S1E8: The Eye of the World v2

[WoTwasThat]

2 hours ago, Gothic Flame said:

I kinda like the "kazoo" idea.

As long as it is a gender-neutral kazoo. 

[WoTwasThat]

2 hours ago, KakitaOCU said:

Why?  Because it doesn't play into some people's preconceived notions about what something should look like in a medieval fantasy series that actually takes place thousands of years in the future?

If I had a priceless artifact that had to be protected I'd put it in the most stable and defensible container I could.  Which would probably involve foam and plastic, not steel.

 

I totally agree. I’ve got this set of Tupperware that practically bulletproof. That’s what I’d use. 

[KakitaOCU]

49 minutes ago, Yojimbo said:

Is your "their" supposed to include me?   Because I find it a bit insulting to have someone tell me how I think or feel.   I bet I am not alone in that sentiment.

 

And I'm sorry, as much I respect a lot of what you write, but it is not wanting things to be STATIC to want characters to act as they were in the first few books or a 14 book saga during the first season of a TV show as opposed to having them act as they are in the last two or three books in said saga almost from the very beginning of the show.  It is wanting characters to be representative of who they are at the beginning of a story instead of skipping to how they are at the end of a story and leave them some room for growth.  Hence my contention that Lan has been butchered.  

Lan is static until Ebou Dar.  He is a generic he-man tough guy with a few moments with Nynaeve until we start getting in his head in the later books.

So I'd have to ask.  What development?  I'm not accusing you of wanting Static, I'm saying the people claiming Lan isn't like he is in the book are flat out saying they want the static version of him that's just kinda there for 5 books before disappearing for a while.

[Gothic Flame]

21 minutes ago, WoTwasThat said:

As long as it is a gender-neutral kazoo. 

There's a dirty joke there somewhere...but taste forbids me from pursuing it.

[Jaysen Gore]

5 minutes ago, KakitaOCU said:

Lan is static until Ebou Dar.  He is a generic he-man tough guy with a few moments with Nynaeve until we start getting in his head in the later books.

So I'd have to ask.  What development?  I'm not accusing you of wanting Static, I'm saying the people claiming Lan isn't like he is in the book are flat out saying they want the static version of him that's just kinda there for 5 books before disappearing for a while.

Yes, we are. We want to see Hollywood stop pissing all over the concept of the heroic ideal as a viable character archetype.  Aside from Captain America, every male hero of the last 30 years has had to learn to be a hero, instead of just being one. It's not a Rafe issue, or a Lan issue. Surprise us but not using the same "become the King you were born to be" useless arc that's been done to death

[Mailman]

25 minutes ago, KakitaOCU said:

Lan is static until Ebou Dar.  He is a generic he-man tough guy with a few moments with Nynaeve until we start getting in his head in the later books.

So I'd have to ask.  What development?  I'm not accusing you of wanting Static, I'm saying the people claiming Lan isn't like he is in the book are flat out saying they want the static version of him that's just kinda there for 5 books before disappearing for a while.

2 things

1. I would argue that we see growth from him when he looks to protect Rand at the start of book 2 before the meeting with the Amrilyn. And his training with Rand as a student. And as you say we have his moments with Nynaeve in the first book.

 

2. They have vastly reduced his combat prowess. Derided as a poor horseman, allows a village wisdom to get a blade to his throat and a trolloc to attack the camp in the ways showing he is poor as a sentry and protector and is unable to track a woman he has spent 20 years travelling with to a stationary location,

 

[bombadillio]

I think the best response again is seeing the ridiculously low rating the show plummeted down to after episode 8 on Rotten Tomatoes

 

[TheSmurf]

4 hours ago, Jackdaw_Fool said:

the Horn of Valere

Spoiler that, dammit!!!

[Wassup]

1 hour ago, Mailman said:

…and is unable to track a woman he has spent 20 years travelling with to a stationary location,

 

To this point. Did Moiraine state she had been to TEotW before?  If so, would we not presume Lan had been there with her and would know where it is?

[TheSmurf]

That Lan didn't immediately set off for her, and that Nynaeve had to help the hapless man with a tracking 'tell' shows us that Lan certainly hadn't ever been there before. 

