Season 1 Discussion (Full Book Spoilers) v2.1

[TheDreadReader]

6 minutes ago, Skipp said:

It has been an interesting ride watching people lose their minds over only seeing part of the whole and then taking that as a fact.

 

combining Saidin/Saidar, Aiel don't wear veils, they've removed Padan Fain from the show etc....

 

I found it both interesting and amusing (in a good hearted way).   

 

 

6 minutes ago, Skipp said:

The book series was massive for the unreliable narrator trope and I think the TV show is no different in that regard.  Concerning the 5 headed dragon and the Dark ones prison being at the Eye might be more of the same and WAFO.

 

 

I agree completely here.  I think this episode really set up both Moiraine and Siuan to potentially look like fools down the road.  The challenge for the writers is whether they have the strength of perspective to keep that part of the books  in and allow it to happen to them.   

 

 

6 minutes ago, Skipp said:

 

But ultimately I think it's best to sit back and don't let these things bother you until we know it for fact in the show.  Even after that we might not know everything.

 

 

I'm still looking forward to the next episodes even if I am a bit frustrated by this one. 

 

 

[DaddyFinn]

9 hours ago, futurehermit said:

 

 

 And why oh why doesn't he have Tam's sword?  The heron mark sword is so important for many reasons including Rand being marked with the heron to help name him as the Dragon.

 

 

He carries it on his hips in every episode ? he drew it on Loial and Lan

[Skipp]

21 minutes ago, Dead Warder said:

 

Wait, what? I haven't seen the latest episode but... what? Are you serious or joking? I hope you are joking.

Is that an issue?  They clearly had a relationship in the books.  Although in the books it seems to have ended by the time they were raised to Aes sedai.

 

The Show decides to keep them together, my wife was shocked by that scene considering the earlier scene before that.  She said "I DID NOT SEE THIS COMING!" while squeeing.

[Gothic Flame]

3 minutes ago, Dead Warder said:

Siuan and Moiraine never had sex with each other, nor was it ever hinted at in New Spring. They both clung to each other as very close friends but not as lovers. 

I agree.

More believable had someone mentioned a prior relationship with a royal bard/gleeman.

[fra85uk]

@Dead Warder Well, a lesbian relationship needed to be enforced in the show by the end of the season +Moraine and Siuan were described to be very close as youths in the books...easy shot for Rafe.

[Maximillion]

54 minutes ago, Skipp said:

It has been an interesting ride watching people lose their minds over only seeing part of the whole and then taking that as a fact.

 

combining Saidin/Saidar, Aiel don't wear veils, they've removed Padan Fain from the show etc....

 

The book series was massive for the unreliable narrator trope and I think the TV show is no different in that regard.  Concerning the 5 headed dragon and the Dark ones prison being at the Eye might be more of the same and WAFO.

 

I could be wrong, the show has done this a couple of times when I thought things would be smoothed over compared to the initial reactions, Loial's appearance being the big one that I can think of off the top of my head.

 

But ultimately I think it's best to sit back and don't let these things bother you until we know it for fact in the show.  Even after that we might not know everything.

 

Can't wait until next week,

 

 

It's far more than the rather simplistic and badly written intrigue they are trying to set up.

If that were the only problem then we could still hope it ties together into something coherent.

But it is more than that.

Just take that last scene and the writing as an example - 'We're off to see the Dark One. OK. Let's go.'..   paraphrasing

That is so bad.  There has not even been much character development for Rand, not much for Egwene (maybe a little more).. Matt has just had what looked like an exorcist moment. Perrin has been cut to shreds ... they are standing there being told they are going to see and fight evil and none of them know who is even supposed to fight.  There is no depth to that at all... I mean Moraine would be standing on her own watching them all run for the trees after that speech!.

 

They are just moving to different points in the plot with shallow filler and hoping it makes sense.

It doesn't.

