How did the show hold up for you?

[Raal Gurniss]

20 minutes ago, EmreY said:

 

Very logical conclusion.  Saying we do not know is the only conclusion that is 100% error-free.  

 

While I agree that it might be likely that there are more book readers responding to this than non-book-readers, I do not know.   Nor do you know.  In addition, we haven't the foggiest idea of how the breakdown goes on the like/dislike scale.  You can make assumptions all you like, but that doesn't mean anything.

Well…I think we can all assume by the reaction on the internet that most people don’t think WoT tv series is very good…I mean the big hits have people talking about it everywhere, this doesn’t! I would say out of every ten people I talk to 4 won’t even have heard if it, 3 won’t like it at all, 2 will think it meh and 1 will really enjoy it.

 

I think that will be similar to most peoples experience of bringing it up in conversation with friends.

[EmreY]

1 minute ago, Raal Gurniss said:

Well…I think we can all assume by the reaction on the internet that most people don’t think WoT tv series is very good…I mean the big hits have people talking about it everywhere, this doesn’t! I would say out of every ten people I talk to 4 won’t even have heard if it, 3 won’t like it at all, 2 will think it meh and 1 will really enjoy it.

 

I think that will be similar to most peoples experience of bringing it up in conversation with friends.

 

I'd love to debate how that might not be the case, but we would be moving far, far away from the topic of discussion and I don't think there really is a perfect solution to that debate anyway. ? 

 

[fra85uk]

More than two weeks since the series ended, my RL conversations with non-book readers are still About Nynaeve being the Dragon reborn...i don't know your experiences but basically nobody i know ( i am Aware it is a small sample) is convinced that DR is really Rand and actually a friend told me "of course she is the DR, she was the only able to survive from those burns"

[Tamal]

1 hour ago, EmreY said:

 

Very logical conclusion.  Saying we do not know is the only conclusion that is 100% error-free.  

 

While I agree that it might be likely that there are more book readers responding to this than non-book-readers, I do not know.   Nor do you know.  In addition, we haven't the foggiest idea of how the breakdown goes on the like/dislike scale.  You can make assumptions all you like, but that doesn't mean anything.

Of course "we do not know" is 100% error free, but that is a meaningless truism when it comes to statistics. You can infer all sorts of spurious correlations to any kind of result today, but that does'nt mean that polls are useless. If the poll was non-anonymous and we put in the read/not-read variable; Would that satisfy? We cannot know if the respondents are truthful. We also cannot know how many people pushed the wrong result, or have changed their mind afterwards, or hate both the show and the books.

 

What we do know, is that this is the Dragonmount forum. It existed before this show, it shall outlast it, and it is made and represented by people who have read the books, bar an (hypotehetically) insignificant (in a statistical sense) number of people who have not. Logical conclusion:

The people who have voted generate a minority of people who like the show, and all values are represented by people who have read the books. 

 

In any case. Time for me to stop going on these off-topic rants. ?

 

 

 

[EmreY]

30 minutes ago, Tamal said:

Of course "we do not know" is 100% error free, but that is a meaningless truism when it comes to statistics. You can infer all sorts of spurious correlations to any kind of result today, but that does'nt mean that polls are useless. If the poll was non-anonymous and we put in the read/not-read variable; Would that satisfy? We cannot know if the respondents are truthful. We also cannot know how many people pushed the wrong result, or have changed their mind afterwards, or hate both the show and the books.

 

Ah, you begin to see the strength of the logical side of the Force.  But...

 

30 minutes ago, Tamal said:

What we do know, is that this is the Dragonmount forum. It existed before this show, it shall outlast it, and it is made and represented by people who have read the books, bar an (hypothetically) insignificant (in a statistical sense) number of people who have not. Logical conclusion:

The people who have voted generate a minority of people who like the show, and all values are represented by people who have read the books. 

 

... is logically equivalent to:

 

Quote

 

What we do know, is that this is the internet. It existed before this show, it shall outlast it, and it is made and represented by people who have not read the books, bar an (hypothetically) insignificant (in a statistical sense) number of people who have. Logical conclusion:

The people who have voted generate a minority of people who hate the show, and all values are represented by people who breathe. 

 

 

To which the obvious answer would be: Huh? ? 

 

You are seeking to define axioms where none may exist (how do you know the forum and the internet won't be superseded by something else?), and your inferences are just plain strange.  

