S1E8: The Eye of the World v2

[JeffTheWoodlandElf]

5 minutes ago, Weird_Old_Lady said:

There was no wrong in this situation. A group of consenting adults have a relationship. Yes. That could be reversed and I would be fine with it. Why is it wrong in your opinion?

Well then, all the women from old James Bond movies were also consenting adults in a relationship and there's nothing wrong with their portrayal either. So long as we agree on that, we're golden. 

[KakitaOCU]

1 hour ago, Jaysen Gore said:

Did Perrin kill his wife in the book?

Did Matt steal from Edmond's Fielders in the book?

Did Abell sleep around on his wife and not protect his family in the book?

Did Nynaeve get a knife to Lan's throat in the book?

Did Tam kill multiple trollocs in the book?

Did 5 women kill 500 trollocs in the book?

Did LTT act from desperation in the book?

Did Lan decide to take them to SL in the book?

Did women fight at Fal Dara, or did they evacuate in the book?

How many people did Nynaeve heal with channeling in the book? More or less than in the cave?

 

Did every one one of the changes I listed above make women look stronger and men weaker than in the books?

Nope, Perrin killed other people in a berserker rage, no change in dynamic other than this time he has a reason to care other than general human decency.

We don't know what Mat did in book 1, he was a non-entity until after the dagger had him.  So maybe.

Abell is a bad change and I've vocally agreed with that.

No, she just stealthed up on him and sat there in his presence while he didn't notice.

Tam did.  Which was something that yanked me out of the book because if he hadn't practiced the blade in 20 years he would have been unbelievably rusty.  As was he still showed himself dangerous and powerful.

LTT acted from hubris and arrogance from the get go, giving over temporarily only because he thought he'd fail and then pushing forward on his own heedless of risk because he decided he was right.

Not sure how many Moraine killed by herself.  If Shienar had Aes Sedai they would have held the Gap without Rand's Deus Ex.

Lan did decide that, vocally and in argument with Moraine until she finally caved and accepted his recommendation.  If anything TV Lan made a command decision from strength where as Book Lan argued and pleaded until the strong woman gave him his way.

Women evacuated, a lovely sexist and nonsensical step that in no way weakens men by changing.

Nynaeve's block was fully in place in book 1.  But again, making her stronger doesn't make men weaker, you're bias is showing in the last two points.

None of this made men weak, that you find any lack of success a sign of weakness and any significant task done by a woman a sign of emasculation is troubling to an extreme.

Edited January 3, 2022 by KakitaOCU

[Ralph]

3 minutes ago, Guire said:

In general I think most of the characters are less appealing.  I don't have a narrative other than characters I have loved for 30 are being changed.  I am happy for people who can get joy from these changes.  Saying there is not a pattern in these changes though is just a bit silly.  And most of the positive reviews mention these changes as a large part of the reviewers enjoyment of show.

Mention downgrading the men? None I have seen

 

There are reviews that have praised the updating of the gender divide, and the fact that Eg and N are ta'veren. None have praised the changes to Perrin or Mat because they are lesser characters, as men should be, in the way you are perceiving the "agenda" 

 

Not sure where you have seen this

[MasterAblar]

40 minutes ago, JeffTheWoodlandElf said:

Did Lan have to be told by village girl Nynaeve how to track his own Aes Sedai? 

Did Egwene get to stab Valda while a terrified Rand runs away from a short woman? 

Was Lews Therin the Tamyrlin Seat? 

Was Agelmar respectful of Aes Sedai and also one of the Five Great Generals? 

Was Amalisa not a minor character of far less importance than her husband? 

Didn't Logain need 6 women to shield him in the books but in the show it's only 3? 

Does Loial open the Ways or is it Moiraine? 

Does Nynaeve have a block in the books? 

Are Warders treated as tools for sex in the books? (Okay, gotta expand on this because no one has mentioned it. But, like, in episode 4 there's those two gay warders who are lounging by the fire and then their Aes Sedai comes over and is all like, "Time for sex" and they just get up and go to service her. Can you freaking imagine if this scene was gender swapped??? Of course, "problematic" material often only goes one way.) 

 

Anyway, the list goes on and on and on. And the tragic irony is that these attempts to prop up the women actually totally backfire. The writers' desperate attempts to make them cool are so transparent as to be laughable and actually make the female characters seem somehow more pathetic than their book counterparts. 

 

No offence but half of these are wrong or just silly.

