What do you think of the new first look photos?!

[lt;(^-^)gt;]

20 hours ago, Ararana24 said:

I know media adaptations are never perfect (though LotR and the first half of GoT came really really close - I also wasn't that attached to either of those stories when the media first released), but this is simply horrifying to my WoT book-loving heart.

 

Speaking as someone who was already extremely attached to LotR before the movies came out, I definitely get what you're feeling. But because I've been through that, I know that an adaptation can work out beautifully despite changes.

 

The idea that LotR is "perfect" as a movie adaptation comes from their smashing success and groundbreaking/epic levels of special and practical effects, amazing costume, prop, and set work, and spot-on performances. They are great films. There are actually loads of adaptation changes though. On the topic of character appearances, Frodo was 50 during his journey (the hobbit equivalent of 30-ish). He was a good bit older than his friends. In my head he looked nothing like the rosy-cheeked Elijah Wood that we got in the movies. But in the end it worked, and although Wood's youthful face does now have a place in my head attached to my idea of Frodo, it's not a bad thing despite my initial thoughts, and it hasn't replaced anything, only built on it.

 

I guess my point is that I want to reassure you, we can get a "perfect" adaptation of a story on the level of LotR even with significant changes to character appearances. Because that's exactly what happened with me and LotR.

[Harldin]

I'm a huge Last Kingdom fan as well, never read the books though but I loved Hart as Beocca, can't imagine anyone else playing him.

[Skipp]

I am somewhat surprised by the amount of negativity surrounding the shows release.  I hope most of it comes from the basis of not wanting to be hurt by the adaption.  And while I wish the guitar was a harp and thought the dagger would be bigger I see nothing but professionalism and enthusiasm from the production team.

 

And while none of the actors in the released pictures matched my head cannon I am nothing but ecstatic with what I have seen.  Despite this I do remember that when they first released the headshots of the E5 I was able to match each of them to their character without needing captions..... except for Josha I was only able to match him from process of elimination.  Now that I have seen them in costume I will never have to worry about them not matching my head cannon again.

 

Btw, have you seen Nynaeve's braid????

[templar7]

On 9/1/2021 at 11:43 AM, Elder_Haman said:

I know everyone is probably sick of my comparisons to The Last Kingdom - but I'll make another one cause that show rocks and is also a good barometer for what I'm hoping WoT will be -- a quality, character focused adaptation that can deviate from the source material without changing the focus of the story or the core of its main characters.

 

So, for example, Father Beocca is described in the books as having wild, red hair and being extremely ugly with pox scars, a lazy eye and a crippled hand. In the television show, Beocca is played by Ian Hart: 

 

 

While the difference between the book description and Hart is vast, there was never a single time where it made an iota of difference to me watching the show. That's because Hart absolutely nails Beocca's gentle spirit, his devotion to Christ, and his compassion for Uhtred. Indeed, since the Saxon Chronicles (upon which Last Kingdom is based) are written from the first person, Hart's portrayal adds a layer of depth to the Beocca/Uhtred relationship that we don't get to see in the books due to narrative limitations.

 

There are many other places in The Last Kingdom where the book descriptions do not really fit the actors. In fact, I'd say it's more unusual when the actors actually seem to fit the book description. And yet Last Kingdom is a wonderful show that has only added to my enjoyment of the books because of its ability to bring forward some of the subtext from the novels in a wonderfully engaging and emotional way.

 

Which is all a very long worded way of saying -- don't sweat the little changes. They won't matter much. It's the tone, pacing, and character interplay that will make or break this series.

So well said Sir. Little details from our novel memories are usually just that... Ours. I didn't even remember when Perrin got his beard, but to other folks, its everything.

Lets all focus on the broad strokes.

Edited September 4, 2021 by templar7
spelling

[DaddyFinn]

Dang, I guess I should continue to watch The Last Kingdom. I quit it after season 2 I think.

[TheMountain]

LotR was overall, incredibly faithful to the descriptions of the visuals in the books. The production even hired the two major book illustrators as concept artists for the movies. I really don't see that here, and it bothers me immensely because it would be so easy to get right!

[CaddySedai]

I would rather them create a good series overall then miss the point and focus too much on getting everything right. 

 

If I could have both Id take that too. But even perfect visuals does not mean you get a faithful adaptation. 

 

Nor does the loss of a fully faithful adaptation in any way ruin the overall impact of a show/movie.

 

Now, if you will excuse me while I try to impress the Russian Judge with my dive.