 

Edited January 5, 2022 by EmreY

[Squatting Monkey]

After reading a 42 pages of this forum, I will chime in. 

 

I watched the first episode and then read the first book as I watched the next two.  I even started on the second book.  I am not trying to be a polemicist here, and I can see many of the issues that pull book-readers away from the t.v. adaptation, but to be completely honest --and maybe it gets better as it goes on.  I haven't been very impressed with the first book. 

 

People talk about the character moments and the nuance -- but I haven't been engaged by much of it.  For the most part, I am just constantly distracted by the "homage" to Tolkien's work.  It is almost allegorical to the Fellowship.  I haven't' found many aspects of  WoT (first book anyway) that feel at all original.  What doesn't seem to port from Tolkien appears to port straight from LeGuin, McCarthey, and even Moorcock.  You can clearly see Tolkien's influences in Beowulf, the Kalavalla etc. But they do not seem to make up all of the major plot points/characters of his maiden novel.  Should I continue reading this series or is it more of the same.

[Lethira the second]

15 minutes ago, Squatting Monkey said:

After reading a 42 pages of this forum, I will chime in. 

 

I watched the first episode and then read the first book as I watched the next two.  I even started on the second book.  I am not trying to be a polemicist here, and I can see many of the issues that pull book-readers away from the t.v. adaptation, but to be completely honest --and maybe it gets better as it goes on.  I haven't been very impressed with the first book. 

 

People talk about the character moments and the nuance -- but I haven't been engaged by much of it.  For the most part, I am just constantly distracted by the "homage" to Tolkien's work.  It is almost allegorical to the Fellowship.  I haven't' found many aspects of  WoT (first book anyway) that feel at all original.  What doesn't seem to port from Tolkien appears to port straight from LeGuin, McCarthey, and even Moorcock.  You can clearly see Tolkien's influences in Beowulf, the Kalavalla etc. But they do not seem to make up all of the major plot points/characters of his maiden novel.  Should I continue reading this series or is it more of the same.

Welcome to the discussion! 

 

I don't think I'm alone in saying EoTW is the weakest book of the series.  It begins as very much an 'homage' to Tolkien.  WoT was one of the first to break out of Tolkiens shadow.  From book 2 the series carves its own path, I would recommend pushing forward.  

 

As to the TV series, it's pretty polarising.  Some people have enjoyed it, and I'm happy for them.  A lot of people are massively disappointed that the adaptation never really materialised instead we got a 'loosely based on'

 

 

[Truthteller]

The premise that fans are more likely to be critical is very dubious.  These very threads prove otherwise.  The series went desperately off the rails from the first episode, and yet all these people that are being critical kept coming back, and they kept coming back because they so badly wanted to enjoy the show, giving it chance after chance.  
 

Indeed, the portrayal of those that are critical as close minded purists is offensive and exclusionary, demonstrating a deep arrogance and unwillingness to listen.

 

By contrast, I keep looking to read a defence of the series that is even faintly plausible so that I can enjoy the series more.  You think we want to hate the series?  I don’t, indeed while it deserves to be hated, I merely dislike it, so great is my wanting to love.

[DaddyFinn]

38 minutes ago, Squatting Monkey said:

Should I continue reading this series or is it more of the same.

The book forum is maybe better if you want to discuss this more. I would read books 1-4 and then decide if it's worth to continue. 1-3 are IMO very different in tone and prose than the rest of the series. Book 4 is where the WoT truly starts to become it's own.

 

https://dragonmount.com/forums/forum/8-wheel-of-time-books/

 

 

Edited January 5, 2022 by DaddyFinn

[EmreY]

48 minutes ago, Squatting Monkey said:

After reading a 42 pages of this forum, I will chime in. 

 

I watched the first episode and then read the first book as I watched the next two.  I even started on the second book.  I am not trying to be a polemicist here, and I can see many of the issues that pull book-readers away from the t.v. adaptation, but to be completely honest --and maybe it gets better as it goes on.  I haven't been very impressed with the first book. 

 

People talk about the character moments and the nuance -- but I haven't been engaged by much of it.  For the most part, I am just constantly distracted by the "homage" to Tolkien's work.  It is almost allegorical to the Fellowship.  I haven't' found many aspects of  WoT (first book anyway) that feel at all original.  What doesn't seem to port from Tolkien appears to port straight from LeGuin, McCarthey, and even Moorcock.  You can clearly see Tolkien's influences in Beowulf, the Kalavalla etc. But they do not seem to make up all of the major plot points/characters of his maiden novel.  Should I continue reading this series or is it more of the same.

