Sanderson's Recent Interview

[johnnysd]

Have to say this thread is both amazing and disheartening. If anyone has been paying attention at all they would realize that the show will  be very close to the books. Having the first attack on Winternight makes sense, Thom having a guitar since the actor can actually play it make sense. even the sword and dagger are only minor changes. If you go and watch the Geeky Eri block videos the show will basically track with the books. 

 

Showing the Logain stuff actually make sense and it is described in the books anyway. And I believe it will make the TV show better. False dragons ARE to be feared and showing that will set up the show arc way better

 

In terms of Sanderson, I hate his WoT books and do not consider them cannon so not super concerned about his opinion. 

 

Also Rafe has stated he consults and gets Harriets opinion all the time. and has Sarah Nakamura as consultant  to make it as faithful to the books as possible. It is simply not a true statement that Rafe is going to to do a "based on" version and Amazon has actually stated it is their most anticipated series (yes over LOTR)

 

I mean if you cant get past the ruby being in the wrong place then you will never enjoy it. There were those on GOT boards that were like that and literally hated every episode of the show.

 

Also this show has about a $200 million budget for a single season and many people have said that the show has the most epic sets they have ever seen.

 

I could not be more excited. And I have read the books at least 10 times (Sanderson fan faction only once)

[Harldin]

16 hours ago, Elder_Haman said:

I'm interested to see where this is headed. Yesterday clearly marked the beginning of a new phase in marketing. That's the first truly official thing that we've seen that isn't meant only for fan service.

 

Keep an eye on "The Tomorrow War" tomorrow. (It stars Chris Pratt and is an action, sci fi movie.) Amazon is going to want WoT to appeal to the same people who watch that movie. I wouldn't be surprised if there is a slightly longer teaser attached.

 

Just watched Tomorrow War, yea its ok  3 1/2 ⭐ out of 5 Fairly typical 21st Century Movie, FX brilliant, acting reasonable, writing standard fare for a modern movie. 

Edited July 2, 2021 by Harldin

[DojoToad]

7 hours ago, johnnysd said:

Have to say this thread is both amazing and disheartening. If anyone has been paying attention at all they would realize that the show will  be very close to the books. Having the first attack on Winternight makes sense, Thom having a guitar since the actor can actually play it make sense. even the sword and dagger are only minor changes. If you go and watch the Geeky Eri block videos the show will basically track with the books. 

 

Showing the Logain stuff actually make sense and it is described in the books anyway. And I believe it will make the TV show better. False dragons ARE to be feared and showing that will set up the show arc way better

 

In terms of Sanderson, I hate his WoT books and do not consider them cannon so not super concerned about his opinion. 

 

Also Rafe has stated he consults and gets Harriets opinion all the time. and has Sarah Nakamura as consultant  to make it as faithful to the books as possible. It is simply not a true statement that Rafe is going to to do a "based on" version and Amazon has actually stated it is their most anticipated series (yes over LOTR)

 

I mean if you cant get past the ruby being in the wrong place then you will never enjoy it. There were those on GOT boards that were like that and literally hated every episode of the show.

 

Also this show has about a $200 million budget for a single season and many people have said that the show has the most epic sets they have ever seen.

 

I could not be more excited. And I have read the books at least 10 times (Sanderson fan faction only once)

I don't know how you can't consider the Sanderson books canon.  All signs point to a much heavier involvement from Harriet and the team in the books than in the TV show.  But in the end, who cares what you think (or what I think) - the show is coming!!

[johnnysd]

5 hours ago, DojoToad said:

I don't know how you can't consider the Sanderson books canon.  All signs point to a much heavier involvement from Harriet and the team in the books than in the TV show.  But in the end, who cares what you think (or what I think) - the show is coming!!

 

Well I do realize they went off Jordan's notes but if you have seen any of the reviews of what the books actually are and what the notes are they are very very different. So in the end the last 3 or 4 books by Jordan would have been significantly maybe entirely different than what Sanderson wrote even with all that assistance. And also there is a LOT of purely Sanderson stuff to tie a lot of things together and get from point A and B. And I just do not like them. They read as fan fiction regardless of whether they are official or not so I choose to ignore them. The overall view of the WoT world is much different under him and I do not like his take so his opinions are sort of irrelevant to me. 

[johnnysd]

1 hour ago, johnnysd said:

 

Well I do realize they went off Jordan's notes but if you have seen any of the reviews of what the books written by James himself and what they actually are and what the notes are they are very very different. So in the end the last 3 or 4 books by Jordan would have been significantly maybe entirely different than what Sanderson wrote even with all that assistance. And also there is a LOT of purely Sanderson stuff to tie a lot of things together and get from point A and B. And I just do not like them. They read as fan fiction regardless of whether they are official or not so I choose to ignore them. The overall view of the WoT world is much different under him and I do not like his take so his opinions are sort of irrelevant to me. 