 

Edited September 16, 2021 by CaddySedai

[Elder_Haman]

3 hours ago, DaddyFinn said:

Dang, I guess I should continue to watch The Last Kingdom. I quit it after season 2 I think.

They are filming the final season of the show right now. 

[Guest redgiant]

5 hours ago, TheMountain said:

LotR was overall, incredibly faithful to the descriptions of the visuals in the books. The production even hired the two major book illustrators as concept artists for the movies. I really don't see that here, and it bothers me immensely because it would be so easy to get right!

 

This has been a big issue with me since the first photos were shown. I have always maintained that one reason we get almost no content from the WoT show (an unusually small amount compared to any show or movie I can remember - other than Amazon's Second Age show, at least the one photo of Valinor and the Two Trees is a fan's dream shot), is that they are acutely aware of how much they have deviated and changed the story, characters and visuals. When you are afraid of bad press, you simply don't show anything. That is always true in any media, and conversely when you know (or think you know) that your show is great in the eyes of fans and supporters, you whet their appetite and show them more even in little consistent dribbles.

 

That has not happened once with WoT. They go radio silent for ridiculously long periods (I mean, look right now, the same DM front page blurbs from weeks ago are still there, we are just adding tiny comments to the existing threads, no follow-on .. anything after the supposedly momentous reveal of the teaser. Ridiculous the lack of inertia exhibited by Amazon and the WoT show thus far.

 

Not only did LOTR hire Howe and Lee, but they were faithful to Naismith and other existing, well-known professional and fan renditions of literally every aspect of Middle Earth. In fact like early GoT, is was so faithful that the very few exceptions stood out like sore thumbs and were what fans who wanted to nit pick would harp narrowly on, and with valid reasons for a show so faithfully in all other places: like the Saruman falling off Orthanc after stabbed in the back by Grima (which actually happens in the Scouring of the Shire, just not on top of the tower).

 

The point here is that the few exceptions in LOTR have been explained quite literally by Jackson, and company in their extended commentaries on how and why they put the stories together as they did. Every single decision esp the 'odd ones' has a known and reasonable explanation. And they are related to in-story as to why they occurred and were adapted or added/removed. They always account for why they did it in story terms and the impact they foresee in the story b/c of it.

 

Wot is a different beast altogether. The ratio of faithful:madeup is reversed. There are so many plot, character and visual changes its hard to even list them all (and that's just what we know of so far). They act like they have completely ignored (again for reasons we do not know) almost all existing prior art. It's like making up your own visuals and structures and characters in LOTR without caring that it goes directly (not subjectively) against the words in the books, the for-decades accepted art and visual interpretations of the book's most well-known artists and fans (WoT's equivalent to Howe, Lee and Naismith), and offers no explanations or logic as to why they did these things in the context of the story. No elven lithe and graceful appearance, no filigree architecture, no Helms Deep, Orthanc, Baradur, Shire, Bree, Minas Tirith, Edoras looking spot on like they had always been rendered and drawn.

 

On the contrary, all WoT excuses and rationalizing thus far has been external factors in making a TV show, like aging them up for practical multi-year contract reasons, diversity for the modern audience, expensive set omission (despite an enormous budget) and little more that translates into an in-story explanation that would explain such massive changes and omissions. From now on Rafe, give me an in-story reason why you make changes. I am not referring to reasonable invented additions or fleshing out (like showing Logain's actual capture that is certainly going on in story terms anyhow, or Thom playing a guitar b/c at least the actor actually plays one for the sake of realism in depiction); I am talking about changing major aspects and flow out of whole cloth without seemingly any real story reason to do so.

 

When you factor in the follow-on plot affects of making such early changes like we have seen and been hinted at in the story, then the number and impact of changes made snowballs to enormous proportions in later seasons' deviations from the books.

 

Here are some things  I immediately wonder "WTH made them do this":

 

- that 'thing' is not a Waygate I hope. It isn't even a Portal Stone. it is a cheap couple of polystyrene columns that make no sense whatsoever if they are indeed supposed to replace either of those things (of course, the lot of them are never near a Portal Stone so it must be a Waygate). Where is the Avendesora leaf, how will that snowball and needlessly change how they get away from Machin Shin, lock the gate from being followed, etc? What is the conscious decision that led to that not remotely being like the books clearly describe? The leaf is an excuse to introduce what Avendesora is, why its important, and later it affects ... oh nevermind. Someone had to come up with it and convince others it was a good decision.

