How did the show hold up for non-fans watching with you?

[Cauthonfan4]

7 minutes ago, Raal Gurniss said:

I mean odds are someone saying their entire social circle loved it or hated it is probably not being particularly genuine.

or someone with a small social circle, like it or not, many of us are nerds/introverts and probably have tight nit small circles.

[Raal Gurniss]

18 hours ago, Cauthonfan4 said:

or someone with a small social circle, like it or not, many of us are nerds/introverts and probably have tight nit small circles.

Well same still goes..Even in smaller groups there will still be a diversity of taste…In my group the majority won’t have watched it and out of those that have only 1 actually liked it and they where the only one not to have read the books.

Edited February 6, 2022 by Raal Gurniss

[ilovezam]

 

Pretty neat video from Bookborn that seems relevant here

[Cauthonfan4]

i went and watched this and nae'blis and daniel greenes and other reviews and i love how they all agree its "fine" at best, and the comment section is full of people who echo what we have been saying.

[EmreY]

I went and watched very single reaction to the series, and the comments sections are indeed full of people who say what you've been saying, upvoted once, and many, many more where they say they are enjoying the show and have been upvoted numerous times.

 

But who bloody cares?  Who lives their life by Youtube comments?

[Cauthonfan4]

3 minutes ago, EmreY said:

But who bloody cares? 

Clearly us fans care, or we wouldn't be so bloody upset about all the changes that they made to the show for no reason. 

[EmreY]

Who cares about Youtube comments, is what I meant to say.

[Juan Farstrider]

On 2/4/2022 at 4:16 PM, Skipp said:

...

But feel free to keep screaming into the void if that helps you through the day. 

This cuts both ways. You like the show? So what? People here can rationalize what they saw into coherence? So what? That this website existed long before there was any realistic chance of seeing a movie or show based on these books sort of means there is no need to "like" or excuse or even give a second chance to the show. If anything it grants unique licence to assess the show critically in light of the collective understanding of the books and to be open if the show comes up lacking in that comparison. 

Edited February 7, 2022 by Juan Farstrider
shpellin' errs

[Juan Farstrider]

On 2/5/2022 at 1:25 AM, Andra said:

On 2/4/2022 at 3:17 PM, Skipp said:

And deciding to view the show as a different turning of the wheel is neither a good nor a bad thing. 

 

On 2/5/2022 at 1:25 AM, Andra said:

Actually, it's a horrendously bad thing - a pathetic copout that was invented to explain away a raft of indefensible changes.

I agree with Andra, and pretending it is merely a different turning of the wheel would need them to either get all the myths even more wrong and all sorts of things that would put things in the actual Wheel of Time books further into the obscurity. Wheel of Time would look as different from the books as the Age of Legends would look to real Rand/Matt/Perrin/Egwene/Nynaeve/Moraine/etc. 

Call it Wheel of Time II: Training Wheels. Or The Wheels of the Time Go Round and Round. Or call it Wheel of Time: Fan Fiction Edition. You see this in music all the time, where bands re-record some iconic band's music and the call it a tribute. Call it Rafe's Tribute to Wheel of Time. Everyone would ask "Who's Rafe?" and hope for a spin off series to The Expanse that isn't rushed like the last season felt.  

I think it is a case of the industry knowing it is easier to glom-onto a known IP their crappy stories from sub-par story tellers who come cheaper than skilled and qualified ones, making a chimera of old and new that pleases few, inspires less, and leaves the culture more empty than it was. If anything Rafe is proving Oswald Spengler right at least in some ways: culture is dead, not creating anything but it's own coffin where, once inside, it sees nothing but its own memories & feels nothing but its own rigor mortis (I might be misrepresenting his ideas here in this run-on sentence)

[Juan Farstrider]

4 hours ago, EmreY said:

I went and watched very single reaction to the series, and the comments sections are indeed full of people who say what you've been saying, upvoted once, and many, many more where they say they are enjoying the show and have been upvoted numerous times.

 

But who bloody cares?  Who lives their life by Youtube comments?