 

[DojoToad]

2 hours ago, johnnysd said:

 

Well I do realize they went off Jordan's notes but if you have seen any of the reviews of what the books actually are and what the notes are they are very very different. So in the end the last 3 or 4 books by Jordan would have been significantly maybe entirely different than what Sanderson wrote even with all that assistance. And also there is a LOT of purely Sanderson stuff to tie a lot of things together and get from point A and B. And I just do not like them. They read as fan fiction regardless of whether they are official or not so I choose to ignore them. The overall view of the WoT world is much different under him and I do not like his take so his opinions are sort of irrelevant to me. 

I know what the books are.  I've read the Sanderson ones twice.  I've never seen or heard of what was in Jordan's notes and doubt many people do.  Do you have links to this information?  Of course they are different books than what Jordan would have written - Jordan didn't write them.  So guess I don't see your point.  To be honest, Jordan's last books were a hard slog and Sanderson coming in was refreshing to me.  Did I have problems with certain aspects?  Yes.  Would Jordan's version have been significantly different?  Probably.  At this point, no one's opinion on the show matters - we'll all make up our own when we see it.

 

Until then, all opinions are just speculation and something interesting to talk about until the show hits the small screen.  Nothing Harriet, Brandon or anyone else says is going to keep me from watching an episode or three so I can make up my own mind on going further.

[Harldin]

Until the day Harriet McDougall says they are not Canon, then they should be treated as Canon full stop.

She owns Wheel of Time afterall.

[lt;(^-^)gt;]

I'd love to get to see the raw stuff that Sanderson worked with to put together the last 3 books, but at the same time I suspect it's probably a pretty daunting amount of stuff. It's been a while but I think I remember Sanderson said that there was more writing in the notes than the whole published series.

[king of nowhere]

8 hours ago, johnnysd said:

 

Well I do realize they went off Jordan's notes but if you have seen any of the reviews of what the books actually are and what the notes are they are very very different. So in the end the last 3 or 4 books by Jordan would have been significantly maybe entirely different than what Sanderson wrote even with all that assistance.

first, I haven't read the notes, and so I have no idea of what you mean by "very very different". you could be a case like trymascus, where "they changed everything for the sake of getting their own stamp on it" means "the sword has no quillons".

but assuming there are indeed big differences, I'd be surprised if indeed there were not. because Jordan left notes.

writing a book the size of WoT is a lenghty process, involving multiple revisions. I don't know much about jordan, but i follow sanderson closely; and he first drafts an outline. then he writes a first draft. then he revises and writes a second, and maybe a third. then he gives it to the alpha readers, who give feedback, and on that he writes another draft, and that one goes to the beta readers, who give more feedback resulting in more drafts.

and each and every one of those drafts results in plot changes. because a lot of things don't work at first, or they could be improved, or they fail to deliver the right emotional impact that the author was aiming for.

So, even when it is the same author going from start to finish, the final book is still very different from the starting draft.

 

In the case of wot, jordan didn't even leave a outline. he left notes. which are bits and snippets of what would become the outline. which would have gone through multiple revisions anyway.

So yes, I don't doubt that sanderson books are much different than the notes. I am also sure, if jordan had been around to finish writing, his own final books would be very different from his own notes too.

 

Which is also the reason I contend with the purists, those who don't like changes and think the story should be followed as slavishly as possible. No, the story is not gospel; the author himself could have very easily written it another way. Indeed, the author himself may have actually liked a different version better. the author himself kept making changes. And then at some point he went and published, and this set a canon. But that canon could have very easily been different. if you could rewind the universe and have robert jordan write wot multiple times in multiple parallel realities, he would have written different stories every time.

and he would have been praised every time, because all those differences would not change a good story into a bad one.

 

now, you don't like his books, you don't like his style, that's fine. I like his style, I like his take on things, I like that characters are allowed to drop the idiot ball and get things done a bit more often, and I like his books more than the original ones.

regardless, those books being different from the notes is no problem whatsoever. because jordan's books themselves would have been very different from the notes too. because what ends up being "canon" and what ends up being revised in the many drafts of a book is largely coincidential.

[Guest redgiant]

I have my opinions which are driven by my own experiences with human nature and analogies to other similar aspects of life that tend to support them.