 

- why do we all see what I assume are weaves? Unless it is clearly only from a CHANNELING WOMAN'S POV for Saidar, then you have utterly wrecked a central tenet of the entire series that affects tons of plot. Non-channelers cannot see them, only the effects they produce. Saidin channelers cannot see Saidar and vice versa without other aids or training (big plot lines). Don't even get me started on the True Power vs One Power, or even if they will bother pretending that distinction exists in the TV show since they are dumbing down so many other things. Who decided this was a Good Idea? Did they read the books and understand the ramifications such a simplification will have? Are all the reveals about the black lines emanating from Forsaken, the various place where things unseen become seen, all that gone? I have to believe that they will not casually always show stupid wisps of white to everyone in the scene as being visible when anyone channels, that this is either a misdirection or a scene where the context is clearly only from, say, Alanna and not everyone around her. Even Warders are SPECIFICALLY said to not see their Aes Sedai's weaves.

 

- why does Lan have no armor and so far is clearly typecast as a samurai-style fighter? Daniel Henney is athletic and I am sure he fights very believably, that is not at issue. The issue is what he is given by Rafe  to have to work with in his role. Lan is a tough swordfighter but not a martial arts expert (that would be more like Aiel). Lan wears armor a lot. Don't tell me they can't have him lug armor around, b/c that is what an armor-wearing warrior does. Just ask Jamie Lannister or The Hound or Jorah Mormont or Jon Snow or any number of other folks in series that are supposed to WEAR ARMOR. They wore it all the time just fine, since it was supposed to be like a part of them and it was. Maybe we just aren't seeing the scenes where he does wear it and act more like a swordsman, but I fear that is just another detail they threw out for reasons I would like explained.

 

I want to be wrong. I really do. I love these books, but I don't rubber stamp all this like some do. Thus far, in my opinion, they are changing way too many things without any in-story rationale. And like an iceberg, I fear I am only seeing the tip of this attitude.

Edited September 16, 2021 by redgiant

[CaddySedai]

At the end of the day it all boils down to what we see. I mean its one thing to take one side. or the other. or be in the middle. or be upside down and twisted.

 

But till we watch it none of us will know how we feel about the PRODUCT. 

 

So I tend to give the benefit of the doubt till they either impress the heck out of me. do good enough. or disappoint the hell out of me (I'm looking at you last attempt at DUNE as a series. No opinion on the most recent one obv)

[Skipp]

25 minutes ago, redgiant said:

 

This has been a big issue with me since the first photos were shown. I have always maintained that one reason we get almost no content from the WoT show (an unusually small amount compared to any show or movie I can remember - other than Amazon's Second Age show, at least the one photo of Valinor and the Two Trees is a fan's dream shot), is that they are acutely aware of how much they have deviated and changed the story, characters and visuals. When you are afraid of bad press, you simply don't show anything. That is always true in any media, and conversely when you know (or think you know) that your show is great in the eyes of fans and supporters, you whet their appetite and show them more even in little consistent dribbles.

 

That has not happened once with WoT. They go radio silent for ridiculously long periods (I mean, look right now, the same DM front page blurbs from weeks ago are still there, we are just adding tiny comments to the existing threads, no follow-on .. anything after the supposedly momentous reveal of the teaser. Ridiculous the lack of inertia exhibited by Amazon and the WoT show thus far.

 

Not only did LOTR hire Howe and Lee, but they were faithful to Naismith and other existing, well-known professional and fan renditions of literally every aspect of Middle Earth. In fact like early GoT, is was so faithful that the very few exceptions stood out like sore thumbs and were what fans who wanted to nit pick would harp narrowly on, and with valid reasons for a show so faithfully in all other places: like the Saruman falling off Orthanc after stabbed in the back by Grima (which actually happens in the Scouring of the Shire, just not on top of the tower).

 

The point here is that the few exceptions in LOTR have been explained quite literally by Jackson, and company in their extended commentaries on how and why they put the stories together as they did. Every single decision esp the 'odd ones' has a known and reasonable explanation. And they are related to in-story as to why they occurred and were adapted or added/removed. They always account for why they did it in story terms and the impact they foresee in the story b/c of it.

 

Wot is a different beast altogether. The ratio of faithful:madeup is reversed. There are so many plot, character and visual changes its hard to even list them all (and that's just what we know of so far). They act like they have completely ignored (again for reasons we do not know) almost all existing prior art. It's like making up your own visuals and structures and characters in LOTR without caring that it goes directly (not subjectively) against the words in the books, the for-decades accepted art and visual interpretations of the book's most well-known artists and fans (WoT's equivalent to Howe, Lee and Naismith), and offers no explanations or logic as to why they did these things in the context of the story. No elven lithe and graceful appearance, no filigree architecture, no Helms Deep, Orthanc, Baradur, Shire, Bree, Minas Tirith, Edoras looking spot on like they had always been rendered and drawn.

