Comparing Wheel of Time to other fantasy adaptations

[Deviations]

4 hours ago, EmreY said:

My own credentials are weak.  I've got only three copies of the Silmarillion sitting on my bookshelf...  And only in English.  I've got only three copies of LoTR too, in English.  (One each in a very few other languages.)  And Christopher Tolkien's books, Tolkien's letters, a dried blade of grass that once grew across the road from Tolkien's house in Oxford, a pint glass filched from a pub where he liked to meet with friends, that sort of thing.  Not in the least bit obsessive.

Classic!

[Jaysen Gore]

9 hours ago, Gothic Flame said:

We have a lot of characters but not a lot of characterization. That's why I'm leery about the writers. After WoT and either hearing the excuses for the lack of, or worse, hearing "good enuff" a company paying that much money had damn well do better than mediocre. The writing needs to be superlative, and the characters need to live. 

They have plenty of leeway in this regard. 

I think the LOTR writers have it both easier and harder than any of the adaptations we usually discuss. On one hand, it's easier, because the the entire second age is represented by 32 pages of the Silmarillion - 20 minutes of TV time, give or take, according to usual conversions. And aside from the forging, and the Downfall itself, not a single viewer will be able to complain about "it wasn't that way in the books". As long as, you know, there aren't 42 Rings of Power, 6 of which go to Hobbits to wear at different meals.

 

On the other hand, the writers will have to create out of whole cloth the fabric and story of the second age, and it will have to feel like Lord of the Rings; magic, sets, language, costuming. And there are only a few possible characters for the Dr. McCoy / Scotty on TNG type special episodes (Galadriel / Celeborn / Haldir, Elrond, Arwen, Thranduil, Legolas, that female elf that doesn't exist)

 

On the gripping hand (for Niven fans), the Akallabeth is a tragedy, about how hubris and the lust for power and immortal life results in the downfall of an entire advanced civilization. And absolutely nothing I've seen from Hollywood in the last 50 years has shown me they have anyone who knows what a true tragedy feels like, let alone shown the ability to successfully write one.

 

I wish them well, and I will check it out, but I am not hopeful. 

[Chivalry]

On 1/12/2022 at 3:02 PM, Skipp said:

I had thought this a few months ago but someone was able to provide a source that the purchase for the rights is completely separate from the season budget

 

 

Normally you would be entirely correct but if I recall Amazon is on the hook for 5 seasons minimum, I think it was part of the purchase rights.  If true I cannot fathom how Amazon thinks it is a good idea.  I read Lord of the Rings when I was in 4th grade.  My friends and I took a 6 hour road trip each year to watch the movies in theatre.  I would watch the extended films once a year for nearly a decade.  But I personally have no excitement for the this show.  That could change upon viewing it but it has an uphill battle with me.

 

I love the LOTR books and movies, but I'm not nearly as pumped for this series as I was for WOT. I will watch it, and I'll probably enjoy it. I'm just not as invested emotionally.

 

The problem for the LOTR series is that it will be compared not just with the Peter Jackson movies but with newer fantasy/ Sci FI offerings...and a lot has changed since the release of the movies 20 years ago. 

 

I'm genuinely curious (almost amusingly so) what route the LOTR team takes. Will they aim for a similar, elevated tone as the films? Will they opt for a grittier, more 'realistic' look, in the fashion of the GOT? Are we going to see morally ambiguous protagonists and charming anti-heroes? Shocking brutality? Elven brothels (please no...)?

 

[EmreY]

Charming anti-heroes. maybe not.  Very charming antagonists, yes. ? 

[A17gry1]

I've read the books, listened to the audio books on several occasions, and I personally can't stand the deviations from the books.  Matt has always been my favorite character and the way he's portrayed....  I can't understand all the dramatics with using the one power, how aren't the sisters slaughtered with all the hand waving...  The enemy just stand around mesmerized by pretty fingers?  And there was never any indication Moraine and Swan was bed fellows...  I don't see how this sexual relationship adds to the story...  will Swan no longer get our beloved Andor General?

 

So far the cinematography is all that's going for it...  but I'm biased...

