000 year old veteren.

 Her skills do make her kinda boring as she can pretty much defeat anything not named Sauron fairly easily (cf cave troll vs troll in movies with Fellowship). 

And year the not hobbits, Stranger, Adar etc were more interesting imho.


----------



## Parmandur

Tonguez said:


> to me it was the non-Tolkien characters - Nori and Lenny Henry, Bronwyn, Arondir, Adar who were the most interesting and there stories most compelling.
> The Elrond-Durin Mithril story seemed a little superfluous in the end.
> 
> I think Galadriel being both a POV character and very competent from the start may have had her coming across as Mary-sue or DMPC. She was there to drive the high level plot while the other characters had smaller stories where they could just focus on their space.
> Galadriels flaws made her interesting but the mystery was tied up on who is Halbrand and where is Sauron rather than ‘_whats next from Galadriel_’



So, what the writers were going for with the Elrond-Durin plot line and Galadriel's badassery (per the official podcast) was setting up thst the Elves were in a situation that neither diplomatic charm, technical skill, friendship, or military badassery could save them, and going ahead with the "Magic Ring" plan that Galadriel  knows is _the literal work of Satan_ seems to be their "only option." Now that's some classic Noldor tragic error right there.


----------



## Zardnaar

Parmandur said:


> So, what the writers were going for with the Elrond-Durin plot line and Galadriel's badassery (per the official podcast) was setting up thst the Elves were in a situation that neither diplomatic charm, technical skill, friendship, or military badassery could save them, and going ahead with the "Magic Ring" plan that Galadriel  knows is _the literal work of Satan_ seems to be their "only option." Now that's some classic Noldor tragic error right there.




 Is that your take or interview with writers? I assume the later podcast and all.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

Tonguez said:


> The Elrond-Durin Mithril story seemed a little superfluous in the end.





Tonguez said:


> Sauron goes off and forges the One Ring in Mt Doom - which I assume is where Halbrand is going off to do in season 2. Not sure when the Dwarf rings get made



We have established a McGuffin: rings require mithril, and all the currently available supply has been used up. So next season Sauron is going to have to go cap-in-hand to the dwarves to get more. How will he pay for it? With seven rings. Oh yeah, and a balrog. It's quite clever really.

I have an idea they have planned this seasonal structure for the show:

Sesson One: Three Rings
Sesson Two: Seven Rings
Sesson Three: Nine Rings
Sesson Four: One Ring
Sesson Five: The Land of Mordor


Also: LotR: good protagonist on a quest to destroy the Ring, RoP: evil protagonist on a quest to forge the Ring. It's just the sort of mirroring these writers seem to like. They are not going to make the forging of the One Ring easy for Sauron.


----------



## Rabulias

We also have Earien (Isildur's sister) who looks to be getting ready to try out the _palantir_. Looks like that will be resolved next season.


Spoiler: House of the Dragon spoilers



Again, the dying words of a mentally compromised king cause trouble...


----------



## Paul Farquhar

Oh did anyone else notice the close-up shots of the extremely distinctive ring designs and think "merchendising opportunity, ka-ching!"


----------



## Paul Farquhar

Parmandur said:


> Galadriel knows is _the literal work of Satan_ seems to be their "only option."



Technically Sauron's Plan A was foiled. He had intended two rings, alloyed with his own essence (which would have been signified by his blood). One for him, one for Galadriel. Three rings, free of his essence, was not his design.

But Sauron always has a Plan B.

And, by giving him a personality, rather than just a simple embodiment of evil, I think Lucifer is a better comparison than Satan.


----------



## MarkB

Parmandur said:


> I knew the Stranger was Gandalf the moment one of the Harfoots sang "not all who wonder or wander are lost." Instant giveaway.



Really? I didn't make the connection on that one. It's a line written by Bilbo about Aragorn, and the idea of it originating from a Harfoot song passed down through generations seemed connection enough. How does it tie to Gandalf?


----------



## Zardnaar

Not to bad article more or less agree with it. 









						'The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power' Finale: Did We Get Everything Amazon Paid For?
					

Epic battles and stunning vistas aside, the underwhelming conclusion of Season One of this prequel series proves TV’s most expensive show could be doing a lot more with all that money




					www.rollingstone.com
				




 Ssuron reveal was fine/predictable alng with "Gandalf".


----------



## Morrus

I loed that finale. I did have one quetion though -- I'm no Tolkien expert, but didn't Suaron call himself something else (Annatar or something?) when tricking the elves? Or am I misremembering some half forgotten discussion? Not that it matters, and I suppose that would have given the game away.


----------



## Ryujin

Morrus said:


> I loed that finale. I did have one quetion though -- I'm no Tolkien expert, but didn't Suaron call himself something else (Annatar or something?) when tricking the elves? Or am I misremembering some half forgotten discussion? Not that it matters, and I suppose that would have given the game away.



Yup, Annatar, Lord of Gifts.


----------



## Parmandur

Zardnaar said:


> Is that your take or interview with writers? I assume the later podcast and all.



That's the writers take: the point of all the major plotlines was that the good guys fell flat on their faces, and put the Elven leaders in a corner where the right answer was probably "sail to Valinor and have faith things will work out" but instead they cling to power and use the enemies tactic (make magic rings to forestall the will of the Valar).


----------



## Parmandur

Paul Farquhar said:


> We have established a McGuffin: rings require mithril, and all the currently available supply has been used up. So next season Sauron is going to have to go cap-in-hand to the dwarves to get more. How will he pay for it? With seven rings. Oh yeah, and a balrog. It's quite clever really.
> 
> I have an idea they have planned this seasonal structure for the show:
> 
> Sesson One: Three Rings
> Sesson Two: Seven Rings
> Sesson Three: Nine Rings
> Sesson Four: One Ring
> Sesson Five: The Land of Mordor
> 
> 
> Also: LotR: good protagonist on a quest to destroy the Ring, RoP: evil protagonist on a quest to forge the Ring. It's just the sort of mirroring these writers seem to like. They are not going to make the forging of the One Ring easy for Sauron.



I really like their portrayal of Sauron as a hero un his own mind. He wants to save the world!


----------



## Parmandur

MarkB said:


> Really? I didn't make the connection on that one. It's a line written by Bilbo about Aragorn, and the idea of it originating from a Harfoot song passed down through generations seemed connection enough. How does it tie to Gandalf?



No, it's a line _written by Gandalf_ in the letter he leaves for Frodo in Bree. The moment I heard it here, I knew that they were supplying a backstory for Gandalf's love of Hobbits.


----------



## Parmandur

Morrus said:


> I loed that finale. I did have one quetion though -- I'm no Tolkien expert, but didn't Suaron call himself something else (Annatar or something?) when tricking the elves? Or am I misremembering some half forgotten discussion? Not that it matters, and I suppose that would have given the game away.



You are right, but I expect either we will hear thst name in future Seasons, or that none fell through the cracks due to complex rights issues with the Simirillion. They nanecheck it in his dialog with Celebrimbor, however, when he talks about his idea being a "gift" ("Anatar = "bringer of gifts")


----------



## Olgar Shiverstone

Parmandur said:


> No, it's a line _written by Gabdalf_ in the letter he leaves for Frodo in Bree. The moment I heard it here, I knew thst they were supplying a backstop for Gandalf's love of Hobbits.



Actually @MarkB has it correctly. Bilbo wrote it, Gandalf reused it in his letter.

----
Frodo felt Bilbo stir impatiently at his side. Evidently he was annoyed on his friend’s behalf. Standing suddenly up he burst out:

_All that is gold does not glitter,
Not all those who wander are lost;
The old that is strong does not wither,
Deep roots are not reached by the frost.
From the ashes a fire shall be woken,
A light from the shadows shall spring;
Renewed shall be blade that was broken:
The crownless again shall be king._

‘Not very good perhaps, but to the point – if you need more beyond the word of Elrond. If that was worth a journey of a hundred and ten days to hear, you had best listen to it.’ He sat down with a snort.

‘I made that up myself,’ he whispered to Frodo, ‘for the Dunadan, a long time ago when he first told me about himself. I almost wish that my adventures were not over, and that I could go with him when his day comes.’

- _The Fellowship of the Ring_, Book II, Chapter 2, "The Council of Elrond"


----------



## Lidgar

Did I hear correctly that the gems used in the elven rings contained a bit of the essence of the Valar?

If so, could that essence be what protects the elves from the power of the One Ring down the line?


----------



## Sepulchrave II

Paul Farquhar said:


> And, by giving him a personality, rather than just a simple embodiment of evil, I think Lucifer is a better comparison than Satan.



He seems more like Milton's Belial to me.

On th' other side up rose
BELIAL, in act more graceful and humane;
A fairer person lost not Heav'n; he seemd
For dignity compos'd and high exploit:
But all was false and hollow; though his Tongue
Dropt Manna, and could make the worse appear
The better reason, to perplex and dash
Maturest Counsels

I'm hoping the actor - who is Australian - drops the Yorkshire accent in his role of Sauron, and goes more RSC. It's grim up North, but Sheffield's not as bad as Mordor.


----------



## Zaukrie

That show is great fantasy. I can't figure out how any fantasy fan doesn't love it.


----------



## Zaukrie

Parmandur said:


> That's the writers take: the point of all the major plotlines was that the good guys fell flat on their faces, and put the Elven leaders in a corner where the right answer was probably "sail to Valinor and have faith things will work out" but instead they cling to power and use the enemies tactic (make magic rings to forestall the will of the Valar).



The right answer was to leave middle earth to Sauron? Nah.... That was the easy path.


----------



## Parmandur

Olgar Shiverstone said:


> Actually @MarkB has it correctly. Bilbo wrote it, Gandalf reused it in his letter.
> 
> ----
> Frodo felt Bilbo stir impatiently at his side. Evidently he was annoyed on his friend’s behalf. Standing suddenly up he burst out:
> 
> _All that is gold does not glitter,
> Not all those who wander are lost;
> The old that is strong does not wither,
> Deep roots are not reached by the frost.
> From the ashes a fire shall be woken,
> A light from the shadows shall spring;
> Renewed shall be blade that was broken:
> The crownless again shall be king._
> 
> ‘Not very good perhaps, but to the point – if you need more beyond the word of Elrond. If that was worth a journey of a hundred and ten days to hear, you had best listen to it.’ He sat down with a snort.
> 
> ‘I made that up myself,’ he whispered to Frodo, ‘for the Dunadan, a long time ago when he first told me about himself. I almost wish that my adventures were not over, and that I could go with him when his day comes.’
> 
> - _The Fellowship of the Ring_, Book II, Chapter 2, "The Council of Elrond"



Touché! I forgot that!!

However, I still think it was meant to be a hint towards the Stranger's real identity.


----------



## Parmandur

Zaukrie said:


> The right answer was to leave middle earth to Sauron? Nah.... That was the easy path.



No, that's just it, it isn’t easy. The Noldor weren't supposed to leave Valinor in the first place, and their violent choices to pursue Morgpth were ultimately besides the point to how Morgoth actually was defeated. All their struggle caused was sorrow and defeat. Galadriel at the end of this season repeated the mistake of her family in pursuing the Simiruls to begin with, and foreshadows the temptation of Boromir to take the path of using the One Ring.


----------



## Parmandur

Basically, King Durin III is 100% accurate in his analysis and trust that the Elves should probably heed the Doom of Mandos (implied but not named) and stop their Middle Earth Boondoggle.


----------



## Sepulchrave II

Parmandur said:


> Doom of Mandy's



They have to become vegetarians?


----------



## FitzTheRuke

I thought that ended on a high note. S1 had some faults, but IMO it stuck the landing very well and was always worth watching. I look forward to more!


----------



## Morrus

Two years until s2. Man that’s a long time!


----------



## Arilyn

I enjoyed this first season very much. I was engaged and looked forward to new episodes. So for me, a success!


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots

Rabulias said:


> Though I did think Celebrimbor echoing Adar's words, and "the key that unlocked the dam" was a bit much.



For one thing, that's not how dams work, Celebrimbadingbadingbor.


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots

reelo said:


> In _canon_ the 3 elven rings were actually made last, except for the One Ring.
> The 16 others (along with other, "lesser" rings) were crafted before that by the Gwaith-i-Mírdain (Celebrimbor&Co) and Annatar together.
> 
> Then, Annatar left Eregion (presumably to craft the One) and the elves, having "learned" the craft from him, forged the Three alone, without his involvement.
> 
> So this is actually a non-trivial change.



It's trivial in the sense that it doesn't actually change _what_ happened, just the order in which it happened. 