 

On the contrary, all WoT excuses and rationalizing thus far has been external factors in making a TV show, like aging them up for practical multi-year contract reasons, diversity for the modern audience, expensive set omission (despite an enormous budget) and little more that translates into an in-story explanation that would explain such massive changes and omissions. From now on Rafe, give me an in-story reason why you make changes. I am not referring to reasonable invented additions or fleshing out (like showing Logain's actual capture that is certainly going on in story terms anyhow, or Thom playing a guitar b/c at least the actor actually plays one for the sake of realism in depiction); I am talking about changing major aspects and flow out of whole cloth without seemingly any real story reason to do so.

 

When you factor in the follow-on plot affects of making such early changes like we have seen and been hinted at in the story, then the number and impact of changes made snowballs to enormous proportions in later seasons' deviations from the books.

 

Here are some things  I immediately wonder "WTH made them do this":

 

- that 'thing' is not a Waygate I hope. It isn't even a Portal Stone. it is a cheap couple of polystyrene columns that make no sense whatsoever if they are indeed supposed to replace either of those things (of course, the lot of them are never near a Portal Stone so it must be a Waygate). Where is the Avendesora leaf, how will that snowball and needlessly change how they get away from Machin Shin, lock the gate from being followed, etc? What is the conscious decision that led to that not remotely being like the books clearly describe? The leaf is an excuse to introduce what Avendesora is, why its important, and later it affects ... oh nevermind. Someone had to come up with it and convince others it was a good decision.

 

- why do we all see what I assume are weaves? Unless it is clearly only from a CHANNELING WOMAN'S POV for Saidar, then you have utterly wrecked a central tenet of the entire series that affects tons of plot. Non-channelers cannot see them, only the effects they produce. Saidin channelers cannot see Saidar and vice versa without other aids or training (big plot lines). Don't even get me started on the True Power vs One Power, or even if they will bother pretending that distinction exists in the TV show since they are dumbing down so many other things. Who decided this was a Good Idea? Did they read the books and understand the ramifications such a simplification will have? Are all the reveals about the black lines emanating from Forsaken, the various place where things unseen become seen, all that gone? I have to believe that they will not casually always show stupid wisps of white to everyone in the scene as being visible when anyone channels, that this is either a misdirection or a scene where the context is clearly only from, say, Alanna and not everyone around her. Even Warders are SPECIFICALLY said to not see their Aes Sedai's weaves.

 

- why does Lan have no armor and so far is clearly typecast as a samurai-style fighter? Daniel Henney is athletic and I am sure he fights very believably, that is not at issue. The issue is what he is given by Rafe  to have to work with in his role. Lan is a tough swordfighter but not a martial arts expert (that would be more like Aiel). Lan wears armor a lot. Don't tell me they can't have him lug armor around, b/c that is what an armor-wearing warrior does. Just ask Jamie Lannister or The Hound or Jorah Mormont or Jon Snow or any number of other folks in series that are supposed to WEAR ARMOR. They wore it all the time just fine, since it was supposed to be like a part of them and it was. Maybe we just aren't seeing the scenes wear he does wear it and act more like a swordsman, but I fear that is just another detail they threw out for reasons I would like explained.

 

I want to be wrong. I really do. I love these books, but I don't rubber stamp all this like some do. Thus far, in my opinion, they are changing way too many things without any in-story rationale. And like an iceberg, I fear I am only seeing the tip of this attitude.

There is a lot to unpack here so lets focus on your 3 primary complaints.

 

1) They certainly took some artistic license on the waygate.  From what I understand the pillars are a monument in a random field in the Czech Republic.  They cleary thought they could do something neat with them since they weren't going to have a waygate in a Camylen basement.  We don't know what they are fully going to look like or how they open or if they have an Avendesora leaf so we will just have to wait and see but you are kinda assuming the absolute worst here.

 

2)  Visible channeling in the trailer.  Once again you are assuming they are cutting an important thing from the books.  They clearly wanted to show off channeling for the trailer so it only makes sense for them to show something.  And who is to say we won't have scenes where channeling happens and we don't see it?  As for the visuals of the weaves RJ specifically said in an interview that the weaves were barely visible transparent lines with maybe a hint of colour.  So far, aside from colour, I would say that matches fairly closesly to what we are seeing.  I am hoping as our characters grow they will start to colour the weaves a bit to show that.