 

Rand has literally no combat experience whatsoever and he's faced with someone who has a sword to his throat and while he is unarmed you expect him to not run away?

 

Both Amalisa and Agelmar are very minor characters to be honest. 

 

Logain had 6 random women to shield him. Here he had 3 of the very strongest in the tower. And he still killed one.

 

No Moiraine opens the Ways not Loial.

 

Nyneave hasn't been shown to have a block yet and while I think they've probably gone over the top with what she can do her block will probably be cause by ptsd from episode 8. Which isn't a bad change to be honest.

[Weird_Old_Lady]

4 minutes ago, JeffTheWoodlandElf said:

Well then, all the women from old James Bond movies were also consenting adults in a relationship and there's nothing wrong with their portrayal either. So long as we agree on that, we're golden. 

Yes. Those are fine. It's the fact that we didn't get it the other way round until 2021 that makes it kinda gross.  We are not evicting you from the field, we just are gonna play too now. As long as you wear protection your balls will be fine. Honest.

[VooDooNut]

6 minutes ago, Weird_Old_Lady said:

Dear Ball-Havers,

 

Just because we want to play too does not mean we are evicting you from the field. Calm down. Your own personal balls are safe.

Is no one else thinking of this scene? ?

[notpropaganda73]

15 minutes ago, Guire said:

In general I think most of the characters are less appealing.  I don't have a narrative other than characters I have loved for 30 are being changed.  I am happy for people who can get joy from these changes.  Saying there is not a pattern in these changes though is just a bit silly.  And most of the positive reviews mention these changes as a large part of the reviewers enjoyment of show.

 

Apologies, the 2nd part of my post was more aimed at the general tenor of the recent comments in this thread rather than your post, the first part was just responding to you, I should have been clearer. 

 

Edit: But I do not see the pattern that some of the recent posters in this thread see. I see changes to characters, some bad, some good (imo). Mat is one that is constantly brought up but I think the change to his background will make him one of the more compelling characters in the show. He was my partners' favourite of all the main cast until he left the show. She was shouting at the screen when Padan Fain talked about one of the EF5 turning to the dark and it showed Mat because she thinks they're all wrong about him, and that Rand is right (she also hates Egwene because of that scene where she criticised Mat). It's anecdotal I know, but there's at least one person out there that has enjoyed that character as the show has presented him.

 

Edited January 3, 2022 by notpropaganda73

[JeffTheWoodlandElf]

5 minutes ago, Ralph said:

Were you concerned about this potential before the show started, due to Rafe's comments about being a feminist and updating certain parts of the gender divide in WOT? 

 

I'll be open about it and say that, yes, I suspected that this was the way it was gonna go from the beginning. I was calling that the show would turn out the way it did 4 years ago when Rafe's first interviews were coming out (or whenever that was). 

 

However, if this is confirmation bias, and I am just looking for this stuff, Rafe certainly didn't make it hard on me. 

 

If there was an adaptation of Misborn that "emphasized the ensemble" and pushed Vin to the side in favor of Kelsier, Elend, or Sazed, people would be incensed. When it happens to the men of WoT, it's only Tuesday. 

[Jaysen Gore]

7 minutes ago, Ralph said:

I still want to hear from each of the many participants on this forum who are seeing an "agenda" - 

 

Were you concerned about this potential before the show started, due to Rafe's comments about being a feminist and updating certain parts of the gender divide in WOT? 

 

I have asked this several times and not received any response, and I still suspect there is confirmation bias going on over here. 

 

I haven't seen a single change I believe was motivated by trying to downgrade the men. Every change has its reason, which may or may not be justified, but I believe only someone looking for it would see this as an agenda

I'm not seeing an "agenda", I'm seeing a pattern. I have no idea about Rafe's personal political leanings, and I don't care. I don't know if there was an intentional plan to devalue the male characters. No one outside the production room does, or believably claim that they do. 

 

What I know is that changes from the books have been made at the character and plot level, and almost without fail, those changes have resulted in the male characters looking less effective / competent / good than they are in the books, without any offsetting examples of where they are made to look better, or even in a lot of cases to look the same as they do in the books. 

[Guire]

1 minute ago, Weird_Old_Lady said:

Yes. Those are fine. It's the fact that we didn't get it the other way round until 2021 that makes it kinda gross.  We are not evicting you from the field, we just are gonna play too now. As long as you wear protection your balls will be fine. Honest.