 

[fra85uk]

9 minutes ago, Dead Warder said:

Why was it needed? I don't truly understand the necessity of this nor do I understand the requisite to show/hint at any sex in this show, regardless of orientantion. I only have an unpopular opinion as to why.

 

No need to answer at it derails the thread objective.

 

Well, it is evident that Rafe has his own agenda/way of thinking and WoT is just the substrate to inject it in the media.

 

But let us not derail...

[Skipp]

28 minutes ago, Dead Warder said:

It is an issue with me yes - those two were never lovers so this is another wild departure... or better yet another showrunner sideline agenda.

 

Siuan and Moiraine never had sex with each other, nor was it ever hinted at in New Spring. They both clung to each other as very close friends but not as lovers. 

 

Robert Jordan is strictly on record that pillow friends had sex.  Moiraine and Suian are strictly described as Pillow friends in the books

 

 

"Robert Jordan

And for MJJ, as posted by DomA, pillow friends are not just good friends. Oh, they are that, too, but they also get hot and sweaty together and muss up the sheets something fierce. By the way, pillow friends is a term used in the White Tower. The same relationship between men or women elsewhere would be called something else, depending on the country."

 

Source; https://www.theoryland.com/intvmain.php?i=210

[Skipp]

New Spring, Chapter 17

 

Merean says "“She was sent to my study more often than any three other girls. Except for her pillow-friend Siuan. Of course, pillow-friends often get into tangles together”"  Describing talking about Moiraine and Suian.

 

Moiraine then gets in a huf about how close Suian and her were was no ones business but their own.

[KakitaOCU]

7 hours ago, Maximillion said:

So then, 'five dragons'.. 'many headed dragon'. ?

 

Also what was the introduction of the idea that it's 'certain death' to be in the same place as the DO and the Dragon as they fought?

 

I like that you mention something as a horrible change, then quote an issue that proves it isn't a change.

No one discusses a multiple body Dragon holding parts of the soul.  Not with seriousness.  Moraine says every area has its own take on things and that one area suggested a many headed dragon.  Siuan dismisses it as stupid, then starts asking after individuals.  Then they discuss the fact that if they bring 5 people to the Eye, 4 are likely to die since only one is the Dragon.

It's not there as a "This is a change we've made" it's there as a discussion on how unreliably a 3000 year old book in a dead language is.

[Jaysen Gore]

I had a thought that I'd shared elsewhere, but I think I'll put it here too. It helps me to understand some of the heat that's being generated in the community.

 

I think of it this way. Rafe has gone back and made adjustments to Star Wars in hopes of improving both the overall quality of the trilogy as a whole, and to have things make more sense with more character balance and drama from a story telling perspective.  But at this point, we have no guarantees of seeing the Return of the Jedi get made. It's a risk, because at this point, Star Wars isn't becoming the cultural touchstone we think it could have been - and even feels like a different movie to some people. And all we have is the hope that ESB and ROTJ will be better, not the proven reality. 

 

In other words, to be proven right in his approach, he'll really need to stick the landing, and we may not ever get there.

[Maximillion]

3 hours ago, KakitaOCU said:

I like that you mention something as a horrible change, then quote an issue that proves it isn't a change.

No one discusses a multiple body Dragon holding parts of the soul.  Not with seriousness.  Moraine says every area has its own take on things and that one area suggested a many headed dragon.  Siuan dismisses it as stupid, then starts asking after individuals.  Then they discuss the fact that if they bring 5 people to the Eye, 4 are likely to die since only one is the Dragon.

It's not there as a "This is a change we've made" it's there as a discussion on how unreliably a 3000 year old book in a dead language is.

It’s another stupid head fake to the audience to draw out the shallow mystery storyline that Rafe seems obsessed with.

 

 

 

[Jaysen Gore]

Who shot JR?

Who killed Laura Palmer?

Who is the Dragon Reborn?

 

Sure, they didn't succeed all the way, but these types of guessing games have generated some of the most buzzed entertainment of the last 40 years, and drive viewership in mass media.  They aren't using sex  to drive viewership ("It's not porn, it's HBO!") so they're trying to use mystery. 