If making the rings out of order made Sauron, for instance appear in the form of a hobbit, it would be a non-trivial change.


----------



## Morrus

I’m trying to recall. What was Halbrand/Sauron’s actual role in the unlocking of the dam/exploding Mt Doom? Wasn’t that the machinations of Adar, who is apparently his enemy?


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots

Morrus said:


> I’m trying to recall. What was Halbrand/Sauron’s actual role in the unlocking of the dam/exploding Mt Doom? Wasn’t that the machinations of Adar, who is apparently his enemy?



Given that the map rune was found all over wherever Sauron traveled, it presumably was his plan first and after Adar stabbed him (or whatever), he said "well, _this_ plan is still good; we're doing that for my baby boys."


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots

My wife (who has read zero of LotR, but enjoyed all the movies) and I really liked this.

I thought this show probably made halflings cooler than any TV or movie has to date and, for once, we weren't eager to get the elves off-screen (although they're still the most tiresome bunch, clearly even to each other) and the dwarves were, by far, the big standouts.

The show was a nice corrective to other LotR material by having a lot of heroic women, ranging from Galadriel to Bronwyn, whose heroism is all the more impressive given that she's a level 1 commoner and not a Tier 4 PC showing a lot of patience around everyone else.

I especially liked the portrayal of Galadriel. It is rare that we are allowed to see a woman just simmering with barely contained rage in nearly every scene the way we do Galadriel (I could probably name 30 or 40 male characters like this without breaking a sweat, of course). And while she's reckless and brash for an elf, compared to everyone else, she is stately and contained, and the actress managed to convey both elements at all times.

Likewise, I thought the expansion of skin tones and ethnicities for LotR was great, although the moment we had one Pacific Islander-looking actor (given where they filmed this, he's probably Maori) made me realize making all of Numenor played by Pacific Islanders would have been amazing.

Even when they skimped on things (Lindon is apparently three rooms, the show having apparently spent all of its setting budget on Numenor), the show looked and sounded like a million bucks. (Considerably more than that, actually.) And Fiona Apple's sung version of the poem at the end was as good as any of the vocal songs in the LotR movies and feels very in keeping with them.

I liked most of the stuff invented for this story, particularly Adar, the Kilmonger of this show.

For the second season, I want much, much more dwarves, I'm excited to see Rhun, and I want to see some freaking ent-wives. They teased ents in the first episode, and nothing since. Ent-wives or we riot!


----------



## Rabulias

Morrus said:


> I’m trying to recall. What was Halbrand/Sauron’s actual role in the unlocking of the dam/exploding Mt Doom? Wasn’t that the machinations of Adar, who is apparently his enemy?



I think this applies in a much more abstract sense, though this might be over-analysis and reaching a bit on my part. I think the hilt was invested with part of Sauron's essence long ago in the making of this plan, but when Morgoth was defeated, humans loyal to Sauron took the hilt and kept it hidden, passing it (and its importance) down through the generations until it ends up in Waldreg's barn. This goes back to the name Halbrand meaning "half-sword," meaning Halbrand is the remainder of Sauron left after he poured some of himself into the swordhilt. In a sense it was Sauron that unlocked the dam, just not the part that is manifested in Halbrand's form.

As far as Adar, he could be a true believer and working a deep-cover long-con for Sauron, but I doubt it. I believe his story about killing Sauron (or at least he attempted it and believes he succeeded) due to Halbrand's anger at Adar when he has Adar on the ground about to kill him. Adar and Sauron may be at odds themselves, but they both want a homeland for orcs. I could see season 2 showing some factional infighting between Adar and Sauron, trying to sway orcs to their side in the newborn land of Mordor.


----------



## Rabulias

Whizbang Dustyboots said:


> The show was a nice corrective to other LotR material by having a lot of heroic women, ranging from Galadriel to Bronwyn, whose heroism is all the more impressive given that she's a level 1 commoner and not a Tier 4 PC showing a lot of patience around everyone else.
> 
> I especially liked the portrayal of Galadriel. It is rare that we are allowed to see a woman just simmering with barely contained rage in nearly every scene the way we do Galadriel (I could probably name 30 or 40 male characters like this without breaking a sweat, of course). And while she's reckless and brash for an elf, compared to everyone else, she is stately and contained, and the actress managed to convey both elements at all times.



Agreed. And to those who complain that Galadriel is presented as too perfect and can do no wrong, I point to the fact that despite her success and prowess, it was in fact her that saved Sauron, inspired him to reach for more, and facilitated his return. That's a pretty big screw up in my book.


----------



## Ryujin

Rabulias said:


> Agreed. And to those who complain that Galadriel is presented as too perfect and can do no wrong, I point to the fact that despite her success and prowess, it was in fact her that saved Sauron, inspired him to reach for more, and facilitated his return. That's a pretty big screw up in my book.



After all, Epic Level characters only make Epic Level screw-ups.


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots

Rabulias said:


> Agreed. And to those who complain that Galadriel is presented as too perfect and can do no wrong, I point to the fact that despite her success and prowess, it was in fact her that saved Sauron, inspired him to reach for more, and facilitated his return. That's a pretty big screw up in my book.



Yeah, like I said when she jumped off a ship in the middle of the ocean and just started swimming toward Middle-Earth, hundreds of miles away, she is a mythic character, doing mythic things, including having the kind of failings only heroes of Greek myth, Beowulf and the like can have.


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots

Also, if I was working on the post-production of the next season of Wheel of Time, I would be letting all of Amazon's calls go to voicemail.


----------



## Morrus

Whizbang Dustyboots said:


> Also, if I was working on the post-production of the next season of Wheel of Time, I would be letting all of Amazon's calls go to voicemail.



Why?


----------



## Galandris

Lidgar said:


> Did I hear correctly that the gems used in the elven rings contained a bit of the essence of the Valar?




Celebrimbor was talking about the Silmarils, who had a bit of the essence of Valinor (the light of the Trees, actually), and he hoped to use the three gems to make the same thing, ie capture the essence of Middle Earth. [After all, creating the Silmarils ended up such a GREAT idea that his grandson is keen to emulate Feänor....]


----------



## MarkB

I guess they ended up being a little bit of everything. Gems from Middle Earth, mithril infused with elven light (and perhaps balrog darkness), and metals from Valinor.


----------



## Galandris

Morrus said:


> I loed that finale. I did have one quetion though -- I'm no Tolkien expert, but didn't Suaron call himself something else (Annatar or something?) when tricking the elves? Or am I misremembering some half forgotten discussion? Not that it matters, and I suppose that would have given the game away.




This is something... I think they needed to change given their own change to the story. Annatar is a quenya name. It is consistent with the story from the the books "Hello, I am en emissary of the Valar, I am a favoured of Aulë the crafter among the Valar, and I am here to help ", so it was coherent for him to have a quenya name as he was supposed to be from Valinor. And it was correct-sounging for the Noldor. 

Here, he's a "man from the south". Even Numenoreans had stopped using quenya name for their kings for generations (or since a few month, due the timewarp), so why would some random Southerner bear a quenya name? It would sound... fishy. Especially when the name means Bearer of Gift. Even an averagely gullible Noldor would expect him to try a Nigerian scam...


----------



## Olgar Shiverstone

Parmandur said:


> Touché! I forgot that!!
> 
> However, I still think it was meant to be a hint towards the Stranger's real identity.




Oh absolutely, much to my chagrin. As well as a number of subsequent quotes by the Stranger and Galadriel (about his opposite).


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots

Morrus said:


> Why?



It's their second-highest budget show and every scene without Rosamund Pike looks and sounds like a bad Xena knock-off. Something is deeply wrong on the show, especially for how much Amazon is paying for it.


----------



## RuinousPowers

Whizbang Dustyboots said:


> It's their second-highest budget show and every scene without Rosamund Pike looks and sounds like a bad Xena knock-off. Something is deeply wrong on the show, especially for how much Amazon is paying for it.



I like the WoT cast well enough, but I don't feel like it ever had a real rewatchable episode or scene that I wanted to immediately watch again.


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots

RuinousPowers said:


> I like the WoT cast well enough, but I don't feel like it ever had a real rewatchable episode or scene that I wanted to immediately watch again.



Yeah, they have all of the components, more or less. It's just not clicking. There's at least one thing an episode that makes me think "oh, this show is about to turn the corner," and then they drop the ball again in the next scene.


----------



## ART!

Paul Farquhar said:


> Oh did anyone else notice the close-up shots of the extremely distinctive ring designs and think "merchendising opportunity, ka-ching!"



IIRC, some of The Rings they're using on the show are pre-existing ones, or modified pre-existing ones. Basically, they found jewelers who had already made what they were looking for.


Whizbang Dustyboots said:


> I especially liked the portrayal of Galadriel. It is rare that we are allowed to see a woman just simmering with barely contained rage in nearly every scene the way we do Galadriel (I could probably name 30 or 40 male characters like this without breaking a sweat, of course). And while she's reckless and brash for an elf, compared to everyone else, she is stately and contained, and the actress managed to convey both elements at all times.



The range of surface and below-the-surface emotion Morffyd Clark portrays in just a single shot, in almost every single shot, is really impressive. I'm really enjoying her work in this.


----------



## MarkB

Galandris said:


> This is something... I think they needed to change given their own change to the story. Annatar is a quenya name. It is consistent with the story from the the books "Hello, I am en emissary of the Valar, I am a favoured of Aulë the crafter among the Valar, and I am here to help ", so it was coherent for him to have a quenya name as he was supposed to be from Valinor. And it was correct-sounging for the Noldor.
> 
> Here, he's a "man from the south". Even Numenoreans had stopped using quenya name for their kings for generations (or since a few month, due the timewarp), so why would some random Southerner bear a quenya name? It would sound... fishy. Especially when the name means Bearer of Gift. Even an averagely gullible Noldor would expect him to try a Nigerian scam...



Maybe he'll use that name when he scams the Dwarves and Men.


----------



## Eric V

Enjoyed the finale a lot.  My son, who's more of a Tolkien scholar than me, a little less so.

Couple of questions arising:

1) Celembribor still has 16 rings to make, with Sauron's help (according to lore).  So...how's that going to work now?  Options include 

a) A flashback that shows Halbrand and Celembribor making the others before making the Three.  Sort of like working on prototypes before the main deal.  This would be the easiest way to keep to the lore, even with the truncated timeline.  

b) Sauron comes back later, in a new guise, and makes the rings with Celembribor.  This stretches credulity a bit, though it's telling that Celembribor does not know that Halbrand = Sauron, so it's possible (and perhaps is the writers-room reason why Galadriel doesn't tell him).  

c) Celembribor doesn't make the remaining rings, but in another guise Sauron teaches Men and Dwarves how to make them themselves.  This probably makes the most narrative sense considering where the writers have placed themselves at the end of S1, but it strays far from the original story.*

Any other options?

Question 2: While the Stranger is heavily hinted at to be Gandalf (due to that last line), in the lore only the Blues come during the 2nd Age.  And the Stranger is going east, which the Blues did.  So...which do you think he is?  Gandalf?  Blue?  Saruman, maybe (he started off good, after all)?

*My son pointed out that, since there is already so little in the way of constraints to write for this period of ME's history, it's kind of a shame that some of the things that Tolkien was clear on get ignored.  I'm not talking about timelines; we'd need new actors for the humans every episode if the timeline was to be respected.  Rather, the way Sauron gets into Eregion, how the 16 rings get crafted, etc.  Might have been nice if the show had remained faithful to these things.  It's not a huge bother to me; as I said, I am no Tolkien scholar.  I can see how it might bother those who bothered to learn the lore.


----------



## Maxperson

wicked cool said:


> I saw the fake coming once they started spinning him (Saruman from the movies). Is he gandolf but they just can’t say it?
> I’m going to abide by the moderators note and not bash but I would like to ask questions



I'm positive that the stranger is Gandalf.  His level in the "What level is Gandalf?" threads just took a big leap up.  He did some powerful stuff.


wicked cool said:


> So Sauron died and came back? But morgoth can’t? I wonder  if the 3 servants can also come back



Morgoth never died.  He was very weak from tying himself to Middle Earth and investing much of his power to create dragons and the like.  The Valar captured him and exiled him into the void where he isn't strong enough to get out.


wicked cool said:


> Did the blue wizards arrive before gandolf or with him? Wasn’t sauroman the leader of the wizards?



