Jump to content

DRAGONMOUNT

A WHEEL OF TIME COMMUNITY

New Q&A with Rafe Judkins


Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

It was always going to have to be different.  It's the nature of the beast.  Tv shows have budgets.  There are time constraints for episodes.  And narrating or voice-over-ing inner dialog or observations just isn't a feasible story-telling device for modern audiences.  Whole characters and side-plots have to be excised or mushed together and brand new scenes have to be invented and written to do some of those things that voice-overs and narration can't.

 

Of course, to me that makes it all the more important to keep as true as possible to the iconic imagery established in the IP being adapted.  And particularly foolish to make the kinds of changes or appeals to the fans they've been making, considering the size of that book fanbase before any "mainstream" media adaptation of it's work has been made.  

 

Making the changes they have isn't a matter of making the world feel "lived in." There's nothing inherently unrealistic or cartoonish about slightly curved swords with crossguards, or a wickedly curved dagger with a ruby capping its hilt, or an elaborately engraved and inlaid instrument for a royal-court-bard-in-exile.  It's a matter of their making a conscious decision to put their own aesthetic stamp on things, even if it means overriding the aesthetic of the IP it's based on.  And that's a stupid decision every time, that is nearly always a big red flag that somebody in the showrunners team is too far up their own butt.  The vibes I get here are not The Last Airbender than anything else right now.

 

You also asked about Sanderson and his involvement, or Harriet and Maria and theirs.  The last we heard from Sanderson, he had only read six scripts of the eight episodes.  He hasn't said that he's seen any footage or final edits.  He's also said that there's going to be things that fans of the books probably really won't like.  As for Harriet and Maria, neither has said anything about it on social media or elsewhere that I can find.  Rafe has talked about Maria's help, but he either must have been joking about what she helped with, or there is a horrifying lack of familiarity with the IP going on in the writer's room.  And as for Harriet, considering the events following The Winter Dragon, it's not surprising that we hear nothing from her, especially if she doesn't have anything nice to say.

 

And when we look at Rafe's own credentials, he's not some genius auteur with a demonstrated knack for adapting popular literature into TV.  He's a former producer for some middling CW shows, and it's not like CW is known for producing great TV.  It's mostly just watchable, at best.

Edited by Thrasymachus
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Thrasymachus said:

And when we look at Rafe's own credentials, he's not some genius auteur with a demonstrated knack for adapting popular literature into TV.  He's a former producer for some middling CW shows, and it's not like CW is known for producing great TV.  It's mostly just watchable, at best.

What are you even talking about? Rafe is best known as a producer on “Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D” (which, though hardly amazing, was a quality entry in the Marvel universe that lasted seven seasons) and as a writer for “Chuck” (which lasted 5 seasons and has a devoted following to this day). Neither appeared on the CW. 
 

He also worked as a producer on “Hemlock Grove” a horror franchise that has earned 5 Emmy nominations, and “My Own Worst Enemy” which has also won awards. Neither of those were CW shows. 
 

In fact, there is not a single CW show anywhere in his bio. Why do you feel the need to lie about something so easily checked?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ah ha! I totally spaced on Elyas. That makes sense if they plan on moving his role later in the story.

 

The discussion about changes reminds me so much of when the LotR movies were coming out. I was (and remain) a huge Tolkien fan and purist. I hated every single change. Even some that seem small on paper rubbed me the wrong way, and the big stuff felt like deal breakers when I saw them at first. But they weren't, in the end. It's not that I forgive those changes or even overlook them. I just simultaneously like the good and dislike the bad. And man there was a whole lot of good. Of course it's all so subjective it's hard to compare, but that's what I'm expecting for WoT too.

