Most of the trailer turned me off; looks like a young adult series

[Sirkassad]

So I've watched the trailer once, and immediately it looked PG-13 at best.  Then I see on Amazon's web page they give it a TV14 which backs up what I saw.  I don't claim to be a WoT expert (read the first book 20 years ago) but I'd be lying if I said this didn't turn me off somewhat.  I'd like to here from the WoT experts as to whether this series is in fact a young adult series and the trailer was accurate.  

[DojoToad]

My opinion as a WoT junkie is that it is not a YA series.  Many changes from book to show but that doesn't necessarily mean inaccurate - just different.

[Elder_Haman]

4 hours ago, Sirkassad said:

I'd like to here from the WoT experts as to whether this series is in fact a young adult series and the trailer was accurate.  

I think it's important for this conversation that you define your terms. "Young Adult" was not really an established thing at the time that EotW came out in 1990. But Jordan did market his books to younger readers and notably eschews lurid descriptions of sex and violence.

 

When I think of "Young Adult" shows and series, I think of things like the Arrowverse on CW, Shadow & Bone, or Twilight. What makes these things YA to me is not the fact that they cast young, attractive actors, but that the focus of the plot tends to be on romantic relationships and most of the character tension is driven by shifts in the landscapes of those relationships. The plot itself is often secondary to the romantic relationships, serving mostly as a backdrop against which the passions play out.

 

Wheel of Time is not that. And nothing about what I saw in the trailer makes me think it's going to be that. Rafe said that you can watch the series with teenagers, which leads me to believe that they were smart and did not choose to follow the sexposition trend. 

 

So are there elements that are "YA", sure. But Wheel of Time is in many ways far "grittier" than LotR. To me, it looks like they are trying really hard to actually capture the essence of these books. 

[king of nowhere]

this is a new avenue for me. I can assume maybe people see something that does not contain gratuitous violence/nudity, thinks "this is YA material", and immediately associate it to goofy teenagers succeeding against people more mature and competent than they are for no reason, and love triangles melodrama.

but it's not a very balanced way to look at this. And slapping in a pair of tits and a disembowlement in a trailer just to show that "they are serious" does not seem a particularly trustworthy thing either.

 

I mean, maybe they do not put boobs and disembowlement because they have a childish plot targeted to children.

Or maybe they do put boobs and disembolwements because they have no plot and are trying to compensate with fanservice.

Either way, the presence/absence of b&d does not tell you anything about the plot's quality. You'll just have to take the risk.

[Feon Ceseth]

I thought I read somewhere that the characters in the show were all aged up in order to try and prevent the YA tags.

[JJLXL]

s=20https://twitter.com/TheWheelOfTime/status/1433534444170735634?s=20

 

This has me a bit disappointed. I get it, but the confirmation of YA is disheartening. 

[Agitel]

8 hours ago, JJLXL said:

s=20https://twitter.com/TheWheelOfTime/status/1433534444170735634?s=20

 

This has me a bit disappointed. I get it, but the confirmation of YA is disheartening. 

 

It doesn't mean it'll have common themes targeted at a YA audience. It just means it is not sexually .explicit or have gratuitous gorey depictions, or much vulgar language. And it'll probably still have more "mature-only" content than the books.

 

Edit: See Sinister's description of the raring below. I was not clear in the above, but I meant "not as much" of these things as compared to a Mature rating. I did not mean it wouldn't have them at all.

Edited September 6, 2021 by Agitel

[SinisterDeath]

4 hours ago, Agitel said:

 

It doesn't mean it'll have common themes targeted at a YA audience. It just means it is not sexually explicit or have gratuitous gorey depictions, or much vulgar language. And it'll probably still have more "mature-only" content than the books.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/TV_Parental_Guidelines

Quote

This program may be unsuitable for children under 14 years of age.[11]

Programs rated TV-14 contain material that parents or adult guardians may find unsuitable for children under the age of 14.

 

The FCC warns that "Parents are cautioned to exercise some care in monitoring this program and are cautioned against letting children under the age of 14 watch unattended."

 

[11] Programs with this rating contain

intensive suggestive dialogue, strong coarse language, intense sexual situations or intense violence.[12]

 

[Guire]

TBH I don't really care if we see any direct sex or direct nudity.  I assume sweat lodge, bath scenes, blah blah blah will all be changed to allow for lower rating.  Can Trolloc cook pots, flayed Saldeans, and intense battle scenes make it under TV14?  If so then I am good.  