I forget the order they arrived in Middle Earth, but others could very well already be here and we just haven't seen them since it isn't their story, or at least isn't their story yet.


wicked cool said:


> Those who wear the rings at some point become wraiths to the one ring? Was that already created



The One Ring was the last ring created.


wicked cool said:


> Galadriel has magic? Wasn’t she more powerful than gandolf? Didn’t she use magic in the battle with gandolf etc against the necromancer?



She might be more powerful than Gandolf.  Certainly she can bring more power to bear in Middle Earth than she can since he is under orders to limit himself.


----------



## Maxperson

MarkB said:


> A fine finale. While I've enjoyed all the storylines this season, the harfoots have been an unexpected and welcome pleasure throughout, very much my favourite storyline, and I loved the conclusion to this arc of their story.
> 
> And hey, the show delivered on its title. We get actual Rings of Power by the end of the first season.



I just wonder who is actually going to make the 7 and the 9.


----------



## Maxperson

Mercurius said:


> *Magic (and Galadriel). *Magic is very understated in Tolkien's stories, so it is hard to say how it is used beyond relatively minor effects done by Gandalf. For instance, he used a sword in his battle against the Balrog, and so you can say that Gandalf was "magic-infused," but not casting D&D-esque spells.



In the books he cast produce flame(hobbit), lightning bolt(hobbit), knock(lotr), Light(lotr), fireball(lotr), counterspell(lotr), detect thoughts(lotr), and break enchantment(lotr).  Perhaps more.


----------



## Maxperson

Tonguez said:


> yeah the three elven rings go to Galadrial (silver) Elrond (blue) and Gil-galad (later Gandalf) (red) they were made first, then Sauron goes off and forges the One Ring in Mt Doom - which I assume is where Halbrand is going off to do in season 2. Not sure when the Dwarf rings get made



The 7 and 9 were created first while Sauron was still helping the elves. Then after Sauron departed the 3 were made in secret.  The One Ring was the last one forged.


----------



## Maxperson

reelo said:


> In _canon_ the 3 elven rings were actually made last, except for the One Ring.
> The 16 others (along with other, "lesser" rings) were crafted before that by the Gwaith-i-Mírdain (Celebrimbor&Co) and Annatar together.
> 
> Then, Annatar left Eregion (presumably to craft the One) and the elves, having "learned" the craft from him, forged the Three alone, without his involvement.
> 
> So this is actually a non-trivial change.



Yeah.  And in the books Sauron gave the elves secrets of power to allow the forging of the rings.  It was those secrets that allowed the One Ring which used the same secrets, to bind the others.  In the show all Sauron did was tell the elves to mix mithril with other metals.  That's not enough to take control of the rings with the One.


----------



## Maxperson

Ryujin said:


> I thought that I remembered that the three Elven rings were made in secret, after The One, so that they wouldn't fall under Sauron's sway. Weird that they would change that bit, that seems fairly central to the theme. Like I said up-thread, hopefully everything else has already been made an distributed before he went to the Elven forges.



No.  They were made prior to the One and when Sauron put on the One Ring, they felt it and removed their rings before he could take control of them.  They have to be worn for him to do so.  They didn't put them back on until after the last alliance of elves and men took Sauron down and the One Ring was lost.


----------



## Maxperson

Parmandur said:


> I knew the Stranger was Gandalf the moment one of the Harfoots sang "not all who wonder or wander are lost." Instant giveaway. Halbrand, I thought they were building up to be Witch King of Angmar, but now I think that's probably Theo, we'll see.



They also dressed him in grey.


----------



## Sepulchrave II

Maxperson said:


> In the books he cast produce flame(hobbit), lightning bolt(hobbit), knock(lotr), Light(lotr), fireball(lotr), counterspell(lotr), detect thoughts(lotr), and break enchantment(lotr).  Perhaps more.



_Fire seeds_ against the wargs before the Fellowship attempt the Redhorn pass - albeit with pine cones, rather than acorns. Either _searing light, sunbeam_ or _sunburst_ during the retreat from Osgiliath to drive the Nazgul away, depending on how high you'd like to turn the volume. The are all Sun Domain spells in 3E/PF, which would make sense.

Maybe _Pyrotechnics_ for the amusement of young hobbits.


----------



## Maxperson

Zardnaar said:


> Galadriel isn't a Mary Sue. Her skills make sense in world, and she's an elf they're just better in world. 5000 year old veteren.
> 
> Her skills do make her kinda boring as she can pretty much defeat anything not named Sauron fairly easily (cf cave troll vs troll in movies with Fellowship).



She's the most powerful elf to ever live, with the possible exception of Feanor who might have equaled her.


----------



## Maxperson

Sepulchrave II said:


> _Fire seeds_ against the wargs before the Fellowship attempt the Redhorn pass - albeit with pine cones, rather than acorns. Either _searing light, sunbeam_ or _sunburst_ during the retreat from Osgiliath to drive the Nazgul away, depending on how high you'd like to turn the volume. The are all Sun Domain spells in 3E/PF, which would make sense.
> 
> Maybe _Pyrotechnics_ for the amusement of young hobbits.



And all the rest I mentioned that are in fact in the books.


----------



## Maxperson

Lidgar said:


> Did I hear correctly that the gems used in the elven rings contained a bit of the essence of the Valar?
> 
> If so, could that essence be what protects the elves from the power of the One Ring down the line?



They are never protected. They take off the ring before Sauron can seize control of them and don't put them back on until Sauron is defeated and the One Ring is lost.


----------



## Sepulchrave II

Maxperson said:


> And all the rest I mentioned that are in fact in the books.



Sure. My suggestions were in response to "perhaps more."

General question - do people consider the seven and the nine basically of the same type in the books? It seems to me that were allocated to Men and Dwarves by Sauron after he seized them from Celebrimbor, but I can't seem to find any reference to the notion that they were forged with that explicit purpose in mind. So Celebrimbor and Sauron forged sixteen great rings together, later distributed according to Sauron's whim.

Do you consider that there were qualitative differences _between_ these rings. Did each have its own "character" - so to speak.

Just curious.


----------



## Maxperson

Sepulchrave II said:


> Sure. My suggestions were in response to "perhaps more."
> 
> General question - do people consider the seven and the nine basically of the same type in the books? It seems to me that were allocated to Men and Dwarves by Sauron after he seized them from Celebrimbor, but I can't seem to find any reference to the notion that they were forged with that explicit purpose in mind. So Celebrimbor and Sauron forged sixteen great rings together, later distributed according to Sauron's whim.
> 
> Do you consider that there were qualitative differences _between_ these rings. Did each have its own "character" - so to speak.
> 
> Just curious.



I think they were all the same. They amplified what the user desired.  Bilbo became a great burgler, gollum a great murderer, Sam would have become a renowned gardener.  The One was the same, only it had much more power.  As far as I know, only the three elven rings had different powers.


----------



## Zardnaar

Parmandur said:


> That's the writers take: the point of all the major plotlines was that the good guys fell flat on their faces, and put the Elven leaders in a corner where the right answer was probably "sail to Valinor and have faith things will work out" but instead they cling to power and use the enemies tactic (make magic rings to forestall the will of the Valar).





Maxperson said:


> She's the most powerful elf to ever live, with the possible exception of Feanor who might have equaled her.




 Yeah her skills make sense in universe and sheher backstory explains them. 

 Elves are just better in ME as well.


----------



## Tonguez

Maxperson said:


> I think they were all the same. They amplified what the user desired.  Bilbo became a great burgler, gollum a great murderer, Sam would have become a renowned gardener.  The One was the same, only it had much more power.  As far as I know, only the three elven rings had different powers.



From Wikipedia: Powers and effects of the Rings

Type of RingPowers grantedEffects on bearerRuling RingInvisibility, extended lifespan, control,
knowledge of all other RingsCorruption to evilElven-RingsTo heal and preserveNostalgia, procrastinationDwarf-RingsTo gain wealth, extended lifespanGreed, angerRings for MenInvisibility, extended lifespan, terrorEnslavement, fading to permanent invisibility


----------



## Maxperson

Tonguez said:


> From Wikipedia: Powers and effects of the Rings
> 
> Type of RingPowers grantedEffects on bearerRuling RingInvisibility, extended lifespan, control,
> knowledge of all other RingsCorruption to evilElven-RingsTo heal and preserveNostalgia, procrastinationDwarf-RingsTo gain wealth, extended lifespanGreed, angerRings for MenInvisibility, extended lifespan, terrorEnslavement, fading to permanent invisibility



That's how they ended up working at the ultimate end.  But they were made to enhance what the wearers desired.  The dwarves wanted to mine and own things, so it made them better at achieving great wealth, and made the wearers greedy.  The humans wanted power, so it gave it to them and then corrupted them into the Nazgul.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Paul Farquhar said:


> The idea that "canon" matters, or even exists, in fiction, is silly. It matters in holy books, because they are supposed to be true. But fiction is, by definition, untrue. There is no "true" version of the story, and stories continually change to suit the teller and the audience. This is a strength. To try and freeze a story in amber is to diminish it.




Mike Rugnetta has a perfect essay on the subject, specifically referencing Harry Potter, but entirely applicable to this discussion. Canon Is An Abyss – Mike Rugnetta


----------



## Zardnaar

Watching season 6 of GoT. 

 Young Ned Stark is the same actor as Elrond. 

 Up to Brans visions and noticed.


----------



## Parmandur

Maxperson said:


> I just wonder who is actually going to make the 7 and the 9.



Probably Celebrimbor with Sauron, since he seems to really desire the power Sauron put in his mind.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

Galandris said:


> This is something... I think they needed to change given their own change to the story. Annatar is a quenya name. It is consistent with the story from the the books "Hello, I am en emissary of the Valar, I am a favoured of Aulë the crafter among the Valar, and I am here to help ", so it was coherent for him to have a quenya name as he was supposed to be from Valinor. And it was correct-sounging for the Noldor.
> 
> Here, he's a "man from the south". Even Numenoreans had stopped using quenya name for their kings for generations (or since a few month, due the timewarp), so why would some random Southerner bear a quenya name? It would sound... fishy. Especially when the name means Bearer of Gift. Even an averagely gullible Noldor would expect him to try a Nigerian scam...



I think more to the point, loremaster viewers would have spotted in straight away and it would have been plastered all over the internet...


----------



## Paul Farquhar

Maxperson said:


> I just wonder who is actually going to make the 7 and the 9.



Just Sauron, I expect (but he will need mithril). Or Sauron+dwarves, Sauron+men. It's what makes sense from a "where we are at now" point of view. Trying to shoe-horn in some "but it says..." isn't going to lead anywhere. We know the writers aren't working that way.

The Silmarilion states quite explicitly that Gandalf (and Radagast) never went east. Saruman and the Blue wizards went east, but only Saruman came back. Does that mean the stranger can't be Gandalf?


----------



## Paul Farquhar

Sepulchrave II said:


> He seems more like Milton's Belial to me.



'Fraid I haven't read Milton.


Sepulchrave II said:


> I'm hoping the actor - who is Australian - drops the Yorkshire accent in his role of Sauron, and goes more RSC. It's grim up North, but Sheffield's not as bad as Mordor.



I hope he has a good range of accents, and switches between them depending on who he is trying to manipulate.

Tolkien makes a point that Aragorn changes his accent depending on who he is talking to.


----------



## MarkB

Maxperson said:


> That's how they ended up working at the ultimate end.  But they were made to enhance what the wearers desired.  The dwarves wanted to mine and own things, so it made them better at achieving great wealth, and made the wearers greedy.  The humans wanted power, so it gave it to them and then corrupted them into the Nazgul.



My headcanon for the One Ring and invisibility was that it basically required some advanced knowledge of Ring lore to specify its effect, and the last wielder to possess such knowledge was Isildur. He set it to "invisibility" mode, and no subsequent wearer knew how to switch it out of that mode.


----------



## Ryujin

Maxperson said:


> In the books he cast produce flame(hobbit), lightning bolt(hobbit), knock(lotr), Light(lotr), fireball(lotr), counterspell(lotr), detect thoughts(lotr), and break enchantment(lotr).  Perhaps more.



Hold Portal (LotR).


----------



## Ryujin

It seems to me that they melted down rather a lot of gold and silver, int hat dagger, for it to only make 3 rings.


----------



## Galandris

Maxperson said:


> That's how they ended up working at the ultimate end.  But they were made to enhance what the wearers desired.  The dwarves wanted to mine and own things, so it made them better at achieving great wealth, and made the wearers greedy.  The humans wanted power, so it gave it to them and then corrupted them into the Nazgul.