I don't watch a ton of tv.  But I remember Walking Dead, The 100, GoT, Shannara all having important female and LGBTQ characters.  Creating new IP with representative characters is wonderful.  What was reason for changes in WoTshow?  Adding more perspective from female PoV is good.  Male characters changes can be explained away all day.  They weren't needed to make show good.  

[KakitaOCU]

13 minutes ago, MasterAblar said:

Rand has literally no combat experience whatsoever and he's faced with someone who has a sword to his throat and while he is unarmed you expect him to not run away?

To follow up on this.  Now, I could be wrong because it's such a small part of the books that very rarely comes up.  But doesn't Rand have a very strong aversion to harming women?  O:-)

[KakitaOCU]

8 minutes ago, JeffTheWoodlandElf said:

If there was an adaptation of Misborn that "emphasized the ensemble" and pushed Vin to the side in favor of Kelsier, Elend, or Sazed, people would be incensed. When it happens to the men of WoT, it's only Tuesday. 

If there's an adaptation of Mistborn and it's the one woman Vin show without equal focus on the other three main characters I'll be very displeased.  Much like Rand, she's a main character, not The main character.

More to the point, if we were making a show of Mistborn Final Empire:  Vin's a secondary character behind Kelsier until the 2/3rds moment.

If we're doing the Trilogy then she's not important until about halfway through the first film/season and then shares screen with Elend for next season or so and then eventually gets eclipsed by Sazed.

Edited January 3, 2022 by KakitaOCU

[JeffTheWoodlandElf]

12 minutes ago, Weird_Old_Lady said:

Dear Ball-Havers,

 

Just because we want to play too does not mean we are evicting you from the field. Calm down. Your own personal balls are safe.

Lol This is good. 

 

All I'm saying is that WoTTV should have been WoT. If the WoT showrunners wanted to push their own ideas, they should have made something original or picked another property to adapt which already suited those goals.

 

I welcome non-ball-havers. I've long said that I prefer media with female characters because 9/10 I'd rather watch a lady doing something than a dude (The other 1/10 is the WNBA). 

 

But WoT could have been an empowering show for women while also representing the characters accurately. The fact that changes were made seemingly to compensate for an inequality which didn't really exist in the books shows that if anyone is insecure, it's the WoTTV writers. 

[notpropaganda73]

4 minutes ago, Jaysen Gore said:

I'm not seeing an "agenda", I'm seeing a pattern. I have no idea about Rafe's personal political leanings, and I don't care. I don't know if there was an intentional plan to devalue the male characters. No one outside the production room does, or believably claim that they do. 

 

What I know is that changes from the books have been made at the character and plot level, and almost without fail, those changes have resulted in the male characters looking less effective / competent / good than they are in the books, without any offsetting examples of where they are made to look better, or even in a lot of cases to look the same as they do in the books. 

 

Honestly, the only one that I am super critical of the show on is Lan. I think they made a good move in adding nuance and emotional depth to him - but they have really missed a trick by not giving him small character moments to show him as the badass he is. The only time they attempted it was in episode 7 when he was suddenly behind Nynaeve, which I think was their attempt at a call back to Nynaeve tracking him, but honestly it was just badly done and came off as cheesy. They could have added the nuance and emotional depth to Lan without losing any of the stuff that makes him so great (imo). 

 

The other ones that are constantly listed, I genuinely see good story reasons for the changes, and then it's just about execution. Perrin = badly executed, really ineffective, and he needs a LOT of help to develop as a character in S2 (please Elyas please). Mat = well executed (imo) and unfortunate that the actor left. I think he is set up to be one of the most interesting characters in the show. Rand = middle of the road. What we've seen of him I think has been good for the most part. But he was sidelined for too long and they made bad choices in not showing Tam's fever dream early or giving us more dream sequences or another scene or two of Mat and Rand on the road on their own. 

[VooDooNut]

1 minute ago, KakitaOCU said:

To follow up on this.  Now, I could be wrong because it's such a small part of the books that very rarely comes up.  But doesn't Rand have a very strong aversion to harming women?  O:-)

That's a very minor character detail. Rarely an issue in the books. I'd forget about it myself if I didn't add it to this list I keep in my head for daily recitation.

[fra85uk]

17 minutes ago, KakitaOCU said:

To follow up on this.  Now, I could be wrong because it's such a small part of the books that very rarely comes up.  But doesn't Rand have a very strong aversion to harming women?  O:-)

Yes but in the books a meeting very similar with Dana the Darkfriend ends up with the lady getting disarmed and tied.

