How did the show hold up for you?

[ArrylT]

3 hours ago, ArrylT said:

I mentioned this either earlier here or on a different thread - but the likely only way that another adaptation of WOT comes around is if this one is successful & drives the franchise forward.

 

The longer this series lasts, the more fans it will bring to the Wheel of Time Franchise.  The more fans, the more the financial appeal of doing another adaptation comes to be likely.   GOT got lots of negative pushback on their last seasons but on the whole the majority of the fantasy community enjoyed the show and now they're going to get more GOT.  

 

Why do you think DC & Marvel movies keep getting made?  Because the franchise is constantly growing - and with it the merchandise & financial reasons to keep doing so.

 

Same with Star Wars / Star Trek.   Doctor Who.

 

Franchises that end on positive notes get fans keeping the nostalgia alive.  Which leads to new adaptations, new stories and so forth.

 

Franchises that have fans actively trying to hate on or ruin it cause the franchise die.   

 

There is absolutely nothing wrong with disliking the show, having a lot of negative criticism of the show or disappointment in how certain aspects are portrayed.   That is not what I am talking about - I'm only talking about people who do nothing to solve problems and go out of their way to send hate to the show and/or its fans.

 

Don't be like this darkfriend

 

 

Thankfully it seems to me that the majority of people are having good reactions to and love becoming a part of the WOT community.     The amount of positive interaction I've seen on Twitter & Youtube is very heartening, and I think exactly what Robert Jordan would have wanted.   And lots of these fans will then turn to the books. 

 

So I am pretty appreciative of most of the people here on DM who dislike WOT the show since it does not seem like many of them have any desire to ruin it for others - simply want an adaptation that they themselves can enjoy.

 

And like I said - that can come provided this franchise continues to grow - and that simply means accepting and allowing this adaptation to run its course.   But Chris there is unfortunately the deluded one if he thinks killing the show after S2 will allow for a reboot in 15 years when it took 30 years to get this made.  It took 20 years to get LOTR made after the animated ones and that franchise is the granddaddy of all fantasy franchises.  It took 30 years to get Hobbit after the animated hobbit.  

 

We're simply not going to get another adaptation if this one gets sabotaged.   

 

Those kinds of people have a lot more in common with either White Cloaks or Forsaken than they realize (since both put either personal desire or their own agenda over the greater good).

 

[JenniferL]

15 minutes ago, ArrylT said:

 

Yes 22 years later on a fantasy franchise that has sold 150+ million copies not including merchandise.  And that specific film despite bad critic (not fan) reviews still ended up making a profit, get nominated for awards and was partially doomed by poor marketing & executive decisions.   The film itself had an influence on the next adaptation (which as we know did not get 100% fan approval).    But at no point was LOTR under attack from its own fans.   

 

Nor was it killed off mid-production.

 

The animated version is the first half of the trilogy. They never made the second movie, even though the first was profitable, because the fan backlash was so bad. 
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lord_of_the_Rings_(1978_film)

 

[ArrylT]

2 minutes ago, JenniferL said:

 

The animated version is the first half of the trilogy. They never made the second movie, even though the first was profitable, because the fan backlash was so bad. 
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lord_of_the_Rings_(1978_film)

 

 

I have no desire to argue and apologize if it comes off as that.   I simply do not read or interpret it as that.  I see it that the marketing / executive decisions made it so fans did not know a sequel was happening and that is where the backlash is from - not on the film quality itself.     I know that I myself really enjoyed the film (although I saw it years later).  

[JenniferL]

No worries. I think it’s become more appreciated over time. I run the High Fantasy track at DragonCon and the last time we did a panel on this movie the room was standing room only. 

[ArrylT]

14 minutes ago, JenniferL said:

No worries. I think it’s become more appreciated over time. I run the High Fantasy track at DragonCon and the last time we did a panel on this movie the room was standing room only. 

 

Having been a volunteer at a local Comic Con I can only say thanks for all that you do to make things like DragonCon a success.

 

[flinn]

 Growing up, I watched the cartoon every year. Back then it was played once a year.

[SinisterDeath]

11 hours ago, JenniferL said:

 

Honestly, I’m enjoying the show, but I agree with this. “You better say you like this or at least stay quiet so we can get a better version when they inevitably reboot it twenty years from now” is a nonsensical argument. There’s plenty of things that were highly praised and aren’t being rebooted. It’s completely fine to dislike the adaptation as long as you aren’t being a jackass to the people who do like it. 