 

And if I'm remembering correctly, Moraine never mentions being there before (in the show).

Edited December 31, 2021 by TheSmurf
'In the show'

[KakitaOCU]

2 hours ago, Jaysen Gore said:

Yes, we are. We want to see Hollywood stop pissing all over the concept of the heroic ideal as a viable character archetype.  Aside from Captain America, every male hero of the last 30 years has had to learn to be a hero, instead of just being one. It's not a Rafe issue, or a Lan issue. Surprise us but not using the same "become the King you were born to be" useless arc that's been done to death

Because the "heroic ideal" is boring and flat.  There's nothing interesting there, it's a power fantasy for people to escape into and imagine being this generic super cool dude.

As for Captain America, that was a deconstruction too.  He was only the perfect hero so long as no one crossed what he personally defined as good.  There's a reason he's the wrong side of Civil War despite his "Win" at the end.  There's a reason Chris Evans openly states Cap is being selfish and wrong.  

“Captain America has always put the needs of the masses before his own desires,” Evans said at a Beverly Hills press conference for the film. “That is exactly what is different in this film. Instead of dedicating himself to what others need, he prioritizes what he wants, which is a departure. It colors the character in a really nice way. It is hard to find ways to make this guy, who is this incredibly austere and moral character, lighter and more dynamic, but in this movie he becomes potentially selfish.”  (https://parade.com/475162/paulettecohn/captain-america-civil-war-star-chris-evans-on-cap-getting-selfish/)

The only reason he ends up back on the "Right" side is because a global catastrophe kills literally half the population and destabilizes the government.  Then when that stability might be coming back he bails to go have his own life deciding he's done enough good.

He has depth and ultimately is the story of a hero who eventually goes "Wait, why do I have to be a hero?"  And stops.

Now if Lan's character arc in the books had been deciding he could put down the mountain just a little bit and have his happiness with Nynaeve, you'd have an argument.

But that's not his arc.  His arc is:

Spoiler

Wants to suicide against the Blight.  Moraine convinces him there's a better way to fight, he becomes her confidante and guarding.  He is relatively unchanging from books 1-5, showing emotion only to push Nynaeve away and to be angry at Moraine because she won't let him have his suicide if she dies (And because she takes away his agency).  

At book 5 he leaves only because he is compelled to.  He then goes to stay with Nynaeve, again on orders, where he finally opens a LITTLE bit to her and they get married.  It seems like maybe he's going to develop as a character here but....

Nope, still wants to suicide against the Blight to no purpose what-so-ever.  Only fails at this because Nynaeve tricks him.  

 

[KakitaOCU]

2 hours ago, Mailman said:

2 things

1. I would argue that we see growth from him when he looks to protect Rand at the start of book 2 before the meeting with the Amrilyn. And his training with Rand as a student. And as you say we have his moments with Nynaeve in the first book.

 

2. They have vastly reduced his combat prowess. Derided as a poor horseman, allows a village wisdom to get a blade to his throat and a trolloc to attack the camp in the ways showing he is poor as a sentry and protector and is unable to track a woman he has spent 20 years travelling with to a stationary location,

 

1: That's not growth, he's semi supportive of a young man, he does that in New Spring, that's him being a basically decent person, not development.  Ultimately it's a one note situation as he never shows that type of support again, not really being with Lan until book 4 and then leaving at book 5.   His situation with Nynaeve is not development, it's a out of nowhere reveal.  I'm fine with people pointing out Rand's viewpoint is the source, but there's no shown development of this, it just randomly pops up.

2: What combat prowess was reduced?  He has one bad horse story, which is not the same.  Nynaeve only got found by them because Moraine sensed her in the books, not because Lan noticed her.  If you mean poor sentry in the ways, it's a multi day travel, he had to sleep at some point.  Blame Moraine for not placing any wards (Which she did in the books and which she conveniently couldn't do in the show).  We also don't know if he could or couldn't track her, just that his normal method for keeping tabs on her was no go and Nynaeve offered help.  

You're looking for reasons to claim he's diminished.