 

However, i am not really bothered anymore About how pathetic and poorly written/acted is that single DF encounter in the show but the fact that, with so many different DF encounters written in the books they had to come out with that BS.

 

Just for say, if i could choose one DF encounter from Eotw i would go for the one in the inn with the skinny owner, it was full of tension.

Edited January 3, 2022 by fra85uk

[JeffTheWoodlandElf]

18 minutes ago, Weird_Old_Lady said:

Yes. Those are fine. It's the fact that we didn't get it the other way round until 2021 that makes it kinda gross.  We are not evicting you from the field, we just are gonna play too now. As long as you wear protection your balls will be fine. Honest.

Okay cool. So we don't disagree haha 

 

My comments are aimed at the people who act like there was something inherently wrong about that stuff to begin with but have no problem when it's reversed. 

 

That isn't you, and I apologize for misunderstanding where you were coming from in the first place. Please accept this totally radical (and sanitary) fistbump.

 

*fistbump*

[JeffTheWoodlandElf]

Just now, fra85uk said:

Just for say, if i could choose one DF encounter from Eotw i would go for the one in the inn with the skinny owner, it was full of tension.

Rafe: *nervously googles "tension"*

[Jaysen Gore]

19 minutes ago, KakitaOCU said:

Nope, Perrin killed other people in a berserker rage, no change in dynamic other than this time he has a reason to care other than general human decency.

We don't know what Mat did in book 1, he was a non-entity until after the dagger had him.  So maybe.

Abell is a bad change and I've vocally agreed with that.

No, she just stealthed up on him and sat there in his presence while he didn't notice.

Tam did.  Which was something that yanked me out of the book because if he hadn't practiced the blade in 20 years he would have been unbelievably rusty.  As was he still showed himself dangerous and powerful.

LTT acted from hubris and arrogance from the get go, giving over temporarily only because he thought he'd fail and then pushing forward on his own heedless of risk because he decided he was right.

Not sure how many Moraine killed by herself.  If Shienar had Aes Sedai they would have held the Gap without Rand's Deus Ex.

Lan did decide that, vocally and in argument with Moraine until she finally caved and accepted his recommendation.  If anything TV Lan made a command decision from strength where as Book Lan argued and pleaded until the strong woman gave him his way.

Women evacuated, a lovely sexist and nonsensical step that in no way weakens men by changing.

Nynaeve's block was fully in place in book 1.  But again, making her stronger doesn't make men weaker, you're bias is showing in the last two points.

None of this made men weak, that you find any lack of success a sign of weakness and any significant task done by a woman a sign of emasculation is troubling to an extreme.

So, let's see if I've got this:

- you support this change because general human decency about not killing strangers in a rage is not enough of a barrier to killing people, so you think fridging his wife wass a better way to go, and that there is a believable way for him to overcome this trauma at some point in his life, let alone in the less than 6 months before meeting his new wife.

- you support the change, because you think Mat was a non-entity 

- Nynaeve did not stealth up to him - she was on the other side of a clearing behind a tree; a massive difference than being in melee range.

- Tam - again, you support the change, because you don't agree with what was shown in the book. 

- Aes Sedai in the Gap -  a group of trained sisters as strong as Moiraine (of which there are 3 - Caddy, Siuan, and Elaida) maybe; but that's not what was shown here.

- women fighting in Fal Dara. I guess chivalry is dead, and women and children first no longer need apply.

 

And to claim that I said any significant task done by a woman is emasculating is completely and categorically false.

[EasingTheBadger]

5 hours ago, KakitaOCU said:

 

It's interesting that you contrast Lan against that scene specifically.

That scene is hilariously bad as a living action scene.  (Assuming you mean first episode).  The Crossbow gets off one shot when at minimum there should have been two, the opponents all politely move in one at a time with the camera carefully off them so you don't have to watch them wait patiently in line to die.  The two with Shields hold their shields well behind them never even trying to use them.

Honestly, it's a very sad scene that almost yanked me out of the episode at the time.  Not because Calvil was bad but because there's no situation where 6 armed people and an archer go get killed one at a time

This critique reminds me of many similar comments that a certain cold open in WoT the show stirred up.

 

 I guess perceptions on plausibility depend on what lens you are viewing a particular series through. 

 

Just goes to show that we all have our our own showblindness.

 

[EasingTheBadger]

8 hours ago, Weird_Old_Lady said:

Again I receive the Bela reaction. What does this mean, friends? 

I use it for a post that provides a dependable insight or response.  