You care. You're posting about it. I care. I'm posting about it. Who cares if no one else cares? Not caring would really mean the books failed and the fandom would be quite a mystery. If no one cared enough to discuss and dissect the show it would be a failure of the books also, but if it is a window onto the success of failure of the show is questionable. If the show was great, that would be evident. If the show was dreadful but without the existence of the books, it would be difficult to measure except for the difficulty of the measurement, because no one would care at all. 

[EmreY]

4 hours ago, Juan Farstrider said:

You care. You're posting about it. I care. I'm posting about it. Who cares if no one else cares? Not caring would really mean the books failed and the fandom would be quite a mystery. If no one cared enough to discuss and dissect the show it would be a failure of the books also, but if it is a window onto the success of failure of the show is questionable. If the show was great, that would be evident. If the show was dreadful but without the existence of the books, it would be difficult to measure except for the difficulty of the measurement, because no one would care at all. 

 

I mean Youtube comments, as I have said before, although I admit it wasn't the most elegantly structured sentence.  And having a borderline INFJ/ENFJ personality (multiple tests over many years), I desperately need to defend those who cannot defend themselves. ? 

Edited February 6, 2022 by EmreY

[Juan Farstrider]

2 hours ago, EmreY said:

 

I mean Youtube comments, as I have said before, although I admit it wasn't the most elegantly structured sentence.  And having a borderline INFJ/ENFJ personality (multiple tests over many years), I desperately need to defend those who cannot defend themselves. ? 

Well, youtube comments or not, I think my point stands. 

I have no idea what you mean by the rest, but I have to ask: who are you defending here that cannot defend themselves? 

[Andra]

18 hours ago, Cauthonfan4 said:

i went and watched this and nae'blis and daniel greenes and other reviews and i love how they all agree its "fine" at best, and the comment section is full of people who echo what we have been saying.

"Fine?  You know what 'fine' stands for, don't you, kid?"

"Freaked out, insecure, neurotic and emotional."

 

Amazon wasn't going for "fine."  They wanted "fantastic."

And they didn't get that from pretty much any category of viewer.

Edited February 7, 2022 by Andra

[Cauthonfan4]

6 hours ago, Andra said:

Amazon wasn't going for "fine."  They wanted "fantastic."

And they didn't get that from pretty much any category of viewer.

Exactly. They billed this as the next game of thrones and got Shannara chronicles instead. 

[EmreY]

45 minutes ago, Cauthonfan4 said:

Exactly. They billed this as the next game of thrones and got Shannara chronicles instead. 

 

The Light help us.

[psmith1990]

11 hours ago, Cauthonfan4 said:

Exactly. They billed this as the next game of thrones and got Shannara chronicles instead. 

 

Just curious. Is there any promotional material 'they' (Rafe? Amazon?) released which actually 'bills' WoT as the 'next Game of Thrones'? Or is that coming solely from Jeff Bezos comparing the properties in so much as he wanted his own GoT? Because for me, the expectations set would differ quite a lot dependent on that answer. And what about the two properties and their respective successes and failures we're measuring, too. 

 

Certainly, if it WAS another GoT (either S1 OR S8), I personally wouldn't have been very interested in checking it out. Period. And that's the thing. What attracts us to either/both the books and show is likely to be very different from fan to fan - in terms of what characters we want focused on most, what plot or arcs we see as indispensable, what beats we think should be hit, our willingness to potentially add material to build the world whilst removing other material that someone has deemed less necessary, or not, etc.

Edited February 7, 2022 by psmith1990

[Andra]

1 hour ago, psmith1990 said:

 

Just curious. Is there any promotional material 'they' (Rafe? Amazon?) released which actually 'bills' WoT as the 'next Game of Thrones'? Or is that coming solely from Jeff Bezos comparing the properties in so much as he wanted his own GoT? Because for me, the expectations set would differ quite a lot dependent on that answer. And what about the two properties and their respective successes and failures we're measuring, too. 

 

Certainly, if it WAS another GoT (either S1 OR S8), I personally wouldn't have been very interested in checking it out. Period. And that's the thing. What attracts us to either/both the books and show is likely to be very different from fan to fan - in terms of what characters we want focused on most, what plot or arcs we see as indispensable, what beats we think should be hit, our willingness to potentially add material to build the world whilst removing other material that someone has deemed less necessary, or not, etc.