Wasn't the "turning into Nazgûl" the answer to human's desire of immortality? It's a pretty strong theme that humans really don't like the Gift of Illuvatar... (death).


----------



## Galandris

Ryujin said:


> It seems to me that they melted down rather a lot of gold and silver, int hat dagger, for it to only make 3 rings.




I guess most of the dagger was of a metal more suited to be a weapon than gold and silver, with just a few parts being actually gold and silver. That, and for the people who prefers out-of-universe explanations, the filmmakers weren't expert at forging themselves and favoured the graphical effect of the smelting of a huge amount of metal.


----------



## MarkB

Ryujin said:


> It seems to me that they melted down rather a lot of gold and silver, int hat dagger, for it to only make 3 rings.






Galandris said:


> I guess most of the dagger was of a metal more suited to be a weapon than gold and silver, with just a few parts being actually gold and silver. That, and for the people who prefers out-of-universe explanations, the filmmakers weren't expert at forging themselves and favoured the graphical effect of the smelting of a huge amount of metal.



Or they didn't use it all, and the rest is in storage.


----------



## Maxperson

Paul Farquhar said:


> Just Sauron, I expect (but he will need mithril). Or Sauron+dwarves, Sauron+men. It's what makes sense from a "where we are at now" point of view. Trying to shoe-horn in some "but it says..." isn't going to lead anywhere. We know the writers aren't working that way.



Yeah.


Paul Farquhar said:


> The Silmarilion states quite explicitly that Gandalf (and Radagast) never went east. Saruman and the Blue wizards went east, but only Saruman came back. Does that mean the stranger can't be Gandalf?



It also says none of the Istari showed up this early, Isildur and Anarion weren't born yet, Galadriel wasn't warlike, the Balrog doesn't wake up yet, mithril is traded to the races of Middle Earth for more than a thousand years and not kept a secret, Sauron hid and wasn't killed, the 7 and 9 were forged first, and more.  Gandalf going east is par for the course at this point.


----------



## Ryujin

Galandris said:


> I guess most of the dagger was of a metal more suited to be a weapon than gold and silver, with just a few parts being actually gold and silver. That, and for the people who prefers out-of-universe explanations, the filmmakers weren't expert at forging themselves and favoured the graphical effect of the smelting of a huge amount of metal.



I think that even a non smith would consider that if you melted down the whole thing and all of it wasn't suited to be used in the rings, then separating out the individual metals after the fact would be rather tough.


----------



## Maxperson

Galandris said:


> Wasn't the "turning into Nazgûl" the answer to human's desire of immortality? It's a pretty strong theme that humans really don't like the Gift of Illuvatar... (death).



I think that was the corruption of the rings, which they accepted from Sauron due to the promise of immortality.  The rings tried to corrupt the dwarves, but failed to do more than exert a bit of influence and make them greedy.


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully

That was a really nice season finale.


Whizbang Dustyboots said:


> For one thing, that's not how dams work, Celebrimbadingbadingbor.



Actually, in show canon, it seems that's how Elven dams seem to work. Or at least I presume the dam that opened with that little Sauron artefact and created Mordor's gloomy atmopshere was of Elven design. 



ART! said:


> One thing I'm really liking about this show is Bear McCreary score. More specifically, I can't stop listening to his themes, especially _Galadriel_, _The Stranger_, _Numenor_, _Valinor_, and _Elendil & Isildu_r. They're really strong, I think, and distinctive. I love the Mediterranean/Middle-Eastern/North-African sound of the Numenor theme, and _The Stranger_ reminds me of Bedrich Smetana's _Vltava._



Bear McCreary is at it again. So far I think I liked all his work, at least the stuff I know. He was great for Battlestar Galactica, Human Target, The Cape, Caprica, Defiance, Da Vinci's Demons and now RoP. And I've heard he's great in the God of War games as well, and Black Sail also sounds pretty interesting, but I haven't played the game or seen the show respectively.


----------



## Vael

Bear McCreary hasn't ever really missed, IMO.


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots

Mustrum_Ridcully said:


> Bear McCreary is at it again. So far I think I liked all his work, at least the stuff I know. He was great for Battlestar Galactica, Human Target, The Cape, Caprica, Defiance, Da Vinci's Demons and now RoP. And I've heard he's great in the God of War games as well, and Black Sail also sounds pretty interesting, but I haven't played the game or seen the show respectively.



Black Sails has its issues, but its soundtrack is top notch. (I am to pirate stories to a bunch of folks on this thread are to Tolkien.)


----------



## Zardnaar

"Sauron didn't know he was playing Sauron when he took the role. 









						Rings of Power star learned they were playing iconic Lord of the Rings villain after filming began
					

Major spoilers ahead.




					www.digitalspy.com


----------



## reelo

Just a quick graphic for those who don't know the canon timeline so they can get an idea what the showrunners have been jumbling around.


----------



## billd91

Zaukrie said:


> That show is great fantasy. I can't figure out how any fantasy fan doesn't love it.



It may be fantasy, but it's fantasy in a context - the Second Age of Middle Earth. What may work in a general fantasy show might still be pretty bad at presenting that context. As far as I'm concerned, it shines best and most interestingly when it's well away from the canonical characters and events. When it does deal with the canonical characters, the visuals are excellent but the story is weirdly convoluted.


----------



## Zaukrie

Canon is stupid.


----------



## billd91

Well, you know, you license someone else's IP to create a high-profile adaptation - it would be weird to *not* expect viewers' prior relationship with that IP to inform their reaction to the adaptation.


----------



## Parmandur

reelo said:


> Just a quick graphic for those who don't know the canon timeline so they can get an idea what the showrunners have been jumbling around.



Yes, they have done an excellent job rearranging this for dramatic purposes.


----------



## Maxperson

Parmandur said:


> Yes, they have done an excellent job rearranging this for dramatic purposes.



I don't agree.  They could have done a great job just limiting the story to the actual timeline with the rings.  Plenty of room for lots of drama and good stories based around Annatar showing up and tricking the elves, figuring out how to forge the rings, forging the three in secret, revealing Sauron, and the subsequent invasion and destruction of Eregion.  

Lots and lots of stories and drama to be had with just that bit of time and history.  No need to bring in Gandalf or the Numenoreans and then screw with the timeline in a major way. It didn't need to happen.


----------



## RuinousPowers

Maxperson said:


> I don't agree.  They could have done a great job just limiting the story to the actual timeline with the rings.  Plenty of room for lots of drama and good stories based around Annatar showing up and tricking the elves, figuring out how to forge the rings, forging the three in secret, revealing Sauron, and the subsequent invasion and destruction of Eregion.
> 
> Lots and lots of stories and drama to be had with just that bit of time and history.  No need to bring in Gandalf or the Numenoreans and then screw with the timeline in a major way. It didn't need to happen.



That's still about 500 years of history, so guess there isn't much point in having anyone but elves and Sauron in the show, and it would feel very limited to one city.


----------



## Parmandur

Maxperson said:


> I don't agree.  They could have done a great job just limiting the story to the actual timeline with the rings.  Plenty of room for lots of drama and good stories based around Annatar showing up and tricking the elves, figuring out how to forge the rings, forging the three in secret, revealing Sauron, and the subsequent invasion and destruction of Eregion.
> 
> Lots and lots of stories and drama to be had with just that bit of time and history.  No need to bring in Gandalf or the Numenoreans and then screw with the timeline in a major way. It didn't need to happen.



They did actually consider thst direction and mapped that out duringdevelopment, but the resultant narrative was extremely complex and confusing with a jumping around timeline thst would have been bewildering in practice.

For dramatic purposes, a condensed timeline is just more practical. This is TV, not literature..


----------



## Parmandur

RuinousPowers said:


> That's still about 500 years of history, so guess there isn't much point in having anyone but elves and Sauron in the show, and it would feel very limited to one city.



No, way more than that: the rings were forged ~1600 years prior to the decline of Numenor.


----------



## Maxperson

RuinousPowers said:


> That's still about 500 years of history, so guess there isn't much point in having anyone but elves and Sauron in the show, and it would feel very limited to one city.



And the dwarves of the time if they need metals for the forging. And the humans of the time if they have to travel through those lands. And...  As I said, plenty of room for lots of stories and drama just based around the forging of the rings.

There was no need to bring in Isildur and Anarion and that particular storyline.


----------



## Maxperson

Parmandur said:


> They did actually consider thst direction and mapped that out duringdevelopment, but the resultant narrative was extremely complex and confusing with a jumping around timeline thst would have been bewildering in practice.
> 
> For dramatic purposes, a condensed timeline is just more practical. This is TV, not literature..



Then condense Annatar arriving in 1200ish to the war in in the 1690s. It would not have been confusing at that point and they wouldn't have dragged Gandalf, Isildur and Anarion into things way outside of their range.


----------



## Ibrandul

I like the show overall but I do wish the showrunners had chosen to do, say, two or three seasons for the 1600s–early 1700s period, followed by a single huge time jump and then two or three seasons for the end of the age. (Annatar's arrival could be condensed into the 1600s or dealt with flashback, or even just skipped—start with him as a supposedly known quantity in Eregion.)

But I don't want that just because it's canon. It just seems like a missed opportunity to do something interesting and unusual with narrative structure. The showrunners have mentioned _The Wire_ as an inspiration on their approach to storytelling structure, especially in the way they think of each season as a unit—which puts the lie to the notion that they think you can only do challenging narrative things in literature and not in TV. Sticking to Tolkien's timeline would have been a _The Wire_ move: bold, tricky to pull off, and potentially very rewarding both thematically (unforeseen consequences of present choices loooong down the line, contrast between elven lives and the lives of mortals, etc.) and narratively (the later Numenoreans' obsession with immortality could hit viewers pretty hard if they themselves had just "lost" everyone in the cast except elves and Sauron, for example).

I understand why they chose to compress and rearrange the timeline, why they thought it's the only right move. And it's not a bad move. But doing so yields a presumably much more conventional story structure. I would wager money that the coming seasons will be arranged around the lines of the poem, and this is why the show chose to have the canonically last-forged elven rings come first: S2: dwarven rings; S3: rings of men; S4: One Ring; S5: "In the Darkness Bind Them"/Last Alliance. That's a fine structure, I suppose. Just not an interesting one.


----------



## Parmandur

Maxperson said:


> Then condense Annatar arriving in 1200ish to the war in in the 1690s.



They are condensing it all together. The Podcaster Tolkien Professor has a good take on this that I agree with, of viewing changes through a Pro/Con paradigm: there are a lot of pros to bringing these major events together for a filmed story, and frankly not much in the way of cons as far as the show is concerned. The world building of having these events be slow and steady across two millenia is great for a book...but doesn't work for visual media.


----------



## Parmandur

jeremypowell said:


> I like the show overall but I do wish the showrunners had chosen to do, say, two or three seasons for the 1600s–early 1700s period, followed by a single huge time jump and then two or three seasons for the end of the age. (Annatar's arrival could be condensed into the 1600s or dealt with flashback, or even just skipped—start with him as a supposedly known quantity in Eregion.)
> 
> But I don't want that just because it's canon. It just seems like a missed opportunity to do something interesting and unusual with narrative structure. The showrunners have mentioned _The Wire_ as an inspiration on their approach to storytelling structure, especially in the way they think of each season as a unit—which puts the lie to the notion that they think you can only do challenging narrative things in literature and not in TV. Sticking to Tolkien's timeline would have been a _The Wire_ move: bold, tricky to pull off, and potentially very rewarding both thematically (unforeseen consequences of present choices loooong down the line, contrast between elven lives and the lives of mortals, etc.) and narrratively (the later Numenoreans' obsession with immortality could hit viewers pretty hard if they themselves had just "lost" everyone in the cast except elves and Sauron, for example).
> 
> I understand why they chose to compress and rearrange the timeline, why they thought it's the only right move. And it's not a bad move. But doing so yields a presumably much more conventional story structure. I would wager money that the coming seasons will be arranged around the lines of the poem, and this is why the show chose to have the canonically last-forged elven rings come first: S2: dwarven rings; S3: rings of men; S4: One Ring; S5: "In the Darkness Bind Them"/Last Alliance. That's a fine structure, I suppose. Just not an interesting one.



I really enjoy that chiastic structure, myself. I'm really curious to see what the show does with the unknown Ringbearers: we have Elrond, Galadriel, Gil-Galad, and Durin, but that leaves 15 largely unknown characters to introduce in some fashion (though I think we may have already met a fair number of the Nazgûl).


----------



## Maxperson

Parmandur said:


> The world building of having these events be slow and steady across two millenia is great for a book...but doesn't work for visual media.