 

I want this show to be well-regarded and a worthy TV adaptation of the famous books,  but I still need to see more to shore up the areas of doubt that have nagged me from what little I have seen thrown to us.

 

So here are some (to me) interesting observations ...

 

1. TWoT books have sold 80 million copies and is #8 all-time. I find it super hard to imagine how crafting the TV adaptation "for the fans" is anything but a good idea. What do you think made the story famous enough to become a project in the first place? Craft it to appeal to the fans that validated the whole story (literally, in spirit, whatever is needed), and the bulk of humanity with a brain will also come along as new fans just like when we first picked up the books and the story started to unfold. If you go too "least common denominator", you will lose the faithful while barely getting the attention of the unwashed masses' fickle and fleeting minds. Even if all you care about is sheer numbers of viewers, that number will shrink and not stick around if the fickle masses are what drives it.

 

2. A music analogy - classic rock bands and cover bands comes to mind for some reason. If you have ever gone to a concert purporting to be about music of a band you have loved, you expect to hear the most famous songs performed more or less the way the original band did them. Even for a band known for altering their live performances of their own songs a lot from night to night, there is still a core style and sound you expect to hear. That is why whenever a musician or singer replaces the original one, he/she has to sound like the original instrument or voice in terms of timber, range and the odd lilts they throw in. Otherwise it "isn't their songs" you hear. Freddie Mercury, Robert Plant, Steve Perry, Lou Graham, Tom Scholz, etc etc ... whenever you replace a familiar face or musician or whatever, it needs to remind you of the original reason why you are a fan of theirs. Same idea with books adapted to film or TV. They are like a cover band, but they at least TRY to imitate the original on purpose. If a singer for example ON PURPOSE and keeps throwing in stupid flourishes or vibrato in their singing of a famous well-known song, it just annoys the crap out of the fans who know "he/she doesn't have to do that, why are they doing that?". OTOH, cutting some fat in the song to make its performance length fit a shorter time length is done all the time esp on TV performances, but cutting vs actively changing the famous contents that made the songs famous in the first place, well at some point it isn't even that song any more.

 

3. I hope ... REALLY hope ... that the deviations from George R. R. Martin's words and style that D & D pulled in GoT taught Rafe and Company a valuable lesson. The more D & D "did their own thing" in the last couple of seasons (whether due to the books lagging although GRRM gave them direct notes and events on what would happen, or just they aren't good enough to reproduce the level of grit and smart dialogue and characters as GRRM would), the more damage they did to the point that the unthinkable a few years prior (that GoT could have anything tarnish its quality and believable fantasy world-building epic) actually happened. The utter stupidity of the final season utterly ruined the full-on reputation of the entire series, it was so bone-headed. It even affects one's desire to rewatch the series, knowing how damn awful the ending is.

 

4. The one thing the WoT series has to get right is that "All beats lead to the epic moments". There are certain passages, dialogue and events that just have to  be done more or less according to the books verbatim, even if all the story woven in and surrounding those spots must be bent and molded "to fit" a little. Just do not mess up the big moments (Intro to The Shire, "You shall not pass", "To the king", "Forth Eorlingas", Mt. Doom, etc), or change them in unrecognizable ways in terms of which characters are involved, what they say and how they behave. One example in the LOTR movies where a change added some "ugh", was the whole Arwen enhancement - "Give up the halfling she-elf/Come and claim him" at the Ford of Isen ... were it not for the perfectly-done horses-in-the-waves effects, I would have been rolling my eyes in shame for longer but thankfully that mitigated it somewhat. The moral: Please don't invent story-lines that are embarassing in their naked deviation and need mitigation.

Edited July 3, 2021 by redgiant

[Beidomon]

On 7/2/2021 at 12:13 PM, johnnysd said:

And I just do not like them. They read as fan fiction regardless of whether they are official or not so I choose to ignore them.

I think Sanderson did a remarkable job cleaning up the mess, but I have to agree that his entries do read like fan fiction. I’m not saying anyone could have done a better job, though. 

[Beidomon]

On 7/1/2021 at 11:18 PM, johnnysd said:

Also this show has about a $200 million budget for a single season and many people have said that the show has the most epic sets they have ever seen.

Source? That would be stunning if true. 

[Beidomon]

21 hours ago, king of nowhere said:

 I am also sure, if jordan had been around to finish writing, his own final books would be very different from his own notes too.

Not to quibble, but Jordan was never going to finish this series. It was both expanding and slowing down almost logarithmically as he aged. Another famous fantasy series comes to mind….