 

I can't blame anyone if they feel like the changes we've learned about are warning signs, but I do raise my eyebrow at premature judgements. That's part of the psychological element of enjoying fiction, for me personally. I have to want to enjoy it on some level or I know it's definitely not going to satisfy me. So I try to maintain optimism about the unknown.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Elder_Haman said:

What are you even talking about? Rafe is best known as a producer on “Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D” (which, though hardly amazing, was a quality entry in the Marvel universe that lasted seven seasons) and as a writer for “Chuck” (which lasted 5 seasons and has a devoted following to this day). Neither appeared on the CW. 
 

He also worked as a producer on “Hemlock Grove” a horror franchise that has earned 5 Emmy nominations, and “My Own Worst Enemy” which has also won awards. Neither of those were CW shows. 
 

In fact, there is not a single CW show anywhere in his bio. Why do you feel the need to lie about something so easily checked?

https://www.imdb.com/name/nm1988994/?ref_=fn_al_nm_1
Producer:
The Wheel of Time (TV Series) (series producer - 6 episodes, 2021) (executive producer - 1 episode, 2021)

Honor (Short) (executive producer)

Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. (supervising producer - 22 episodes, 2014 - 2015) (producer - 21 episodes, 2013 - 2014)

Hemlock Grove (TV Series) (co-producer - 13 episodes)

 

Writer:
The Division

Uncharted

The Wheel of Time (TV Series) (developed by - 1 episode, 2021) (screenplay - 1 episode, 2021)

Honor (Short) (writer)

Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. (TV Series) (written by - 5 episodes)

Hemlock Grove (TV Series) (teleplay by - 1 episode)

Chuck (written by - 9 episodes, 2010 - 2012) (executive story editor - 3 episodes, 2011 - 2012) (teleplay - 2 episodes, 2010)

My Own Worst Enemy (TV Series) (staff writer - 6 episodes, 2008)

My Own Worst Enemy: Conspiracy Theory 

Additional Crew:
Chuck (TV Series) (executive story editor - 6 episodes, 2011 - 2012) (story editor - 3 episodes, 2010 - 2011)

The 4400 (assistant to writers - 5 episodes)



4400 was on USA

My Own Worst Enemy was on NBC

Chuck was on NBC

Hemlock Grove was on Netflix

Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D was on ABC.

4 hours ago, Thrasymachus said:

He's a former producer for some middling CW shows, and it's not like CW is known for producing great TV.  It's mostly just watchable, at best.

This could be taken two ways. 
Literally, in claiming he made shows for CW, which would mean Elder Haman is correct on you lying about an easily verifiable fact.
Or, figuratively claiming Hemlock/4400/Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D, and CHUCK are CW quality.

That said, Smallville averaged 4.34 Million views per episode, spiking to 6.3 Million in season 2. It had 10 seasons.
Arrow had 8 seasons. averaging 2.55 Million Viewers.
Flash has 6 seasons, averaging 3.3 Million viewers


Chuck had 5 Seasons, averaging 6.3 Million Viewers.
Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D had 5 seasons, averaging 5.7 Million Viewers.

Legend of the Seeker had 2 seasons, averaging 2.7 Million Viewers
Game of Thrones had 8 Seasons, it averaged 6.8 Million Viewers.
Of note:  The First 5 seasons averaged 5.02 Million Viewers. (It was literally one of the rare shows that GAINED viewers!)

As an aside
CSI: Crime Scene Investigation had 15 Seasons (+1 finale season), averaging 16.12 Million Viewers. By viewership metrics, all of the above fail compared to CSI.

Just in the Fantasy/Fiction segment, CW is relatively "successful" and fulfills it's niche in the viewership marketplace.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Elder_Haman said:

It’s actually the other way around. The Last Kingdom was first published in 2004. Vikings premiered in 2013. 
 

Both shows deal with some of the same historical events, though Last Kingdom is more historically accurate. And both are excellent shows. 
 

The reason I mentioned Last Kingdom specifically is because it adapts a lengthy series of novels, just as WoT will require. It is generally regarded as an excellent adaptation because it focuses on the heart of the main characters even though it sacrifices numerous plot points. 
 

Also, my purely subjective opinion is that Vikings seemed better to me at first too. But it’s not. It’s not really even close. 

