Interviews and News Articles

[ForsakenPotato]

Reviews can be interesting to read when they take their job seriously and are thoughtful, whether or not they are positive or critical, but I think of them as their own category of content/entertainment. I enjoy reading a review that makes me think about things I hadn't before, but I don't think it has much bearing on how much I enjoy watching or reading the work that is being reviewed. Frankly I'd rather read a well-done critical review of something I like than universal praise, because it's more interesting and shows a willingness to engage with the material in a deeper way -- half of what makes big complex series fun is the conversations they start!

[Skipp]

Here is an interesting post on the WoT Show reddit.

 

This user has complied most of the major reviews out there and compares them with the author's previous works and it has seemed to match my own conclusions. Authors that tend to review genre type shows review WoT more favourably, Where as the authors who reviewed the show negatively, for the most part, either rarely review genre TV or review genre TV negatively often.  The redditor has done a rather nice deep dive into this.

 

While this is ultimately a small sample size, a total of 28 reviews it quite an interesting look.

 

[NinjaPowers975]

This whole clean vs dirty thing with the production design is really just an aesthetic taste issue, I think. 

 

Like, go watch David Lynch's Dune, then watch the new version. The art direction in the David Lynch version is much more vibrant with colors everywhere. It's not really meant to resemble real life. The new one is harsh, spare, empty... Still good, but very different. I actually prefer the look of the Lynch version, even though the new one is a better telling of the story. 

 

I think with fantasy and historical shows we've gotten in a loop where critics (and maybe even some fans) think everything needs to look "real" to be good. But actually "real" is not objectively better than more stylized settings. 

 

This adaptation of WOT blasts you with color and contrast. It's almost like the Wizard of Oz or something... Very, very stylized with images that pop. More like a cartoon in motion than any attempt to faithfully recreate reality, at least based on the trailers. 

 

Some of the critics seem to pick up on this, and those have praised the production design. Others are totally missing the distinction. 

 

Overall I think this bright, colorful, vibrant style is more true to the vision of the books, and I'm glad they went that way, even though it's clearly hurting the critical reception some. 

Edited November 18, 2021 by NinjaPowers975

[AdamA]

I wonder what this will look like in a few months when the season is over. This is sort of reminding me of the initial response to The Witcher. If you go back and count only the reviews on Rotten Tomatoes that came out when it premiered or during the critics preview period, it had 27 out of 51 positive. That's only 53% positive. Yet now it's at 68% because the reviews that came out later were overwhelmingly positive. There were some really mean-spirited early reviews by people that seemed hostile to the idea that Netflix was even trying to make a successful fantasy series as if, and this is probably true from a pure business perspective, they were just trying to cash in on whatever popular property they could in the wake of Game of Thrones and it offended the critics that this is what television has become.

[themann1086]

My fiance and I just rewatched S1 of The Witcher this week to both kill time and prep for S2 which I think drops the same week as Episode 7 of WoT? Anyway, The Witcher is super confusing on a first watch but it all pulls together decently well by the end. So I'm not surprised that initial reviews weren't very positive.

 

3 hours to go before everyone can decide for themselves!

[NinjaPowers975]

14 minutes ago, Skipp said:

Here is an interesting post on the WoT Show reddit.

 

This user has complied most of the major reviews out there and compares them with the author's previous works and it has seemed to match my own conclusions. Authors that tend to review genre type shows review WoT more favourably, Where as the authors who reviewed the show negatively, for the most part, either rarely review genre TV or review genre TV negatively often.  The redditor has done a rather nice deep dive into this.

 

While this is ultimately a small sample size, a total of 28 reviews it quite an interesting look.

 

 

 

Yeah I saw this. It was a pretty cool breakdown, and kind of confirmed something I had been suspecting since sometime yesterday. There seemed to be this big divide between "nerd" media, and more traditional outlets. 

 

Seems like this show, at least in the first season, mostly appeals to people who already like fantasy or science fiction, and doesn't cross over all that well with people who don't. Which probably shouldn't be surprising since EOTW generally has less crossover appeal than almost any book in the series.  

 

I LOVE Eye of the World. I loved it back then, and I love it now. So many great scenes. I enjoyed all the traveling, and the constant struggle to survive while on the run. I really liked the horror elements too. When I first read it way back in the day I was mostly a horror fiction fan, and the scene at the farmhouse with Rand and Tam at the beginning just hooked me like a fish. 

 

But no matter how cool EOTW is, at least to people like me, there's no denying that it only has a tiny fraction of the elements that ultimately make this series really great. 