[Gothic Flame]

8 hours ago, Jaysen Gore said:

On the gripping hand (for Niven fans), the Akallabeth is a tragedy, about how hubris and the lust for power and immortal life results in the downfall of an entire advanced civilization. And absolutely nothing I've seen from Hollywood in the last 50 years has shown me they have anyone who knows what a true tragedy feels like, let alone shown the ability to successfully write one.

Just think of the Nine. Who is the Witch King? Who was Khamûl, and each of the other Nazgûl? One could be from Númenor, another could be an Easterling (Khamül), another one could be from Far Harad, or Umbar, etc. Which means that we could see all these different places. And they can get somewhat creative about it, since Tolkien wrote so little about them. 
There are some details about the nine, but only Khamul was the only other named. The game from Ice Crown Enterprises detail the others being consistent with the source material and so often presented it wouldn't surprise me if they did get ICE on board. (I found the material impressively immersive!) 

[Jaysen Gore]

58 minutes ago, Gothic Flame said:

Just think of the Nine. Who is the Witch King? Who was Khamûl, and each of the other Nazgûl? One could be from Númenor, another could be an Easterling (Khamül), another one could be from Far Harad, or Umbar, etc. Which means that we could see all these different places. And they can get somewhat creative about it, since Tolkien wrote so little about them. 
There are some details about the nine, but only Khamul was the only other named. The game from Ice Crown Enterprises detail the others being consistent with the source material and so often presented it wouldn't surprise me if they did get ICE on board. (I found the material impressively immersive!) 

I retort with two words...

 

Anakin...

 

Skywalker....

[Gothic Flame]

[AdamA]

11 hours ago, Jaysen Gore said:

On the gripping hand (for Niven fans), the Akallabeth is a tragedy, about how hubris and the lust for power and immortal life results in the downfall of an entire advanced civilization. And absolutely nothing I've seen from Hollywood in the last 50 years has shown me they have anyone who knows what a true tragedy feels like, let alone shown the ability to successfully write one.

 

I wish them well, and I will check it out, but I am not hopeful. 

Not that I expect LOTR prequel to rise to the same level, but Godfather and Godfather II were 1972 and 1974, barely making the "last 50 years" cut. Raging Bull was 1980. Saving Private Ryan 1997. Sopranos, The Wire, and Breaking Bad all pretty decent tragedies from television.

 

Even the very specific example of hubris and lust to conquer death accidentally destroying civilization was done quite well by Dark as recently as two years ago, though it was German, not a Hollywood production.

[Jaysen Gore]

41 minutes ago, AdamA said:

Not that I expect LOTR prequel to rise to the same level, but Godfather and Godfather II were 1972 and 1974, barely making the "last 50 years" cut. Raging Bull was 1980. Saving Private Ryan 1997. Sopranos, The Wire, and Breaking Bad all pretty decent tragedies from television.

 

Even the very specific example of hubris and lust to conquer death accidentally destroying civilization was done quite well by Dark as recently as two years ago, though it was German, not a Hollywood production.

I'll give you Raging Bull, and The Godfathers - it's been a long time - but Saving Private Ryan wasn't a tragedy (they achieved their mission, even at the cost of their lives; win!). I never saw The Wire, and in your other examples, the bad guys got what was coming to them - they weren't about the downfall of good men; they were already mobsters (true of SoA and The Shield, too).  But hey, I think that MacBeth isn't a tragedy, either, since the bad guy got what was coming to him, and I had no emotional resonance with him as a "hero".  IF you don't do enough to establish that your bad guy protagonist used to be a good guy, I don't consider it a tragedy when he dies.

 

I'm not saying they don't have tragic elements - there is always tragedy in the "What Might Have Been" aspect of story telling - but to actually show the shift from Hero to Villain in an effective way, and still get people to mourn when the former hero succumbs to the consequences of their actions? That's hard.

[Gothic Flame]

33 minutes ago, Jaysen Gore said:

I'm not saying they don't have tragic elements - there is always tragedy in the "What Might Have Been" aspect of story telling - but to actually show the shift from Hero to Villain in an effective way, and still get people to mourn when the former hero succumbs to the consequences of their actions? That's hard.

Yea... that's why I love Weis and Hickman's Dragonlance. They really know how to crush you when the bad guy bites it.