Aliens: Resurrection - Considered an absolute disaster.

• AvP
• AvP2
• Prometheus 
• Alien: Covenant

Star Trek: Nemesis - Hated by fans and critics alike. (I actually liked it...)

• Star Trek (New Kirk)
• Star Trek Into Darkness
• Star Trek Beyond
• TV Series: Enterprise
• TV Series: Discovery
• TV Series: Picard
• TV Series: Lower Decks
• TV Series: Prodigy

Star Wars Prequels - Reviled by Fans.

• Star Wars VII
• Star Wars VIII
• Star Wars IX - Also hated by fans
• Mandalorian
• Clone Wars
• Rogue One
• Plus many more.

 

One thing that differentiates these from Lord of the Rings, is that they all had 2+ films that were wildly popular and financial successes before one came out that fans loathed.

It sounds like the70s  LoTR Films were financially successful but not liked by fans? ~30 years later we got a live action movie, huge success. Then the Hobbit came out. Now we're getting a TV Series no one asked for.

 

On the Fan Hate side of things, nothing's hated nearly as much by fans then the new Star Wars Trilogy. Yet, that franchise still lives on.

Meanwhile tons of movies that deserve a sequel, never get one. Some Trilogies never get a 2nd Trilogy. Great TV series live and die for inexplicable reasons. (Firefly) 

 

Hollywood is a weird place. 

 

In many ways I'm thankful this series is on Amazon instead of Netflix. 

Netflix will pick up any new series or show, but they'll cancel it at the drop of a hat. 

I can't say if Amazon's record for cancelling shows is any better, but I suspect they' got a bigger budget from Amazon then if they'd gone with Netflix.

 

Back to the topic at hand of how has the show held up for me?

 

Definitely go with what Brandon Sanderson said about another Turning. 

It's an Adaptation of the books, set in another turning of the wheel, where people attempted to do better this rebirth.

What they didn't realize is, that the DF's and Forsaken are going to do better as well. (Perhaps we'll get less incompetent Forsaken?)

[Yojimbo]

1 hour ago, SinisterDeath said:

 

Back to the topic at hand of how has the show held up for me?

 

Definitely go with what Brandon Sanderson said about another Turning. 

It's an Adaptation of the books, set in another turning of the wheel, where people attempted to do better this rebirth.

What they didn't realize is, that the DF's and Forsaken are going to do better as well. (Perhaps we'll get less incompetent Forsaken?)

This is just another way of them saying they didn't know how to tell the actual story from RJ's books.  It is the exact same excuse that was used for the Dark Tower movie, which was absolute dreck and should never have seen the light of day. 

[TheDreadReader]

3 minutes ago, Yojimbo said:

This is just another way of them saying they didn't know how to tell the actual story from RJ's books.  It is the exact same excuse that was used for the Dark Tower movie, which was absolute dreck and should never have seen the light of day. 

 

Excepting, perhaps, that the story remains largely the same with various pieces changed to fit the change in format with allowances for production factors as well.

 

I'm using story in a semi-technical sense of events happening over time with plot being the causal connections between story events. 

 

The characters still left the two rivers, they still traveled to SL, they still split off into separate groups, and now they are assembling back together before continuing on to their next big story beat.  All that remains the same, even if they have not hit all the same location marks or included the same minor characters they meet along the way.   That's what they did in the books and that is what they do in the show.

 

It largely boils down to they had to change some things along the way and how significant those changes are along the way.   Some will find the changes off-putting and others won't.  Ultimately, "they didn't know how to tell the actual story" becomes a semi-meaningless phrase after the 100th time you've seen it because they are telling the "actual story" per my definition above.  The fact that they may have skipped over Bearlon (for example) doesn't change the actual story all that much (even if I would have included it if I were writing the adaptation) because not a lot of significant things actually happened there that you can't include elsewhere.

 

I still hate the phrase "another turning of the wheel" and I wish BS never said it.   It makes me want to scream on the inside whenever I see it.    

 

 

[Gothic Flame]

1 hour ago, TheDreadReader said:

I still hate the phrase "another turning of the wheel" and I wish BS never said it.   It makes me want to scream on the inside whenever I see it.    

He may be feeling empathy for the book fans. After all if someone came along wanting to make a movie from his own books, but the director changed the characterization of some of the characters I think it's fair to say he wouldn't be happy about it.

[TheDreadReader]

Just now, Gothic Flame said:

He may be feeling empathy for the book fans. After all if someone came along wanting to make a movie from his own books, but the director changed the characterization of some of the characters I think it's fair to say he wouldn't be happy about it.

