Is tv incompatible with epic fantasy?

[Elder_Haman]

2 minutes ago, UOweTamASword said:

As in Chess, you can plan a move out many turns ahead and "succeed" in that minor tactic, but its the overall strategy that determines whether you're successful and thought the game through thoroughly enough.

The Chess analogy is an interesting one. 

The object of Chess is, obviously, to checkmate your opponent. But there are many different strategies for obtaining that result. Different ways to attack. Different ways to defend. You can only judge the game once it is over.

 

Rafe has spoken numerous times about looking at the series from a long-term perspective. He wants to tell the entire WoT story and his aim is "to stick the landing" (his words). It's very easy to analyze this show episode by episode, talk about what has been cut and what has been changed and how much it differs from the books. But until you see the entire product, you won't know whether the strategy behind those changes was effective or ineffective. You can't know whether they've "stuck the landing" until the routine is compete.

 

I've liked a lot. I've disliked some. I'm ambivalent about some. So far, they've made some moves I wouldn't have made. In chess terms, call it using a slightly unconventional opening.  

[UOweTamASword]

1 minute ago, Jaysen Gore said:

I still read them when I do re-reads as well. But if you tell me I have to turn 14 books into 64 episodes, drastic cuts need to be made, and IMO, those story arcs were redundant and repetitive.

 

And no, I didn't really consider Ishamael in that, mainly since Moridin has little to do with the mid-book plotlines. And I guess I had envisioned him rescuing instead of killing Lanfear, and not having Graendal killed just to put her in an ugly body. So I guess it's more the concept of Ara / Osan that I would drop, and just find a way not to kill the others.

 

Hmm, I actually thought it was an interesting twist having Aran'gar infiltrate the Aes Sedai camp while channeling saidin. What did you not like about it? I'd wager you'll get your way though on that, the show seems to have very different opinions from the book on what and how male/female channeling differs.

 

On top of that I believe they're trimming the Forsaken from 13 to 8, and Balthamel and Aginor are no doubt near the top of that list.

 

5 minutes ago, Theseus78 said:

 

As I said before, if they can brush off Sanderson, they can brush off Sarah (a WoT superfan?). So you can see how this reassures me not at all. All this makes clear to me is that Sarah is not a direct part of the writing process (in that she's not in the writing room) and no other expert is either (or they wouldn't need to consult her as such).

 

That they consult with someone on things like this after they come up with them wouldn't even assure me if they actually had veto power (which they clearly don't). After all, we are dependent on the writer's room (no WoT experts and some non-readers) to determine what is a change and whether its even worth paying their consultant to consider. Or at least I hope she's paid!

 

I'd be interested to hear whether Sarah thinks the WoT books are great as-is or if she'd like to edit them in certains ways if given a chance (and how). That would illuminate a bit what kind of expert opinion they're occasionally including.

[Elder_Haman]

4 minutes ago, UOweTamASword said:

 

Hmm, I actually thought it was an interesting twist having Aran'gar infiltrate the Aes Sedai camp while channeling saidin. What did you not like about it? I'd wager you'll get your way though on that, the show seems to have very different opinions from the book on what and how male/female channeling differs.

 

On top of that I believe they're trimming the Forsaken from 13 to 8, and Balthamel and Aginor are no doubt near the top of that list.

 

 

As I said before, if they can brush off Sanderson, they can brush off Sarah (a WoT superfan?). So you can see how this reassures me not at all. All this makes clear to me is that Sarah is not a direct part of the writing process (in that she's not in the writing room) and no other expert is either (or they wouldn't need to consult her as such).

 

That they consult with someone on things like this after they come up with them wouldn't even assure me if they actually had veto power (which they clearly don't). After all, we are dependent on the writer's room (no WoT experts and some non-readers) to determine what is a change and whether its even worth paying their consultant to consider. Or at least I hope she's paid!

 

I'd be interested to hear whether Sarah thinks the WoT books are great as-is or if she'd like to edit them in certains ways if given a chance (and how). That would illuminate a bit what kind of expert opinion they're occasionally including.