 

Welcome and don't mind the civil war.

 

The first book is a bit of a mess.  It gets much better over the next three books, the following seven are uneven, and the final three tidy things up.

 

For my part, I too don't think there's much originality to the series, but the tropes don't overwhelm, the story is generally interesting, and the philosophy is different and subversive.

Edited January 5, 2022 by EmreY

[Chivalry]

When I first picked up the WOT books, I wasn't concerned with whether or not the books were derivative of Tolkien's stories. I didn't need something exceedingly original. I wanted a fun, engaging read, and these books (including the early ones) delivered. Robert Jordan's world-building was amazing. And while he gets plenty of things wrong, he also gets many, many things right, and his works raise some fascinating points. I would encourage anyone who has purchased the audiobooks to listen to the interview at the end of The Eye of the World, where RJ lays out his interpretation of the concept of prophecy and the Chosen One in fiction. I think this was one of his more enduring contributions to Fantasy Fiction. 

 

Everything is derivative. Tolkien didn't invent dwarves, elves, dragons, or goblins. I thoroughly enjoyed his books, which were...and remain...a product of his personal experiences and his times.  He, too, got many things wrong. He was also blinded by the prejudices of his time. 

 

And just as Tolkien inspired many writers, Robert Jordan's books have inspired plenty of other works, from the GOT to the Sword of Truth series. It's the nature of the field.

 

 

 

[EmreY]

IMO, if RJ had had the same time to rewrite the books and refine certain aspects ahead of their being published (as Tolkien had) instead of writing and publishing serially, this could have been by far the best fantasy series out there.

 

Fortunately, Rafe is here to do the editing and rewriting job for him (albeit in a different medium) and the resulting TV show is the best of all possible renditions of the story.

 

(I'll let myself out now.)

[Ralph]

29 minutes ago, Truthteller said:

The premise that fans are more likely to be critical is very dubious.  These very threads prove otherwise.  The series went desperately off the rails from the first episode, and yet all these people that are being critical kept coming back, and they kept coming back because they so badly wanted to enjoy the show, giving it chance after chance.  

Sorry I think this is not correct. Yes, the people who disliked it kept watching, but it is clear they disliked it far more and for far more reasons than any non-reader

29 minutes ago, Truthteller said:

 

Indeed, the portrayal of those that are critical as close minded purists is offensive and exclusionary, demonstrating a deep arrogance and unwillingness to listen.

I don't think anyone has said this about people who are critical. Indeed I think everyone has been critical to various extents. This has been said about those who cannot fathom that other people enjoyed something they didn't, those who say anyone who defends the show must be a shill, those who say Rafe hates the stories, those who say how can DM allow reviews that don't pan the show, etc etc etc. 

29 minutes ago, Truthteller said:

 

By contrast, I keep looking to read a defence of the series that is even faintly plausible so that I can enjoy the series more.  You think we want to hate the series?  I don’t, indeed while it deserves to be hated, I merely dislike it, so great is my wanting to love.

 

Edited January 5, 2022 by Ralph

[Spiritweaver1]

35 minutes ago, Squatting Monkey said:

After reading a 42 pages of this forum, I will chime in. 

 

I watched the first episode and then read the first book as I watched the next two.  I even started on the second book.  I am not trying to be a polemicist here, and I can see many of the issues that pull book-readers away from the t.v. adaptation, but to be completely honest --and maybe it gets better as it goes on.  I haven't been very impressed with the first book. 

 

People talk about the character moments and the nuance -- but I haven't been engaged by much of it.  For the most part, I am just constantly distracted by the "homage" to Tolkien's work.  It is almost allegorical to the Fellowship.  I haven't' found many aspects of  WoT (first book anyway) that feel at all original.  What doesn't seem to port from Tolkien appears to port straight from LeGuin, McCarthey, and even Moorcock.  You can clearly see Tolkien's influences in Beowulf, the Kalavalla etc. But they do not seem to make up all of the major plot points/characters of his maiden novel.  Should I continue reading this series or is it more of the same.