[SinisterDeath]

4 hours ago, redgiant said:

3. I hope ... REALLY hope ... that the deviations from George R. R. Martin's words and style that D & D pulled in GoT taught Rafe and Company a valuable lesson. The more D & D "did their own thing" in the last couple of seasons (whether due to the books lagging although GRRM gave them direct notes and events on what would happen, or just they aren't good enough to reproduce the level of grit and smart dialogue and characters as GRRM would), the more damage they did to the point that the unthinkable a few years prior (that GoT could have anything tarnish its quality and believable fantasy world-building epic) actually happened. The utter stupidity of the final season utterly ruined the full-on reputation of the entire series, it was so bone-headed. It even affects one's desire to rewatch the series, knowing how damn awful the ending is.

Honestly, D & D are not a good example at all of when "doing your own thing" makes a shitty product.
Read this article: ‘Game of Thrones’ creators confirm that they had no clue what they were doing
 

Quote

Dan is saying that #GameofThrones was basically an expensive film school for he and Dave. For example, they had no idea how to work with costume designers, and it was a huge learning experience.

TDLR: They had no clue what they were doing, it succeeded despite they're failures. Really, it's a testament of how good of a writer G.R.R Martin is, that even two bumbling idiots who have no idea how to write a script can steal from the book and make a world wide phenomena.

Something not everyone knows is that G.R.R did his "time" in hollywood. He wrote scripts before, and it actually translates to his books pretty well in that regard.
To be brutally honest, G.R.R's books translate to screen a LOT easier then the Wheel of Time does.

 

51 minutes ago, Beidomon said:

Not to quibble, but Jordan was never going to finish this series. It was both expanding and slowing down almost logarithmically as he aged. Another famous fantasy series comes to mind….

I think he could have finished it.
Whether it your bookshelf buckled under the enormous mass of it, is another matter entirely.
 

[deathgate]

Wasn't there supposedly some sections of the books Sanderson did that Jordan had already finished including a lot of the ending? Did we ever find out explicititly which those were and did that change anyone's mind who thought Sanderson did a poor job only to find out whoops Jordan did that chapter? 

[Elder_Haman]

3 hours ago, deathgate said:

Wasn't there supposedly some sections of the books Sanderson did that Jordan had already finished including a lot of the ending? Did we ever find out explicititly which those were and did that change anyone's mind who thought Sanderson did a poor job only to find out whoops Jordan did that chapter? 

I believe the epilogue is all RJ. 

[johnnysd]

On 7/2/2021 at 7:10 PM, king of nowhere said:

first, I haven't read the notes, and so I have no idea of what you mean by "very very different". you could be a case like trymascus, where "they changed everything for the sake of getting their own stamp on it" means "the sword has no quillons".

but assuming there are indeed big differences, I'd be surprised if indeed there were not. because Jordan left notes.

writing a book the size of WoT is a lenghty process, involving multiple revisions. I don't know much about jordan, but i follow sanderson closely; and he first drafts an outline. then he writes a first draft. then he revises and writes a second, and maybe a third. then he gives it to the alpha readers, who give feedback, and on that he writes another draft, and that one goes to the beta readers, who give more feedback resulting in more drafts.

and each and every one of those drafts results in plot changes. because a lot of things don't work at first, or they could be improved, or they fail to deliver the right emotional impact that the author was aiming for.

So, even when it is the same author going from start to finish, the final book is still very different from the starting draft.

 

In the case of wot, jordan didn't even leave a outline. he left notes. which are bits and snippets of what would become the outline. which would have gone through multiple revisions anyway.

So yes, I don't doubt that sanderson books are much different than the notes. I am also sure, if jordan had been around to finish writing, his own final books would be very different from his own notes too.

 

Which is also the reason I contend with the purists, those who don't like changes and think the story should be followed as slavishly as possible. No, the story is not gospel; the author himself could have very easily written it another way. Indeed, the author himself may have actually liked a different version better. the author himself kept making changes. And then at some point he went and published, and this set a canon. But that canon could have very easily been different. if you could rewind the universe and have robert jordan write wot multiple times in multiple parallel realities, he would have written different stories every time.

and he would have been praised every time, because all those differences would not change a good story into a bad one.

 

now, you don't like his books, you don't like his style, that's fine. I like his style, I like his take on things, I like that characters are allowed to drop the idiot ball and get things done a bit more often, and I like his books more than the original ones.

regardless, those books being different from the notes is no problem whatsoever. because jordan's books themselves would have been very different from the notes too. because what ends up being "canon" and what ends up being revised in the many drafts of a book is largely coincidential.