They have Sarah on the team. They have Brandon Sanderson as a script consultant. Harriet is involved. What more do you want? Short of resurrecting Jordan and having him write the scripts, what could possibly satisfy you?

[UOweTamASword]

2 minutes ago, Elder_Haman said:

The Chess analogy is an interesting one. 

The object of Chess is, obviously, to checkmate your opponent. But there are many different strategies for obtaining that result. Different ways to attack. Different ways to defend. You can only judge the game once it is over.

 

Rafe has spoken numerous times about looking at the series from a long-term perspective. He wants to tell the entire WoT story and his aim is "to stick the landing" (his words). It's very easy to analyze this show episode by episode, talk about what has been cut and what has been changed and how much it differs from the books. But until you see the entire product, you won't know whether the strategy behind those changes was effective or ineffective. You can't know whether they've "stuck the landing" until the routine is compete.

 

I've liked a lot. I've disliked some. I'm ambivalent about some. So far, they've made some moves I wouldn't have made. In chess terms, call it using a slightly unconventional opening.  

 

That's true and once again we are to judge the final product all on our own.

 

One may be watching a chess match and see that someone is behind in pieces, their king undefended, and they've completely lost the center of the board. In that case its almost certainly not worth watching any longer and I don't think you'd blame someone for not wasting their time to see the inevitable end be drawn out. Even if there is a 0.1% chance for a forced draw that you can never be sure of.

 

But in this subjective case, one person's 99.9% hopeless position can be another person's as you say "slightly unconventional opening" or even a brilliant opening much better than Jordan managed. We are all free to judge for ourselves and spend our time accordingly.

[Jaysen Gore]

2 minutes ago, UOweTamASword said:

 

Hmm, I actually thought it was an interesting twist having Aran'gar infiltrate the Aes Sedai camp while channeling saidin. What did you not like about it? I'd wager you'll get your way though on that, the show seems to have very different opinions from the book on what and how male/female channeling differs.

 

On top of that I believe they're trimming the Forsaken from 13 to 8, and Balthamel and Aginor are no doubt near the top of that list.

I too thought that it was a really good idea in the books, I just think the political realities inherent in opening that can of worms is such that they just cut it and move on; if they can't do something that complex wwell, better not to touch it at all. We're talking about TV, and one of the things I think it sucks at is doing subtle and complicated, and the implications of a male soul in a female body (even if you ignore the "spawn of the devil" real world issues) are way too complicated to manage inside the series. 

 

And, see, here's an example of what I think of as unnecessary change. I see no reason not to keep all 13, because the 5 missing ones from that statue shot (Aginor, Balth, Be'lal, Rahvin, and Semirhage) are probably in 7 scenes (3 for Rahvin, 1 for the rest) for a total of maybe 10 minutes in the entire TV series.  So until proven otherwise, they didn't have statues, because they're not going to last long enough to matter.

[UOweTamASword]

10 minutes ago, Elder_Haman said:

They have Sarah on the team. They have Brandon Sanderson as a script consultant. Harriet is involved. What more do you want? Short of resurrecting Jordan and having him write the scripts, what could possibly satisfy you?

 

My own interpretation (and reality since Rafe is the showrunner) is that these people have zero say in the final product. They offer opinions and if Rafe doesn't like them, he can say "thanks for your thoughts" and move on.

 

I've heard directly from Brandon that reading through the draft of scripts he found the characters to be unlikable and even ***holes (strong words from Brandon). To me that's not a time for a revision, but a time to question the entire approach. Obviously that's not plausible because they involved Brandon as a late in the process consultant (correct me if I'm wrong).

 

Why should I be reassured by any of this? Rafe could have consulted with me and it would make no difference, because I'd not tell him what he wants to hear. From my perspective this is ultimately Rafe's vision and these consultants are just there to help him iron out the details.

 

Rafe's said he thinks Jordan would write the series differently if alive today. Leaving aside the distasteful act of putting words in a dead man's mouth to prop up your own viewpoint, that opinion alone indicates his vision of WoT and mine will never align well enough for me to enjoy it.

 

Edit: I'd also like to know how Harriet is involved, I haven't heard that. I only know the quote (paraphrasing) from her to Jordan on her approach to these things: "Sell the rights, clear the checks and don't ever watch the movie!"