 

3)  Where in the Eye of the World is Lan described as wearing armour?  The only times that I recall him actually donning armour were during the Aiel War and the last battle.  In fact I remember a quote where Lan specifically says he hasn't worn a Helmet in years.  As we all know the Darryl Sweet covers are not exactly accurate to what is in the books.  And we don't know what type of fighter Lan is because of the way RJ described fights.  When just using the names of sword forms it is entirely up to your imagination and I personally must say that the names of most sword forms made me imagine a very fluid fighting style.

[Elder_Haman]

So, I gather that the WoT visuals are extremely important to you @redgiant. And while we can bicker back and forth about the importance of any particular aspect is to the overall story and whether changes to that aspect may or may not be required, I'm certainly not going to change your mind about the way the show looks. That's cool. You're not required to like the show.

 

But I don't understand this part:

2 hours ago, redgiant said:

That has not happened once with WoT. They go radio silent for ridiculously long periods (I mean, look right now, the same DM front page blurbs from weeks ago are still there, we are just adding tiny comments to the existing threads, no follow-on .. anything after the supposedly momentous reveal of the teaser. Ridiculous the lack of inertia exhibited by Amazon and the WoT show thus far.

 

What exactly are you expecting? They dropped a teaser roughly 90 days ahead of the intended debut. Rafe did another Q&A. They've announced an appearance at NY ComicCon (and exclusive footage). There have been a ton of print and online articles referencing the show and hyping it as one of the "best new shows" for the last part of 2021. They announced a new director for S2.

 

What more do you want them to do at this point?

 

 

Edited September 16, 2021 by Elder_Haman

[CaddySedai]

I for one wouldn’t mind Rafe visiting me for coffee and telling me everything that I could possibly want to know off the record. And to give me my own Ring. 

 

You did ask what one might want. lol

[Guest redgiant]

2 hours ago, Skipp said:

1) They certainly took some artistic license on the waygate.  From what I understand the pillars are a monument in a random field in the Czech Republic.  They clearly thought they could do something neat with them since they weren't going to have a waygate in a Camylen basement.  We don't know what they are fully going to look like or how they open or if they have an Avendesora leaf so we will just have to wait and see but you are kinda assuming the absolute worst here.

 

In your comment lies part of the issue: "since they weren't going to have a waygate in a Camelyn basement". Remember those follow-on snowball effects I mentioned? This is already one of them. Why isn't Camelyn present, and why isn't the Waygate a forgotten entrance deep in a basement with Loial having to stoop, etc, etc, etc.? So they take some existing thing in the world and just retcon it into the story even though there is zero basis for it. That's the sort of thing I rail against I guess; once they deviate, the tendency for continued deviations just grows wider and larger and more far afield.

 

2 hours ago, Skipp said:

2)  Visible channeling in the trailer.  Once again you are assuming they are cutting an important thing from the books.  They clearly wanted to show off channeling for the trailer so it only makes sense for them to show something.  And who is to say we won't have scenes where channeling happens and we don't see it?  As for the visuals of the weaves RJ specifically said in an interview that the weaves were barely visible transparent lines with maybe a hint of colour.  So far, aside from colour, I would say that matches fairly closesly to what we are seeing.  I am hoping as our characters grow they will start to colour the weaves a bit to show that.

 

There are few topics in the book series more factual and foundationally objective than this aspect as I stated it.

 

Non-channelers cannot see anything of the weaves themselves. Ever. Just the effects of what they perform.

 

Male vs female channelers command the different halves of the One Power and cannot see each other's weaves.  Even when trying to unknot a weave they are feeling around with THEIR side of the ONe Power at what seems like a hole with nothing there. This strikes at the HEART of topics like weave inversion, tying off a weave, unknotting a weave you cannot literally see anything about (if you are of the opposite half), and others.

 

https://wot.fandom.com/wiki/Weave

 

How much retcon-ing are you able to live with here? Is it an okay change to have normal non-channeling people see Aes Sedai weaving things? For me, that's like giving Gandalf a pink mohawk.

 

2 hours ago, Skipp said:

3)  Where in the Eye of the World is Lan described as wearing armour?  The only times that I recall him actually donning armour were during the Aiel War and the last battle.  In fact I remember a quote where Lan specifically says he hasn't worn a Helmet in years.  As we all know the Darryl Sweet covers are not exactly accurate to what is in the books.  And we don't know what type of fighter Lan is because of the way RJ described fights.  When just using the names of sword forms it is entirely up to your imagination and I personally must say that the names of most sword forms made me imagine a very fluid fighting style.