I very much appreciate your position and I thought the same when I climbed aboard the WoT train.  However, perhaps due to my own biases after TGH  I felt that the "apprentice" was surpassing the master.  I don't mean to say that Tokien was surpassed in all respects.  However, in certain regards important to me.  The story was clearly richer.

 

First and foremost RJ created strong women characters who were hero's in their own right and who got significant words devoted to their development, motivations and  actions and role in the ultimate outcome.   

 

Second RJ created a complex magic system integrated into the working of his world and managed to make it mostly internally consistent across a whole lot of words.  There is the world of dreams, portal stones all kinds of things to fire the imagination.

 

Third RJ paid a lot of attention to all kinds of details so we get realistic battle strategies and visions of laid out cities/villages that only enhance the world building.  He certainly exceeds in the cultural diversity of his world with reasonably consistent accents..  Of course he had a lot more words to do it.   

 

Fourth RJ attempts (unevenly) to portray the evil antagonists perspectives and motivations we get to know about them and why they ended up Forsaken.

 

There are other things but these four were the things that gave the nod to RJ vs Tolkien early on.

All that said once I was 5 books or so in I started to wonder if the story would ever end.  It wanders around and there is considerable repetitive material.   After A Memory of Light, the last book, I went back to TLOTR being the best by a small margin.  That is because RJ couldn't seem to tell his story concisely in a reasonable number of volumes.  That's what frustrates me about the show.  They had an opportunity to take a shot at editing the story down into a more concise tale but they are blowing it big time.    

 

Don't get me wrong I love the series and am rereading it.  I follow the winding path and enjoy it all.  I do read pretty fast though.    

 

 

[Spiritweaver1]

7 minutes ago, EmreY said:

IMO, if RJ had had the same time to rewrite the books and refine certain aspects ahead of their being published (as Tolkien had) instead of writing and publishing serially, this could have been by far the best fantasy series out there.

 

Fortunately, Rafe is here to do the editing and rewriting job for him (albeit in a different medium) and the resulting TV show is the best of all possible renditions of the story.

 

(I'll let myself out now.)

I appreciate your opinion but with all the issues that have been pointed out in this thread and the episode threads how can you say this is best of all possible renditions of the story.  If we look at it objectively it isn't really even the same story.   A far better approach would be to focus on trimming out the least valuable material in the story and focus the writing team on adapting the remaining material for a visual medium.  Instead they are having to write a new fantasy story and it is pretty clear that none of them are very good at it.  Almost as big a mistake as when Rand tries to use Callandor to whup the Seanchan.  

[Truthteller]

I don’t think Rade hates the series, I think he doesn’t understand it.

 

Take the transformation of Emond’s Field from a traditional, inward looking, village into a college town, replete with drinking, gambling, sex for favours, etc.  

 

Now there is nothing necessarily wrong with those things, and those things show up later in the series, but they are not Emond’s Field, which provides the foundation for the main characters motivations (each in their own way).  When you change the home town you change the characters, but to what?  
 

The ironic thing is that Emond’s Field becomes something like this later in the series, which is the part of the point of the series.  But if it starts there it can’t change, in which case the story has no point.

 

The same thing happens with Mat.  By “accelerating” his character you don’t get any development.  So yea he loves gambling, but this isn’t something he did in EF, which is why he is so happy to leave his old life behind.  
 

Likewise, There is something analogous to Mat’s relationship with Tylin and exchanging sex for the bracelet, but the context is entirely different, and so what they say about the character is entirely different.  
 

This could be repeated for character after character.  Race, and by extension those defending the series, misunderstand the series.  A series is more than a series of plot events, it has themes, it says something, it makes an argument concerning the nature of human beings, and on this basis the show says something quite different than the book.  

[Jaysen Gore]

1 hour ago, DaddyFinn said:

The book forum is maybe better if you want to discuss this more. I would read books 1-4 and then decide if it's worth to continue. 1-3 are IMO very different in tone and prose than the rest of the series. Book 4 is where the WoT truly starts to become it's own.

 

https://dragonmount.com/forums/forum/8-wheel-of-time-books/

 

 

I would just add that Book 4 is Where the Wheel of time stops following various fantasy tropes (Chosen One, and two MacGuffin searches), and really heads off in it's own, completely unique (for the time) direction.