There is actually a major Last Kingdom Character in the final Season of Vikings, King Alfred. 
Personally I’m a big fan of both shows, i think they complement each other very well. Must admit though.

 

*Warning Spoilers for both Shows

 

I missed both Ragnar and Alfred after they left there shows and didn’t quite enjoy the shows as much.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, TheMountain said:

Number of viewers =/= quality

You Don T Say GIFs - Get the best GIF on GIPHY

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It was partly a figurative claim, and partly just a mistake on my part. CW is who carries Agents of Shield around my parts.  I guess it's the first seasons in syndication.  I tried watching it when it first came out, which, incidentally is also when Rafe was with the show.  Obviously, it didn't hook me.

 

As for numbers, the Wheel of Time fanbase already brings around 7-8 million fans in just North America, judging by book sales and print runs.  Another 5 in Great Britain and Europe.  That's a lot of fans that can push a show to the top of the ratings, if they like the show.  That's also more than enough fans to tank it if even a significant portion of them feel like the show doesn't respect them or the IP.  That's why it's dumb to make stupid, pointless cosmetic changes and poke the bear with dumb little teasers that seem more designed to infuriate than titillate.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Thrasymachus said:

As for numbers, the Wheel of Time fanbase already brings around 7-8 million fans in just North America, judging by book sales and print runs.  Another 5 in Great Britain and Europe.  That's a lot of fans that can push a show to the top of the ratings, if they like the show.  That's also more than enough fans to tank it if even a significant portion of them feel like the show doesn't respect them or the IP.  That's why it's dumb to make stupid, pointless cosmetic changes and poke the bear with dumb little teasers that seem more designed to infuriate than titillate.

Sales =/= Fans.

70M world wide sales / 15 books = ~4.6M Readers
44M North America / 15 books = ~2.93M Readers

Chances are, a good percentage of the above figures include duplicate readers. Even then, it is an unknown factor how many of them even know or care about the series, or the tv show.

DM has around ~34K members, that represents 0.73% of all readers were "fan" enough to register to DM (and who knows how many of those are Bots!)
DM on FB has ~19K followers.

72.8k people follow the official Wheel of Time - Amazon Twitter account. 1.58% of all readers.

TarValon.net has around ~2480 members.

Theoryland ~7653 members.
Dustywheel Facebook ~3.8k Followers

"The Wheel of Time" on Facebook has 78k followers.

Even if all of these were all unique individuals and no overlap between fansites, twitter, & facebook, all of "us" barely represent a quarter million people. We are but a drop of the bucket in what this show aims in viewership. 
If this show completely strays and turns WoT into a modern era retelling, makes Egwene the Dragon Reborn, and completely butchers the story and still manages to get ~5-8M viewers, how much we "hate" it won't affect them in the least.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, Thrasymachus said:

The last we heard from Sanderson, he had only read six scripts of the eight episodes.  He hasn't said that he's seen any footage or final edits.  He's also said that there's going to be things that fans of the books probably really won't like.

 

I also want to point out how misleadingly you characterize Sanderson's comments. He did say that there are going to be some changes that he calls "polarizing" and that it will be Rafe's vision of the Wheel of Time.

 

He also said that he is "100% behind Rafe" and that the majority of the changes he feels are good choices. He compared this adaptation to Peter Jackson's adaptation of LotR and that he believes Rafe "genuinely loves" the source material.

 

I'm also having a hard time wrapping my head around the idea that you expect Amazon to hire a top of the line design team and then tell them to go copy the fanart. I can't imagine how insulted I would be if a major budget production hired me to create a show for them, then told me to just go copy existing designs. It's like hiring Michelangelo to paint your garage. 