 

Other than recent images of Daniel, there are no images over the decades of this series where Lan *isn't* shown with some form or armor, be it either Boromir-like metal armoring, or Aragorn-like light leather armoring. I include all fan art, book covers, official merch, DragonCon renderings and cosplay, CCG card game, WoT PC game. He was never in 30+ years rendered as a samurai.

 

https://www.bing.com/images/search?q=lan+mandragoran

 

Look at this comment from https://wot-prime.fandom.com/wiki/Lan_Mandragoran:

Trivia

• Lan Mandragoran is an adaptation of the character of the same name from the book series

Why on earth would they feel the need to even say that: "character of the same name"? Guilty conscience? Because when they link outside their bubble (in this case to wot.fandom.com) to content not retcon'd to match the TV show, the disparity will be jarring?

 

Lan's armor is one specific area I will concede more latitude despite all of the above being true. The book text often doesn't say what exactly he is wearing for armor and protection, and his sword forms and toughness are more important overall. And I will also agree that Sweet's TEotW cover establishes the armor look (also promulgated in the card game and PC game) where the book contents don't specifically support it as much. But we are all products of what we have been told and shown over a few decades.

 

And like I said, I fear more for the iceberg lurking under the surface than the tip we can currently see, insofar as changes for the sake of changes go. When you fire a moonshot from the Earth that is initially off by a mere 0.001 degrees, uncorrected you still end up missing the moon entirely by 1,000s of miles.

[Elder_Haman]

17 minutes ago, redgiant said:

How much retcon-ing are you able to live with here? Is it an okay change to have normal non-channeling people see Aes Sedai weaving things?

So do you propose that we, as the audience, should be unable to see the Aes Sedai weave things? When should the weaves be portrayed on screen and when shouldn't they be?

Edited September 16, 2021 by Elder_Haman

[Borderlander]

24 minutes ago, Elder_Haman said:

So do you propose that we, as the audience, should be unable to see the Aes Sedai weave things? When should the weaves be portrayed on screen and when shouldn't they be?

 

I know you're asking someone else, but I thought I'd jump in.

 

The more I think about it, the less options I see for the showrunners as to how to depict the One Power, and the more I think they probably chose the best option, after all. (Even though I have been fairly critical of the actual spidery white threads in other posts. I admit, though, I'm kinda comin' around.)

 

Let's break it down! Start with Option A, which is keeping non-channelers blind to the One Power, as per the books.

 

A) If they stay true to the books and only have channelers able to see the One Power, then you have two subsequent choices:

   a1) Have the TV audience unable to see the weaves, as well, and do it like the Force, entirely invisible except when we enter Channeler-Mode. But how would that work realistically, logistically, and visually? The camera swings behind the channeler's shoulder like a First-Person video game, and suddenly there are CGI weaves every which way? Could get pretty clunky, especially if you had to do it several times. And it puts the onus on the casual viewer to then keep track of which on-screen characters can see the weaves and which cannot. No doubt there are creative ways it could be approached to add some variety to the camera-trickery, but it would require 7 seasons worth of cinematographic gymnastics. It's certainly not a terrible option, but it requires a lot of planning and deft execution (make me think of all the mind-boggling work LOTR did to make the hobbits look small) and a lot of trust placed in the viewers to keep track of it all.

 

   a2) Allow the TV audience to see all the weaves, but maintain an in-show, true-to-the-book environment where non-channelers can't see them. In which case we (and that 'we' will include millions of woolheaded non-book-readers) will be watching CGI-weaves shooting all over the place, but having to constantly remind ourselves that some of the characters onscreen can see them and some can't, or that maybe some can but are just pretending they can't... That starts to get pretty unwieldy pretty quickly, and might get a bit gimmicky, like watching an actor pretend they can't see a ghost in a show that the audience can see.

 

Or, there is Option B, which is to just let everyone see the One Power. How would that work?

  b1) Everyone can see the One Power. Rewrite some book scenes to make it work. Not my favorite, as a book purist, but it might be the least-bad option around. Yes, it is a huge change... <sigh>  I think it's one I can get over, though, especially when I go back and think about the other two options. 

 

I'll leave it there. 

[Skipp]

For the Weaves i hope they will take the approach allowing the viewers to see the weaves but not everyone in universe.  I would suspect to do this they will show the weaves often but will occasionally switch to a POV view from Nynaeve(for example) who doesn't see anything except the result and then the camera will swing back to Alanna and we will see the weaves and the result. 