[spectralballadeer]

I'm no Lord of the Rings scholar so I can't add to that part of the discussion but earlier on I saw WOT being compared to Shadow and Bone which is something I would like to comment on since I've been a fan of the Grishaverse for some time and have watched and rewatched the show a number of time. Obviously I haven't read far enough in WOT to see the entire universe but enough of it to fall in love with and appreciate how rich and detailed it is. I've stared at the map quite a bit lol.

S&B operates on a no less rich but smaller scale world building? It covers a large surface area ut it's very tightly knit if that makes a lick of sense. The show is also combining not only the S&B books but also the Six of Crows duology and I think the show runners did an excellent job it by making me feel like I'd been transported to Ketterdam or Ravka along with amazing costumes. I do like how they have changed some elements in giving Alina more agency as a character but the story itself I think is somewhat bland. Don't get me wrong I had moments I enjoyed and I am excited for season 2 but I'm hoping they do more in terms of story.

Having said that and based on how far I have read in WOT I can see the effort put into the world and how difficult it is to bring such a much vaster world to life. Especially in only 8 hour long episode meant to portray a story in a rather hefty book. I can see those areas where it does feel like standard fantasy village that does take away from the immersion a little bit but at others like in Tar Valon that richness is there and the choices that were made do work fantastically. It's a mixed bag for me as far as Rafe excelling but there also needing to be improvement.

I also look at both though and do agree S&B did do it better but these are also first seasons and like with first books in a series I view them as like setups for the universe as much as getting into the story and knowing the main characters. I do believe that WOT as it goes along into season 2 will be an improvement and they'll have learned from season 1 what did and did not work

 

[notpropaganda73]

55 minutes ago, spectralballadeer said:

I'm no Lord of the Rings scholar so I can't add to that part of the discussion but earlier on I saw WOT being compared to Shadow and Bone which is something I would like to comment on since I've been a fan of the Grishaverse for some time and have watched and rewatched the show a number of time. Obviously I haven't read far enough in WOT to see the entire universe but enough of it to fall in love with and appreciate how rich and detailed it is. I've stared at the map quite a bit lol.

S&B operates on a no less rich but smaller scale world building? It covers a large surface area ut it's very tightly knit if that makes a lick of sense. The show is also combining not only the S&B books but also the Six of Crows duology and I think the show runners did an excellent job it by making me feel like I'd been transported to Ketterdam or Ravka along with amazing costumes. I do like how they have changed some elements in giving Alina more agency as a character but the story itself I think is somewhat bland. Don't get me wrong I had moments I enjoyed and I am excited for season 2 but I'm hoping they do more in terms of story.

Having said that and based on how far I have read in WOT I can see the effort put into the world and how difficult it is to bring such a much vaster world to life. Especially in only 8 hour long episode meant to portray a story in a rather hefty book. I can see those areas where it does feel like standard fantasy village that does take away from the immersion a little bit but at others like in Tar Valon that richness is there and the choices that were made do work fantastically. It's a mixed bag for me as far as Rafe excelling but there also needing to be improvement.

I also look at both though and do agree S&B did do it better but these are also first seasons and like with first books in a series I view them as like setups for the universe as much as getting into the story and knowing the main characters. I do believe that WOT as it goes along into season 2 will be an improvement and they'll have learned from season 1 what did and did not work

 

 

Well said. I've never read any of the Grishaverse books but I quite enjoyed S1 of Shadow & Bone - though I felt the ending was a little weak I felt they did a really good job of worldbuilding and making the characters jump off the screen. Though I'd be happy just following the Ketterdam guys for S2! 

[spectralballadeer]

55 minutes ago, notpropaganda73 said:

 

Well said. I've never read any of the Grishaverse books but I quite enjoyed S1 of Shadow & Bone - though I felt the ending was a little weak I felt they did a really good job of worldbuilding and making the characters jump off the screen. Though I'd be happy just following the Ketterdam guys for S2! 

Thank you! The initial Shadow and Bone trilogy are the author's first books so while good are her weakest but she has improved quite a big. The world building of the show is excellent but I agree about the weak ending. Similarly to wot episode 8 being fairly weak as well? Both shows are very strong in my middle I believe but with lack luster endings but it doesn't deter me from them either

[king of nowhere]

I often see comparison with the witcher, and I just finished watching S2, and I'm pretty underwhelmed. I liked S1, but the whole plot is messed up.