[Mailman]

40 minutes ago, Wassup said:

To this point. Did Moiraine state she had been to TEotW before?  If so, would we not presume Lan had been there with her and would know where it is?

It does not matter. If it does not have the ability to move the location is not going to be a secret in the boderlands

[Mailman]

Just now, KakitaOCU said:

1: That's not growth, he's semi supportive of a young man, he does that in New Spring, that's him being a basically decent person, not development.  Ultimately it's a one note situation as he never shows that type of support again, not really being with Lan until book 4 and then leaving at book 5.   His situation with Nynaeve is not development, it's a out of nowhere reveal.  I'm fine with people pointing out Rand's viewpoint is the source, but there's no shown development of this, it just randomly pops up.

2: What combat prowess was reduced?  He has one bad horse story, which is not the same.  Nynaeve only got found by them because Moraine sensed her in the books, not because Lan noticed her.  If you mean poor sentry in the ways, it's a multi day travel, he had to sleep at some point.  Blame Moraine for not placing any wards (Which she did in the books and which she conveniently couldn't do in the show).  We also don't know if he could or couldn't track her, just that his normal method for keeping tabs on her was no go and Nynaeve offered help.  

You're looking for reasons to claim he's diminished.

It certainly is growth it shows that his loyalty is not solely to Moiraine as it was in the beginning. Whether you attribute it to him picking up Nynaeves loyalties or a friendship to Rand as well, he was on his side when he advised him on how to conduct himself with the Amrylin. A meeting which Moiraine was part of.

 

Its a vast difference tracking them, to Nynaeve getting a blade to the throat of the most dangerous warrior in the world.

 

If he could track her why did he wait for Nynaeve to tell him how to track her. Its a stationary place in the TV series he did not even need to track them.

 

You are looking for reasons to claim he is not diminished

[flinn]

6 minutes ago, KakitaOCU said:

1: That's not growth, he's semi supportive of a young man, he does that in New Spring, that's him being a basically decent person, not development.  Ultimately it's a one note situation as he never shows that type of support again, not really being with Lan until book 4 and then leaving at book 5.   His situation with Nynaeve is not development, it's a out of nowhere reveal.  I'm fine with people pointing out Rand's viewpoint is the source, but there's no shown development of this, it just randomly pops up.

2: What combat prowess was reduced?  He has one bad horse story, which is not the same.  Nynaeve only got found by them because Moraine sensed her in the books, not because Lan noticed her.  If you mean poor sentry in the ways, it's a multi day travel, he had to sleep at some point.  Blame Moraine for not placing any wards (Which she did in the books and which she conveniently couldn't do in the show).  We also don't know if he could or couldn't track her, just that his normal method for keeping tabs on her was no go and Nynaeve offered help.  

You're looking for reasons to claim he's diminished.

 It isnt character growth because why? because you have declared it not character growth? roll my eyes.

 

 what combat prowess was reduced? you have been on this board long enough to see the numerous ways his combat prowess has been reduced, even if you refuse to accept it and come up with elaborate reasons why you are right..

 

 not even sure why I am responding to you at this point, it is known you will spin every single thing to something eye roll worthy to defend every detail of the show.

[KakitaOCU]

1 hour ago, bombadillio said:

I think the best response again is seeing the ridiculously low rating the show plummeted down to after episode 8 on Rotten Tomatoes

 

WoT Season 1 is currently at 82%.  Comparatively The Witcher Season 1 was at 56%,  82% is not where I'd prefer it to be at, but will have to see what happens.

Honestly never really concerned myself with the audience score.

[KakitaOCU]

19 minutes ago, Mailman said:

It certainly is growth it shows that his loyalty is not solely to Moiraine as it was in the beginning. Whether you attribute it to him picking up Nynaeves loyalties or a friendship to Rand as well, he was on his side when he advised him on how to conduct himself with the Amrylin. A meeting which Moiraine was part of.

 

Its a vast difference tracking them, to Nynaeve getting a blade to the throat of the most dangerous warrior in the world.

 

If he could track her why did he wait for Nynaeve to tell him how to track her. Its a stationary place in the TV series he did not even need to track them.