 

I think they will do it this way as it allows the audience to see the weaves most of the time while giving visual reminders occasionally that not all characters can.  But that is what I hope they do no guarantee one way or the other.

 

As for Camelyn not being in season 1 is one of the few things we can be fairly certain has changed.  And while I really enjoy the Camelyn scenes in EotW there is nothing there that cannot be moved to other points.  Rafe specifically mentioned in an interview about the snowball effect and if they made a change how that would change events and triggers down the story line so he is aware of it.  So it seems they decided against building sets for a city we won't see much of in the next few seasons and will move the interactions of the book to different points.  I certainly understand not liking this change but I am willing to give the show runners the benefit of the doubt until I see what they have done with the events that should have happened there.  I don't see much of a reason to get worked up about it until we know the end product.

 

I remember when LotR came out, I remember the fan backlash about Tom Bomadill not being in the movie, how it was already a trash adaptation. And while I don't feel Tom Bomadill is nearly important to the story as Camelyn is to WoT I am willing to see how things play out.

[DojoToad]

4 hours ago, Skipp said:

3)  Where in the Eye of the World is Lan described as wearing armour?  The only times that I recall him actually donning armour were during the Aiel War and the last battle.  In fact I remember a quote where Lan specifically says he hasn't worn a Helmet in years.  As we all know the Darryl Sweet covers are not exactly accurate to what is in the books.  And we don't know what type of fighter Lan is because of the way RJ described fights.  When just using the names of sword forms it is entirely up to your imagination and I personally must say that the names of most sword forms made me imagine a very fluid fighting style.

I'm pretty sure Lan was described as wearing armor when in the blight.  It was definitely on the cover art - heavy plate armor...

[SinisterDeath]

1 hour ago, redgiant said:

Non-channelers cannot see anything of the weaves themselves. Ever. Just the effects of what they perform.

Why are you making the assumption that the weaves we see on the screen are visible to everyone?

Or are you mad that because you're not a channeler, you shouldn't be able to see them?
 

1 hour ago, redgiant said:

Male vs female channelers command the different halves of the One Power and cannot see each other's weaves.  Even when trying to unknot a weave they are feeling around with THEIR side of the ONe Power at what seems like a hole with nothing there. This strikes at the HEART of topics like weave inversion, tying off a weave, unknotting a weave you cannot literally see anything about (if you are of the opposite half), and others.

And what part of the trailer gave any indication that they changed this?

Until the show comes out, any idea about how they make it work in the show is speculation.

 

1 hour ago, redgiant said:

https://wot.fandom.com/wiki/Weave

 

How much retcon-ing are you able to live with here? Is it an okay change to have normal non-channeling people see Aes Sedai weaving things? For me, that's like giving Gandalf a pink mohawk

What retconning?

We have it from the literal horses mouth, that weaves are almost colorless. That they're actually closer to smell or taste than having an optical color. 
E.g. we all know what the color blue tastes like.

 

1 hour ago, redgiant said:

Other than recent images of Daniel, there are no images over the decades of this series where Lan *isn't* shown with some form or armor, be it either Boromir-like metal armoring, or Aragorn-like light leather armoring. I include all fan art, book covers, official merch, DragonCon renderings and cosplay, CCG card game, WoT PC game. He was never in 30+ years rendered as a samurai.

AFAIK, Lan wasn't in the PC game. The setting was hundreds of YEARS before the books.
@CaddySedai, can you confirm whether Lan was in the video game, and not just as a difficulty setting?

This picture he's wearing a leather vest, looking like Aragorn.


This cover shows him in regular clothing.

 

Oh look, here's one from the comics where he's not wearing any armor.

Oh gosh, what about this one!

This cover of Newspring?


And the "Lan's NEVER in 30 years been rendered as a samurai"? First... Lets be real, what he's wearing isn't even from Japan...
But I mean, we do have this cover which is somewhat reminiscent of a "samurai" look.

 

1 hour ago, redgiant said:

Why on earth would they feel the need to even say that: "character of the same name"? Guilty conscience? Because when they link outside their bubble (in this case to wot.fandom.com) to content not retcon'd to match the TV show, the disparity will be jarring?