Edited November 18, 2021 by NinjaPowers975

[AdamA]

6 minutes ago, NinjaPowers975 said:

This whole clean vs dirty thing with the production design is really just an aesthetic taste issue, I think. 

 

...

 

Overall I think this bright, colorful, vibrant style is just more true to the vision of the books, and I'm glad they went that way, even though it's clearly hurting the critical reception some. 

I find this an interesting dynamic, too. It has left me wondering what the reception to something like The Wizard of Oz would be like these days. The earlier comment about The Dark Knight was pretty spot on. I really liked that movie and it was novel for its time, like wow, a comic book movie can just look like an old-school crime epic that happens to have Batman and the Joker in it, but no silliness. It reminds me of the great reception to The Mandalorian. People were so fed up with the bloat and ridiculousness of the mainline Star Wars movies, and here comes an old school western "criminal with a heart of gold taking care of a kid" like someone made Bounty Law from Once Upon a Time in Hollywood, but happened to set it in the Star Wars universe.

 

And I like The Mandalorian, but there is something fundamentally less ambitious about "take some traditional form of drama but set it in a fantasy universe" while downplaying all of the fantasy elements. Anyone who wants that can wait for House of the Dragon, which is just going to be Succession if the Roys had dragons. But someone needs to at least try to make fantasy that is still fantastic and doesn't shy away from all the fantasy elements.

[Skipp]

16 minutes ago, NinjaPowers975 said:

This whole clean vs dirty thing with the production design is really just an aesthetic taste issue, I think. 

 

Like, go watch David Lynch's Dune, then watch the new version. The art direction in the David Lynch version is much more vibrant with colors everywhere. It's not really meant to resemble real life. The new one is harsh, spare, empty... Still good, but very different. I actually prefer the look of the Lynch version, even though the new one is a better telling of the story. 

 

 

 

This.... this is exactly what I have been thinking.  The Show is clean and Vibrant because that's the interpretation they are taking from the books.  While I understand why that can be off putting to some of the audience it is not an objectively bad thing.  Same idea that everything needs to be grimdark to be taken seriously.

[Agitel]

Surprisingly, colorful dyes did exist in sixteenth century Europe. And the even bigger shock is that reality did not have light filtered through a cool-hued lens at that time, either!

[Mnemosyne]

2 hours ago, Skipp said:

While yes the costumes are cleaner and more vibrant, GoT has a very serious issue of everyone wearing Black/Brown and the camera has a cold filter seemingly at all times, it is clearly a stylistic choice.

 

And in the same review, the writer talks about how refreshing it is that WoT is not another "grimdark" series... well the costumes are part of that change in vibe.

[king of nowhere]

1 hour ago, NinjaPowers975 said:

This whole clean vs dirty thing with the production design is really just an aesthetic taste issue, I think. 

 

Like, go watch David Lynch's Dune, then watch the new version. The art direction in the David Lynch version is much more vibrant with colors everywhere. It's not really meant to resemble real life. The new one is harsh, spare, empty... Still good, but very different. I actually prefer the look of the Lynch version, even though the new one is a better telling of the story. 

 

I think with fantasy and historical shows we've gotten in a loop where critics (and maybe even some fans) think everything needs to look "real" to be good. But actually "real" is not objectively better than more stylized settings. 

 

This adaptation of WOT blasts you with color and contrast. It's almost like the Wizard of Oz or something... Very, very stylized with images that pop. More like a cartoon in motion than any attempt to faithfully recreate reality, at least based on the trailers.

and yet, i never understood this thing and i don't think i ever will.

maybe reality lacks bright colors?

I guess this must be fake then. totally unbelievable, taken from a children's book. 1/10, would not watch it.

Or perhaps reality can't be clean? Maybe I should try that argument with my mom when she complains about the mess in my room...

 

I don't really notice that kind of thing. then i was made to notice, and i watched a trailer from GoT. And I immediately noticed that "grimdark" there translated in every character being dressed in some shade of grey or black, and every wall being whitewashed grey, or black.

I found it funny, how they went out of their way to take color away from everything, just because it's supposed to be "real". it doesn't make sense. not even in hystorical context: the palaces of the rich were brightly colored

are people aware that, before time destroied the pigments, the parthenon looked something like this?

[DaddyFinn]

2 hours ago, NinjaPowers975 said:

This adaptation of WOT blasts you with color and contrast. It's almost like the Wizard of Oz or something... Very, very stylized with images that pop. More like a cartoon in motion than any attempt to faithfully recreate reality, at least based on the trailers. 

I disagree. Real life IS colorful and vibrant depending where you are, what weather and time of day it is etc.