 

You are looking for reasons to claim he is not diminished

His loyalty was never purely to Moraine, NewSpring shows that, his loyalty such as it is is to destroying the Shadow and avenging Malkier.  He was never unwilling to care about or support other people.  His "Moraine First" was because she was the one doing the most to stop the Shadow.  Once you have the literal savior of existence around, shock, he supports them too.

There's some difference in getting close and getting real close, but not as much as you'd think.  Your tracking and perception training consists of what?  

As for "If he could track her"  we have no idea how much time passed, we see a scene where he talks to Nynaeve, then he leaves.  Now that could mean he waited too long and needed her help, but it could also mean he found out, looked around the keep, verified she was gone, then told Nynaeve he was leaving.

I'm not looking for reasons to claim he's not diminished.  You (generic you) are making claims he's diminished, I'm asking you to support said claims.

 

 

21 minutes ago, flinn said:

 It isnt character growth because why? because you have declared it not character growth? roll my eyes.

 

 what combat prowess was reduced? you have been on this board long enough to see the numerous ways his combat prowess has been reduced, even if you refuse to accept it and come up with elaborate reasons why you are right..

 

 not even sure why I am responding to you at this point, it is known you will spin every single thing to something eye roll worthy to defend every detail of the show.

Because character growth involves fundamental and actual changes about a person that are shown and explained in a logical manner so you can follow as an audience?  Sam growing from a follower and somewhat fearful person to a warrior who would stand against Shelob and carry Frodo up the mountain is significant development.  Gimli learning not all elves are bad is minimal to non-existent development.  In a similar vein, Lan learning that you don't need to suicide yourself for no purpose is significant development.  Lan helping out the savior of the world when his primary goal is always to stop the shadow is logical consistency with who he is.

And no, I have been on board while people insist he's diminished as a combatant.  No actual evidence.  Lots of claims that he didn't notice this or that, nothing about his skill as a swordsman that I know of.  The funny point is, you accuse me of coming up with elaborate reasons for my stance.  I don't.  They're the reasons I come to with a few moments of thought at best.  And I can't help but notice you're not trying to debate the points themselves, You're instead attacking me personally and trying to diminish my credibility via ad hominen nonsense.

[Jaysen Gore]

44 minutes ago, KakitaOCU said:

Because the "heroic ideal" is boring and flat.  There's nothing interesting there, it's a power fantasy for people to escape into and imagine being this generic super cool dude.

As for Captain America, that was a deconstruction too.  He was only the perfect hero so long as no one crossed what he personally defined as good.  There's a reason he's the wrong side of Civil War despite his "Win" at the end.  There's a reason Chris Evans openly states Cap is being selfish and wrong.  

“Captain America has always put the needs of the masses before his own desires,” Evans said at a Beverly Hills press conference for the film. “That is exactly what is different in this film. Instead of dedicating himself to what others need, he prioritizes what he wants, which is a departure. It colors the character in a really nice way. It is hard to find ways to make this guy, who is this incredibly austere and moral character, lighter and more dynamic, but in this movie he becomes potentially selfish.”  (https://parade.com/475162/paulettecohn/captain-america-civil-war-star-chris-evans-on-cap-getting-selfish/)

The only reason he ends up back on the "Right" side is because a global catastrophe kills literally half the population and destabilizes the government.  Then when that stability might be coming back he bails to go have his own life deciding he's done enough good.

He has depth and ultimately is the story of a hero who eventually goes "Wait, why do I have to be a hero?"  And stops.

Now if Lan's character arc in the books had been deciding he could put down the mountain just a little bit and have his happiness with Nynaeve, you'd have an argument.

But that's not his arc.  His arc is:

  Reveal hidden contents

Wants to suicide against the Blight.  Moraine convinces him there's a better way to fight, he becomes her confidante and guarding.  He is relatively unchanging from books 1-5, showing emotion only to push Nynaeve away and to be angry at Moraine because she won't let him have his suicide if she dies (And because she takes away his agency).  

At book 5 he leaves only because he is compelled to.  He then goes to stay with Nynaeve, again on orders, where he finally opens a LITTLE bit to her and they get married.  It seems like maybe he's going to develop as a character here but....