I'm not aware of any specific promotional material that made the comparison.  Which is kind of understandable, as doing so would only draw attention to the competitor you want to surpass.  Not something that is generally done if you actually expect to surpass it.

 

The comparison is based on statements about what Bezos expected out of it, and even about what he said he wanted before acquiring the rights.

 

Not because of the similarity of the content, but because if what he wanted as far as popularity.  Which means it's not a specific season of GOT that he was referring to, or about what kind of character or world development he wanted, just the overall buzz.

[Andra]

And let's not run this thread off into another discussion of ratings.

Or it will just get locked as well.?

Edited February 8, 2022 by Andra

[psmith1990]

1 minute ago, Andra said:

I'm not aware of any specific promotional material that made the comparison.  Which is kind of understandable, as doing so would only draw attention to the competitor you want to surpass.  Not something that is generally done if you actually expect to surpass it.

 

The comparison is based on statements about what Bezos expected out of it, and even about what he said he wanted before acquiring the rights.

 

Not because of the similarity of the content, but because if what he wanted as far as popularity.  Which means it's not a specific season of GOT that he was referring to, or about what kind of character or world development he wanted, just the overall buzz.

 

That was the impression I got too. Is it then fair to mock WoT for not being GoT by saying 'HA THEY SAID THEY WOULD BE NEW GOT BUT ARENT' (by whatever metric we're using) when they never said that in the first place? I guess, for me, I think it just makes more sense to praise or criticise a series on its own merits and flaws, especially if part of the critique is shaming it for not living up to expectations we ourselves have imposed on it. 

 

I DO think there's an interesting discussion that can be had regarding fantasy TV and the inevitable comparisons (there are some decent articles about that) and even how much television consumption, broadcast and streaming, has changed - or not - since GOT first premiered, to be fair, and I do think Bezos can be laughed at for his presumption. I'm just not sure I'm as keen on using that to critique the showrunner or writers, etc, when there are plenty of other ways to do so. 

[Andra]

11 minutes ago, psmith1990 said:

 

That was the impression I got too. Is it then fair to mock WoT for not being GoT by saying 'HA THEY SAID THEY WOULD BE NEW GOT BUT ARENT' (by whatever metric we're using) when they never said that in the first place? I guess, for me, I think it just makes more sense to praise or criticise a series on its own merits and flaws, especially if part of the critique is shaming it for not living up to expectations we ourselves have imposed on it. 

 

I DO think there's an interesting discussion that can be had regarding fantasy TV and the inevitable comparisons (there are some decent articles about that) and even how much television consumption, broadcast and streaming, has changed - or not - since GOT first premiered, to be fair, and I do think Bezos can be laughed at for his presumption. I'm just not sure I'm as keen on using that to critique the showrunner or writers, etc, when there are plenty of other ways to do so. 

I would clarify that, though the statement wasn't made in any promotional materials, it was absolutely made in interviews.  So referring to it is fair.

Especially since much of the criticism on sites like this one are about how the decisions they have made take it away from that goal.

 

And why threads in this forum keep devolving into discussions about ratings and reviews.  Because that is what Bezos was specifically looking for.  Not just a "fine" show, but a "blockbuster."

[psmith1990]

12 minutes ago, Andra said:

I would clarify that, though the statement wasn't made in any promotional materials, it was absolutely made in interviews.  So referring to it is fair.

Especially since much of the criticism on sites like this one are about how the decisions they have made take it away from that goal.

 

And why threads in this forum keep devolving into discussions about ratings and reviews.  Because that is what Bezos was specifically looking for.  Not just a "fine" show, but a "blockbuster."

 

By someone in charge of the actual show? I understand the usefulness of making comparisons, I do. It's shorthand. I just think critiquing it because it's not something it isn't necessarily trying to be is odd? I mean, in terms of wanting audience numbers and buzz, yes, of course it wants that. Any property would. But wanting that success doesn't drive the methods behind decisions regarding character or plot anymore than it would in any other television show, I don't think. It's not being arrogant, from what I can tell, and it's not special in that regard. Of course Bezos will have a different view of things, though. I don't think it's a blockbuster at all, but I think it has good roots and room to grow, and I enjoyed it as something quite a lot more than 'fine', personally. It's the blanket statements and professions of objectivity that sometimes frustrate. 