It's actually very similar to WoT: a lot of hype, good acting, a lot of good moments, but there's something you feel is missing. Except in wot I can tell why they did stuff, and in witcher I cannot. Also, in wot they may have given weak characterization to the main characters, but in witcher I couldn't even recognize most of the secondary characters.

[VooDooNut]

2 minutes ago, king of nowhere said:

I often see comparison with the witcher, and I just finished watching S2, and I'm pretty underwhelmed. I liked S1, but the whole plot is messed up.

It's actually very similar to WoT: a lot of hype, good acting, a lot of good moments, but there's something you feel is missing. Except in wot I can tell why they did stuff, and in witcher I cannot. Also, in wot they may have given weak characterization to the main characters, but in witcher I couldn't even recognize most of the secondary characters.

I watched it once. I don't think I'll watch it again until, at the very least, I read the Witcher books.

 

WOT had some unfortunate CGI/set piece issues, but Witcher takes the cake with terrible backdrops and set design in some (not all) of the episodes. In particular I keep thinking about the scene in s2e2 (i think) where Yennefer and the other woman are tied to the most fake looking tree with a tacky  green screen/backdrop behind them in the shot. I think s2e1 was my favorite of the season because of the monsters.

 

[Skipp]

And here I am having watched The Witcher Seasons 1 and 2, only having a vague suggestion of the story outside of the show and just really enjoyed it,  Same with my wife.

 

It was nice couple of months to go from really enjoying WoT to really enjoying The Witcher S2. 

[ArrylT]

23 hours ago, Skipp said:

And here I am having watched The Witcher Seasons 1 and 2, only having a vague suggestion of the story outside of the show and just really enjoyed it,  Same with my wife.

 

It was nice couple of months to go from really enjoying WoT to really enjoying The Witcher S2. 

 

In the end that is all that matters.   That hopefully the person watching the show was able to enjoy it, whether it was an original or an adaptation, remake, reboot, etc.  

 

Personally, I think what I enjoy the most, apart from being able to rewatch/re-read Wheel of Time whenever wanted, is all the additional content being created, not just by the shows but also by people who enjoy the shows they watch.  There is a ton of WoT content out there now, and I can only imagine the same is true for S&B, LOTR & GOT now - and hopefully one day I'll have the time to delve into all of that content as well.  Seeing the volume of people interact and share their takes on a fantasy world is about as close to being inside the world itself and actually being able to read The Travels of Jain Farstrider or hear a gleeman perform songs from The Great Hunt for the Horn, at least imo.

[VooDooNut]

5 minutes ago, ArrylT said:

 

In the end that is all that matters.   That hopefully the person watching the show was able to enjoy it, whether it was an original or an adaptation, remake, reboot, etc.  

 

Personally, I think what I enjoy the most, apart from being able to rewatch/re-read Wheel of Time whenever wanted, is all the additional content being created, not just by the shows but also by people who enjoy the shows they watch.  There is a ton of WoT content out there now, and I can only imagine the same is true for S&B, LOTR & GOT now - and hopefully one day I'll have the time to delve into all of that content as well.  Seeing the volume of people interact and share their takes on a fantasy world is about as close to being inside the world itself and actually being able to read The Travels of Jain Farstrider or hear a gleeman perform songs from The Great Hunt for the Horn, at least imo.

Great point. I love watching the Dungeons and Dragons show Critical Role, and one of my favorite parts is all the fan-art that's shared with/by the community.

[DaddyFinn]

IMDb ratings at the moment.

 

WoT

 

Witcher

 

WoT:

7-10 74,2%

1-6 25,8%

 

Witcher:

7-10 88,5%

1-6 11,5%

 

I picked 7-10 as the "good" group because I think 6 is more towards "bad". Interesting how much less Witcher has 1-6 ratings. Is the show actually so good? Is it faithful? Are there less passionate book fans? Less review bombing? Something else? It would be better to compare Witcher season 1 ratings. Are those numbers available anywhere?