 

The production design folk are at the top of their craft. They are experts in designing tv environments. They know what they need to do to make their world feel authentic and likely went through multiple design variations before deciding on the look of each piece. I'm just not sure why I'm supposed to be bothered by the type of minor changes you mention.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To the "creative person wants to be creative" argument, I would argue that even as descriptive as RJ was, there is still a ton of room left for interpretation and filling in the gaps when you go from a written to a visual medium. Even if the props were to end up looking like the "official merchandise," there is still a vast wide open world left to design/illustrate and countless features that simply cannot be fully captured on a page. "A picture is worth a thousand words," as they say. For example, we know that some of the buildings of Tar Valon were designed by Ogier to look like "breaking waves." There is a lot of room for interpretation and artistic expression there. Indeed, that is what a book illustrator often does (to varying degrees of success depending on their ability and understanding of the story). The writing, as descriptive as it may be, will always be the "broad strokes" of the art, not the entirety of it. This an adaptation, not a whole new world/story/plot created wholesale from scratch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, SinisterDeath said:


That said, Smallville averaged 4.34 Million views per episode, spiking to 6.3 Million in season 2. It had 10 seasons.
Arrow had 8 seasons. averaging 2.55 Million Viewers.
Flash has 6 seasons, averaging 3.3 Million viewers


Chuck had 5 Seasons, averaging 6.3 Million Viewers.
Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D had 5 seasons, averaging 5.7 Million Viewers.

Legend of the Seeker had 2 seasons, averaging 2.7 Million Viewers
Game of Thrones had 8 Seasons, it averaged 6.8 Million Viewers.
Of note:  The First 5 seasons averaged 5.02 Million Viewers. (It was literally one of the rare shows that GAINED viewers!)

As an aside
CSI: Crime Scene Investigation had 15 Seasons (+1 finale season), averaging 16.12 Million Viewers. By viewership metrics, all of the above fail compared to CSI.

Just in the Fantasy/Fiction segment, CW is relatively "successful" and fulfills it's niche in the viewership marketplace.

@SinisterDeath where did you get these viewership statistics? Because I have my doubts about some of them (and really all statistics that people post on forums like these). The problem with people googling for statistics (in general) is that statistics are manipulated to prove any given point of an author and so you're going to get various answers. For example, when I google Game of Thrones average viewership, what comes up for me is a Forbes article that says that GoT averaged 44.2 million viewers across all platforms. Ok, so I go back and look again. I get a stastica.com article that says, "the last season of GoT pulled in over 10 million viewers per episode." 

Ok, but I'm genuinely trying to find the source in which you got 6.8 million and then assert that CSI as a show did almost three times better. So I try a new google search ... "most popular show of all time by viewership" and I get: Top 100 most watched tv shows of all time - IMDb - and it puts GoT and #1, Stranger Things at #2, TWD at #3 ... now I'm really confused. What is the most watched show?! I try a new search: "most watched show ever" and I get: America's most popular TV shows of all time, ranked - CBS News - a CBS news article that says it's Jeopardy.

 

I don't mean to bog down or divert our will WoT changes be deal-breakers thread. But ... I hope this demonstrates why people throwing out these statistics is not always or even usually helpful... because Search engines are catering to what they think you want to see/have looked at before ... and statistics in general can be very misleading.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Wolfbrother31 said:

@SinisterDeath where did you get these viewership statistics? Because I have my doubts about some of them (and really all statistics that people post on forums like these). The problem with people googling for statistics (in general) is that statistics are manipulated to prove any given point of an author and so you're going to get various answers. For example, when I google Game of Thrones average viewership, what comes up for me is a Forbes article that says that GoT averaged 44.2 million viewers across all platforms. Ok, so I go back and look again. I get a stastica.com article that says, "the last season of GoT pulled in over 10 million viewers per episode." 