 

Big leap of logic here.
First, it's a bloody wiki, editable... by literally anyone. It's not an admission of guilt from Rafe Judkins. Every character in the tv show is going to be an adaptation of the BOOK character.
Second, You realize everyone uses his short hand name "Lan", few refer to him by his whole bloody name.
Just like most of us just say "Nynaeve" instead of el'Nynaeve ti al'Meara Mandragoran.
Third, we'll get his whole name dropped during an episode, but everyone's just going to call him Lan, or Lan Daddy.

 

 

1 hour ago, redgiant said:

Lan's armor is one specific area I will concede more latitude despite all of the above being true. The book text often doesn't say what exactly he is wearing for armor and protection, and his sword forms and toughness are more important overall. And I will also agree that Sweet's TEotW cover establishes the armor look (also promulgated in the card game and PC game) where the book contents don't specifically support it as much. But we are all products of what we have been told and shown over a few decades.

The book covers are never, and have never been canonical.

 

[DojoToad]

22 minutes ago, SinisterDeath said:

The book covers are never, and have never been canonical.

Yet you show several book covers to prove your point.  Hmmm.

 

And you obviously missed Eye of the World - where Lan is shown in heavy plate armor.  May not be canon, but it was my first impression of Lan - and it stuck, even if there was little mention of the armor (any?) after the first book.

 

Chapter 49 - "The Dark One Stirs".  Page 619 in the hardcover - "When he came back now, more often than not there were gashes in his armor..."

 

Edited September 17, 2021 by DojoToad

[Skipp]

3 minutes ago, DojoToad said:

Yet you show several book covers to prove your point.  Hmmm.

 

And you obviously missed Eye of the World - where Lan is shown in heavy plate armor.  May not be canon, but it was my first impression of Lan - and it stuck, even if there was little mention of the armor (any?) after the first book.

 

Page 619 in the hardcover - "When he came back now, more often than not there were gashes in his armor..."

 

By that logic Nic Cage should have been casted as Rand and we should have 4 boys leaving the village.

 

And to your previous post I don't believe Lan is described as wearing armour anywhere in the first book, even in the blight.

Edited September 17, 2021 by Skipp

[DojoToad]

7 minutes ago, Skipp said:

By that logic Nic Cage should have been casted as Rand and we should have 4 boys leaving the village.

 

And to your previous post I don't believe Lan is described as wearing armour anywhere in the first book, even in the blight.

Look at the post again - chapter 49 specifically mentions gashes in his armor.  Can't get more clear than that.

 

Try again, Skipp.

Edited September 17, 2021 by DojoToad

[SinisterDeath]

16 minutes ago, DojoToad said:

Yet you show several book covers to prove your point.  Hmmm.

Yes, because I was specifically addressing this.

  

1 hour ago, redgiant said:

Other than recent images of Daniel, there are no images over the decades of this series where Lan *isn't* shown with some form or armor, 

Context is important. This isn't the "gotcha" you think it is. ? 

 

16 minutes ago, DojoToad said:

And you obviously missed Eye of the World - where Lan is shown in heavy plate armor.  May not be canon, but it was my first impression of Lan - and it stuck, even if there was little mention of the armor (any?) after the first book.

And as I said, the covers aren't Canonical. 

How many swords does Lan carry on him?

Why is Loial only a head taller than Rand? Where's all his furry hair?


When has Perrin ever had red hair, and wore a headband? Where's his curly dark hair?



Aviendha wasn't with Rand during this scene. Should have bene Min.

 

16 minutes ago, DojoToad said:

Page 619 in the hardcover - "When he came back now, more often than not there were gashes in his armor..."

As for Lan wearing armor in the book itself, find me a description that implies he's wearing heavy plate armor?
 

[CaddySedai]

@SinisterDeath

 

So the game does not even feature Lan, or Rand. Its based earlier in the timeline and the creators and Jordan made the decision that the game is in a portal stone world. 

 

So it exists as canon, and at the same time has zero impact on the books as a whole. 

 

I mean at the end of it your character, since being raised to Amrylin, takes the seals to the Dark One’s prison at Shayol Ghul and weaves their ability to break him free out of them. So that he cannot be released manually until the prophesied return of the Dragon and their eventual conflict at the Last Battle. 

 

And before people say it has nothing to do with characters we know - you battle Ishamael during the course of the game. 

[Skipp]

24 minutes ago, DojoToad said:

Look at the post again - chapter 49 specifically mentions gashes in his armor.  Can't get more clear than that.

 

Try again, Skipp.

i had been racking my brain trying to think of a time when he was described as such.  So thanks for pointing it out.   Unfortunately it doesn't tell us what he was wearing.  Could be anything from a leather jerkin to a full breastplate.

Edited September 17, 2021 by Skipp