Edited December 21, 2021 by UOweTamASword

[Elder_Haman]

2 minutes ago, UOweTamASword said:

Rafe's said he thinks Jordan would write the series differently if alive today. Leaving aside the distasteful act of putting words in a dead man's mouth to prop up your own viewpoint, that opinion alone indicates his vision of WoT and mine will never align well enough for me to enjoy it.

Wow. If this isn't the pot calling the kettle black.

 

3 minutes ago, UOweTamASword said:

I've heard directly from Brandon that reading through the draft of scripts he found the characters to be unlikable and even ***holes (strong words from Brandon). To me that's not a time for a revision, but a time to question the entire approach. Obviously that's not plausible because they involved Brandon as a late in the process consultant (correct me if I'm wrong).

And you are cherry picking (and taking out of context) Brandon's statements. He has said very positive things about the show. Very positive things about the way Rafe approaches the process of the adaptation.

 

Likewise, Harriet has publicly said very positive things about the show and about Rafe. You ask why you should be reassured? Because the people who know the most are saying reassuring things. The degree of cynicism required to simply assume without evidence that their public opinions have been bought is mind boggling to me.  

[Jaysen Gore]

6 minutes ago, UOweTamASword said:

 

My own interpretation (and reality since Rafe is the showrunner) is that these people have zero say in the final product. They offer opinions and if Rafe doesn't like them, he can say "thanks for your thoughts" and move on.

 

I've heard directly from Brandon that reading through the draft of scripts he found the characters to be unlikable and even ***holes (strong words from Brandon). To me that's not a time for a revision, but a time to question the entire approach. Obviously that's not plausible because they involved Brandon as a late in the process consultant (correct me if I'm wrong).

 

Why should I be reassured by any of this? Rafe could have consulted with me and it would make no difference, because I'd not tell him what he wants to hear. From my perspective this is ultimately Rafe's vision and these consultants are just there to help him iron out the details.

 

Rafe's said he thinks Jordan would write the series differently if alive today. Leaving aside the distasteful act of putting words in a dead man's mouth to prop up your own viewpoint, that opinion alone indicates his vision of WoT and mine will never align well enough for me to enjoy it.

 

Edit: I'd also like to know how Harriet is involved, I haven't heard that. I only know the quote (paraphrasing) from her to Jordan on her approach to these things: "Sell the rights, clear the checks and don't ever watch the movie!"

But having your opinion and rationale heard and rejected is not the same as having NO say. Prayers are always answered, just most of the time, the answer is no.

 

And I expect both Brandon and Sarah are there for plot integrity, not character integrity. Making sure that changes made to the plot doesn't lop off entire branches before they're ready to deal with them. The character changes are a lost cause, because Hollywood always wins. 

[UOweTamASword]

12 minutes ago, Jaysen Gore said:

I too thought that it was a really good idea in the books, I just think the political realities inherent in opening that can of worms is such that they just cut it and move on; if they can't do something that complex wwell, better not to touch it at all. We're talking about TV, and one of the things I think it sucks at is doing subtle and complicated, and the implications of a male soul in a female body (even if you ignore the "spawn of the devil" real world issues) are way too complicated to manage inside the series. 

 

And, see, here's an example of what I think of as unnecessary change. I see no reason not to keep all 13, because the 5 missing ones from that statue shot (Aginor, Balth, Be'lal, Rahvin, and Semirhage) are probably in 7 scenes (3 for Rahvin, 1 for the rest) for a total of maybe 10 minutes in the entire TV series.  So until proven otherwise, they didn't have statues, because they're not going to last long enough to matter.

 

On a first inclination, I'd like to think they could just do it as done in the book - which isn't very complicated to me if you've established the magic system. And leave all the outside interpretations re: transgender to others interpretation. But you're probably right in that many look for a reason to be offended nowadays, many would see it as a refutation or a celebration depending on whatever they wanted to see.

 

Do you think they'll actually include all 13 or is that just your hope? I'm just making my educated guess on this, but I'd wager very unlikely they will.