 

For me personally, WoT S1 is a ~9/10 but I think that the 7,2 is pretty realistic for the larger audience. I wouldn't expect it to be over 8 after S1.

 

It will be interesting to see where WoT balances out after it has several hundred thousand ratings.

Edited January 26, 2022 by DaddyFinn
Separated good and faithful to their own questions

[ilovezam]

On 1/21/2022 at 1:03 PM, Chivalry said:

Will they opt for a grittier, more 'realistic' look, in the fashion of the GOT? Are we going to see morally ambiguous protagonists and charming anti-heroes? Shocking brutality? Elven brothels (please no...)?

Stop it, it hurts. I guess if they do it GoT style, it could still be really entertaining if done and written well, even if it would feel... wrong.

 

It could be worse though. I'm kinda just imagining something more in line with this:

 

Isildur: "I will use the Ring to destroy them all!"

 

Isildur's invented sister: "The One Ring answers to Sauron alone. It has no other master. The Ring has a mind of its own, and if you took the Ring, at the banks of the Anduin, the Ring would surely leave your hand and Orcs will loose their poisoned arrows upon you and you would die, and the women, as usual, would be left to clean up the mess you leave behind!"

 

Isildur: "My overly anxious sister speaks of over-exaggerated rumours of the dangers of the Ring. I have faced down hordes of Orcs that will make the Elves blanch! I will take the Ring to Mount Doom myself - my family have always defended Man by ourselves!"

 

*Isildur dies in the next episode, ruining everything* 

Edited January 26, 2022 by ilovezam

[Jaysen Gore]

6 hours ago, DaddyFinn said:

IMDb ratings at the moment.

 

WoT

 

Witcher

 

WoT:

7-10 74,2%

1-6 25,8%

 

Witcher:

7-10 88,5%

1-6 11,5%

 

I picked 7-10 as the "good" group because I think 6 is more towards "bad". Interesting how much less Witcher has 1-6 ratings. Is the show actually so good? Is it faithful? Are there less passionate book fans? Less review bombing? Something else? It would be better to compare Witcher season 1 ratings. Are those numbers available anywhere?

 

For me personally, WoT S1 is a ~9/10 but I think that the 7,2 is pretty realistic for the larger audience. I wouldn't expect it to be over 8 after S1.

 

It will be interesting to see where WoT balances out after it has several hundred thousand ratings.

Not to say it is the case, but this feels a little like self-selection bias. Because anyone who rated the Witcher 1-5 in season 1 wouldn't have been watching it for Season 2. In the same way I think there's several people who despised Season 1 of WoT that they shouldn't watch season 2.  And then they're not ranking it at all. Leaving fans of the show giving higher reviews as the only people commenting on it.

[BookLover]

I am picky as a historian. For instance, it was unfortunate the series Rome was canceled near the beginning of season two. Overall, other Roman historians agree that overall the first season was close to accurate. However, I have much hope for WOT although it will be challenging. It was the series that introduced me to the books. So if anything, the negative reviews from diehard fans of the books series intrigued people like me. As for The Witcher, I could not get through five minutes of it. Really it was the actors that portrayed Moraine and Lan battling the Trollics that drew me in. And having read GOT before the TV series emerged, I analyzed that perhaps that I would enjoy this book series. I do. It is really a page-turner.

[DaddyFinn]

32 minutes ago, BookLover said:

I am picky as a historian. For instance, it was unfortunate the series Rome was canceled near the beginning of season two. Overall, other Roman historians agree that overall the first season was close to accurate. However, I have much hope for WOT although it will be challenging. It was the series that introduced me to the books. So if anything, the negative reviews from diehard fans of the books series intrigued people like me. As for The Witcher, I could not get through five minutes of it. Really it was the actors that portrayed Moraine and Lan battling the Trollics that drew me in. And having read GOT before the TV series emerged, I analyzed that perhaps that I would enjoy this book series. I do. It is really a page-turner.

There's so much awesome scenes, stories and characters ahead of you ?

[BookLover]

7 minutes ago, DaddyFinn said:

There's so much awesome scenes, stories and characters ahead of you ?

I suspect there is much food for thought for me as I make connections to our current age and navigate this journey for humanity especially during these crazy times. Life is about choices not answers, after all. ?