 

I actually like Sanderson's books. His own books. I loved Elantris and Mistborn and have read the first three books of Way of Kings which is good and bad. I just do not like the Sanderson WoT books. I am not trying to sway anyone's opinion  What I was saying though if you watch any of the dusty wheel shows on the notes, even the books Jordan himself wrote from the notes were quite different, and most times better. Also I am not a purist, I think the changes I have seen in WoT make sense and should make a better story. They could change something that I have a big issue with but in general as long as the action is good and production values are good and they take the TV series seriously (like history, not fantasy-which is what LOTR and GOT did and made it successfull) all things that they do seem to be doing I think I will adore the show. 

[johnnysd]

On 7/3/2021 at 1:09 PM, redgiant said:

I have my opinions which are driven by my own experiences with human nature and analogies to other similar aspects of life that tend to support them.

 

I want this show to be well-regarded and a worthy TV adaptation of the famous books,  but I still need to see more to shore up the areas of doubt that have nagged me from what little I have seen thrown to us.

 

So here are some (to me) interesting observations ...

 

1. TWoT books have sold 80 million copies and is #8 all-time. I find it super hard to imagine how crafting the TV adaptation "for the fans" is anything but a good idea. What do you think made the story famous enough to become a project in the first place? Craft it to appeal to the fans that validated the whole story (literally, in spirit, whatever is needed), and the bulk of humanity with a brain will also come along as new fans just like when we first picked up the books and the story started to unfold. If you go too "least common denominator", you will lose the faithful while barely getting the attention of the unwashed masses' fickle and fleeting minds. Even if all you care about is sheer numbers of viewers, that number will shrink and not stick around if the fickle masses are what drives it.

 

2. A music analogy - classic rock bands and cover bands comes to mind for some reason. If you have ever gone to a concert purporting to be about music of a band you have loved, you expect to hear the most famous songs performed more or less the way the original band did them. Even for a band known for altering their live performances of their own songs a lot from night to night, there is still a core style and sound you expect to hear. That is why whenever a musician or singer replaces the original one, he/she has to sound like the original instrument or voice in terms of timber, range and the odd lilts they throw in. Otherwise it "isn't their songs" you hear. Freddie Mercury, Robert Plant, Steve Perry, Lou Graham, Tom Scholz, etc etc ... whenever you replace a familiar face or musician or whatever, it needs to remind you of the original reason why you are a fan of theirs. Same idea with books adapted to film or TV. They are like a cover band, but they at least TRY to imitate the original on purpose. If a singer for example ON PURPOSE and keeps throwing in stupid flourishes or vibrato in their singing of a famous well-known song, it just annoys the crap out of the fans who know "he/she doesn't have to do that, why are they doing that?". OTOH, cutting some fat in the song to make its performance length fit a shorter time length is done all the time esp on TV performances, but cutting vs actively changing the famous contents that made the songs famous in the first place, well at some point it isn't even that song any more.

 

3. I hope ... REALLY hope ... that the deviations from George R. R. Martin's words and style that D & D pulled in GoT taught Rafe and Company a valuable lesson. The more D & D "did their own thing" in the last couple of seasons (whether due to the books lagging although GRRM gave them direct notes and events on what would happen, or just they aren't good enough to reproduce the level of grit and smart dialogue and characters as GRRM would), the more damage they did to the point that the unthinkable a few years prior (that GoT could have anything tarnish its quality and believable fantasy world-building epic) actually happened. The utter stupidity of the final season utterly ruined the full-on reputation of the entire series, it was so bone-headed. It even affects one's desire to rewatch the series, knowing how damn awful the ending is.

 

4. The one thing the WoT series has to get right is that "All beats lead to the epic moments". There are certain passages, dialogue and events that just have to  be done more or less according to the books verbatim, even if all the story woven in and surrounding those spots must be bent and molded "to fit" a little. Just do not mess up the big moments (Intro to The Shire, "You shall not pass", "To the king", "Forth Eorlingas", Mt. Doom, etc), or change them in unrecognizable ways in terms of which characters are involved, what they say and how they behave. One example in the LOTR movies where a change added some "ugh", was the whole Arwen enhancement - "Give up the halfling she-elf/Come and claim him" at the Ford of Isen ... were it not for the perfectly-done horses-in-the-waves effects, I would have been rolling my eyes in shame for longer but thankfully that mitigated it somewhat. The moral: Please don't invent story-lines that are embarassing in their naked deviation and need mitigation.

 

On #1- Totally agree. Hyper WoT fan sites forget that WoT is incredibly main stream. Instant #1 best sellers and some of the most read books forever.

 

On #2 - Don't totally agree. I think there is some room for changes if the core of the song essentially stays the same. I have zero doubt that the core will stay the same in the TV series.