[Theseus78]

22 minutes ago, UOweTamASword said:

 

Hmm, I actually thought it was an interesting twist having Aran'gar infiltrate the Aes Sedai camp while channeling saidin. What did you not like about it? I'd wager you'll get your way though on that, the show seems to have very different opinions from the book on what and how male/female channeling differs.

 

On top of that I believe they're trimming the Forsaken from 13 to 8, and Balthamel and Aginor are no doubt near the top of that list.

 

 

As I said before, if they can brush off Sanderson, they can brush off Sarah (a WoT superfan?). So you can see how this reassures me not at all. All this makes clear to me is that Sarah is not a direct part of the writing process (in that she's not in the writing room) and no other expert is either (or they wouldn't need to consult her as such).

 

That they consult with someone on things like this after they come up with them wouldn't even assure me if they actually had veto power (which they clearly don't). After all, we are dependent on the writer's room (no WoT experts and some non-readers) to determine what is a change and whether its even worth paying their consultant to consider. Or at least I hope she's paid!

 

I'd be interested to hear whether Sarah thinks the WoT books are great as-is or if she'd like to edit them in certains ways if given a chance (and how). That would illuminate a bit what kind of expert opinion they're occasionally including.

Your position as stated was:

Quote

In reality you have writers who are making stuff up that sounds good and, no, I didn’t call them stupid, but have they thought things out as far as Jordan did? Absolutely not. So why make the changes, when you’ve got something better?

I'm simply proving that your position as stated is incorrect.  They have thought these things out.  Sarah's entire job is to think these things out.  They may still make the change, once they understand the implications.

 

Now, you want to move the goalposts and say that no changes should be made because Jordan's version is the best.  That's an entirely subjective viewpoint.  Changes are required to get anything from book to print.  There are lots of parts that are going to get cut.  I'm not going to miss Perrin's PLOD to get Faile back.   

[UOweTamASword]

24 minutes ago, Elder_Haman said:

Wow. If this isn't the pot calling the kettle black.

 

And you are cherry picking (and taking out of context) Brandon's statements. He has said very positive things about the show. Very positive things about the way Rafe approaches the process of the adaptation.

 

Likewise, Harriet has publicly said very positive things about the show and about Rafe. You ask why you should be reassured? Because the people who know the most are saying reassuring things. The degree of cynicism required to simply assume without evidence that their public opinions have been bought is mind boggling to me.  

 

The pot calling the kettle black? What did I call you or anyone else?

 

I do like how you're moving the conversation from what say they had in the project (not much if any imo) to now talking about what their opinions may be after the fact. Just wanted to note that before responding.

 

I haven't said their opinions are bought, you're once again putting words in my mouth. But if I say something positive about someone that doesn't always mean that they're my favorite person. Have you ever heard the phrase "If you don't have something nice to say about someone, don't say anything at all"?

 

In the same sense there is zero gain for Sanderson or Harriet to trash this show and much to lose. So even if they hated it with every fiber of their being they'd be wise to keep that opinion to themselves. And I'm not saying they do, they clearly don't, but the point being that positive opinions after the fact (i.e. too late to change anything) mean nothing to me.

 

I can tolerate a dr pepper you brought to me to drink, but if you'd asked me first I'd rather have had a chocolate milk. Why should I be reassured that Sanderson and Harriet may not mind the flavor of beverage they had little to no say in, if I find the taste repugnant? Should I drink something that tastes like sewer water to me because they didn't mind it?

 

21 minutes ago, Jaysen Gore said:

But having your opinion and rationale heard and rejected is not the same as having NO say. Prayers are always answered, just most of the time, the answer is no.

 

And I expect both Brandon and Sarah are there for plot integrity, not character integrity. Making sure that changes made to the plot doesn't lop off entire branches before they're ready to deal with them. The character changes are a lost cause, because Hollywood always wins. 

 

I like your analogy: I may pray to God, but if God really wants something to happen do I have a say in whether it does? Absolutely not. A prayer is a request, its only input if God wants it to be.