[Agitel]

4 hours ago, SinisterDeath said:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/TV_Parental_Guidelines

 

 

Thank you. I did mean "as much as a mature rating," but that definitely did not come across right in my original post.

[SinisterDeath]

6 hours ago, Agitel said:

 

Thank you. I did mean "as much as a mature rating," but that definitely did not come across right in my original post.

*Shrugs*

I've read a lot of flack over the rating since we found out... A lot of people are acting like TV-14 = PG. But TV-14 is basically the same as PG-13. Meaning partial nudity is allowed (E.g. breasts), and "medium to high-level implied scenes of sexual intercourse".

 

So unlike GoT, we won't have dongs. But we'll probably haves lots of boobs & butts.

[bobert]

This all seems a bit silly. Are we really parsing out nudity predictions. The books always came across to me as PG to PG-13 anyway. If they threw in a bunch of gratuitous nudity and violence, I would say that is deviating from the source material. It would also draw comparisons to GoT which they seem to be trying to avoid.

[flinn]

 The ridiculously bad sex scenes was the worst thing about GoT. If sex scenes are something you look for in a tv show, I think something is wrong with you. Especially in the internet age. All the porn you could possibly want is already at your finger tips.. why does it have to be in a tv show that actually has CONTENT that people should want to see.  Just think... if GoT had cut out all those crap sex scenes and filled it with content instead... would things have been so rushed at the end?

 

 You know how to completely ruin girl on girl sex? Have creepy ass Littlefinger reciting a monologue during it.. GoT had the worst sex scenes of any show I have ever watched.

[king of nowhere]

1 hour ago, flinn said:

 The ridiculously bad sex scenes was the worst thing about GoT. If sex scenes are something you look for in a tv show, I think something is wrong with you. Especially in the internet age. All the porn you could possibly want is already at your finger tips.

 

I belive (hope?) that's not what people are complaining about. the fact that they keep throwing around the words "young adult" like it's the worst possible slur make me inclined to think they are afraid the show will devolve into dumb love triangles melodrama.

Because of course we know there are only two kinds of movies: those with gratuitous sex and violence, and the dumb teens love melodramas, with no other possible options. If wot won't have sex, then it must have some poorly inserted love triangles. (some forums use blue text for sarcasm, not sure if it will be recognized here)

 

Most of those worried about "YA" are vocal complainers, and I'd dismiss them as already deeply prejudiced against the show, and grasping for everything they can find to support their prejudice that the show will suck.

But there are also a few people who say "everything is fine, except the bright colors make me thing this will be YA, and it would be really bad". I don't know, maybe they've been emotionally scarred by something they've seen in the past. I have no other hypothesis on why someone would react so badly to lack of dongs or lack of dirt

[flinn]

20 minutes ago, king of nowhere said:

I belive (hope?) that's not what people are complaining about. the fact that they keep throwing around the words "young adult" like it's the worst possible slur make me inclined to think they are afraid the show will devolve into dumb love triangles melodrama.

Because of course we know there are only two kinds of movies: those with gratuitous sex and violence, and the dumb teens love melodramas, with no other possible options. If wot won't have sex, then it must have some poorly inserted love triangles. (some forums use blue text for sarcasm, not sure if it will be recognized here)

 

Most of those worried about "YA" are vocal complainers, and I'd dismiss them as already deeply prejudiced against the show, and grasping for everything they can find to support their prejudice that the show will suck.

But there are also a few people who say "everything is fine, except the bright colors make me thing this will be YA, and it would be really bad". I don't know, maybe they've been emotionally scarred by something they've seen in the past. I have no other hypothesis on why someone would react so badly to lack of dongs or lack of dirt

 Yeah I have seen people talk about the "lighting" as well. Maybe I am just not seeing what they are seeing, but the trolloc attack on Emonds Field certainly wasnt bright and looked pretty gritty, Shadar Logoth was gritty during the dark scenes, Logain dark and gritty, etc.. In LoTR, the Shire scenes were all bright and colorful as well.

[JJLXL]

5 hours ago, bobert said:

The books always came across to me as PG to PG-13 anyway.