 

On #3 - The last 2 seasons and especially the last one were incredibly bad. Two things happened and it is something WoT may face if it lasts 8 or 9 seasons. First, Benioff and Weiss wanted out and so they rushed together two final seasons and destroyed everything in the process. It probably needed an additional 3 seasons or 2 extended ones to really bring the story to a conclusion. HBO should have considered a new team at the helm rather than rushing to a conclusion.

 

Second and the biggest one. Through the course of the show, little plot details changed, events were slightly different and the characters changed from the books. Despite being at their core very similar to the book versions they were very different. Because of these two things the ending Jordan had planned and the events leading up to it  literally made no sense whatsoever for these characters. TV Dany would not have done what she did, TV Bran was basically forgotten so his ending made less than zero sense. R=L=J meant nothing, but was pretty critical in the TV show. TV Stannis would not go as far as book Stannis, etc...They should have written an arc that ultimately made sense for the characters they were. Jon Snow in the TV version should have ultimately been on the Iron Throne TV Dany would have woken up and realized she did not want to be her brother.

 

WoT will face this too. After 5 or six seasons  things will be just different enough that certain arcs and the ending as it is will not make sense. It will be interesting to see how they handle this.

 

On #4 I think that is very true and was part of why LOTR was so successful. And the WoT show will need to do the same things. I am sure we could all the list the major events that need to be retained. The one caveat is what I said with #3 in that at some point some of those tentpole moments might not make sense anymore for the TV show.

 

[king of nowhere]

8 hours ago, johnnysd said:

 

I actually like Sanderson's books. His own books. I loved Elantris and Mistborn and have read the first three books of Way of Kings which is good and bad. I just do not like the Sanderson WoT books. I am not trying to sway anyone's opinion  What I was saying though if you watch any of the dusty wheel shows on the notes, even the books Jordan himself wrote from the notes were quite different, and most times better. Also I am not a purist, I think the changes I have seen in WoT make sense and should make a better story. They could change something that I have a big issue with but in general as long as the action is good and production values are good and they take the TV series seriously (like history, not fantasy-which is what LOTR and GOT did and made it successfull) all things that they do seem to be doing I think I will adore the show. 

fair enough. as i said, if it's just a matter of artistic preference, it can't be argued.

I'm merely saying that "it's different from the notes" doesn't mean anything, because the final draft of a book is always going to be quite different from the first sketched outline

 

Quote

WoT will face this too. After 5 or six seasons  things will be just different enough that certain arcs and the ending as it is will not make sense. It will be interesting to see how they handle this.

oh, yeah. Another reason we need a director capable of making (sensible) changes where needed, rather than someone who will just stick to the books.

 

Edited July 7, 2021 by king of nowhere

[Elder_Haman]

16 hours ago, johnnysd said:

On #1- Totally agree. Hyper WoT fan sites forget that WoT is incredibly main stream. Instant #1 best sellers and some of the most read books forever.

Yes. But also, no. You want people who love the books to love the series, certainly. But they will also want to appeal broadly to a new audience. Also, many people who read the books only read it once and moved on. They will remember the broad strokes, not the intricacies. 

 

16 hours ago, johnnysd said:

On #2 - Don't totally agree. I think there is some room for changes if the core of the song essentially stays the same. I have zero doubt that the core will stay the same in the TV series.

I totally agree with this. Rafe & Co. don't have to make big alterations, but there is room for changes to be made. My hope is that every change they make to broaden the appeal of the show aligns with an artistic choice to pursue a vision of the story that is more impactful on the screen, rather than to pander to the broadest possible audience. 

 

16 hours ago, johnnysd said:

On #3 - The last 2 seasons and especially the last one were incredibly bad. Two things happened and it is something WoT may face if it lasts 8 or 9 seasons. First, Benioff and Weiss wanted out and so they rushed together two final seasons and destroyed everything in the process. It probably needed an additional 3 seasons or 2 extended ones to really bring the story to a conclusion. HBO should have considered a new team at the helm rather than rushing to a conclusion.

The end of GoT was hot garbage. But WoT has one huge advantage - the novels are finished. There's a huge difference between having GRRM's notes about what's supposed to happen and having a completed story. Hell, it doesn't seem like GRRM knows how to get his characters where he wants them to go. (Though it's very possible, he's decided to re-write the entire ending based on the intensely negative fan reaction...)

 

But that won't be a problem for WoT. WoT's problem will be the pacing leading up to the end. Say everyone starts to tire of the series after ... the Cleansing. How quickly can you get from that point to the Last Battle? But at least the ending won't be entirely unfamiliar and counter to the character development because they still have mileposts they can hit in each character arc.