 

Regarding the below, Rafe very clearly and explicitly says when he pitched it, it wasn't as "the next Game of Thrones" and implicitly states that even in terms of phenomenon, WoT won't be that. So I can't see the hubris others seem to, frankly.

 

https://www.cbr.com/wheel-of-time-rafe-judkins-game-of-thrones-comparisons/

 

In a Nov. 19 interview with The Ringer, Judkins was asked whether all the talk about Thrones in reference to The Wheel of Time was helpful or whether it was a burden. "I find it exclusively an oppressive burden," he laughed. "To be honest, the show is really not, and the books are not like Game of Thrones, and I said that to Amazon right up front. I was like, 'If you are looking for the next Game of Thrones, this isn't it. What I'm going to pitch you is a series that is really different.'"

 

Judkins also shared his thoughts on what it meant to replicate the success of a TV phenomenon, and how it's more than copying the same genre. "I think when people say they're looking for the next Game of Thrones, often they mean something that pops the cultural bubble and exists in a hugely global space... I think the next thing that does that will be a totally different kind of show. It could be about Danish soccer players, I don't know what it'll be."

 

As a fan of fantasy literature, Judkins didn't show any distaste for George R.R. Martin's A Song of Ice and Fire books or the HBO series based on them. "I loved the Thrones books, and then loved the adaptation too. So I was like, 'I love this, but it's not what this is, and I'm not going to make it this. So if we engage in this together, do it knowing that you're bringing something else that's really amazing to life, which is The Wheel of Time, which is in so many ways a pillar of fantasy literature that has never been adapted.'"

 

Edited February 8, 2022 by psmith1990

[VooDooNut]

3 minutes ago, psmith1990 said:

 

"...that has never been adapted.'"

 

*Billy Zane has entered the chat*

 

 

WOT could be so much worse. I'm so glad it's not Game of Sex Thrones.

[Juan Farstrider]

On 2/6/2022 at 12:26 AM, ilovezam said:

 

Pretty neat video from Bookborn that seems relevant here

Wow, that video is great. I sort of wish they had graded each episode rather than the whole season, just because "6/10" from each seems tough to really pull information from. Or, have a rubric of criteria to judge, acting, writing, dialogue, pacing, clarity, or something. 

But, I don't think those not-so random viewers indicate we've a hit on our hands here. 

[Andra]

44 minutes ago, Andra said:

I would clarify that, though the statement wasn't made in any promotional materials, it was absolutely made in interviews.  So referring to it is fair.

 

33 minutes ago, psmith1990 said:

By someone in charge of the actual show? I understand the usefulness of making comparisons, I do. It's shorthand. I just think critiquing it because it's not something it isn't necessarily trying to be is odd?

That depends on whether you consider Roy Price (head of Amazon Studios) or even Bezos himself to be "in charge of the actual show."

Price gave interviews in 2017 using the term, and Bezos is quoted in a book (confirmed by people directly involved) to have said it repeatedly through the years since.  Even setting up a list of thirteen points GoT had that he felt were important for any pitched IP to have going for it.

 

Jeff Bezos Wants Amazon to Make the Next 'Game of Thrones' | Inc.com

Every TV Show Trying To Be The Next Game Of Thrones (& Why They'll Fail) (screenrant.com)

 

It's not that Rafe pitched it that way so much as that it's what Bezos was demanding when Rafe pitched it.

 

[notpropaganda73]

8 hours ago, Andra said:

It's not that Rafe pitched it that way so much as that it's what Bezos was demanding when Rafe pitched it.

 

Right... but why is the show being criticised for not being something that it hasn't tried to be? 

 

And why would the studio go ahead with the production and demand that it's like GOT, if it was explicitly made clear in the pitch that the show isn't going to be GOT? 

 

I'm struggling to understand the point of this criticism levelled at the show, especially when there's plenty of other stuff to critique it on. I can understand saying Bezos wants a show like GOT, and this isn't it - but I don't really see why the show should be criticised for that.