But................that's the point.  There's no reason to have those major events together.  Have one major event, the forging of the rings and all the drama and action around that happen.  Then another series about the downfall of Numenor and the establishment of Gondor and Arnor and the battle to take the ring from Sauron.


----------



## Maxperson

Parmandur said:


> I really enjoy that chiastic structure, myself. I'm really curious to see what the show does with the unknown Ringbearers: we have Elrond, Galadriel, Gil-Galad, and Durin, but that leaves 15 largely unknown characters to introduce in some fashion (though I think we may have already met a fair number of the Nazgûl).



I the nine were given to the kings and queens of mortal men.  I could see the boy of the southrons being a leader to get one, and perhaps Miriel being tempted into accepting one to restore her sight.


----------



## Parmandur

Maxperson said:


> But................that's the point.  There's no reason to have those major events together.  Have one major event, the forging of the rings and all the drama and action around that happen.  Then another series about the downfall of Numenor and the establishment of Gondor and Arnor and the battle to take the ring from Sauron.



Aure there is...to get them on screen in q coherent fashion.


----------



## Parmandur

Maxperson said:


> I the nine were given to the kings and queens of mortal men.  I could see the boy of the southrons being a leader to get one, and perhaps Miriel being tempted into accepting one to restore her sight.



The only really canon info we have is that 3 were Numenoreans, and one was an Easterling. Pharazon was one of the Nazgûl in ICE MERP canon, and seems a plausible candidate, as do his son, Elendil's daughter, Miriel, Valendil and Theo.


----------



## Ibrandul

Parmandur said:


> I really enjoy tgatchiastic structure, myself. I'm really curious to see what the show does with the unknown Ringbearers: we have Elrond, Galadriel, Gil-Galad, and Durin, but that leaves 15 largely unknown characters to introduce in some fashion (though I think we may have already met a fair number of the Nazgûl).



I think it's likely that several of the dwarf-lords will remain relatively indistinguishable from one another (dwarves distinguishable only by their names being a long-entrenched Tolkienian tradition; only a few of the dwarves in "The Hobbit" have personalities).

But the nine humans, I think, will all have to be bona fide individuals. Some will not have appeared yet—for instance the Istar and Nori will surely meet Khamûl in Rhûn next season (unless the estate is feeling especially greedy-cranky and refuses the rights to that name, which I doubt).

And I agree: at this point almost any human we have met could wind up wraithy before all is done. I can't see these showrunners tying themselves to the notion that they must be monarchs per se. The Witch-king in particular is almost certainly a Numenorean we have seen this season, and there are really only a few possibilities. I do hope they don't wraithify Pharazon, to whom _The Silmarillion_ assigns a more appropriate fate.


----------



## Maxperson

Parmandur said:


> Aure there is...to get them on screen in q coherent fashion.



It would have been perfectly coherent to split the major events.  We've seen it with the Hobbit and the Lord of the Rings being done separately, yet coherently(not the same as quality as the Hobbit was horrible).  The Hobbit and Lord of the Rings are two separate major events that happened at distinctly different times and were coherent portrayed.


----------



## RuinousPowers

Maxperson said:


> But................that's the point.  There's no reason to have those major events together.  Have one major event, the forging of the rings and all the drama and action around that happen.  Then another series about the downfall of Numenor and the establishment of Gondor and Arnor and the battle to take the ring from Sauron.



Well, they didn't want to make 2 series, and a whole series where there is some suspicion aimed at Sauron, but nothing proven, during a 400 year period of peace and craftsmanship seems awfully slow.


----------



## Maxperson

RuinousPowers said:


> Well, they didn't want to make 2 series, and a whole series where there is some suspicion aimed at Sauron, but nothing proven, during a 400 year period of peace and craftsmanship seems awfully slow.



Well, again, they could have condensed that 400 year period without much disruption to how events played out.  And why wouldn't they want to make two successful series?  Money talks!


----------



## Galandris

Parmandur said:


> The only really canon info we have is that 3 were Numenoreans, and one was an Easterling. Pharazon was one of the Nazgûl in ICE MERP canon, and seems a plausible candidate, as do his son, Elendil's daughter, Miriel, Valendil and Theo.




I am not a Tolkien scholar but I seem to remember that Ar-Pharazôn is trapped with his army in a cave created by the reshaping of Arda until the end of time. While it is conceivable that some Numenorean could have escaped, he's the one I think deserves most to stay trapped there...

The show as it is has so little in common with the timeline that it would have been a great standalone fantasy show and Amazon could have saved millions in licensing. I fail to identify elements that couldn't be replaced/renamed in the story _they _wanted to tell.


----------



## Ibrandul

Parmandur said:


> Pharazon was one of the Nazgûl in ICE MERP canon



Do you know which MERP source contained this? Most of the ringwraiths were given more than one name in MERP, but I haven't seen Ar-Pharazôn identified with any of them. To my knowledge the three Númenorean ringwraiths in MERP lore are Tindamul/Êr-Mûrazôr (the Witch-king), Herundil/Akhôrahil, and Númeniel/Adûnaphel. Is one of them identified with Ar-Pharazôn in a MERP sourcebook?


----------



## John R Davis

Season 2 could be the dwarf rings ( jealous of the elven shinies). More dwarves, less Harfoots.
Internal Mordor conflict ( maybe Sauron grabs a palantir early??).
Not sure what wizard and Nori get up too?
Fall Numenor at its end. Cool opportunity for more of the daughter/palantir ( blind queen could use it too?).

I really liked it and 5 or 6 really interesting characters.


----------



## RuinousPowers

Maxperson said:


> Well, again, they could have condensed that 400 year period without much disruption to how events played out.  And why wouldn't they want to make two successful series?  Money talks!



Money does talk, and a Tolkien show that is only bookended by actual Tolkien events wouldn't appeal to many people.


----------



## Parmandur

jeremypowell said:


> Do you know which MERP source contained this? Most of the ringwraiths were given more than one name in MERP, but I haven't seen Ar-Pharazôn identified with any of them. To my knowledge the three Númenorean ringwraiths in MERP lore are Tindamul/Êr-Mûrazôr (the Witch-king), Herundil/Akhôrahil, and Númeniel/Adûnaphel. Is one of them identified with Ar-Pharazôn in a MERP sourcebook?



I read it on a Wiki, so it may have been something else, bit I'm pretty sure it was a MERP lore wiki: MERP really developed a huge body of alternate extended canon.


----------



## Maxperson

RuinousPowers said:


> Money does talk, and a Tolkien show that is only bookended by actual Tolkien events wouldn't appeal to many people.



Then it's probably a good thing that I didn't suggest that and instead suggested that they come up with some new stuff within that time period.


----------



## Parmandur

John R Davis said:


> Season 2 could be the dwarf rings ( jealous of the elven shinies). More dwarves, less Harfoots.
> Internal Mordor conflict ( maybe Sauron grabs a palantir early??).
> Not sure what wizard and Nori get up too?
> Fall Numenor at its end. Cool opportunity for more of the daughter/palantir ( blind queen could use it too?).
> 
> I really liked it and 5 or 6 really interesting characters.



4 out of 7 Dwarf Clans are actually centered in...Rhun (the 2 others were in Bereliand, so are woth Durin's House now). so, Nori and The Stranger might be the framing device to introduce the barely developed Dwarves of the East. Given how little development the East got, thisnis another huge opportunity for something original and surprising, which is apparently the element that attracted the Tolkien Eatate to this pitch: passion for an original story done respectfully rather than a staid retread.


----------



## RuinousPowers

Maxperson said:


> Then it's probably a good thing that I didn't suggest that and instead suggested that they come up with some new stuff within that time period.



Actually, its exactly what you suggested. And still complaining about the format of the show even after the entire first season has aired is hardly (+).


----------



## Maxperson

RuinousPowers said:


> Actually, its exactly what you suggested. And still complaining about the format of the show even after the entire first season has aired is hardly (+).



It's not a complaint. It's a, it could have been better if... There's a difference.


----------



## Parmandur

jeremypowell said:


> Do you know which MERP source contained this? Most of the ringwraiths were given more than one name in MERP, but I haven't seen Ar-Pharazôn identified with any of them. To my knowledge the three Númenorean ringwraiths in MERP lore are Tindamul/Êr-Mûrazôr (the Witch-king), Herundil/Akhôrahil, and Númeniel/Adûnaphel. Is one of them identified with Ar-Pharazôn in a MERP sourcebook?



Turns out it wasn't MERP, but rather the Monolith Mordor video games that developed a version of the Nazgûl further (including Isildur!). So, still could influence the direction of the show.


----------



## RuinousPowers

Maxperson said:


> It's not a complaint. It's a, it could have been better if... There's a difference.



There is already another thread for you to post what you would have done. 









						What TV series related to the "Matter of Middle-earth" would you prefer to see?
					

I have long thought the film adaptation of the novels of J.R.R. Tolkien (The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings) I would most like to see would be in the form of a series of one-hour episodes, each one covering just one chapter of the book as faithfully as possible.  Another idea I've had for a...




					www.enworld.org
				




This is a thread about what has been done.


----------



## MarkB

Maxperson said:


> I don't agree.  They could have done a great job just limiting the story to the actual timeline with the rings.  Plenty of room for lots of drama and good stories based around Annatar showing up and tricking the elves, figuring out how to forge the rings, forging the three in secret, revealing Sauron, and the subsequent invasion and destruction of Eregion.



The problem is, we as the audience are going to know who Annatar really is, so having him spending multiple seasons through the forging of all the rings hanging around and fooling the elves and everyone else winds up either making them look very stupid or making him too unbeatable as a manipulator, and either way the plotline will exhaust the audience's patience.

The way they did it here, with him fooling people in the story for a single season, and most of that spent with even the audience still guessing, is about as long as you can sustain it dramatically.


----------



## billd91

MarkB said:


> The problem is, we as the audience are going to know who Annatar really is, so having him spending multiple seasons through the forging of all the rings hanging around and fooling the elves and everyone else winds up either making them look very stupid or making him too unbeatable as a manipulator, and either way the plotline will exhaust the audience's patience.



Depends on how you want to tell the story. Those of us watching the prequel trilogy knew that Senator Palpatine was going to be the Emperor all along, and that Anakin Skywalker was going to be Darth Vader. The point of telling the story, and us watching it, was to see how they got there. Quite a few of us also knew about the Red Wedding in Game of Thrones before it was revealed in all its gory and it was still interesting to watch.

Not every treacherous plot needs to be a plot twist surprise reveal for the audience (even if your name is M. Night Shyamalan, hmmm, maybe *especially* if your name is M. Night Shyamalan).


----------



## Dausuul

Parmandur said:


> The only really canon info we have is that 3 were Numenoreans, and one was an Easterling. Pharazon was one of the Nazgûl in ICE MERP canon, and seems a plausible candidate, as do his son, Elendil's daughter, Miriel, Valendil and Theo.



Pharazon and Miriel have canonical fates that are very hard to reconcile with them being Nazgûl.


----------



## MarkB

billd91 said:


> Depends on how you want to tell the story. Those of us watching the prequel trilogy knew that Senator Palpatine was going to be the Emperor all along, and that Anakin Skywalker was going to be Darth Vader. The point of telling the story, and us watching it, was to see how they got there. Quite a few of us also knew about the Red Wedding in Game of Thrones before it was revealed in all its gory and it was still interesting to watch.
> 
> Not every treacherous plot needs to be a plot twist surprise reveal for the audience (even if your name is M. Night Shyamalan, hmmm, maybe *especially* if your name is M. Night Shyamalan).



Okay, that's a fair point.


----------



## Parmandur

Dausuul said:


> Pharazon and Miriel have canonical fates that are very hard to reconcile with them being Nazgûl.



But not impossible, since it has been done already in recent licensed media.


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots

billd91 said:


> Well, you know, you license someone else's IP to create a high-profile adaptation - it would be weird to *not* expect viewers' prior relationship with that IP to inform their reaction to the adaptation.



Yes and no. For better or worse, the Peter Jackson movies are _vastly_ better known and consumed than the novels are, similar to the relationship between the MCU films and Marvel Comics. I think the adapters are probably making the wise commercial decision to go with what makes the movie audience happy, when they have to choose, rather than the book audience.

And most of the book people are still going to watch, much like my friend who sits beside me at every MCU movie and gripes about all the continuity errors from the comics, and not listening to me tell him it's a parallel universe every. single. time.

That kind of decision is inevitably going to frustrate many of the book fans, in both cases, but when you've got corporations and billionaires looking over your shoulder, not doing the commercially best thing would be very hard.