I got it here, which came from  Nielsen Media Research. Chances are, Forbes was counting People illegally watching GoT because GoT was behind the paywall that was HBO.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Game_of_Thrones
image.png

 

9 minutes ago, Wolfbrother31 said:

Ok, but I'm genuinely trying to find the source in which you got 6.8 million and then assert that CSI as a show did almost three times better. So I try a new google search ... "most popular show of all time by viewership" and I get: Top 100 most watched tv shows of all time - IMDb - and it puts GoT and #1, Stranger Things at #2, TWD at #3 ... now I'm really confused. What is the most watched show?! I try a new search: "most watched show ever" and I get: America's most popular TV shows of all time, ranked - CBS News - a CBS news article that says it's Jeopardy.

image.pnghttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CSI:_Crime_Scene_Investigation
image.png

The IMDB list you put up, is based on IMDB Votes, not viewership.
 

 

Also:
M*A*S*H Series Finale still holds records...
https://www.statista.com/statistics/959403/most-watched-tv-finales-usa/

image.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, TheMountain said:

Even if the props were to end up looking like the "official merchandise,"

I think the problem is the assumption that the 'official merchandise' would mesh well with the look that the design team is going for. 

 

It's also important not to ignore the obvious $$ reasons for making new 'official merchandise'. Clearly, Amazon is not going to miss the opportunity to make money on something brand new.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
15 minutes ago, SinisterDeath said:

I got it here, which came from  Nielsen Media Research. Chances are, Forbes was counting People illegally watching GoT because GoT was behind the paywall that was HBO.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Game_of_Thrones
image.png

 

image.pnghttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CSI:_Crime_Scene_Investigation
image.png

The IMDB list you put up, is based on IMDB Votes, not viewership.
 

 

Also:
M*A*S*H Series Finale still holds records...
https://www.statista.com/statistics/959403/most-watched-tv-finales-usa/

image.png

 

@SinisterDeath I wasn't attempting in any way to give accurate statistics - I can see that it's based on votes. That's my point though. Statistics and googling can mislead people easily. And you're kind of proving my point- I just read that statista article - so again, this is misleading - in the article itself it says they have separate categories because that list that puts MASH on the top is NOT accounting for TV since instant streaming - and it says, "Stranger Things" season 3 according to Netflix statistics averaged 63 million viewers, I think, now I can't even re-find that article (but Netflix counts 70% watched as completed I think it said)!

 

Oh ha. I can't find it or click on your link cause statistica is now saying i have to pay for a membership to view their statistics. blah! lol

Edited by Wolfbrother31
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Elder haman is right about the $$. And I reeeeally hope he's right about WoT being faithful to the characters/ character arcs. I'm so hopeful that @Thrasymachus is wrong! But I tend to be a little negative too - since so many beloved fantasy series have been botched.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

And to prove someone else's point about book fans/sales not necessarily translating to tv viewership ... one of my closest friends is a big fan of the books (read the whole series twice- and with how long it is I count that as a big fan), didn't even know there was a show in the making [which neither does the general public] because they have not marketed it on the level I would have hoped (like during the Super-bowl)! And he said that there's no way the show even could be good to a super-fan because of how expansive the books are. I think he's probably right. I think a lot of people on DM are going to be displeased ... but that doesn't mean that the show won't be successful. If it's done well, I think it could be very entertaining ... but they are going to change A LOT and cut a lot. Hence, though I originally asked it just to Haman and Thras - I think everybody on DM needs to reflect on what their deal-breaker point is! 

 

 

Edited by Wolfbrother31
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also @Elder haman thanks for the tip. I'll have to go back and give the Last Kingdom more of a shot - because I really liked Vikings right up until **spoiler everyone** Ragnar died. After that it was pretty downhill. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Wolfbrother31 said:

That's my point though. Statistics and googling can mislead people easily.

I don't think you really have a point other than to argue to be honest.

I shared the viewership numbers from the same source (Wiki) for shows that Rafe has worked on, versus some well known CW shows as a general point that just because "someone" thinks a show is crap, there's still quite a lot of people who actually do watch those shows, and just because one person finds it to have "shitty quality", millions of others apparently think it's "damn good tv".