Edited November 18, 2021 by DaddyFinn

[Agitel]

This might be a rash judgment, but I wonder how many of these reviewers complaining about colors have their TV display set to Vivid, which by default is amped up to way oversaturated colors and hues and is not at all how cinema or television intends you to watch their product. I calibrated my TVs color settings years ago, and nothing I've seen in the trailers looks oversaturated or too colorful to me. It just doesn't look all gray and brown.

Edited November 18, 2021 by Agitel

[ManetherenTaveren]

2 hours ago, Skipp said:

 

The Show is clean and Vibrant because that's the interpretation they are taking from the books.  While I understand why that can be off putting to some of the audience it is not an objectively bad thing.  Same idea that everything needs to be grimdark to be taken seriously.

I'm looking forward to examining this raised issue, although I doubt it will matter this season. Once the bubbles of evil start occurring and the land's taint becomes omnipresent, I'm sure the color contrasts will change....or at least it should approach a serious "grimdark." 

[king of nowhere]

14 minutes ago, ManetherenTaveren said:

I'm looking forward to examining this raised issue, although I doubt it will matter this season. Once the bubbles of evil start occurring and the land's taint becomes omnipresent, I'm sure the color contrasts will change....or at least it should approach a serious "grimdark." 

the end is nigh! put on your black cloak, everyone!

[Skipp]

Daniel's Greene's Non spoiler review of Eps 1-3 and his spoiler review of Episode 1.

 

 

[ArrylT]

 

This reviewer really liked the look of the Trollocs (4:50).  ?

 

[Elgee]

On 11/18/2021 at 10:51 PM, NinjaPowers975 said:

This whole clean vs dirty thing with the production design is really just an aesthetic taste issue, I think. 

 

I agree. Also, if they look further than the first 10 minutes into the first episode, people get plenty dirty.

I have lots and lots of other criticisms about the show, but that one isn't one of them.

[Maximillion]

13 hours ago, ArrylT said:

 

This reviewer really liked the look of the Trollocs (4:50).  ?

 

 

Thanks for the time stamp - that woman has a hard time getting to the point.  Jeez.

[carr1934]

Not a review but a longtime fan reflecting on the books, WoTmania, and the challenge of adaptation: 

"The real world grows up around us, but the make-believe worlds that exist in black ink on white pages are ours, and ours alone, to colour in. What readers imagine is unique, fiercely held, and impossible to replicate. Adaptations destroy these individually created pictures by forcing new images on us—ones that become virtually impossible to unsee."
https://thewalrus.ca/wheel-of-time-tv/

[Vambram]

Here is an excellent interview of Marcus Rutherford from radiotimes.com. This gives a decent in depth look into Marcus and also Perrin. 

 

https://www. radiotimes.com/tv/fantasy/Marcus-rutherford-the-wheel-of-time-rt-interview/

 

[ArrylT]

https://popculture.com/streaming/news/the-wheel-of-time-co-author-weighs-in-amazon-prime-adaptation-changes/

 

Brandon Sandersons thoughts on adaptation changes (you can also find part of this on reddit WOT)

 

 

[Daenelia]

https://www.theguardian.com/culture/2021/nov/23/the-wheel-of-time-actor-madeleine-madden-as-an-aboriginal-woman-my-life-is-politicised

 

I am about to read this (I should really do some work at some point, but after this: I am concentrating on my work. Promise.)

[MasterAblar]

Hmmm, I don’t necessarily agree with this part: 

 

“Particularly with Egwene and Nynaeve, we really get insight into their thinking and their lives, which we may not necessarily get in the books,”

 

For Nyneave, it’s not wholly wrong, since Nyneave is a character who is so dishonest with herself, both regarding her flaws and her qualities.

 

Egwene on the other hand was not quite like that. I’d argue her character was quite pronounced in the books: fiercely independent, very eager to learn and discover all that she could, unwilling to accept restrictions, certain of herself and confident to a fault.

 

Indeed, so far in the series even though I quite like the actresses’ portrayal I think we’ve yet to really see the bite and assertiveness which characterizes Egwene. Only 3 episodes in of course so not necessarily surprising but so far I get the feeling they softened her character somewhat. 

Edited November 23, 2021 by MasterAblar

[notpropaganda73]

https://decider.com/2021/11/23/the-wheel-of-time-on-prime-video-episode-2-weep-for-manetheren-behind-the-scenes/

 

I think this is a good article for everyone who is complaining about changes from the books, just to highlight what goes on with making a TV show or movie, and how many people are pushing against different ideas and scenes. 

 

This also tells me that Rafe absolutely understands what is important from the books, regardless of how people may be feeling about certain changes so far.