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots

Parmandur said:


> They did actually consider thst direction and mapped that out duringdevelopment, but the resultant narrative was extremely complex and confusing with a jumping around timeline thst would have been bewildering in practice.



People have had trouble keeping track of 20 years of stuff happening in a single season of House of the Dragon. If only the elves were consistent presences from episode to episode of Rings of Power, I think most of the audience would throw up their hands and give up.


----------



## Maxperson

Dausuul said:


> Pharazon and Miriel have canonical fates that are very hard to reconcile with them being Nazgûl.



Pharazon yes, Miriel not as much.  It is said that she was swept away by a wave while trying to reach the peak of Meneltarma, but no one could have seen it to say for sure.  She could have just as easily flew away on a Fel Beast wearing one of the nine rings.  Pharazon led his people to Aman and landed.  Witnesses that are still alive saw it and he was buried there by Eru. It's a bit tougher to change his fate into being one of the Nazgul.


----------



## Maxperson

Parmandur said:


> But not impossible, since it has been done already in recent licensed media.



I'm not sure I'd call 35 years ago recent, but yeah, it was done.


----------



## Bolares

Morrus said:


> I’m trying to recall. What was Halbrand/Sauron’s actual role in the unlocking of the dam/exploding Mt Doom? Wasn’t that the machinations of Adar, who is apparently his enemy?



Maybe he had a hand in giving the guy the sword hilt to unlock the dam?


----------



## Dausuul

Parmandur said:


> But not impossible, since it has been done already in recent licensed media.



How did they reconcile it? What's their explanation for how Pharazon got out of the Caves of the Forgotten and crossed back to Middle-Earth after being imprisoned by Eru himself?

If the answer is "They don't explain it," then they didn't reconcile anything with canon; they just goofed. (Or changed canon intentionally.)


----------



## Maxperson

Dausuul said:


> How did they reconcile it? What's their explanation for how Pharazon got out of the Caves of the Forgotten and crossed back to Middle-Earth after being imprisoned by Eru himself?
> 
> If the answer is "They don't explain it," then they didn't reconcile anything with canon; they just goofed. (Or changed canon intentionally.)



Unfortunately I lost my Lords of Middle Earth Volume II or I would look it up.


----------



## Galandris

Bolares said:


> Maybe he had a hand in giving the guy the sword hilt to unlock the dam?




Was I dreaming when I understood the scene where the elf we're intended to think is Galandriel chase him to take back to hilt from him as occurring right after he got his sword, put blood on it, gave it to the guy, then took a small hatchet and ran, so the protagonist would chase him and not the real hilt? I got distracted at this moment but I really understood the scene as meant to be understood like that.


----------



## Parmandur

Maxperson said:


> I'm not sure I'd call 35 years ago recent, but yeah, it was done.



Shadows Over Mordor is like 6-7 years old.


----------



## Parmandur

Dausuul said:


> How did they reconcile it? What's their explanation for how Pharazon got out of the Caves of the Forgotten and crossed back to Middle-Earth after being imprisoned by Eru himself?
> 
> If the answer is "They don't explain it," then they didn't reconcile anything with canon; they just goofed. (Or changed canon intentionally.)



Changes are not inherently bad. We'll see what they do here.


----------



## ART!

The more you want to criticize a work for not being what you think it "should be", the more you need to understanding the art form, the artists' intentions, and their methods for that criticism to be actual art criticism and not mere opinion. There's nothing wrong with the latter, of course, but it's too easy to see one's opinion as Very Reasonable And Thoughtful, Yes Indeed.


----------



## Maxperson

Parmandur said:


> Shadows Over Mordor is like 6-7 years old.



I don't know that one.


----------



## Ryujin

Whizbang Dustyboots said:


> Yes and no. For better or worse, the Peter Jackson movies are _vastly_ better known and consumed than the novels are, similar to the relationship between the MCU films and Marvel Comics. I think the adapters are probably making the wise commercial decision to go with what makes the movie audience happy, when they have to choose, rather than the book audience.
> 
> And most of the book people are still going to watch, much like my friend who sits beside me at every MCU movie and gripes about all the continuity errors from the comics, and not listening to me tell him it's a parallel universe every. single. time.
> 
> That kind of decision is inevitably going to frustrate many of the book fans, in both cases, but when you've got corporations and billionaires looking over your shoulder, not doing the commercially best thing would be very hard.



It's a little easier to hand-wave things in the MCU given that the comics already did the multiple universes thing and what there is now is virtually unrecognizable from what I knew in the '60s/70s/'80s. Still, there's nothing in "Rings of Power" that makes me say, What the f*** are they doing?!!!" It's more a bit of wondering at where they're going.


----------



## Parmandur

Maxperson said:


> I don't know that one.



It's an Open Wprld adventure game where the player is an Anti-Hero rogue Gondorian Ranger fighting a guerilla war inside Mordor. Takes quite a few liberties, but was popular and recent.


----------



## MarkB

Parmandur said:


> It's an Open Wprld adventure game where the player is an Anti-Hero rogue Gondorian Ranger fighting a guerilla war inside Mordor. Takes quite a few liberties, but was popular and recent.



Did you mean Middle Earth: Shadow of Mordor and its sequel Shadow of War?

They did have some great story elements, which similarly took creative liberties with the lore. Their interpretation of Celebrimbor and his backstory with Sauron is superbly well done.

EDIT: Also the bits with Gollum are awesome.


----------



## Parmandur

MarkB said:


> Did you mean Middle Earth: Shadow of Mordor and its sequel Shadow of War?
> 
> They did have some great story elements, which similarly took creative liberties with the lore. Their interpretation of Celebrimbor and his backstory with Sauron is superbly well done.
> 
> EDIT: Also the bits with Gollum are awesome.



Yup, that's it: I only know it by reputation, and that a lot of the Critical Role crew provided voice acting (Liam O'Brian being Gollum, IIRC).


----------



## MarkB

Parmandur said:


> Yup, that's it: I only know it by reputation, and that a lot of the Critical Role crew provided voice acting (Liam O'Brian being Gollum, IIRC).



I played them when they came out. They captured the visual style of the movies very well, especially the orcs, which are made far more than just grunts thanks to the Nemesis system. The first game is excellent, the second suffers from some pacing issues but still has great elements.

The combat is very much in the style of the Batman Arkham games, one-on-many battles with moves that allow for crowd management and building combos to pull off special moves, but there's also a rewarding stealth / ranged system in there too. I enjoyed it back in the day, but when I tried to get into it for a replay recently I found that I no longer have the patience for it.


----------



## Zardnaar

Looking out there a lot of early reviews are kinda negative. Boring and pretentious, badly written etc, glorified fan fuction 

 It was rough starting out picked up towards the end. 

 Personally I would have pickedvavskice of time in the second age and develop that. Wouldn't have offended the hardcore Tolkein fans, less muddled pacing etc.


----------



## Parmandur

Zardnaar said:


> Wouldn't have offended the hardcore Tolkein fan



Good luck with that, lol.


----------



## Zaukrie

I hope next season we have a thread about the show, and not about the books.....


----------



## Ibrandul

Zaukrie said:


> I hope next season we have a thread about the show, and not about the books.....



For my part, I would be happy to see a thriving "no book spoilers" thread here. But I wouldn't participate in it, since I'm as book-spoiled as they come.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

Zardnaar said:


> Personally I would have pickedvavskice of time in the second age and develop that. Wouldn't have offended the hardcore Tolkein fans, less muddled pacing etc.



Then you wouldn't have access to Tolkien's actually good plot hooks. And never underestimate the ability of hardcore fans to get offended.


----------



## Zardnaar

Paul Farquhar said:


> Then you wouldn't have access to Tolkien's actually good plot hooks. And never underestimate the ability of hardcore fans to get offended.




 It's not just the hard core though. Quite a few negative reviews in mainstream publications (Forbes, Guardian, Rolling Stone iirc), not much online buzz. 

 HotD is cleaning up there. It was a rough start for RoP and the 3rd or 4th episode was bad imho.

 I think one of the executive types at Amazon fell asleep watching it. 

 Show has issues.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

Zardnaar said:


> It's not just the hard fire though. Quite a few negative reviews in mainstream publications (Forbes, Guardian, Rolling Stone iirc), not much online buzz.
> 
> HotD is cleaning up there. It was a rough start and the 3rd or 4th episode was bad imho.
> 
> I think one of the executive types at Amazon fell asleep watching it.
> 
> Show has issues.



The mainstream press has always disliked Tolkien, especially with his tendency to get lost in describing the countryside, songs and bad poetry.

"We need pace" "We need action" they say. Which put the program makers in a bind. To be true to Tolkien you need a leisurely pace, a love of nature, songs and poems. All of which are going to put you at odds with conventional shot-attention-span reviewers.


----------



## Zardnaar

Paul Farquhar said:


> The mainstream press has always disliked Tolkien, especially with his tendency to get lost in describing the countryside, songs and bad poetry.
> 
> "We need pace" "We need action" they say. Which put the program makers in a bind. To be true to Tolkien you need a leisurely pace, a love of nature, songs and poems. All of which are going to put you at odds with conventional shot-attention-span reviewers.




 Reception is mixed is main point. Not just the usual suspects. 

 There's a tendency to downplay and dismiss online but objectively it's there. And it's not just the usual suspects.

 Alot of reviews only rate the first few episodes as well. RoP was a bit weak there and kinda bad on one of those episodes. You only get one chance to make a first impression.

 IMDb seems fairly spot on for the two best episodes anyway.









						The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power (TV Series 2022– ) - IMDb
					






					m.imdb.com
				




Thought 7 was better than episode 3 or 4 can't remember the exact one.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

Zardnaar said:


> Reception is mixed is main point. Not just the usual suspects.
> 
> There's a tendency to downplay and dismiss online but objectively it's there. And it's not just the usual suspects.



Reaction to the original novel was "mixed". Which is to say, mostly negative in the mainstream. And most of the criticism levelled at the novel are, in a sense, valid. Tolkien was not a professional novelist, and he ignored a lot of conventional storytelling rules. Once you get past the racism, a lot of the criticisms levelled at the TV show are the same as those levelled at the novel, with regard to pacing and so on.


----------



## Zardnaar

Paul Farquhar said:


> Reaction to the original novel was "mixed". Which is to say, mostly negative in the mainstream. And most of the criticism levelled at the novel are, in a sense, valid. Tolkien was not a professional novelist, and he ignored a lot of conventional storytelling rules. Once you get past the racism, a lot of the criticisms levelled at the TV show are the same as those levelled at the novel, with regard to pacing and so on.




 True I've only ever managed to finish the Hobbit. Peter Jackson seemed to have made most people happy so it's not impossible.


----------



## Galandris

jeremypowell said:


> For my part, I would be happy to see a thriving "no book spoilers" thread here. But I wouldn't participate in it, since I'm as book-spoiled as they come.




An easy way would have been to avoid borrowing from the book and launch a new fantasy series. I am very serious about it: having watched the show with people who never heard about the Middle Earth outside of a casual watching of the Peter Jackson films...

1. They don't get thrilled by the namedropping because they don't recognize it and are puzzled instead;
2. They like the new elements of the show (the harfoots are totally unidentified as hobbits);
3. They identify the same pacing problem as I do;
4. They... hardly make links with the characters of the films. Galadriel wasn't recognized by name, those films were 20 years ago. She's just "an elf", like... Dobby and who was it? Legolas!"

All in all, it could be an original story without losing anything.

Tolkien fans are less than thrilled by the changes they made to characters, literary adaptions fans complains about the inconsistencies, they'll probably generate more criticisms if they don't resolve a few situation they have put themselves in because of leftover inconsistencies with the LotR films... The only advantage of using direct reference to LotR are because it attracts curiosity from the slim slice of humanity between "Tolkien hardcore fans" (a few, but generally vocal as fans do) and "people who don't care particularly about Tolkien", both of which are not benefitting from the Tolkien association.

I'd say that the "mainstream reviewers" don't fall within the slim slice, most probably belonging to the "people who don't care".

Let's take an illustration. The Dwarves are swearing using Aulë's name. It has 0 added benefit for people who haven't read the Silmarillion and remember it well enough. I don't think Aulë is mentionned in the LotR movies and possibly even not books.  It only puzzles them "Who? Did I hear well? Oh it was just filler text." It can also infuriate fans (why would they use this name and not call him the Maker or Mahal, esp. Durin who is demonstrated to be bad at speaking sindarin?). Is the number of people who remember their reading of the Silmarillion enough to justify introducing this kind of difficulty for the other two types of target?