Edited January 3, 2022 by EasingTheBadger
Fat fingers

[VooDooNut]

9 minutes ago, Weird_Old_Lady said:

I have never met a feminist that does not believe that men and women should both be allowed consenting adult relationships. 

By definition this makes sense. Though now you've got me imagining the rogue sadomasochistic feminist who takes pleasure in making sure no one, not even themselves, is allowed the pleasures of human experience. But that's not very realistic...unless...

 

[Elder_Haman]

Enough with the talk of balls. Get back on topic please.

[KakitaOCU]

1 minute ago, Jaysen Gore said:

- you support this change because general human decency about not killing strangers in a rage is not enough of a barrier to killing people, so you think fridging his wife wass a better way to go, and that there is a believable way for him to overcome this trauma at some point in his life, let alone in the less than 6 months before meeting his new wife.

Me personally?  No.  But I did spend years in the WoT community constantly seeing people moaning that Perrin should just get over it, killing the White Cloaks wasn't a big deal, they were bad, he was in a fight, it's okay, why is he stressing on it...

What I personally feel is not the same as understanding that a greater audience will find one a cop out and the other a genuine reason to question a choice.  Further.  Even while I'm happy with the book path you can't deny that accidentally hurting someone you care about would be a much more relatable reason to question your path.
 

3 minutes ago, Jaysen Gore said:

- you support the change, because you think Mat was a non-entity 

 

I am indifferent to this change because Mat as a character has not changed and we didn't get anything on Mat pre dagger in the books.  This isn't "I think"  This is in EotW Mat plays a prank, follows the group and then gets the Dagger and changes. 
 

4 minutes ago, Jaysen Gore said:

- Nynaeve did not stealth up to him - she was on the other side of a clearing behind a tree; a massive difference than being in melee range.

I see t his argument a lot, it's not valid.  Stealth is stealth, sneaking closer gives more chance for the stealth person to make a mistake and be heard, but it's not harder, there's just more rolls of the dice so to speak.  Real world funny story?  I've successfully snuck up on people that were actively watching for me, while wearing a bright red coat and carrying a 7 and a half foot polearm.  If you're good at Stealth you're good at Stealth and even the best scouts have off moments.  

 

6 minutes ago, Jaysen Gore said:

- Tam - again, you support the change, because you don't agree with what was shown in the book. 

Fair, but are we arguing changes in general?  I was disagreeing with the idea that there's an agenda to make men weak.  
 

7 minutes ago, Jaysen Gore said:

- Aes Sedai in the Gap -  a group of trained sisters as strong as Moiraine (of which there are 3 - Caddy, Siuan, and Elaida) maybe; but that's not what was shown here.

Cadsuane is stronger by a fair margin.  Lelaine and Romanda are also on Moraine's level.  That said, no, I mean a group of the ones at Alanna, Verin, Annoura, etc strength could do it.  Cadsuane could likely hold it alone given her Paralis net, but that's another story.
 

 

11 minutes ago, Jaysen Gore said:

- women fighting in Fal Dara. I guess chivalry is dead, and women and children first no longer need apply.

That kind of chivalry is sexist plain and simple.  Children should be evacuated and I would argue pregnant women should have the option, but no, making a change to say women can stand up and fight for their lives too is not a change that weakens men.

[Weird_Old_Lady]

8 minutes ago, Jaysen Gore said:

So, let's see if I've got this:

- you support this change because general human decency about not killing strangers in a rage is not enough of a barrier to killing people, so you think fridging his wife wass a better way to go, and that there is a believable way for him to overcome this trauma at some point in his life, let alone in the less than 6 months before meeting his new wife.

- you support the change, because you think Mat was a non-entity 

- Nynaeve did not stealth up to him - she was on the other side of a clearing behind a tree; a massive difference than being in melee range.

- Tam - again, you support the change, because you don't agree with what was shown in the book. 

- Aes Sedai in the Gap -  a group of trained sisters as strong as Moiraine (of which there are 3 - Caddy, Siuan, and Elaida) maybe; but that's not what was shown here.

- women fighting in Fal Dara. I guess chivalry is dead, and women and children first no longer need apply.

 

And to claim that I said any significant task done by a woman is emasculating is completely and categorically false.

Chivalry is made by men and for men. It was mostly to keep women in control. I'm glad it's dead because it was obviously failing.

 

Are you sure we are from the same reality? 

 

Yes, I will gladly take having to open my own doors in exchange for bodily autonomy and freedom to fully participate in society. What the heck. Wouldn't you? Why or why not?