 

I agree 100% with you on your second paragraph and that's what worries me. It seems to me the show writers are using these consultants to help them double check for plotholes, not for any type of check on whether the spirit of the books is being satisfied or characters done justice. If they cared about that they'd have gone about this very differently (including putting a WoT "expert" directly in the writer's room).

 

19 minutes ago, Theseus78 said:

Your position as stated was:

I'm simply proving that your position as stated is incorrect.  They have thought these things out.  Sarah's entire job is to think these things out.  They may still make the change, once they understand the implications.

 

Now, you want to move the goalposts and say that no changes should be made because Jordan's version is the best.  That's an entirely subjective viewpoint.  Changes are required to get anything from book to print.  There are lots of parts that are going to get cut.  I'm not going to miss Perrin's PLOD to get Faile back.   

 

You're the one "moving the goalposts" or just not reading what I said. I said they haven't thought things out as far as Jordan did. Note the emphasis. Not that they haven't thought things out at all. Two very different measures.

Edited December 21, 2021 by UOweTamASword

[Jaysen Gore]

2 minutes ago, UOweTamASword said:

 

On a first inclination, I'd like to think they could just do it as done in the book - which isn't very complicated to me if you've established the magic system. And leave all the outside interpretations re: transgender to others interpretation. But you're probably right in that many look for a reason to be offended nowadays, many would see it as a refutation or a celebration depending on whatever they wanted to see.

 

Do you think they'll actually include all 13 or is that just your hope? I'm just making my educated guess on this, but I'd wager very unlikely they will.

My belief - both hope, and story logic - is that the death / defeat of the Forsaken are major plot points for our heroes, so if they aren't going to use them, they'd have to replace them. If it's just Ba'alzamon at the Eye, who does Moiraine battle to trigger Rand, for example? Or remove Be'lal, and who is Rand's real challenge at the Stone? Or what drives Morgase out of Camelyn, setting Elayne up to be Queen? Sure you could have Sammael do all of those, but then he's the villain always escaping from our heroes, making them look weak. And it also turns Sammael (or Demandred) into king of half the world - Camelyn, Illian, Tear - since the female forsaken are needed where they are

 

If as you say, they haven't worked this out to the nth degree, then eliminating Forsaken up front is probably a bad move. since they don't know if they need them again or not.  But if they have, then I have to think they keep them, because as I noted, they're speed bumps for Rand, nothing more.

 

It's Occam's Razor - keeping them is less work than replacing them.

[DigificWriter]

2 minutes ago, UOweTamASword said:

I said they haven't thought things out as far as Jordan did.

 

There's absolutely no way for you to know how much planning has been done for the series unless you're actually affiliated with it.

[UOweTamASword]

3 minutes ago, Jaysen Gore said:

My belief - both hope, and story logic - is that the death / defeat of the Forsaken are major plot points for our heroes, so if they aren't going to use them, they'd have to replace them. If it's just Ba'alzamon at the Eye, who does Moiraine battle to trigger Rand, for example? Or remove Be'lal, and who is Rand's real challenge at the Stone? Or what drives Morgase out of Camelyn, setting Elayne up to be Queen? Sure you could have Sammael do all of those, but then he's the villain always escaping from our heroes, making them look weak. And it also turns Sammael (or Demandred) into king of half the world - Camelyn, Illian, Tear - since the female forsaken are needed where they are

 

If as you say, they haven't worked this out to the nth degree, then eliminating Forsaken up front is probably a bad move. since they don't know if they need them again or not.  But if they have, then I have to think they keep them, because as I noted, they're speed bumps for Rand, nothing more.

 

It's Occam's Razor - keeping them is less work than replacing them.

 

I'd argue keeping the story as-is is easier than changing/replacing it in almost every case, and perhaps you'd agree. But I'd wager the showrunners don't feel that way based on the changes so far. Either that or they just really like a challenge ?

 

To play devil's advocate, would giving those roles to Sammael who isn't killed not just make the Forsaken more formidable like you said you hoped they'd be? But the issue with that is they'd be taking moments away from Moiraine and that doesn't seem likely to me, the showrunners seem to like Moiraine. You may be right, I certainly agree that keeping them is much easier and better than the other way around.