----------



## Paul Farquhar

Zardnaar said:


> True I've only ever managed to finish the Hobbit. Peter Jackson seemed to have made most people happy so it's not impossible.



How can you say that, when he cut the best character*?


*Tom Bombadil, obviously


----------



## Morrus

I'm defintly thinking the 'it's not the same as the book' discussion needs to be spun off to its own thread.


----------



## Zardnaar

Are 6&8 generally regarded as the best episodes? I liked the last 3 more than first three. Battle episode and Sauron reveal.


----------



## Parmandur

Zardnaar said:


> True I've only ever managed to finish the Hobbit. Peter Jackson seemed to have made most people happy so it's not impossible.



Lol, I was active on Tolkien forums when those movies were coming out. Jackson made a lot of people deeply, deeply angry.


----------



## Stalker0

Whizbang Dustyboots said:


> Yeah, like I said when she jumped off a ship in the middle of the ocean and just started swimming toward Middle-Earth, hundreds of miles away, she is a mythic character, doing mythic things, including having the kind of failings only heroes of Greek myth, Beowulf and the like can have.



I feel like that was reinforced when Elrond was talking to Durin and strongly implied that he let him win the test of endurance. Basically if Elrond can outhammer a dwarf, its reasonable that Galadriel could swim across the sea. Elves are just nuts, its not Galadriel specifically.

People talk the "Mary Sue" label with Galadriel but I really don't see it. To me, a Mary Sue acts perfect and generally has perfect things happen to them. But in Galadriel's case, her anger and bloodlust continues to tip over the apple cart. Her men betrayed her and mutinied, she got rebuked and thrown in jail in Numenor, she was so obsessed with using Halbrand to unite the people against the orcs that she didn't see him for what he is...etc. The irony is the one time Galadriel finally calmed down and spoke to the Queen Regent as a person, rather than spitting fire, she got her desire....and she calmed down due to Halbrand's council.

Halbrand sees her weakness, and has been manipulating it for his own ends. That's far from a mary sue.


----------



## Bolares

Stalker0 said:


> Elves are just nuts, its not Galadriel specifically.



Maybe I'm wrong but I think that yes, elves are just nuts but Galadriel is REALLY powerfull, even for an elf.


----------



## Zaukrie

Zardnaar said:


> It's not just the hard core though. Quite a few negative reviews in mainstream publications (Forbes, Guardian, Rolling Stone iirc), not much online buzz.
> 
> HotD is cleaning up there. It was a rough start for RoP and the 3rd or 4th episode was bad imho.
> 
> I think one of the executive types at Amazon fell asleep watching it.
> 
> Show has issues.



nm. Not worth it.


----------



## Zaukrie

Morrus said:


> I'm defintly thinking the 'it's not the same as the book' discussion needs to be spun off to its own thread.



Please, please, please enforce this next season. Please.


----------



## Zaukrie

Zardnaar said:


> True I've only ever managed to finish the Hobbit. Peter Jackson seemed to have made most people happy so it's not impossible.



You must not have been online then. "True" fans were angry all the way.


----------



## Bolares

Zaukrie said:


> You must not have been online then. "True" fans were angry all the way.



So much so that there is a need to come to a (+) where people are explicitly not interested in discussing that topic.


----------



## Zaukrie

Bolares said:


> So much so that there is a need to come to a (+) where people are explicitly not interested in discussing that topic.



apologies.


----------



## ART!

Zaukrie said:


> You must not have been online then. "True" fans were angry all the way.



Yeah, if you take into account the ubiquity and vehemence of social media, the online opinions of RoP seem about on-par.


----------



## Nikosandros

Parmandur said:


> Lol, I was active on Tolkien forums when those movies were coming out. Jackson made a lot of people deeply, deeply angry.



Yeah, I remember it... and it is still boggling.

[Naive mode] Why do people get angry about this things? Personally, I'm not crazy about the series. I find it OK at best, but getting angry? Offended? Thinking that the holy scripture of Tolkien has been desacrated? It will never make any sense to me. [/naive mode]


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Dioltach said:


> We're getting bogged down in the "This is/isn't Tolkien" discussion again. The fact is that it's been licensed and approved by the Tolkien Estate, and they're really the only ones with any authority to make that distinction.



It will never not be strange to me that someone’s grandchildren can hold their IP, decades after their passing. It’s absurd that anyone still has control of fictional works from before my parents were born.


----------



## Maxperson

Stalker0 said:


> I feel like that was reinforced when Elrond was talking to Durin and strongly implied that he let him win the test of endurance. Basically if Elrond can outhammer a dwarf, its reasonable that Galadriel could swim across the sea. Elves are just nuts, its not Galadriel specifically.



Elves are nuts, but not THAT nuts.  

Amroth was on a boat within sight of shore and drowned trying to swim back in a storm.  Many Noldor drowned during the Kinslaying.  Voronwe's shipmates drowned in a storm.  The only reason he survived was that some higher power saved him.

Galadriel wouldn't have had the endurance to swim the entire ocean and get back.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

On the other hand, surfing across the ocean on a shield would have been brilliant!


----------



## Nikosandros

Paul Farquhar said:


> On the other hand, surfing across the ocean on a shield would have been brilliant!



With a belching dwarf behind providing propulsion.


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots

Stalker0 said:


> Halbrand sees her weakness, and has been manipulating it for his own ends. That's far from a mary sue.



If Liam Neeson had played a character doing all the things Galadriel did and behaved the same way she did in Rings of Power, I think everyone would nod and say "yeah, that checks out." I honestly think audiences -- no matter how they feel about women -- just aren't used to seeing a petite blonde being 100% badass like she is.


----------



## Bolares

Zaukrie said:


> apologies.



oh no, I was not talking about you


----------



## Zaukrie

Whizbang Dustyboots said:


> If Liam Neeson had played a character doing all the things Galadriel did and behaved the same way she did in Rings of Power, I think everyone would nod and say "yeah, that checks out." I honestly think audiences -- no matter how they feel about women -- just aren't used to seeing a petite blonde being 100% badass like she is.



I mean, she does less unrealistic things than what's his name in Mission Impossible movies.....


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots

Nikosandros said:


> [Naive mode] Why do people get angry about this things? Personally, I'm not crazy about the series. I find it OK at best, but getting angry? Offended? Thinking that the holy scripture of Tolkien has been desacrated? It will never make any sense to me. [/naive mode]



Yeah, I think the Wheel of Time series is awful, but I'm not chasing people around the internet to know that I feel that way, especially in settings where people who like the series are gathered.


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots

Zaukrie said:


> I mean, she does less unrealistic things than what's his name in Mission Impossible movies.....



I am convinced that Tom Cruise is trying to die on camera. He's apparently going to actually do a real-life spacewalk in the near future, for a movie, of course.


----------



## Maxperson

Whizbang Dustyboots said:


> If Liam Neeson had played a character doing all the things Galadriel did and behaved the same way she did in Rings of Power, I think everyone would nod and say "yeah, that checks out." I honestly think audiences -- no matter how they feel about women -- just aren't used to seeing a petite blonde being 100% badass like she is.



No. The problem is not with a woman doing those things.  The problem is that Galadriel is not that way in the books.  She never would have done those things.  Had they come up with a new female character to be the general of the armies and be a warhawkish Sauron hunter, I would have been fine with it and even liked it.

Now, if Sean Bean had played a character doing all the things Galadriel did and behaved the same way she did in Rings of Power, he would have died in the first episode.


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots

Maxperson said:


> No. The problem is not with a woman doing those things.  The problem is that Galadriel is not that way in the books.  She never would have done those things.  Had they come up with a new female character to be the general of the armies and be a warhawkish Sauron hunter, I would have been fine with it and even liked it.
> 
> Now, if Sean Bean had played a character doing all the things Galadriel did and behaved the same way she did in Rings of Power, he would have died in the first episode.



I'm not talking about you, Max, as evinced by the fact that you're not saying "Mary Sue."


----------



## Dire Bare

Whizbang Dustyboots said:


> I am convinced that Tom Cruise is trying to die on camera. He's apparently going to actually do a real-life spacewalk in the near future, for a movie, of course.



Go out doing what you love! That's the way to leave this world!


----------



## ART!

Maxperson said:


> Elves are nuts, but not THAT nuts.
> 
> Amroth was on a boat within sight of shore and drowned trying to swim back in a storm.  Many Noldor drowned during the Kinslaying.  Voronwe's shipmates drowned in a storm.  The only reason he survived was that some higher power saved him.
> 
> Galadriel wouldn't have had the endurance to swim the entire ocean and get back.



She just knew she had to get off that boat. Arriving in Valinor might removed her obsession/quest, and she even says later she doesn't know what she would be without that. She didn't want that identity swept away by the beauty of that "afterlife".



Maxperson said:


> No. The problem is not with a woman doing those things.  The problem is that Galadriel is not that way in the books.  She never would have done those things.



Can you explain this? What have you read that makes her behavior depicted in RoP so hard to swallow?


----------



## Zardnaar

I don't think Galadriel is a Mary Sue. 

1. She isn't showing up established more experienced characters. 

2. Her skills are plausible in universe and have an explaination beyond "just because". 

3. Elves tend to be fairly badass in LOTR whether it's biology/long lifespan idk. 

 4. The shows consistent with itself. Galadriel isn't breaking in universe examples with minimal/no explanation. 

  She might have the superman problem though but there's no kryptonite in ME. 

 Heroes journey type stories generally more effective imho with the really powerful types as villains or mentors ymmv of course.


----------



## Bolares

Zardnaar said:


> She might have the superman problem though but there's no kryptonite in ME.



You maybe could say that her kryptonite was her thirst for revenge.


----------



## billd91

Maxperson said:


> No. The problem is not with a woman doing those things.



Well, for some people (like the people bandying about the term Mary Sue), this is the problem. They can pretty much be ignored as the usual misogynistic trolls.


Maxperson said:


> The problem is that Galadriel is not that way in the books. She never would have done those things.



This is a fundamentally different question and one that gets at how the show kind of chafes at people who are fans of the books.


ART! said:


> Can you explain this? What have you read that makes her behavior depicted in RoP so hard to swallow?



If we stick to the materials the showrunners have the rights to adapt, there isn't a lot to go on. In the LotR appendices, Galadriel and Celeborn live together (not Celeborn lost at war) in Lindon for a time, she's mighty enough to rate one of the three rings (along with Gil-galad and Círdan), and she throws down the walls of Dol Guldor after the One Ring is destroyed (presumably with magic more than force of arms). That's not much to say anything certain. 
That said, if we do consider materials they don't have rights to but aren't supposed to contradict, she and Celeborn rule Eregion before Celebrimbor and the other smiths, she heads off to Lorien before Celeborn, and is suspicious of Sauron in his guise of Annatar while Celebrimbor is taken in. And, moreover, she's not a fan of the antics of Fëanor and his sons and their obsessive enmity with Morgoth over the Silmarils. But here she is obsessing over Sauron and seeking revenge for the death of her elder brother, Finrod, in a quest of Fëanorian proportions. And, for me, that irritates a bit. Pretty much every reference to her in the books, she's generally wise and insightful, even if a bit ambitious to rule her own lands - not obsessive and petulant like she is in much of the first season of the show.
So, yeah, I see the complaint about her depiction being a bit hard to swallow. I certainly have a hard time with the idea of her alienating Gil-galad and Elrond to the point where they're trying exile her off to Valinor. That also seems a misuse of the trip to Valinor to me.
And the sad part is I think they could have portrayed her as more mature and wise but still suspicious of the persistence of the enemy's forces and influence. She's suspicious of Annatar for reasons, she moves east to Lorien within much shorter distance of Mordor for reasons. She's definitely got the temperament of a warden, but a generally patient one.