 

Well, I'm a book fan too and I hate the phrase.   One's view on the show does not indicate ownership of the term "book fan" or not.   

 

Also, BS was open to changing the gender of a major character in adaptation of one of his one works.  So, he is not inherently against changes for adaptation in the big picture.  That can be seen in the overall direction of his comments related to season 1.   His most specific criticism of the show was for one change (which I happen to generally agree with).

 

I think the fan community did more damage repeating the phrase over and over without explaining what they meant by it.  But, that is just the way that the cookie crumbles.  

 

 

 

 

 

[DaddyFinn]

I like to think this show as a portal stone world

[shiningwalls]

To me the show doesn’t qualify as an “adaptation” of the books; it’s at best a work of fan fiction that uses the characters and the mythology from the books (albeit with great liberties taken) to create something that bears only a superficial resemblance to the source material.

Many who like the show defend the points of departure from the books by saying that the books are too long and detailed to be realistically adapted for the screen given time and other limitations, hence changes are inevitable.

I agree that it’s not realistic to expect every detail in the books to be adapted for the screen; many exclusions are undoubtedly necessary.

But that certainly does NOT entail making new stuff up in place of the original material! Here’s the thing that truly baffles me about each and every episode. If the running time of each episode is such a precious resource, why does it get padded up with stuff that doesn’t even appear in the books, thereby pushing out stories and details that actually do, and which arguably make a bigger impact to the larger arc?

For example, why do we need the large part of one episode devoted to the grief of a Warder (Stepin) after the death of his Aes Sedai? Not only was this not in the books, but the Warder and his sister were not even important characters, and the details of the Warder bond are arguably not one of those that are truly critical to the larger story arc and the mythology (unlike say, the fact that the Dragon Reborn is a male channeler who has to contend with the taint on saidin). (Even the details of the funeral/grieving scenes were almost all made up for the show and do not appear in the books, e.g. that gratuitous scene of the great serpent ring consigned to flames; the chest-thumping scene etc.)

I get that the grief scenes are human interest drama, which you need for compelling storytelling, but it would be more effective to devote the time to really fleshing out the emotional lives of the main characters – especially when screentime is a scarce resource – than that of secondary characters. Ironically, in the same episode, we have a scene in which wolves come to Perrin and Egwene’s rescue in the Whitecloak camp; but none of the backstory of Perrin’s link with the wolves is explained, not to mention Perrin’s ambivalence over his ability. Right there in the original is a richly drawn psychological portrait of a young man grappling with fear, self-loathing, etc. But all we get on screen are some jump cuts between Perrin’s eyes and attacking wolves, as if that suffices. Apparently, who cares about the main character when you can melodramatize a minor character’s grief instead. 

If the argument is that the books contain a lot of detail, then I would argue that the main task of the director/scriptwriter is mainly in condensing and trimming what is already in the source material, rather than making up new material wholesale.

Especially if the details made up for the show just don’t capture the flavor and the essence of the original. The departures from the books are so radical that watching the show doesn’t give a sense of familiarity from reading the books. (And I don’t mean it in a superficial sense, e.g. that the characters or production design don’t match the mental images I have when reading the books.)

A faithful screen adaptation of a book doesn’t mean it has to replicate every single detail, but it does have to capture the spirit of the original. I’m a huge fan of Tolkien’s LOTR in its original novel form, but I also felt that the Peter Jackson films were a very successful adaptation despite not following the novels to the letter; the essence of the original was well conveyed. Ditto the Harry Potter films. Not so this WoT tv series, which doesn’t do justice to the novels at all.

[SinisterDeath]

1 hour ago, TheDreadReader said:

I still hate the phrase "another turning of the wheel" and I wish BS never said it.   It makes me want to scream on the inside whenever I see it.    

I'm familiar with Robert Jordan's own words regarding other turnings of the wheel, Age Lace, and the grand tapestry analogy he used to explain how names/faces/details change between turnings, while the overall story remains the same one turning of the wheel to the next.

 

We have the creators own words on how other turnings can differ, and in my mind there's nothing wrong with calling it another turn.
It allows for an Adaptation to exist within the same universe, while also allowing for the book, the tv show, the movie, the anime, and the video game to all exist in their own separate turnings of the wheel. 

Using the MCU as an example, employs the multiverse. 

The Marvel Cinematic Universe is different from the Marvel Comic multiverse. Yet, they largely cover many of the same stories.