 

Check back after X-mas to see if there's any doubt left at all as to who the Dragon Reborn is, and how close to the end of the End of the World they actually end up.

[RhienneAgain]

After watching the most recent episode ok really struggling to understand why the writers/producers/showrunners/whatevers who are working on this have chosen to adapt a story they are so clearly uncomfortable with.  The focus on female characters to the detriment of Rand and Mat, the changing of the Dragon to male or female, the possibility of the many-headed dragon, etc. If they didn't feel RJ's story (which is laden with male/female specific details from minor aspects to incredibly major (magic system, world politics)) was acceptable in this day and age, why have they attempted to adapt it?  

 

[Skipp]

The showrunners have stated multiple times that they are adapting the entire series when considering season 1.  Making Moiraine the main focus is working fairly well for nonreaders.  Focusing on Moiraine allows us to focus on aspects of the Tower, Warders and still have the mystery of the DR.  I don't imagine they will keep the focus on Moiraine every season.

 

While I can understand how this would be disappointing for people looking to have the focus solely on Rand I think this the showrunners are right to focus on Moiraine this season.  If they keep the focus on her for the 2nd season I would be much less understanding. 

 

In my opinion tGH is the book where the character growth for the boys actually starts.

[orbops]

I posted this originally in one of the news articles, but seems more appropriate here.

 

My wife and I are very happy with the adaption. Of course they're going to make major changes to the series, and realistically the most we can hope for is about 5-7 seasons. Even in the books, probably half of the books had nothing going on, and I remember the utter disappointment of only seeing Nynaeve for about 2 chapters in one of the middle books.

In today's streaming environment such as Tik Tok and YouTube, no one wants to even watch an hour show anymore. I remember that when I worked for DirecTV, they were counting a valid streamer if they only watched a couple minutes of a show.

 

For all the Amazon adaptation haters out there, think of it this way. If too many fans are ripping this adaptation apart, we won't even get to season 3 - and that means non-readers will not be motivated to read the series. If this series ends up being successful, it could create spinoffs like what Star Trek Discovery has done on Paramount+. These potential spinoffs could always focus on one of the characters, or events. Wouldn't you rather have 5-7 years of a WoT adaptation, rather than nothing more in the future? Since Amazon has spent $80M on just season 1, why would any other streamer take a chance in the future of another adaptation?

[Gothic Flame]

4 minutes ago, orbops said:

Since Amazon has spent $80M on just season 1, why would any other streamer take a chance in the future of another adaptation?

Dude...lotr 

[Jaysen Gore]

3 minutes ago, RhienneAgain said:

After watching the most recent episode ok really struggling to understand why the writers/producers/showrunners/whatevers who are working on this have chosen to adapt a story they are so clearly uncomfortable with.  The focus on female characters to the detriment of Rand and Mat, the changing of the Dragon to male or female, the possibility of the many-headed dragon, etc. If they didn't feel RJ's story (which is laden with male/female specific details from minor aspects to incredibly major (magic system, world politics)) was acceptable in this day and age, why have they attempted to adapt it?  

 

But they haven't changed the Dragon. At all. All they've done is introduce a factor of "we don't believe the prophecies", And laid a lot of false trails. It has a sales benefit of using the mystery of the DR to increase viewership among non-readers. But more importantly from a production perspective, it allows them to ignore most of the prophecy talk that exists in WoT because they're not going to be able to film it all. No point parsing the Karaethon Cycle if you don't believe it, and you can safely ignore prophecies (twice and twice, slay them with the leaf, sword that is not a sword, etc, etc)  if you need to drop a sub-plot - or even a whole book - due to production reasons. I guarantee we see Rand channel at the Eye, and probably find the banner and the broken seal. By the time everyone open's their presents Christmas morning, you will know Rand Al Thor is the Dragon Reborn.

