WoT not getting love

[DojoToad]

I know fantasy isn't for everyone, but I didn't think it was this niche.  Five articles of Rosamund Pike throwing shade at Gwyneth Paltrow - between them they mention seven of Pike's past/present projects, but not one mention for WoT.  What the hell! 

 

https://pagesix.com/2023/06/15/rosamund-pike-shades-gwyneth-paltrows-goop/

 

https://www.usmagazine.com/celebrity-body/news/rosamund-pike-shades-wellness-industry-gwyneth-paltrows-goop/

 

https://www.foxbusiness.com/entertainment/gone-girl-star-rosamund-pike-slams-goop-style-brands-all-being-conned-by-wellness-industry

 

https://people.com/rosamund-pike-shades-gwyneth-paltrow-goop-we-are-conned-wellness-industry-7511472

 

https://etcanada.com/news/998647/rosamund-pike-says-were-all-being-conned-by-the-wellness-industry-when-asked-about-gwyneth-paltrows-goop-company/

[CaddySedai]

There is a reason that most booksellers have a sci-fi/fantasy combo section. Increases size and visibility in the hopes of getting bleed over sales. 

[CaddySedai]

Also, <bleep> Goop. 

[king of nowhere]

On 6/17/2023 at 4:03 PM, DojoToad said:

I know fantasy isn't for everyone, but I didn't think it was this niche.

 

I was expecting fantasy to be this niche 20 years ago, not now.
ah, well, we'll just have to go back into our closets

[Samt]

5 hours ago, king of nowhere said:

I was expecting fantasy to be this niche 20 years ago, not now.
ah, well, we'll just have to go back into our closets

Lord of the Rings won best picture and  Game of Thrones was critically acclaimed and a pop culture phenomenon (early seasons, at least). Only bad fantasy adaptations are niche.

[WhiteVeils]

I didn't read all the articles, but it looks like they focused only on the movies that Pike has made, because Paltrow also primarily does movies. (Paltrow has no notable TV Series, just guest appearances). Therefore the framework of these articles is setting up 'movie star' vs. 'movie star'.   As such, TV series are moot in the discussion....the TV series Pike has been in aren't relevant for setting the framework up they want to set up (movie actress cat fight).   It's like comparing Hugh Jackman to Robert Downing Jr in relationship to their thoughts on action movies and failing to mention Jackman's background in musical theater. 
Trying to examine this stuff for how important or 'known' Wheel of Time isn't really helpful...and kind of crazy making. 

[bringbackthomsmoustache]

2 hours ago, WhiteVeils said:

It's like comparing Hugh Jackman to Robert Downing Jr in relationship to their thoughts on action movies and failing to mention Jackman's background in musical theater. 

Were you aware that Robert Downey Jr starred in a film remake of "the singing detective"?

[DojoToad]

7 hours ago, WhiteVeils said:

I didn't read all the articles, but it looks like they focused only on the movies that Pike has made, because Paltrow also primarily does movies. (Paltrow has no notable TV Series, just guest appearances). Therefore the framework of these articles is setting up 'movie star' vs. 'movie star'.   As such, TV series are moot in the discussion....the TV series Pike has been in aren't relevant for setting the framework up they want to set up (movie actress cat fight).   It's like comparing Hugh Jackman to Robert Downing Jr in relationship to their thoughts on action movies and failing to mention Jackman's background in musical theater. 
Trying to examine this stuff for how important or 'known' Wheel of Time isn't really helpful...and kind of crazy making. 

I don't know about that.  Most/all of the articles mention "People Who Knew Me" which is an audio drama airing on the BBC.  Doubt there is any overlap with Paltrow here, but it is where Pike takes a jab at her.  They also mention a podcast Pike is narrating (Mother, Neighbor, Russian Spy).  But no mention of the audio book she narrated - Eye of the World.

 

Not nearly as many mentions of Paltrow's projects.  Without going through the articles again, I only remember two movies.

 

Also several mentions "Die Another Day" which is a Bond movie - so a big deal, but also more than 20 years old.  I'm just surprised that Pike or 'her people' weren't sure that all of her current and/or recent projects weren't tagged for the promotional value.  Now Pike is a busy actor, so why choose several 15 and 20 year old projects - which most people will know - but become less relevant every year over projects that are more immediate and will likely have a larger impact on future projects and younger audiences?