They're told different ways, with different characters, different faces, different motivations, etc. 

[TheDreadReader]

43 minutes ago, SinisterDeath said:

I'm familiar with Robert Jordan's own words regarding other turnings of the wheel, Age Lace, and the grand tapestry analogy he used to explain how names/faces/details change between turnings, while the overall story remains the same one turning of the wheel to the next.

 

We have the creators own words on how other turnings can differ, and in my mind there's nothing wrong with calling it another turn.
It allows for an Adaptation to exist within the same universe, while also allowing for the book, the tv show, the movie, the anime, and the video game to all exist in their own separate turnings of the wheel. 

 

 

True.  I personally hate the term when applied to the tv show adaptation because it is a relatively meaningless one unless you start figuring out how significant the range of changes are to what RJ described.   Many of the quotes from RJ would seem to indicate that the characters stay the same but there will be differences in the color of threads or how they are woven to form the pattern.   What that looks like in practice leaves a lot of room for debate.  

 

Me, I'm a big fan of the show and I think it is a great adaptation but I still think that BS good intentions with the term ended up creating more problems than it was worth within the fandom itself.   Generally, it would be nice we could move past the "oh no they are making changes" and "it's another turning of the wheel" phase of the conversation.   Perhaps, getting stuck in that phase of the conversation was inevitable, I dunno.

 

 

 

 

 

[Ryan al'Thor]

I enjoyed 5. My only gripes were the warder funeral stuff took up too much time. I like the exposition but it could have been truncated. Also Loial's hair is just comical, but the actor nailed it. Liked the whitecloak scenes and Rand/Mat interactions.

 

I would give it 8.5/10

Edited December 4, 2021 by Ryan al'Thor

[SinisterDeath]

12 minutes ago, TheDreadReader said:

Many of the quotes from RJ would seem to indicate that the characters stay the same but there will be differences in the color of threads or how they are woven to form the pattern.   What that looks like in practice leaves a lot of room for debate.  

I think of it like Cross-stitching. 

I could take a picture and run it through software, and each time it will come out just a little bit different. Only the slightly different thread color codes, and the position those threads go, are people, events, places, etc. 

 

15 minutes ago, TheDreadReader said:

Me, I'm a big fan of the show and I think it is a great adaptation but I still think that BS good intentions with the term ended up creating more problems than it was worth within the fandom itself. 

Aye. any term can be over used in a positive or negative way. It can be abused by those with an agenda, and take on a different meaning depending on the audience.

 

 

As a whole, I'm capable of viewing adaptations from a book -> movie/tv viewpoint, or as a stand-alone viewpoint. I can criticize the hell out of it, while also praising it for the things it does good. So far, there's nothing I hate about it.

 

[Skipp]

13 minutes ago, SinisterDeath said:

I think of it like Cross-stitching. 

I could take a picture and run it through software, and each time it will come out just a little bit different. Only the slightly different thread color codes, and the position those threads go, are people, events, places, etc. 

 

Aye. any term can be over used in a positive or negative way. It can be abused by those with an agenda, and take on a different meaning depending on the audience.

 

 

As a whole, I'm capable of viewing adaptations from a book -> movie/tv viewpoint, or as a stand-alone viewpoint. I can criticize the hell out of it, while also praising it for the things it does good. So far, there's nothing I hate about it.

 

Except for "Child Valda", honestly the actor is killing it.

[TheMountain]

I was feeling optimistic after episodes 1-2, but it has been draining a bit with how far off the rails from the books we are getting each week. Trying very hard to follow my own advice and enjoy it as a standalone piece completely separate from the books.

 

At one point in Episode 5 my wife asked me why Lan was screaming and beating his chest like that, and I said, "Don't ask me, I have no freaking idea" ??

 

I feel like I'll have to distance myself from the show to all the people I've raved about WoT to lol to preserve my credibility. Generally, I'm regarded as having decent taste in film and being difficult to please ?

Edited December 4, 2021 by TheMountain

[Skipp]

9 minutes ago, TheMountain said:

I was feeling optimistic after episodes 1-2, but it has been draining a bit with how far off the rails from the books we are getting each week. Trying very hard to follow my own advice and enjoy it as a standalone piece completely separate from the books.

 

At one point in Episode 5 my wife asked me why Lan was screaming and beating his chest like that, and I said, "Don't ask me, I have no freaking idea" ??