 

I'd still wager they cut them, because that's what this show seems to like to do a lot of so far whether it makes sense to me or not. But you've introduced some doubts to my wager!

[UOweTamASword]

15 minutes ago, DigificWriter said:

 

There's absolutely no way for you to know how much planning has been done for the series unless you're actually affiliated with it.

 

Technically there's no way for me to be 100% sure that Rafe isn't the reincarnated, improved, and more progressive version of Robert Jordan (as God intended him to be). Not without being Rafe or God (two different entities imo).

 

That said, do you think the writers have or ever will (even adding them all put together) put ~30 years of planning into this story? Because that's how much thought Jordan put into the final product of the Wheel of Time. And that's assuming they're as capable as Jordan, which I have to laugh at.

 

Sure, Jordan, didn't put 25 years into it before starting. If you'd like consider he started work in 1984 and finished EotW in 1990, that's 6 years. Is it really controversial on here to say Jordan put in more thought in those 6 years than Rafe did? On a Wheel of Time "fan" forum no less!

 

And here they are making changes to the product that ripple down those 25 years, and after its all said and done Jordan's product came out certified platinum (imo). Messing with that is somewhere between silly and nefarious, from my perspective.

Edited December 21, 2021 by UOweTamASword

[Elder_Haman]

26 minutes ago, UOweTamASword said:

The pot calling the kettle black? What did I call you or anyone else?

You’re talking about it being distasteful to put words in the mouth of a dead man while putting words in the mouth of the same dead man. 

[dwn]

1 hour ago, Jaysen Gore said:

For context, here's a few changes I'm desperately hoping get made. And they are definitely cutting away

- eliminate the Shaido at Dumai's Wells. Just gone.

- radically shorten Perrin's 3 book hunt for Faile

- greatly reduce Elayne's political games in Camelyn

- eliminate the resurrected Forsaken

I'll start with just that, and see how much of what's left I can fit in 8 seasons. If I still need more, than Morgase dies at Rahvin's hands, there's no WT embassy to the BT, and people get on and off boats, but don't spend time on them learning to channel.

 

From there, rebalance / schedule the remaining storylines so characters have a smooth arc over the length of the series, and maybe make changes to respond to the above pruning.

To this I'd add reduce or drastically rework the entire Ebou Dar sequence, particularly Mat's escape from Altara. Fun as it is to read, it's just as much of a quagmire as Perrin and Elayne's plotlines in the later books.

[JaimAybara]

I watched in an interview with Sanderson where he said he had no gag order regarding whether or not he likes the show. If he doesn’t like it, he is free to torch it. Now, whether he would or not if he didn’t like it is hard to say, because he also has stated he will let it succeed or fail by its own merits, but it’s pretty cool to know. If it for whatever reason it does completely go off the rails he does have the right to take a flamethrower to it. Which I was surprised to find out to be honest. 
 

 

*Around the 5:15 mark he says he’s allowed to say whatever he wants. So for those who wanted clarity on his opinion at least, he’s let us know we will likely get it one way or the other.* 

 

Edited December 21, 2021 by JaimAybara
*Added the receipts*

[UOweTamASword]

10 minutes ago, Elder_Haman said:

You’re talking about it being distasteful to put words in the mouth of a dead man while putting words in the mouth of the same dead man. 

 

Go ahead and quote where I put words in a dead man's mouth. I'd be happy to hear it smh

[dwn]

40 minutes ago, Jaysen Gore said:

My belief - both hope, and story logic - is that the death / defeat of the Forsaken are major plot points for our heroes, so if they aren't going to use them, they'd have to replace them. If it's just Ba'alzamon at the Eye, who does Moiraine battle to trigger Rand, for example? Or remove Be'lal, and who is Rand's real challenge at the Stone? Or what drives Morgase out of Camelyn, setting Elayne up to be Queen? Sure you could have Sammael do all of those, but then he's the villain always escaping from our heroes, making them look weak. And it also turns Sammael (or Demandred) into king of half the world - Camelyn, Illian, Tear - since the female forsaken are needed where they are

 

If as you say, they haven't worked this out to the nth degree, then eliminating Forsaken up front is probably a bad move. since they don't know if they need them again or not.  But if they have, then I have to think they keep them, because as I noted, they're speed bumps for Rand, nothing more.