Your memory is not serving you well if you think the books came across as PG-13.  There is arguably way more over the top violence in WoT than in GoT.  Nudity, not so much, but violence is aplenty.  Think Dumai's wells.  Emptying entire villages into Trollock cook pots.  Any scene involving Padan Fain while he's with the shadow souled. Many torture scenes involving Forsaken.   The list goes on and on.  Maybe it was described using PG-13 language, but the scenes were definitely R-rated. I don't know how you get around that on screen without making a lot of changes.

Edited September 6, 2021 by JJLXL
clarity

[Agitel]

17 minutes ago, JJLXL said:

Your memory is not serving you well if you think the books came across as PG-13.  There is arguably way more over the top violence in WoT than in GoT.  Nudity, not so much, but violence is aplenty.  Think Dumai's wells.  Emptying entire villages into Trollock cook pots.  Any scene involving Padan Fain while he's with the shadow souled. Many torture scenes involving Forsaken.   The list goes on and on.  Maybe it was described using PG-13 language, but the scenes were definitely R-rated. I don't know how you get around that on screen without making a lot of changes.

 

And all of that except Dumai's Wells I can easily see how to do justice to at a  TV-14 rating.

Edited September 6, 2021 by Agitel

[king of nowhere]

villages getting exterminated and eaten is no problem. as long as you don't show it happening. just have the characters stumble upon an empty village with blood splattered around. have someone ask where are the bodies, and someone else more knowledgeable state that the trollocs brought them for food. Have a character look into a coockpot and vomit; you don't need to show the actual content of the coockpot.

 

most torture is done with the power, which makes it extremely easy to keep tv-14. the villain channels inside the victim, the victim screams in pain. you don't have to show anything. rapes can be implied without being shown, just like in the books.

 

dumai's wells? i think they can show piles of corpses, as long as the camera does not go close enough to see many details.

 

just like the R-rated scenes can be described using pg-13 language, they can also be filmed in such a way, without taking anything away from the story

[flinn]

 Fairy tales are mostly G rated and there are some pretty dark themes. It is how it is presented, not so much the content itself. The way it was presented in WoT was more teenage friendly, if you want to call it YA, then maybe so. I will say this, the relationships are about as YA as it gets. I am very glad to see the "kids" aged up and the relationships more mature. The Egwene relationship was just silly. At their age, they would have already been married or definitely having a physical relationships.. What else is there to do for teenagers in a small village?

[Agitel]

4 hours ago, flinn said:

The Egwene relationship was just silly. At their age, they would have already been married or definitely having a physical relationships.. What else is there to do for teenagers in a small village?

 

This attitude strikes me as anachronistic, but perhaps a modern audience literally can't view it as realistic.

[king of nowhere]

7 hours ago, flinn said:

The Egwene relationship was just silly. At their age, they would have already been married or definitely having a physical relationships.. What else is there to do for teenagers in a small village?

this is a very ethnocentric view; other cultures may work differently. Actually, it doesn't hold much water even under an ethnocentric perspective.

I mean, in today's western world, if rand and egwene have been together for years, there's no reason for them to not have sex. Unless they are deeply religious.

In the western world 100 years ago, there would be no reason for them to still be unmarried. Well, a lot of girls married around 15-16, but not all of them, and a couple waiting a bit more was not so unusual. Though, with egwene approaching 20, there would be a strong social pressure for her to be married already.

Actually, that pressure to be married was because there was constant need for more children, as most of them were lost to sickness and many others were lost to war. randland has fairly advanced medicine and child mortality is much lower than we had in our preindustrial society, and they've seen no wars in centuries, so there would be no such social pressure.

And let's not even start talking about other cultures, I'm not enough of an expert there. But there are places where somebody would look at this and think "this is silly, egwene's parents should have arranged her marriage by the time she was 12", and others that would be like "two single adults alone together without any kind of chaperone? scandalous!!!".

 

ultimately, this is a book where there is a culture making widespread use of slaves, but being quite egalitarian and meritocratic otherwise. A culture of people who could easily conquer the whole world, but choose not to; they don't know why, but they have 12 chiefs who tell them they should not, and they follow. A culture where, for three days every year, people go out in the streets and have sex with random foreigners, while they are quite prudish at any other time. the place is commanded by an organization of magicians that's heavily infiltrated by darkfriends, who could easily root them out, but they don't because they find the very concept shaming.