Moreover, the fact that shows like CSI are wildly more "popular" in viewership numbers then heavily scripted shows like GOT, is crazy; but it's also indicative of what people are willing to "pay" to watch premium tv. Remember, when GoT released, HBO Max wasn't out yet, and you still had to get HBO through your cable company to even use the HBO Now.

Neither IMDB popularity ranking by votes, or Rotten Meter inherently means a show is "high quality".
It more or less means that the viewership had enough dedicated fans to vote/review the show to get on those lists in the first place. If GoT had 10M viewers, and only 1M voted on IMBD, that's 1 in 10 voted. Imagine if 1 in 10 CSI voted for CSI on IMDB?

There have ben a LOT of great/high quality shows that got canned, not because they weren't good, or "high quality". They were canned because not enough people watched them.


That said, I do hope that with the rise of streaming, we can axe the faulty Nielsen rating system, as we get "actual" viewership data.
(Edited out the second can, because in my head I said "we can can", which is grammatically and linguistically correct, it's just difficult to read the second can like a soda can.)
 

 

15 minutes ago, Wolfbrother31 said:

And to prove someone else's point about book fans/sales not necessarily translating to tv viewership ..

You mean me?

 

 

15 minutes ago, Wolfbrother31 said:

And he said that there's no way the show even could be good to a super-fan because of how expansive the books are. I think he's probably right. I think a lot of people on DM are going to be displeased ... but that doesn't mean that the show won't be successful.

Agreed

 

 

15 minutes ago, Wolfbrother31 said:

but that doesn't mean that the show won't be successful. If it's done well, I think it could be very entertaining ... but they are going to changed ALOT. Hence, though I originally asked it just to Haman and Thras - I think everybody on DM needs to reflect on what their deal-breaker point is! 

 

Deal-breaker for me is funny, cause I'll probably watch this even if it's the worst case scenario I illustrated above (now below). 
It would be unbearable to watch if it had MTV actor quality like the Shannara chronicles. I had troubles sitting past 2 episodes of that... Though I've heard it got better?

2 hours ago, SinisterDeath said:

If this show completely strays and turns WoT into a modern era retelling, makes Egwene the Dragon Reborn, and completely butchers the story and still manages to get ~5-8M viewers, how much we "hate" it won't affect them in the least.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

@SinisterDeath nope. didn't want to argue. when you say, "I do hope that with the rise of streaming, we can can the faulty Nielsen rating system, as we get "actual" viewership data."  that was what I was trying to say...as well as, that I'm not certain that it's true that CSI is actually more popular than Game of Thrones or in-general, that it's easy to demonstrate what are the most popular shows in the streaming era as compared to older shows. You make a good point that HBO wasn't easy to access for everyone - which - popularity of the streaming services themselves and what shows are offered on each service factor into viewership of course - for example - if the Mandalorian was on Netflix rather than Disney+ would it have had more viewers? And with that thought -- I almost hope that the LoTR show comes out first and is widely popular -- that might really help WoT viewership because, if I had to choose right now to just have one streaming service - I wouldn't have Amazon Video over any of the other streaming services!

Edited by Wolfbrother31
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Wolfbrother31 said:

nope. didn't want to argue. when you say, "I do hope that with the rise of streaming, we can can the faulty Nielsen rating system, as we get "actual" viewership data."  that was what I was trying to say...

Gotcha.

 

 

13 minutes ago, Wolfbrother31 said:

as well as, that I'm not certain that it's true that CSI is actually more popular than Game of Thrones or in-general, that it's easy to demonstrate what are the most popular shows in the streaming era as compared to older shows.

CSI had further reach (I believe CBS is free-over the air for many people across the states, and was a prime-time show during the weekday. (Fridays?) It was also on repeat on a ton of networks for years.

Among certain demographics, shows like CSI, SVU are actually pretty popular, and the Nielsen ratings reflect that. The difference is, shows like GoT have a younger and more vocal audience then shows like CSI.