[Tamal]

2 hours ago, EmreY said:

2 hours ago, Tamal said:

Of course "we do not know" is 100% error free, but that is a meaningless truism when it comes to statistics. You can infer all sorts of spurious correlations to any kind of result today, but that does'nt mean that polls are useless. If the poll was non-anonymous and we put in the read/not-read variable; Would that satisfy? We cannot know if the respondents are truthful. We also cannot know how many people pushed the wrong result, or have changed their mind afterwards, or hate both the show and the books.

 

Ah, you begin to see the strength of the logical side of the Force.  But...

The resistance to irony is strong in this one. 

 

2 hours ago, EmreY said:

You are seeking to define axioms where none may exist (how do you know the forum and the internet won't be superseded by something else?), and your inferences are just plain strange.  

 

How very Erasmus Montanus. ? I will take my reason, thank you very much. It allows me to assume that this forum has people with stronger and more substantive opinions on Robert Jordan than the local football pub on a given day, because they have read the books. An absolutely insane proposition, of course. 

[DojoToad]

3 hours ago, EmreY said:

IMO, if RJ had had the same time to rewrite the books and refine certain aspects ahead of their being published (as Tolkien had) instead of writing and publishing serially, this could have been by far the best fantasy series out there.

 

Fortunately, Rafe is here to do the editing and rewriting job for him (albeit in a different medium) and the resulting TV show is the best of all possible renditions of the story.

 

(I'll let myself out now.)

Literal LOL.  This is the funniest thing I've read in days.  Thank you.  ?

[Chivalry]

7 hours ago, Squatting Monkey said:

After reading a 42 pages of this forum, I will chime in. 

 

I watched the first episode and then read the first book as I watched the next two.  I even started on the second book.  I am not trying to be a polemicist here, and I can see many of the issues that pull book-readers away from the t.v. adaptation, but to be completely honest --and maybe it gets better as it goes on.  I haven't been very impressed with the first book. 

 

People talk about the character moments and the nuance -- but I haven't been engaged by much of it.  For the most part, I am just constantly distracted by the "homage" to Tolkien's work.  It is almost allegorical to the Fellowship.  I haven't' found many aspects of  WoT (first book anyway) that feel at all original.  What doesn't seem to port from Tolkien appears to port straight from LeGuin, McCarthey, and even Moorcock.  You can clearly see Tolkien's influences in Beowulf, the Kalavalla etc. But they do not seem to make up all of the major plot points/characters of his maiden novel.  Should I continue reading this series or is it more of the same.

BTW, this is a wonderfully thoughtful first post...welcome, and please keep it up!

 

I think many readers would agree that the series hits it's stride around Book 4. I enjoyed the first half of the series much more than the second half, but still found plenty of enjoyable moments in the later novels.

[first when not last]

16 minutes ago, Chivalry said:

I think many readers would agree that the series hits it's stride around Book 4. I enjoyed the first half of the series much more than the second half, but still found plenty of enjoyable moments in the later novels.

Interesting! if the books didn't hit their stride right away, why on Earth should we expect a TV show based on this complex story that per many people here itself got off to a slow start, to hit its stride right away?

 

Some additional notes based loosely on several other comments among the last 20 or so.

 

First a confession. Far and away my favorite part of LotR was the first book of TFotW. The transition from the safety of the Shire to the dangerous and tricky road, the dawning realization of the power of the enemy,and the very dangerousness of the Ring itself just got me. The rest of the story was wonderful, but for me the first book made the whole series. So the fact that in many points of its structure the first half of the first book of WoT was borrowed from the earlier work was a selling point. It was one of the major reasons I wanted to keep going.

 

But Jordan's world is very different from Tolkien's. for one thing in Jordan's world, people do make love, though RJ does usually keep the  details out of view. ?  But in almost every other way, it's a very different world. For one thing, Jordan did more than create strong female characters many of whom become heroes (and villains) in their own right., he created right from the first chapters of TEotW, a female predominant world. and he made it look totally natural.

 

For instance, in Emond's  Field, Nynaeve would walk around with her discipline stick, and any time a child, or grown man dissed her, or she saw then acting up in some other way, she had the right to thwack said child or man. At one point Cenn Buie was complaining about Nynaeve thwacking him. He suggested that when she did it to him she was being unfair, but neither he nor any other man gave any indication she did not have a right to do it. the distinct impression is given the the Council and Mayor administer the town, but that the Women's Circle actually runs it.