And your suspension of disbelied fails on whether a couple of young people who are maybe-sorta-into-a-relationship have sex or not?

[johnnysd]

On 9/4/2021 at 2:24 AM, Sirkassad said:

So I've watched the trailer once, and immediately it looked PG-13 at best.  Then I see on Amazon's web page they give it a TV14 which backs up what I saw.  I don't claim to be a WoT expert (read the first book 20 years ago) but I'd be lying if I said this didn't turn me off somewhat.  I'd like to here from the WoT experts as to whether this series is in fact a young adult series and the trailer was accurate.  

 

TV-14 is MUCH different than PG-13. TV-14 allows nudity and sexual situations and bloody violence. It actually seems to be tougher on language than PG-13. Also, streaming TV is not rating shows per episode so only the first episode is TV-14 for sure but likely first 3. Rafe has also said they may do different versions with different ratings so that might happen as well.

 

In my view YA has nothing to with ratings. YA is typically about relationships especially FMM love triangles and that is not what WoT is.

[thehumantrashcan]

2 hours ago, johnnysd said:

In my view YA has nothing to with ratings. YA is typically about relationships especially FMM love triangles and that is not what WoT is.

But we are good with the love square (MFFF) of Rand, Min, Elayne, and Avi right? ?  

 

Just kidding.  I agree, no annoying back and forth will they/won't they, Jacob/Edward, Peeta/Gale, etc.  If they add that to the story we will be in YA land and that will be incredibly annoying.

 

So far so good.

[Guest redgiant]

Every YA show has certain commonalities:

 

1. Young people are more valuable/able to get things done/save the world than older adults. Note that while WoT has a natural plot point about the 20-somethings that might be the Dragon, it is a specific plot issue backed up by all sorts of back story and history. And they do not by any means just start off in charge and running things. So that does not mean WoT has to trend YA unless the showrunners make it so.

 

2. The reason for (1) is almost never explained in these shows, since well it can't be. Stories with YA heroes/heroines just seem to place them in that position boom.

 

3. Almost nothing seems "earned"; young kids are just gifted with doing the right things or having abilities with no sense of what journey they took to get them. They just sublime into their roles or powers without the burdens of the "real world" interfering in their grand adventure.

 

4. Snarky comments even in dire situations abound. Everything is a cute joke, and no real darkness can prevent a snide, eye-rolling dialog line.

 

5. Complete twits are often portrayed as young scientist geniuses or maverick fighters or whatever the story needs, utterly belying the demeanor and skills and inner strength it would actually take to be that character. Another words, they are vaccuous given the heft of the role they are supposedly inhabiting.

 

6. The cast defies statistics in its youthfulness. Sometimes they try to explain it away in the plot like Maze Runner, but the main cast is usually devoid of adults in anywhere near the proportion it would realistically be.

 

7. Light plot like romantic relationships and other surface/vanity topics take center0stage more than the weighty issues that in reality would dominate their situations. Teen myopia, let's call it. No matter the period or setting, these shows focus on the same things real-life teens focus on.

 

Just because an actor is young does not at all mean they act YA-ish. The GoT kids were some of the best overall actors I have ever seen of any age, and really conveyed the serious crap they were in most of the time. In particular, Masie Williams.

Edited October 4, 2021 by redgiant

[JaimAybara]

More than anything I just don’t want it to feel too cheesy. YA in the fantasy world at large within recent years comes off as sophomoric and one dimensional. LotR had no nudity at all, no sexual content at all really beyond a kiss here and there, and yet it felt very adult at times, carried weight, and became a standard many want to achieve and hopefully surpass. 

 

YA fantasy to me, particularly in recent years, is like one of the weak versions or slim chance realities of the real world that the portal stone takes Rand to. It’s kinda the same, but also pales in comparison. It’s hard to quantify why it isn’t as good, but you know it is not, there is always something or multiple somethings that are odd or off that you can’t fully put into words, but you instinctively want to rebuke. 
 

Haha sorry if this is an enigmatic take on it, but if they can avoid the campiness that was in Twilight, Hunger Games, and some of the Harry Potter’s, then I think they will avoid most of what people are worried about.