Nope, still wants to suicide against the Blight to no purpose what-so-ever.  Only fails at this because Nynaeve tricks him.  

 

I guess we have a difference of opinion on this topic.  The point to the heroic ideal in a story is to give our flawed characters (or the audience) an example to strive for morally, which is why the ideal needs to go away so our hero can stand on his (or her) own.  But it's why Hollywood can't get Superman right; they just don't get him. doing the right thing for the right reason is so foreign to people now, that they can't relate to it in characters. As you say, people think it's boring, and flat, and passe. Oh yeah - and don't forget completely unbelievable - it actually offends people to see it on screen. It's an old-fashioned notion, I guess.

 

Off topic - we're definitely on different sides of the Civil War Debate; the whole point is if something is wrong, it doesn't matter if "the system" says it's right.  We have ultimate personal responsibility for our morality, and if you choose not to act in the way you feel to be moral because other people tell you not to, you have compromised your own essence.  Even Evans misses it, because doing something just because "the masses" want it doesn't make it right.  It might make it legal, but right and legal are often two different concepts. the entire point of the story (in comics context) is that after 70 years as a moral compass, if you're against Captain America, you're on the wrong side.

 

Back on topic example: Galad is the most moral person in the Wheel of Time, and most people consider him a villain, like Elayne does. So what does that say about the readers? He still has an arc to go through - accepting that people can be good and still fall short of his ideal, but does developing empathy and his desire to still be an example mean he was immoral at the beginning? It's the same lesson Raen learns.

 

Lan Spoilers

Spoiler

As for Lan - you missed out the fact that his arc is coming to accept that his death wish is him actually trying to avoid his duty as King.  Some other story I can't think of at the moment talks about it's easy to die, it takes a helluva lot more courage to live. So Lan has to figure out and accept that he has both things to live for personally, and a duty to his people to stay alive. And that is dependent on him being a bad ass, because being a bad ass is how he chose to avoid his duty. Through his arc, he moves from the personal (Mo, Nyn) to a small group, to a platoon, to a whole country. That's how his wife teaches him the difference between being a bad ass and being a king

 

Edited December 31, 2021 by Jaysen Gore

[KakitaOCU]

15 minutes ago, Jaysen Gore said:

I guess we have a difference of opinion on this topic.  The point to the heroic ideal in a story is to give our flawed characters (or the audience) an example to strive for morally, which is why the ideal needs to go away so our hero can stand on his (or her) own.  But it's why Hollywood can't get Superman right; they just don't get him. doing the right thing for the right reason is so foreign to people now, that they can't relate to it in characters. As you say, people think it's boring, and flat, and passe. Oh yeah - and don't forget completely unbelievable - it actually offends people to see it on screen. It's an old-fashioned notion, I guess.

 

Off topic - we're definitely on different sides of the Civil War Debate; the whole point is if something is wrong, it doesn't matter if "the system" says it's right.  We have ultimate personal responsibility for our morality, and if you choose not to act in the way you feel to be moral because other people tell you not to, you have compromised your own essence.  Even Evans misses it, because doing something just because "the masses" want it doesn't make it right.  It might make it legal, but right and legal are often two different concepts. the entire point of the story (in comics context) is that after 70 years as a moral compass, if you're against Captain America, you're on the wrong side.

 

Back on topic example: Galad is the most moral person in the Wheel of Time, and most people consider him a villain, like Elayne does. So what does that say about the readers? He still has an arc to go through - accepting that people can be good and still fall short of his ideal, but does developing empathy and his desire to still be an example mean he was immoral at the beginning? It's the same lesson Raen learns.

 

Lan Spoilers

  Reveal hidden contents

As for Lan - you missed out the fact that his arc is coming to accept that his death wish is him actually trying to avoid his duty as King.  Some other story I can't think of at the moment talks about it's easy to die, it takes a helluva lot more courage to live. So Lan has to figure out and accept that he has both things to live for personally, and a duty to his people to stay alive. And that is dependent on him being a bad ass, because being a bad ass is how he chose to avoid his duty. Through his arc, he moves from the personal (Mo, Nyn) to a small group, to a platoon, to a whole country. That's how his wife teaches him the difference between military leadership, and kingship.