 

 

17 minutes ago, Wolfbrother31 said:

You make a good point that HBO wasn't easy to access for everyone -

Yep. If you're lucky you can probably even find that GoT was one of the most pirated shows of all time to. Which makes it difficult to get it's "true" viewership numbers. 😉

 

 

18 minutes ago, Wolfbrother31 said:

- for example - if the Mandalorian was on Netflix rather than Disney+ would it have had more viewers?

Probably would have actually. But if Disney+ had been around as long as netflix? Different story. 
Four years from now is going to be insane.

 

 

19 minutes ago, Wolfbrother31 said:

I almost hope that the LoTR show comes out first and is widely popular -- that might really help WoT viewership because, if I had to choose right now to just have one streaming service - I wouldn't have Amazon Video over any of the other streaming services!

It's tough when you factor in viewer fatigue. If they run it at the same time, and weekly, I hope they don't release the same day of the week, if only because they can "preview/advertise" each other's shows to help funnel viewers both ways.


 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
45 minutes ago, SinisterDeath said:

If this show completely strays and turns WoT into a modern era retelling, makes Egwene the Dragon Reborn, and completely butchers the story and still manages to get ~5-8M viewers, how much we "hate" it won't affect them in the least.

 

Oh it hurts. @SinisterDeath you are 100% correct - but that, that is worst case scenario for me. I would rather it was MTV actor quality and poorly, poorly executed - but attempted to be faithful to the story than if they produced something of high quality that did a total abuse to the spirit of WoT!

 

I mean seriously. I think I would actively campaign against the show if it was popular but butchered Jordan in order to push a modern agenda. But I really don't think Sanderson would have said what he did if that was the case.

 

But there I go again - kind of waffling on what I think I can stand changes wise- I'm understanding that a lot has to get cut, a lot has to get changed. I want good quality. But I also just can't completely dispense with faithfulness to the WoT ... shall we say, ethos.  

Edited by Wolfbrother31
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/31/2021 at 12:34 PM, Thrasymachus said:

Making the changes they have isn't a matter of making the world feel "lived in." There's nothing inherently unrealistic or cartoonish about slightly curved swords with crossguards, or a wickedly curved dagger with a ruby capping its hilt, or an elaborately engraved and inlaid instrument for a royal-court-bard-in-exile

Where was the uproar over Thor's Stormbreaker?
MCU:
Stormbreaker_-_IW.png
vs Comics
Thor (Ultimate Marvel character) - WikipediaOmega_Flight_Vol_1_5_Textless.jpg

Many fans speculate the difference between 

Ruby-hilted_dagger.JPG

and

wheel-of-time-teaser-dagger.jpg?fit=1372

 

Is so you can actually see the ruby on the dagger when in use. While I enjoy the first picture more then the second, It becomes understandable from a visual standpoint. 

I was disappointed in the sword, if only because I expected something like this.
Amazon.com: Museum Replicas Officially Licensed Wheel of Time Heron Mark  Sword: Toys & Games

Over what looks like a regular katana?
But I do wonder how much of that comes into play from actuals word making versus unrealistic fantasy unbalanced swords?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

"I want good quality. But I also just can't completely dispense with faithfulness to the WoT ... shall we say, ethos. " To expand on this idea (I think I've said this elsewhere): If I were directing WoT tv series -- warning spoilers***

 

Opening scene would be a battle on the slopes of Dragonmount and Rand being born, while Siuan and Moiraine heard the prophecy.  

 

That's not how the EotW opens or even a scene we ever get in the books. But it could be LotR prologue-esque epic - introduce a lot of the main story arc and would still be in the spirit of WoT

 

Which is why...I really don't have a problem with Logain having an expanded role... they could do some stuff with that that isn't in the books but it could potentially improve the story. 

 

But that is much, much different than having Egwene be the Dragon or (other "modern" stuff) that I don't think I'm aloud to be specific about without getting in trouble or having this thread removed. 

Edited by Wolfbrother31
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


×
×
  • Create New...