 

It's Occam's Razor - keeping them is less work than replacing them.

The Forsaken are a tricky problem. Except for Ishamael, Lanfear and Moghedion (others were key to certain plot points, but not given as much screen time or personality as those three), they were a lot of build-up with little payoff. Were the show to double down on the legendary demonic figures being, in reality, just people, they could definitely keep all 13 and squish them as necessary. Eliminate the resurrection bit (which would be confusing for a TV production anyway), and they could winnow down the core antagonists into the plotlines where they matter without too much fuss.

[Jaysen Gore]

2 minutes ago, UOweTamASword said:

 

I'd argue keeping the story as-is is easier than changing/replacing it in almost every case, and perhaps you'd agree. But I'd wager the showrunners don't feel that way based on the changes so far. Either that or they just really like a challenge ?

 

To play devil's advocate, would giving those roles to Sammael who isn't killed not just make the Forsaken more formidable like you said you hoped they'd be? But the issue with that is they'd be taking moments away from Moiraine and that doesn't seem likely to me, the showrunners seem to like Moiraine. You may be right, I certainly agree that keeping them is much easier and better than the other way around.

 

I'd still wager they cut them, because that's what this show seems to like to do a lot of so far whether it makes sense to me or not. But you've introduced some doubts to my wager!

ON TOPIC 1

I wouldn't go as far as you in your first paragraph changes can be good and beneficial once you accept the limitations of the series as an input. Imagine if they'd tried to add all of Perrin's wolf journey and the Camelyn stop from the book in. So they redo episode 5 and 6 in their entirety. Great. No more Steppin, no more wailing Lan. We're more faithful to the book. Hurray! But now in season 2. they MUST:

1. introduce the mechanics of the warder bond, without multiple warders in danger

2. set up the Aes Sedai culture

3. set up the power struggle in the Tower when the only PoV characters are wet behind the ears novices. 

4. introduce the Trakands, and establish their relationships with our girls.

5. teach the mechanics of the One Power to us and the girls so they can do something at Falme

6. Set Up Nynaeve's block, and her being raised

All before they're Lian-napped, likely in episode 5

At best, I think there's maybe 100 minutes of screen time available to accomplish all of the above. It's rushed, it's exposition heavy, and it doesn't have a lot of room for relationship moments. And if they don't give this progress time, cries of Mary Sue will come loudly

 

Also you now go more than a season having Perrin not progress, since if he learns Wolfbrother in S1, his next major character event is meeting Noam in Season 3.

 

Instead, the way they've done it, 1,2, 3 and a little of 5 are already done, there's a shorter time frame between the intro of Wolfbrother concepts and the Noam meeting, while giving Perrin something to do on the road in S2; they've avoided Camelyn production costs, likely eliminated a recurring role (Hurin or Elyas), and delayed another by a season (Elaida). And the only things that are really missing are Rand intriguing Elayne (handle it in Tear), and Elaida's prophecy (not that necessary, even if it was a great scene). 

 

There's a script guy on here, so he may correct me, but I suspect the above was the heart of the debate in their decision to make the changes they did.

 

TOPIC 2

The downside with having any Forsaken survive the Eye is that it either cripples their fear factor if they run from Rand and Moiraine, or you have to make Rand too strong too fast to justify retreat.  Someone weaker can get lucky and beat someone stronger, especially if there's help from a semi-supernatural being. But forcing a tactical retreat is a whole different thing

[king of nowhere]

2 hours ago, Elder_Haman said:

They have Sarah on the team. They have Brandon Sanderson as a script consultant. Harriet is involved. What more do you want? Short of resurrecting Jordan and having him write the scripts, what could possibly satisfy you?

you know, when they adapted terry pratchett books, and pterry himself was still alive and he approved the changes, some fans argued that he "didn't understand his own work".

so no, not even resurrecting jordan would satidfy some people.