 

Also, I don't think they're focusing on female characters, they're focusing on secondary characters, and building the world. Logain, Steppin, and (next week) Lan are male, and balance out against Siuan, Liandrin, and Min (next week) as female. The rest of episodes 2-7 are focused on the Whitecloak (Male), Tinker (Mixed female dominant), Borderlander (mixed male dominant), and Aes Sedai (Female) Cultures, which are critical for the entire series. Are they doing it at the expense of the EF5, yep. Do I understand the choice? Yep. Do I agree with it? Ask me sometime in Season 3.

 

Once the first part of the world is built on screen, they will have time to focus on the EF5, and establish their characters, personalities, and plotlines. After that, we will learn the next two major cultures. They will use the characters we've come to know as lenses through which to view the Seanchan and Aiel. But this way, we're not trying to learn our kids, and the world, and the history all at once. In theatrical terms, they've effectively made the choice to set the scene before the play starts in earnest using important parts of the chorus.

 

Finally, once we know all the cultures involved, we can focus on the 4 kids from EF as they tie those disparate cultures together to face the Dark One at Tarmon Gaidon.

[orbops]

7 minutes ago, Gothic Flame said:

Dude...lotr 

Sorry, I meant another WoT adaptation.

[phoenixtrinity]

1 hour ago, Gothic Flame said:

Dude...lotr 

I am realizing more and more that I don't understand if the LotR movies were a great adaption of the books or a terrible one. Note, I haven't read the books, so here's what I'm working off of from here and Reddit:

 

- When the LotR movies came out, everyone said they were nothing like the books

- The LotR movies changed or removed character and major plot lines

- Somehow, the LotR movies became popular anyway?

- LotR is so popular it is getting a show on Amazon that I'm guessing must be faithful to the books or no one would want to watch it, if I'm understanding the comments.

 

My question is... Why is Amazon banking on LotR if people are complaining about the WoT adaption the same as people complained about the LotR movies?

 

I'm not trying to be clever here, I am confused. I thought LotR was an extremely popular movie franchise, but now I'm hearing people hated it because it wasn't like the books. So now I'm wondering what this might mean for the WoT.

 

(Thanks if someone takes the time to clarify)

[expat]

Quote

- LotR is so popular it is getting a show on Amazon that I'm guessing must be faithful to the books or no one would want to watch it, if I'm understanding the comments.

My understanding of the LOTR series is that it takes place thousands of years before the events in the movies during the time when Sauron was crafting the one ring.  The work will be completely original and the only touch back to Tolkien will be lore found in the Silmarillion.   

[mogi68]

31 minutes ago, phoenixtrinity said:

I am realizing more and more that I don't understand if the LotR movies were a great adaption of the books or a terrible one. Note, I haven't read the books, so here's what I'm working off of from here and Reddit:

 

- When the LotR movies came out, everyone said they were nothing like the books

- The LotR movies changed or removed character and major plot lines

- Somehow, the LotR movies became popular anyway?

- LotR is so popular it is getting a show on Amazon that I'm guessing must be faithful to the books or no one would want to watch it, if I'm understanding the comments.

 

My question is... Why is Amazon banking on LotR if people are complaining about the WoT adaption the same as people complained about the LotR movies?

 

I'm not trying to be clever here, I am confused. I thought LotR was an extremely popular movie franchise, but now I'm hearing people hated it because it wasn't like the books. So now I'm wondering what this might mean for the WoT.

 

LOTR was generally a good adaptation, if greatly flawed in parts. Some book purists were upset at changes, of course, but the film trilogy had widespread appeal to non book readers. It was accessible, entertaining, and maintained the soul of the story. I know that personally I had several qualms with changes that Peter Jackson made in the last two films, but still enjoyed them greatly and am glad they were made. IMO they were as good as could be expected.