 

I feel like I'll have to distance myself from the show to all the people I've raved about WoT to lol to preserve my credibility. Generally, I'm regarded as having decent taste in film and being difficult to please ?

I understand you and your wife didn't care for the scene but I thought it was fairly clear as to why.

 

Lan was appointed the lead mourner in a group mourning ritual.  He had to display the entire groups grief in a public manner.  The chest beating seemed to be apart of that.  I assume Lan was appointed as the lead either due to his friendship with Stepin or more likely because he was on "suicide watch" when Stepin managed to take his own life.

 

And as Lan would say "Death is light than a feather, Duty is heavier than a mountain", well his duty was to mourn for the group.

 

But to each their own, my wife was crying during the scene.  I am going to rewatch the episode with another couple tonight so we will see how they react to it.

[TheMountain]

7 minutes ago, Skipp said:

I understand you and your wife didn't care for the scene but I thought it was fairly clear as to why.

 

Lan was appointed the lead mourner in a group mourning ritual.  He had to display the entire groups grief in a public manner.  The chest beating seemed to be apart of that.  I assume Lan was appointed as the lead either due to his friendship with Stepin or more likely because he was on "suicide watch" when Stepin managed to take his own life.

 

And as Lan would say "Death is light than a feather, Duty is heavier than a mountain", well his duty was to mourn for the group.

 

But to each their own, my wife was crying during the scene.  I am going to rewatch the episode with another couple tonight so we will see how they react to it.

Oh, I understood what the writers were trying to do, my comment is that it's just completely off the rails and my wife shouldn't be asking me questions about the show like I know anything in the hell about it lol

 

All bets are off, basically. Nothing is canon.

Edited December 4, 2021 by TheMountain

[Maximillion]

3 hours ago, Skipp said:

Except for "Child Valda", honestly the actor is killing it.

 

Agree.  There are two characters that have actually impressed me for different reasons.

Valda - despite some bad writing in the scene where he first encountered Moraine , Lan, Rand, Egwene, Perrin and Mat - is a good character.  His manner - so matter of fact - seems so perfectly executed for the role.

The other actor I think is really good is Aram.

Moiraine's character is acted quite well too - though becoming tiresome - which she didn't (for me at least) in the books.

 

[ArrylT]

Got to watch the first 2 episodes,  with a non reader today.   Even after 4 views, still doesn't lessen the level of enjoyment.   Interesting enough I think each time I've seen the episodes my feelings on the pacing has changed. 

 

Still finding new subtle things as well.  This time I noticed the Perrin / Egwene vibe some had mentioned.   Guess it depends on the perspective you're watching the show with.  ?

 

Edited December 5, 2021 by ArrylT

[Carebear Sedai]

4 hours ago, TheMountain said:

Oh, I understood what the writers were trying to do, my comment is that it's just completely off the rails and my wife shouldn't be asking me questions about the show like I know anything in the hell about it lol

 

All bets are off, basically. Nothing is canon.

 

What exactly didn't your wife understand? It was a funeral procession and Daniel Henney (and Rosamun Pike) did a brilliant job of showing grief. Where's the mystery? 

 

I knew certain factions of book fans would take issue with Lan being developed as more than just a strong-man stereotype, and likely many have issues with men showing grief at all and see it as weakness. But these kinds of changes are the ones I've been hoping for.

 

So far this adaptation has done a lot of fantastic character work. Far better work than RJ had done for most of the characters by this point in the series. Having the books and being able to work backwards has certainly worked to their benefit. I do think the plot feels rushed at times, but otherwise, the show is everything I'd hoped for and more. 

[Gothic Flame]

4 minutes ago, Carebear Sedai said:

I knew certain factions of book fans would take issue with Lan being developed as more than just a strong-man stereotype, and likely many have issues with men showing grief at all and see it as weakness. But these kinds of changes are the ones I've been hoping for.

no...that's not the problem;

 

al'Lan Mandragoran
"To stand against the shadow so long as iron is hard and stone abides. To defend the Malkieri while one drop of blood remains. To avenge what cannot be defended."

Lord of the Seven Towers, Lord of the Lakes, uncrowned King of Malkier, Dai'shan, Diademed Battle Lord of Malkier, Aan'allein.

At age sixteen he was given the hadori and became a man. He began his one man war against the Shadow that he could not win, with the oath graven on his mind. He has nothing left to defend, only to avenge. He will not raise the golden crane to lead other men to their deaths, but will court death himself without a second thought.

-------

The probkem is you didn't want the characterization that made Lan what he was...

You wanted something entirely different.