 

Any industry experts here?

[Lightfriendsocialmistress]

1 hour ago, DojoToad said:

I don't know about that.  Most/all of the articles mention "People Who Knew Me" which is an audio drama airing on the BBC.  Doubt there is any overlap with Paltrow here, but it is where Pike takes a jab at her.  They also mention a podcast Pike is narrating (Mother, Neighbor, Russian Spy).  But no mention of the audio book she narrated - Eye of the World.

 

Not nearly as many mentions of Paltrow's projects.  Without going through the articles again, I only remember two movies.

 

Also several mentions "Die Another Day" which is a Bond movie - so a big deal, but also more than 20 years old.  I'm just surprised that Pike or 'her people' weren't sure that all of her current and/or recent projects weren't tagged for the promotional value.  Now Pike is a busy actor, so why choose several 15 and 20 year old projects - which most people will know - but become less relevant every year over projects that are more immediate and will likely have a larger impact on future projects and younger audiences?

 

Any industry experts here?

Interesting question. I’m just curious, aside from what you observed from the above articles, do you know (or does anyone) if pike participated in promoting the show in other ways and if so to what extent? I don’t really follow that stuff so I don’t know. My limited knowledge is that she has seemed involved beyond her acting role by narrating the audiobook and maybe some other extras but I don’t know if she is neglecting promoting the show entirely or just in certain instances? 

[CaddySedai]

16 hours ago, Samt said:

Lord of the Rings won best picture and  Game of Thrones was critically acclaimed and a pop culture phenomenon (early seasons, at least). Only bad fantasy adaptations are niche.

 

So two properties managed to break into mainstream?

 

That sounds like a niche genre to me. 

 

Or are you implying every other fantasy adaptation ever has been terrible?

[CaddySedai]

Realistically Fantasy is a niche genre. Even amongst the broader “Fiction” category it comes in about half as big as the fiction heavyweight “romance”. 
 

Fantasy is personally my favorite genre. Followed by sci-fi. In films and shows Fantasy is seeing a major push thanks to Lotr, Got, and Potter. But just because its seeing a push now does not mean it is not niche, nor does it mean the push will last. There were pushes in the 90s and early 00s as well. Just because streamers are willing to unload dumb amounts into the genre does not necessarily mean long term success. Or even short term lol. So many fantasy shows (even good ones) fail to find legs. 

[king of nowhere]

17 hours ago, Samt said:

Lord of the Rings won best picture and  Game of Thrones was critically acclaimed and a pop culture phenomenon (early seasons, at least). Only bad fantasy adaptations are niche.

lord of the rings was a famous fantasy work, and game of thrones was a famous fantasy work, and...

what else? I'm not aware of any other famous fantasy (I'm not counting harry potter because that's fantasy for kids; I'm talking fantasy for adults here)

 

So, either you're telling me there are only two well made fantasy adaptations that ever exhisted, or fantasy is still niche despite a couple (three if you count HP) of great successes.

 

P.S. if you're telling me that only 2 or 3 good fantasy adaptations were ever made, that would also be a solid argument for fantasy being niche

[Samt]

34 minutes ago, king of nowhere said:

lord of the rings was a famous fantasy work, and game of thrones was a famous fantasy work, and...

what else? I'm not aware of any other famous fantasy (I'm not counting harry potter because that's fantasy for kids; I'm talking fantasy for adults here)

 

So, either you're telling me there are only two well made fantasy adaptations that ever exhisted, or fantasy is still niche despite a couple (three if you count HP) of great successes.

 

P.S. if you're telling me that only 2 or 3 good fantasy adaptations were ever made, that would also be a solid argument for fantasy being niche

 

59 minutes ago, CaddySedai said:

Realistically Fantasy is a niche genre. Even amongst the broader “Fiction” category it comes in about half as big as the fiction heavyweight “romance”. 
 