Edited December 11, 2021 by mogi68

[Hobo]

36 minutes ago, phoenixtrinity said:

I am realizing more and more that I don't understand if the LotR movies were a great adaption of the books or a terrible one. Note, I haven't read the books, so here's what I'm working off of from here and Reddit:

 

- When the LotR movies came out, everyone said they were nothing like the books

- The LotR movies changed or removed character and major plot lines

- Somehow, the LotR movies became popular anyway?

- LotR is so popular it is getting a show on Amazon that I'm guessing must be faithful to the books or no one would want to watch it, if I'm understanding the comments.

 

My question is... Why is Amazon banking on LotR if people are complaining about the WoT adaption the same as people complained about the LotR movies?

 

I'm not trying to be clever here, I am confused. I thought LotR was an extremely popular movie franchise, but now I'm hearing people hated it because it wasn't like the books. So now I'm wondering what this might mean for the WoT.

 

(Thanks if someone takes the time to clarify)

 

 

I mean, i haven't read the LotR books in a long time, but I remember thinking they were pretty true to the books at the time, yes, they cut a few scenes but thats normal i guess. Some of the changes were for the better, i dont think anyone wanted to wait 17 years for Frodo to leave The Shire, but i could still tell were the movies were bookwise in terms of story and progression. I have no such sense with the WoT adaptation, and while i am trying to enjoy it because i have been waiting for this for a long time, i feel like its being slowly strangled.

 

I honestly believe Amazon should have just constructed there own original story, maybe pay Brandon Sanderson to do it, instead of adapting and tearing apart what was already an amazing story. I feel like Rafe got a copy of the books from a Portalstone telling us a fuzzy muddled version of the story we all know and love.

 

 

 

 

[phoenixtrinity]

24 minutes ago, mogi68 said:

 

LOTR was generally a good adaptation, if greatly flawed in parts. Some book purists were upset at changes, of course, but the film trilogy had widespread appeal to non book readers. It was accessible, entertaining, and maintained the soul of the story. I know that personally I had several qualms with changes that Peter Jackson made in the last two films, but still enjoyed them greatly and am glad they were made. IMO they were as good as could be expected.

Thank you for the kind and honest answer! This sheds some light on what I've heard and makes a bit more sense. If I'm understanding correctly then, this relates to the WoT because WoT is a) being torn apart by book purists and b) not meeting the high quality standards of non-readers. So it will probably get cancelled after S2 ?

 

Is this an accurate summation? I admit, I'm really bummed because I love getting to share this universe with my husband, who will never read the books. But I am trying to honestly see where the show is heading.

[JenniferL]

55 minutes ago, phoenixtrinity said:

I am realizing more and more that I don't understand if the LotR movies were a great adaption of the books or a terrible one. Note, I haven't read the books, so here's what I'm working off of from here and Reddit:

 

- When the LotR movies came out, everyone said they were nothing like the books

- The LotR movies changed or removed character and major plot lines

- Somehow, the LotR movies became popular anyway?

- LotR is so popular it is getting a show on Amazon that I'm guessing must be faithful to the books or no one would want to watch it, if I'm understanding the comments.

 

My question is... Why is Amazon banking on LotR if people are complaining about the WoT adaption the same as people complained about the LotR movies?

 

I'm not trying to be clever here, I am confused. I thought LotR was an extremely popular movie franchise, but now I'm hearing people hated it because it wasn't like the books. So now I'm wondering what this might mean for the WoT.

 

(Thanks if someone takes the time to clarify)

 

The Lord of the Rings movies were criticized by some fans for not being faithful enough to the novels. Characters and subplots were cut, including a male character in order to give a female character more to do onscreen. Things that were only a few pages in the books became giant set pieces and took up a bunch of screen time. But they got great reviews and had enormous crossover appeal outside of the usual sci fi and fantasy crowd and ended up winning a ton of awards. They are considered classics today with enduring appeal. But yeah, there was definitely some complaining that it wasn’t close enough to the books. Tolkien’s son Christopher absolutely hated the movies and completely disowned the production.