----------



## ART!

billd91 said:


> Well, for some people (like the people bandying about the term Mary Sue), this is the problem. They can pretty much be ignored as the usual misogynistic trolls.
> 
> This is a fundamentally different question and one that gets at how the show kind of chafes at people who are fans of the books.
> 
> If we stick to the materials the showrunners have the rights to adapt, there isn't a lot to go on. In the LotR appendices, Galadriel and Celeborn live together (not Celeborn lost at war) in Lindon for a time, she's mighty enough to rate one of the three rings (along with Gil-galad and Círdan), and she throws down the walls of Dol Guldor after the One Ring is destroyed (presumably with magic more than force of arms). That's not much to say anything certain.
> That said, if we do consider materials they don't have rights to but aren't supposed to contradict, she and Celeborn rule Eregion before Celebrimbor and the other smiths, she heads off to Lorien before Celeborn, and is suspicious of Sauron in his guise of Annatar while Celebrimbor is taken in. And, moreover, she's not a fan of the antics of Fëanor and his sons and their obsessive enmity with Morgoth over the Silmarils. But here she is obsessing over Sauron and seeking revenge for the death of her elder brother, Finrod, in a quest of Fëanorian proportions. And, for me, that irritates a bit. Pretty much every reference to her in the books, she's generally wise and insightful, even if a bit ambitious to rule her own lands - not obsessive and petulant like she is in much of the first season of the show.
> So, yeah, I see the complaint about her depiction being a bit hard to swallow. I certainly have a hard time with the idea of her alienating Gil-galad and Elrond to the point where they're trying exile her off to Valinor. That also seems a misuse of the trip to Valinor to me.
> And the sad part is I think they could have portrayed her as more mature and wise but still suspicious of the persistence of the enemy's forces and influence. She's suspicious of Annatar for reasons, she moves east to Lorien within much shorter distance of Mordor for reasons. She's definitely got the temperament of a warden, but a generally patient one.



That makes sense.

I guess I'm okay with a depiction of her pursuant of an arc _to_ that mature and wise Galadriel. Irrational actions resulting from grief is something people can relate to, and the death of her brothers is textual - honestly, I'm surprised they don't include all of them, but I can't remember how the other two died.


----------



## MarkB

ART! said:


> That makes sense.
> 
> I guess I'm okay with a depiction of her pursuant of an arc _to_ that mature and wise Galadriel. Irrational actions resulting from grief is something people can relate to, and the death of her brothers is textual - honestly, I'm surprised they don't include all of them, but I can't remember how the other two died.



Yeah, that "journey to becoming the person they are in the novels" is something that Peter Jackson went in for hard when adapting LotR - to varying degrees of effectiveness. It tended to work poorly with characters who didn't get much screen time in the first place, such as Faramir and Theoden, but worked very well for Aragorn.

At least in a long series the "too little screen time" issue is unlikely to occur.


----------



## Parmandur

doctorbadwolf said:


> It will never not be strange to me that someone’s grandchildren can hold their IP, decades after their passing. It’s absurd that anyone still has control of fictional works from before my parents were born.



I mean, better that Tolkien's descendants benefit than merely corporations: much less gross Tham the absurd work for hire creations of pop cure phenomenon like Captain America or Batman.


----------



## Maxperson

ART! said:


> She just knew she had to get off that boat. Arriving in Valinor might removed her obsession/quest



She might have been Galadriel. 


ART! said:


> Can you explain this? What have you read that makes her behavior depicted in RoP so hard to swallow?



She took part in no major battles and while she had a temper, she was against what Feanor and company were about(war with Morgoth).


----------



## Galandris

ART! said:


> That makes sense.
> 
> I guess I'm okay with a depiction of her pursuant of an arc _to_ that mature and wise Galadriel. Irrational actions resulting from grief is something people can relate to, and the death of her brothers is textual - honestly, I'm surprised they don't include all of them, but I can't remember how the other two died.




I think the reaction depends on familiarity with the setting, as often in this thread.

Regular person (my folks, who have no knowledge of fantasy): "bad-ass elf girl, cool, too bad she didn't apear in LotR".

Informed watcher: "I know she isn't like the Galadriel we know, but I can give it a little leeway because she'll probably mature with time, she must be in her twenties after all".

More informed watcher: "She's already 6,500 years old and spend literally an age being taught philosophy by Melian. Compared to her, the dalai-lama should be a rebel teenager."

Actually, if anything, she behaves like a human with pointy ears, not unlike players playing an elf. The thrill of Elrond chastizing about being there with Isildur when Mankind failed, or other rare scenes where elves acted like elves, seems an little lost.


----------



## Galandris

Maxperson said:


> Elves are nuts, but not THAT nuts.
> 
> Amroth was on a boat within sight of shore and drowned trying to swim back in a storm.  Many Noldor drowned during the Kinslaying.  Voronwe's shipmates drowned in a storm.  The only reason he survived was that some higher power saved him.
> 
> Galadriel wouldn't have had the endurance to swim the entire ocean and get back.




They are establishing new canon. They are just setting a new, high bar. Amazondriel in the next season will certainly never feel tiredness, so they can afford to let her swim across the sea. 

I am not sure this is an example of "not Galadriel" in my mind. Because she's possibly the greatest elf after Fëanor and possibly Luthien. If Fingolfin can ride to Angband and challenge Morgoth to a single duel (and expect to have a chance of winning) after frightening all of Angband's host, an "even superior elf" might be able to be that badass. It's not explicitely within their abilities, but not "out of character". 

I'd be easier if the she was a totally new character because of her reckless behaviour -- that fits better the other noldor princes of her immediate family.


----------



## Maxperson

ART! said:


> I guess I'm okay with a depiction of her pursuant of an arc _to_ that mature and wise Galadriel.



That mature and wise Galadriel IS the one you are seeing, or should be.  She 3422 years old as of the year the show is set in.  She's not some teenage girl that needs to mature.  She did that thousands of years before.


----------



## Morrus

OK, if you want to complain about how the show differs from the book, I'm going to need you to take it to another thread. This is a [+] thread, and that complaint is dominating the thread to the extent that it's hard for anybody to discuss the show in any other context. Feel free to start a new thread, but please do not continue that line of conversation in this thread. Thanks, folks.


----------



## Galandris

Done.


----------



## Olgar Shiverstone

I felt that this Galadriel felt a bit flat. I was hoping for a bit more of Cate Blanchett's otherworldly Galadriel. Maybe you need another 3000 years to reach the "otherworldly elf" level?

On the other hand, Elrond I quite liked, though he came off as even more human than Galadriel.


----------



## MarkB

Galandris said:


> The thrill of Elrond chastizing about being there with Isildur when Mankind failed, or other rare scenes where elves acted like elves, seems an little lost.



I wonder whether we'll see a friendship established between Elrond and Isildur, just to make that failure feel more personal when it happens.


----------



## Galandris

.


----------



## Maxperson

Galandris said:


> I am not sure this is an example of "not Galadriel" in my mind. Because she's possibly the greatest elf after Fëanor and possibly Luthien. If Fingolfin can ride to Angband and challenge Morgoth to a single duel (and expect to have a chance of winning) after frightening all of Angband's host, an "even superior elf" might be able to be that badass. It's not explicitely within their abilities, but not "out of character".



She was said to be the greatest with the possible exception of Feanor.  They were on par.  Fingolfin, though, had no chance of winning.  Wounding Morgoth 8 times was about as good as it was going to get. 

That said, none of them could swim an entire ocean, which is why she, Feanor, Fingolfin and all the rest either had to take a ship, or walk the Helcaraxe.


Galandris said:


> I'd be easier if the she was a totally new character because of her reckless behaviour -- that fits better the other noldor princes of her immediate family.



I agree.

Edit:  Didn't see the mod post until after I posted this.  I won't post again in this part of the discussion.


----------



## Galandris

.


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots

Bolares said:


> You maybe could say that her kryptonite was her thirst for revenge.



Yeah, she's a Greek hero-level character, so she's not going to have Kryptonite, she's going to have a heroic flaw. In her case, her mission blinds her to other possibilities and pushes friends and allies away from her.

(Also, the Superman Problem was created by people who don't know how to write Superman. The way to challenge Superman is to throw challenges at him that he can't just punch. That's why the best version of Lex Luthor is a businessman, not a jackass in powered armor. Superman can punch jackasses in powered armor; he can't punch tort law.)


----------



## Ibrandul

Olgar Shiverstone said:


> On the other hand, Elrond I quite liked, though he came off as even more human than Galadriel.



To be fair, he _is_ much more human than Galadriel.


----------



## Maxperson

jeremypowell said:


> To be fair, he _is_ much more human than Galadriel.



50% more.


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots

Maxperson said:


> 50% more.



That's why he gets the diplomacy racial abilities and she gets, um, fey step.


----------



## Zaukrie

Whizbang Dustyboots said:


> That's why he gets the diplomacy racial abilities and she gets, um, fey step.



Resist pyroclastic damage. It's a little specific, but the DM did give her clues....


----------



## ART!

Galandris said:


> I think the reaction depends on familiarity with the setting, as often in this thread.



To avoid banned specifics, I'll just say I am exceedingly familiar with Tolkien's writings about the 2nd Age, and I am totally okay with the changes in RoP. I just see it as icing on the cake, or ice cream with the cake, or some other enjoyable dessert metaphor!


----------



## Parmandur

ART! said:


> To avoid banned specifics, I'll just say I am exceedingly familiar with Tolkien's writings about the 2nd Age, and I am totally okay with the changes in RoP. I just see it as icing on the cake, or ice cream with the cake, or some other enjoyable dessert metaphor!



Yup, there is no such correlation.


----------



## ART!

[deleted]


----------



## TheSword

I see this series as a prequel to the trilogy. That’s what they are setting us up for… the rise of Sauron and the foundation of the things we know exist in the film trilogy. To be the series seems in keeping and consistent with that… which is all most people know about LOTR/Middle earth.


----------



## OB1

I'm willing to bet that this series will become increasingly popular as it goes on, and will eventually be known as a pinnacle of fantasy filmmaking.  Like the LOTR trilogy, it is supremely confident in what it is trying to accomplish, understands cinematic storytelling and is executing that vision at a very high level.  As @Parmandur mentioned about half a thread ago, it also is deeply rooted in Tolkien's themes (if not his 'cannon') and is weaving those themes brilliantly into the story.

Another small thing it does really well compared to so much other TV is set up it's mysteries.  Sauran isn't revealed just because the filmmakers want to tease the audience, but because it makes sense for the character to be deceptive.  We don't know who the Stranger is because the Stranger doesn't know.  As knowledgable viewers, we get excited about the possibilities, but for the story, every choice makes sense.  Mystery boxes aren't inherently bad, they've just been used so poorly for so long that it's easy to lump them all together as bad storytelling.

I find myself throwing on the LotR trilogy several times a year.  I do that because of the craft of the film and it's characters.  There is so much depth in so many moments, in so many scenes.  RoP is following in those footsteps, a prequel done right.


----------



## Paul Farquhar

ART! said:


> To avoid banned specifics, I'll just say I am exceedingly familiar with Tolkien's writings about the 2nd Age, and I am totally okay with the changes in RoP. I just see it as icing on the cake, or ice cream with the cake, or some other enjoyable dessert metaphor!



If you are saying "not the same as the book" is a [+], then I agree.


----------



## Parmandur

OB1 said:


> I'm willing to bet that this series will become increasingly popular as it goes on, and will eventually be known as a pinnacle of fantasy filmmaking.  Like the LOTR trilogy, it is supremely confident in what it is trying to accomplish, understands cinematic storytelling and is executing that vision at a very high level.  As @Parmandur mentioned about half a thread ago, it also is deeply rooted in Tolkien's themes (if not his 'cannon') and is weaving those themes brilliantly into the story.
> 
> Another small thing it does really well compared to so much other TV is set up it's mysteries.  Sauran isn't revealed just because the filmmakers want to tease the audience, but because it makes sense for the character to be deceptive.  We don't know who the Stranger is because the Stranger doesn't know.  As knowledgable viewers, we get excited about the possibilities, but for the story, every choice makes sense.  Mystery boxes aren't inherently bad, they've just been used so poorly for so long that it's easy to lump them all together as bad storytelling.
> 
> I find myself throwing on the LotR trilogy several times a year.  I do that because of the craft of the film and it's characters.  There is so much depth in so many moments, in so many scenes.  RoP is following in those footsteps, a prequel done right.



I already want to rewatch it, and see how it plays knowing the shape of what's going on.


----------



## Parmandur

Paul Farquhar said:


> If you are saying "not the same as the book" is a [+], then I agree.



It would be a very dull show if they kept it the same as 5 pages of Appendix material, indeed.


----------



## OB1

Parmandur said:


> I already want to rewatch it, and see how it plays knowing the shape of what's going on.



Same.  Looking forward to spending a Saturday afternoon and evening rewatching it straight thru.


----------



## MarkB

One thing I really liked in the final episode that I thought deserved more of a mention was the conversation between Nori and the Stranger about adventures - particularly when he told her that a trip taken alone, no matter how perilous, is merely a journey. An adventure is something you _share_. 

I feel like that should be a motto for RPGs in general.


----------