 

A lot of the themes of the story are introduced in the very beginning. One thing that's very different from Tolkien is how tempted all three of the Tav'eren are at various times throughout the series to turn to the dark. There is nothing like this in LotR until the very climax of the story. In Tolkien, all the anti-dark forces are on the same side, where in RJ's world what with the Seanchen, the Whitecloaks, the Aiel, and the multiple kingdoms on the main continent, a major effort has to be undertaken to create a coalition.

 

One other thing, a close re-read of TEotW has shown me numerous more similarities between the book and the first episodes of the series than I expected.

 

 

[Chivalry]

9 minutes ago, first when not last said:

First a confession. Far and away my favorite part of LotR was the first book of TFotW. The transition from the safety of the Shire to the dangerous and tricky road, the dawning realization of the power of the enemy,and the very dangerousness of the Ring itself just got me. The rest of the story was wonderful, but for me the first book made the whole series. So the fact that in many points of its structure the first half of the first book of WoT was borrowed from the earlier work was a selling point. It was one of the major reasons I wanted to keep going.

 

I loved this too, and I loved the flight from Emond's Field. The Fellowship is still my favorite book (and movie) of the series.

[Raal Gurniss]

15 hours ago, EmreY said:

 

I'd love to debate how that might not be the case, but we would be moving far, far away from the topic of discussion and I don't think there really is a perfect solution to that debate anyway. ? 

 

Well we shall see the next several years.

 

If it produces say 8 seasons complete with highly sought after merchandise then I shall be forced to admit that indeed it is the fantastic show that many are making it out to be.

 

Personally I am amazed it even got a second series, for me personally it was that bad…And I really don’t feel alone in saying so.

 

If you like the show excellent! I am not selfish enough to want 100% of the content catered towards myself!
 

But given that it is a series based on a set of books I enjoyed for decades and I really don’t like it, well it does make you think… This show should really be my cup of tea, but it’s not even close.

Edited January 6, 2022 by Raal Gurniss
Tidied some errors.

[Daenelia]

13 hours ago, Truthteller said:

The premise that fans are more likely to be critical is very dubious.  These very threads prove otherwise.  The series went desperately off the rails from the first episode, and yet all these people that are being critical kept coming back, and they kept coming back because they so badly wanted to enjoy the show, giving it chance after chance.  
 

Indeed, the portrayal of those that are critical as close minded purists is offensive and exclusionary, demonstrating a deep arrogance and unwillingness to listen.

 

By contrast, I keep looking to read a defence of the series that is even faintly plausible so that I can enjoy the series more.  You think we want to hate the series?  I don’t, indeed while it deserves to be hated, I merely dislike it, so great is my wanting to love.

 Woah.

I think from all the posts I have been rwading from people whp enjoy the show and their attitude to those who come back to complain how much they do not like it, I have the distinct impression that those who like the show just feel sad that those who do not like it don't enjoy it.

 

That said: hate-watching is a thing, and you can enjoy watching a show you actually dislike. Which is fine! I do that myself sometimes! Bridgerton comes to mind... ohhh, I loathe that show. I watched it all.

 

And yes: gatekeeping is a thing as well. As a long-long-loooong time trekkie I have seen the worst of the worst on that.

 

I do appreciate that some of the people that are critical (or just dont like it) don't try to make me dislike the show. Most of us can agree to disagree. It leads to good discussions. And no one here is trying to convert one to another viewpoint.

(I do not like to be told what I can or cannot like, and I wont do that to someone else.)

[notpropaganda73]

15 hours ago, Truthteller said:

Indeed, the portrayal of those that are critical as close minded purists is offensive and exclusionary, demonstrating a deep arrogance and unwillingness to listen.

 

By contrast, I keep looking to read a defence of the series that is even faintly plausible so that I can enjoy the series more.  You think we want to hate the series?  I don’t, indeed while it deserves to be hated, I merely dislike it, so great is my wanting to love.

 

You don't see any contradiction in your position here? 

 

I don't portray critics as close minded purists. I think any nuanced reading of these pages will see that those who are fans of the show and those who are critical agree on many of the problems. It's the conclusions that we draw from those criticisms that differ. 

 

Fans of the show are discussing on these forums what the problems are and how they might solve them, how the show might handle events down the road, what they could do better for certain characters etc. The fact these discussions are not "faintly plausible" to you means very little other than your own exclusionary views. 

 

Unless I have misread your meaning, in which case I apologise and ignore me ? 

Edited January 6, 2022 by notpropaganda73