 

16 hours ago, johnnysd said:

On #4 I think that is very true and was part of why LOTR was so successful. And the WoT show will need to do the same things. I am sure we could all the list the major events that need to be retained. The one caveat is what I said with #3 in that at some point some of those tentpole moments might not make sense anymore for the TV show.

 And so I don't think you ever get here. Each character has important moments that the show can build toward from the beginning and those moments will constrain the options. Unlike GoT, there is no point at which the writers will be untethered from the author's original story and so it will be much more difficult for them to lose the threads.

 

On 7/3/2021 at 1:09 PM, redgiant said:

Please don't invent story-lines that are embarassing in their naked deviation and need mitigation.

There are going to be "invented story-lines" - or at least scenes and dialogue that do not exist in the books. And I think it's those scenes and that dialogue that will make or break the show. What they add (by necessity) has to feel at home with the rest of the story. 

 

Fortunately, I think we will know early on. Logain's story will be a good barometer of what the "invented" content is going to look and feel like.

[king of nowhere]

by the way, regarding numbers..

On 7/3/2021 at 10:09 PM, redgiant said:

1. TWoT books have sold 80 million copies and is #8 all-time. I find it super hard to imagine how crafting the TV adaptation "for the fans" is anything but a good idea.

 

this looks impressive. The number, used like this, looks like one fourth of the whole american population read wot.

that number, however, is misleading. the main thing to remember is that there are 14 wot books. every person who read the books bought 14 of them, not just one.

So, those 80 millions books translate actually to less than 6 millions readers. Perhaps they are underestimated; some families will buy a book and then everyone would read it. Perhaps they are overestimated; some people will buy a book, read it, dislike it, and move on. let's say that those factors cancel each other, and let's stick with 6 millions.

6 millions is still a big number, but a small minority of the total population. that's unavoidable; most of the general population doesn't even read books at all, most of those who read are not into fantasy, most of those won't commit to reading 14 big books.

so, we got those 6 millions. But those are not fans. those are just the people who read the books once. if they reached the end, they probably liked it enough, but they certainly don't qualify as fans. still, a lot of those 6 millions readers will be interested in the tv show. in a vague "i read those books 10 years ago and they were nice, let's see what they made of them". most of them will barely remember the story.

 

the actual fans who read the books multiple times (on an undertaking as big as reading 10000 pages, being willing to do it twice authomatically qualifies one as fan), who knows the story in depth, and who may get nitpicky about details, will be maybe 100000. And most of those won't be nitpicky.

 

the tv show must appeal to the general public. if it does, it will be successful, and even most of the fans will like it. and for that, it just have to be well-made. most fans will forgive any change if it is well made, and most viewers won't even know.

but crafting the adaptation "for the fans" at the expence of alientating the general public? terrible idea.

 

 

[Guest redgiant]

Oh I knew that, my main point in the book numbers is relative, sicne all book series suffer that math to some degree, as well as suffer your correct assessment of appeal broadness.

 

When I say "for the fans", take into account my level of what I call "adherence".  I do not consider smart changes to be bad, or augmenting a story with logical additional content to flesh out the timeframe or to replace for instance in-head thinking in a book with actual scenes in a TV show or movie version.

 

So I didn't care at all that Tom Bombadil wasn't in LOTR (in fact, I think adding him and Goldberry would have been really stupid given the spine of the plot in the movies). And Liv Tyler like everyone LOTR was a great actor and didn't bother me other than noticing the story change - and the fact that she was clearly holding a dummy of Frodo at the Ford :). Or that the Scouring of the Shire was omitted, and paid homage to only in a brief flash-forward in Galadriel's mirror.

 

What I did care about was that every single main character from the books was portrayed according to ... the books, physically and behaviorally. I consider it a super small quibble about Faramir being allowed to be tempted by the Ring, since the goal was to get him to the very same place anyhow (just via character growth and realization, not static blind belief as in the books).

 

If those are the sorts of things we need to "brace ourselves for" with WoT, then I'm super happy.

 

I just don't know enough yet to make that claim.

 

I will say, the best single image I have seen so far, which sticks with me as conveying close to what I felt reading about it, was the shot of (what we assume is) Shadar Logoth, with that foggy rendering of huge abandoned city buildings looming so high overhead and that hint at being only part of a much larger dead and eerie landscape. That got my attention.