 

Want to take a moment up front to say I appreciate your discussion.  We might not agree but I genuinely appreciate differing thoughts debated honestly.  ?

In general I don't think that's why they get Superman wrong.  It's definitely why Snyder got Superman wrong, Snyder took Watchmen unironically.  But usually the Superman issue is less his morality and more that he's seen as "too powerful" and miss the queue that the point of most Superman stories is not if he will survive, but what the collateral is, what the affect on people around him is.  How he makes a decision on who to help when there's so many out there but only one of him.

Last on Civil War (go ahead and rebut if you wish, but I will let it drop from here, two posts from me is enough for off topic) the debate of Civil War is "Do first responders have accountability to those they protect and serve?"  And the answer is definitely yes. 

Ultimately, I don't think Galad is the most moral, he's the most simplistic, definitely, and he's by no means a bad person.  The comparison would be again Civil War (Movie)  Tony fully believes his stance, but when a bigger threat rises that needs to be addressed he's willing to set it aside and work with Cap (Until he goes nutty over parents anyway).  Galad in that situation would have wanted to still arrest Cap and Bucky and then try to handle Zemo alone.  Ultimately, Galad is seen as an antagonist not because of his morals but because of his inability to prioritize and understand nuance.

Edit: I didn't respond to your Lan point, my apologies:  I took it differently.  That he was learning to let other people stand up and fight too and it wasn't his call to deny them.  (Rand has a similar lesson).  He doesn't even stop his planned death, he just accepts it's not happening once he gets reinforcements.

Edited December 31, 2021 by KakitaOCU

[DigificWriter]

2 hours ago, bombadillio said:

I think the best response again is seeing the ridiculously low rating the show plummeted down to after episode 8 on Rotten Tomatoes

 

 

Rotten Tomatoes is a garbage website, IMO, and its 'ratings' mean diddly-squat.

[frolly]

2 hours ago, KakitaOCU said:

As for Captain America, that was a deconstruction too.  He was only the perfect hero so long as no one crossed what he personally defined as good.  There's a reason he's the wrong side of Civil War despite his "Win" at the end.  There's a reason Chris Evans openly states Cap is being selfish and "wrong" (quotation marks inserted by me since this is subjective). 

The only reason he ends up back on the "Right" side is because a global catastrophe kills literally half the population and destabilizes the government.  Then when that stability might be coming back he bails to go have his own life deciding he's done enough good.

 

I think this explains why most of your responses on this forum (defending the show at least) have rung false to me since becoming a recent lurker. You're Team Stark and that's your right but your viewpoint of the world and your interpretation of people's motivations and actions is very different from mine.

1 hour ago, KakitaOCU said:

"Last on Civil War (go ahead and rebut if you wish, but I will let it drop from here, two posts from me is enough for off topic) the debate of Civil War is "Do first responders have accountability to those they protect and serve?"  And the answer is definitely yes."

FYI NPR (Radiolab) did a segment called No Special Duty that established that police officers actually don't have a legal obligation to protect and serve (not sure about other first responders)

https://www.wnycstudios.org/podcasts/radiolab/articles/no-special-duty

 

p.s. to get back on topic, I enjoyed parts of season 1 but overall was disappointed at the lack of production quality, sloppy writing/editing/pacing, and generally how boring most of the episodes were. Episode 8 was...an interesting interpretation.  Took an informal survey of non-book reader viewers this week and only 50% finished the season and those who did were not impressed. Hoping for a better season 2 but certainly not paying for it.

[fra85uk]

By the way, what was Moiraine's "tell"?

 

[EmreY]

3 minutes ago, fra85uk said:

By the way, what was Moiraine's "tell"?

 

 

She carves MD ? SS on every sixth tree?

[Mailman]

7 minutes ago, EmreY said:

 

She carves MD ? SS on every sixth tree?

apparently she carves it while she is unconscious and being carried on horseback as well.

[fra85uk]

11 minutes ago, Mailman said:

apparently she carves it while she is unconscious and being carried on horseback as well.

The power of love ❤️