5 hours ago, TheMountain said:

Sure, if one is only comparing the magic systems. Worldbuilding is much more than just magic though. Where Tolkien excelled was in the creation of languages, cultures, legends, religion and histories. There are volumes and volumes of worldbuilding he wrote before ever getting started on LotR. I know because I've read almost all of them.

and none of that is much apprent in the movies. that's my point. the whole worldbuilding of lotr was greatly reduced. you get hints here and there, yes, but you never get the full picture you would get in the books. I watched the movies first, read the books later, and I missed most of it until i read the books.

and same with wot. and with witcher. and with dune. because a movie cannot do that the same way that a book can.

and if you like to put attention to those kind of detail, and you pretend to get them, then there's no way a movie adaptation is ever going to leave you satisfied.

 

It's as impossible as complaining that action sequences in a book are not as beautiful as they are in a movie.

like, the blood snow sequence, that was beautiful, and much better than the book version. there's no way the books can convey that fight sequence and do it justice. there's no way the descriptions of tar valon can keep up with the actual image in the show.

and there's no way the worldbuilding and deep characterization we get in the books can be fully transposed in television.

those are the limitations of the media about which i was trying to make a point.

Edited December 21, 2021 by king of nowhere

[Mailman]

1 hour ago, Jaysen Gore said:

ON TOPIC 1

I wouldn't go as far as you in your first paragraph changes can be good and beneficial once you accept the limitations of the series as an input. Imagine if they'd tried to add all of Perrin's wolf journey and the Camelyn stop from the book in. So they redo episode 5 and 6 in their entirety. Great. No more Steppin, no more wailing Lan. We're more faithful to the book. Hurray! But now in season 2. they MUST:

1. introduce the mechanics of the warder bond, without multiple warders in danger

2. set up the Aes Sedai culture

3. set up the power struggle in the Tower when the only PoV characters are wet behind the ears novices. 

4. introduce the Trakands, and establish their relationships with our girls.

5. teach the mechanics of the One Power to us and the girls so they can do something at Falme

6. Set Up Nynaeve's block, and her being raised

All before they're Lian-napped, likely in episode 5

At best, I think there's maybe 100 minutes of screen time available to accomplish all of the above. It's rushed, it's exposition heavy, and it doesn't have a lot of room for relationship moments. And if they don't give this progress time, cries of Mary Sue will come loudly

 

Also you now go more than a season having Perrin not progress, since if he learns Wolfbrother in S1, his next major character event is meeting Noam in Season 3.

 

Instead, the way they've done it, 1,2, 3 and a little of 5 are already done, there's a shorter time frame between the intro of Wolfbrother concepts and the Noam meeting, while giving Perrin something to do on the road in S2; they've avoided Camelyn production costs, likely eliminated a recurring role (Hurin or Elyas), and delayed another by a season (Elaida). And the only things that are really missing are Rand intriguing Elayne (handle it in Tear), and Elaida's prophecy (not that necessary, even if it was a great scene). 

 

There's a script guy on here, so he may correct me, but I suspect the above was the heart of the debate in their decision to make the changes they did.

 

TOPIC 2

The downside with having any Forsaken survive the Eye is that it either cripples their fear factor if they run from Rand and Moiraine, or you have to make Rand too strong too fast to justify retreat.  Someone weaker can get lucky and beat someone stronger, especially if there's help from a semi-supernatural being. But forcing a tactical retreat is a whole different thing

You dont think Nynaeve at the moment is already in Mary Sue range. She has shown up Moiraine and Aes Sedai twice already in one power situations and has not only tracked Lan but managed to get a blade to the throat of the best fighter in the world.

[Jaysen Gore]

4 minutes ago, Mailman said:

You dont think Nynaeve at the moment is already in Mary Sue range. She has shown up Moiraine and Aes Sedai twice already in one power situations and has not only tracked Lan but managed to get a blade to the throat of the best fighter in the world.

if she doesn't get her block next season, we'll talk.

[Windigo]

32 minutes ago, Jaysen Gore said:

if she doesn't get her block next season, we'll talk.

I agree, so far we have only seen her show her strength in the power, but without intent in anger or dire situations, I am hoping that since they have only shown those situations that once she try's to channel on purpose, she will have the block and can't.