Edited July 7, 2021 by redgiant

[Agitel]

On 7/3/2021 at 4:09 PM, redgiant said:

3. I hope ... REALLY hope ... that the deviations from George R. R. Martin's words and style that D & D pulled in GoT taught Rafe and Company a valuable lesson. The more D & D "did their own thing" in the last couple of seasons (whether due to the books lagging although GRRM gave them direct notes and events on what would happen, or just they aren't good enough to reproduce the level of grit and smart dialogue and characters as GRRM would), the more damage they did to the point that the unthinkable a few years prior (that GoT could have anything tarnish its quality and believable fantasy world-building epic) actually happened. The utter stupidity of the final season utterly ruined the full-on reputation of the entire series, it was so bone-headed. It even affects one's desire to rewatch the series, knowing how damn awful the ending is.

 

I have to disagree a little on the ASOIAF adaptation. In my opinion, D&D lost their vision, phoned in some of the writing, and really changed the type of show they were making. By the end things were just happening to happen, and the pacing, character focus, even the psychology and sociology of the show just changed. And I have to attribute the drop in quality of the show to this rather than to just the fact that they were condensing and adapting. Really, the show jumped the shark for me with the Dornish plot in Season 5. In keeping with the earlier seasons they could have still had Jaime and Bronn go, but on a diplomatic mission, with a loose adaptation of the Dornish plot from Feast but with just Jaime instead of Ser Arys. Or anything else, really. Having Jaime and Bronn's fantastic super secret agent adventure and the sand snakes was just the laziest and least in keeping with the tone of show choice they could have made.

 

[Beidomon]

4 hours ago, Agitel said:

 

I have to disagree a little on the ASOIAF adaptation. In my opinion, D&D lost their vision, phoned in some of the writing, and really changed the type of show they were making. By the end things were just happening to happen, and the pacing, character focus, even the psychology and sociology of the show just changed. And I have to attribute the drop in quality of the show to this rather than to just the fact that they were condensing and adapting. Really, the show jumped the shark for me with the Dornish plot in Season 5. In keeping with the earlier seasons they could have still had Jaime and Bronn go, but on a diplomatic mission, with a loose adaptation of the Dornish plot from Feast but with just Jaime instead of Ser Arys. Or anything else, really. Having Jaime and Bronn's fantastic super secret agent adventure and the sand snakes was just the laziest and least in keeping with the tone of show choice they could have made.

 

Not as bad as the blatant fan servicing “let’s take all the favorite character on a hunting trip to catch an ice zombie - just think of all the great banter” episode. That was the show’s zenith. Or maybe it was turning the Night King into a level boss. Or… damn those last couple of seasons just got so bad. 

[Guest redgiant]

On 7/1/2021 at 9:18 PM, johnnysd said:

... the show will  be very close to the books. ...

Well although I agree with your idea of nits vs material things, I have to say that these being omitted *is not* very close to the books for me, but it could all work out if what is there is exceptionally done in the spirit of Jordan's book vision - its just to me, some of these scenes that are being dropped *are* the best way to express certain aspects of his vision and world-building early on; it remains to be seen if worthy substitutes or alterations work:

• Baerlon (b/c of Min, Morraine vs Children of the Light)
• Four Kings (b/c of Matt's condition and Rand taking care of him against Hake, and what Rand does but doesn't realize he did yet, and in the TV show I presume it would be the same for the audience not to know for a while in how they depict it occurring) - I think 4K is in from what I've seen
• Whitebridge (b/c of Thom and what happens, and the awe of the bridge itself and a reminder to the audience of the at-this-point mysterious and largely unexplained AoL, and its world building)
• Camelyn (this is a MAJOR omission and change for quite a few reasons which everyone knows, like omitting Bree in LOTR)

 

(are any of the above known to be included yet?)

 

I get the rationales given for all of these changes, but they each have their valid reasons for being included, and if I had one choice I could include it would be Camelyn, there's just too many cool and important things happening there. If they drop  Camelyn, they better at least hit the nail on the head at the Eye itself conveying when Rand's hair on his neck stands up, he backs away from the pool but doesn't really know why, and its a very subtly-handled moment on film I hope - I need to see Rand plastered up against that wall but not even realizing he did it, so Josha please sell this scene! (Four Kings alone doesn't convey this b/c we are not supposed to connect what happened there yet on its own).

 

And as to changing the Eye, Malkier, Tarwin's Gap, Green Man etc ... If they don't include Someshta then how would they have for example the utterly epic linkage much later in Forward and Back when we see how all this started in the AoL? A large part of the mystique and world-building of WoT is this linkage system he built up over the course of all these books: foreshadowing, back refs and so on. God don't lose that, Rafe.

Edited July 15, 2021 by redgiant