Fantasy is personally my favorite genre. Followed by sci-fi. In films and shows Fantasy is seeing a major push thanks to Lotr, Got, and Potter. But just because its seeing a push now does not mean it is not niche, nor does it mean the push will last. There were pushes in the 90s and early 00s as well. Just because streamers are willing to unload dumb amounts into the genre does not necessarily mean long term success. Or even short term lol. So many fantasy shows (even good ones) fail to find legs. 

Game of Thrones wasn't much more popular than Wheel of Time prior to the adaptation.  I had actually not heard of GoT before the adaptation.  

Harry Potter is still very much fantasy and it isn't only liked by children.  I know lots of adults that read it, watched it, and enjoyed it.

 

The 2005 adaptation of The Lion, the Witch, and the wardrobe was quite successful at the box office (the sequels less so, but the sequels weren't as good and the sequel books are much less well known anyways).  

 

Twilight is also arguably fantasy for adults and while neither the books nor the adaptations are terribly deep, they are quite successful.  

 

I think the reason that sci-fi is often grouped with fantasy is that the narrative and world building structures have much in common.  The common expression of this is that the difference is magic vs. "alien" technology.  In particular, sci-fi that is far away from modern earth in setting (either through technology, distance, time, or just being set in a different universe) is ultimately very similar to fantasy (Star Wars and Dune are good examples).  It makes sense to group these genres because the audience will naturally have a lot of overlap.  Wheel of Time is even sometimes classified as post apocalyptic sci-fi, although that mostly ignores that the driving force is channeling.  

 

In short, if you define it narrowly enough, it becomes niche.  But if we're talking about the general demand for good fiction set in imaginary settings with transformative rules, there is lots of demand when it is done well.  

[CaddySedai]

Good “Fiction” is still dominated by Romance. Both in print and screen. Last year in Fiction romance accounted for 1.4 billion dollars in sale’s versus somewhere in the mid 500 millions for Fantasy. 

 

Sure it has a bigger footprint than say self help books but it is still not the king of the Fiction castle. 

 

On the Silver and small screens even less so. Full on fantasy makes up only a fraction of the content. 

 

Which is mind boggling to me as one would think that its a match made in imagination heaven lol. 

[Samt]

I think a big consideration is just that the required production value for good fantasy TV or movies is relatively high.  Low budget fantasy, even if the story, characters, and acting are good, ends up looking pretty campy and often silly.  You need to spend quite a bit on costumes/props, sets, special effects, choreography, and cinematography to just end up with a product that feels legitimate.  Amazon spent a huge budget on WoT and even then there are times when the product doesn't really feel completely polished.  

 

Romance movies are often set in the real world.  You don't have to worry much about costumes, sets, or special effects.  You probably don't have major action scenes with lots of fight choreography and props to worry about.  It's a completely different ballgame in terms of what you have to spend just to end up with a product that feels professional.  

[king of nowhere]

1 hour ago, CaddySedai said:

Which is mind boggling to me as one would think that its a match made in imagination heaven lol. 

actually, the few successful fantasy shows underlined the problems.

fantasy's main strenght is worldbuilding. it's what divides it from other forms of fiction. but worldbuilding requires a lot of time, and movies don't have that. sci-fi also has a similar issue, but less so; you can put people in a spaceship without having to explain it; take for example star wars, while it has a huge worldbuilding detailed in dozens of books of the expanded universe (don't ask me about canon, I'm not an expert), the movies themselves have very little of it.

take a fantasy, lower the magic because of limited special effect budget, handwave most worldbuilding because you don't have the screentime to deliver it... you get something like the wot tv show. which has mixed receptions, but in any case has big limitations compared to the book.

 

then, if you go specifically into big sagas, it gets even more complicated. a lone writer in his room can take his time, make revisions, polish the plot. He can have a few assistants to find and smooth out possible plot holes.

try to convey that into tv form, it collapses. main actors may become unavailable. you work on a tight deadline, you can't just delay your production to smoothen the plot because everyone has already been hired for filming in advance. and if you need to change something afterwards, you can't just hire everyone and put them back on set.

as such, tv shows tend to have much less coherent plots - because you have many more interferences.

 

so, making good fantasy adaptations (or original works) is very, very hard.

[Lightfriendsocialmistress]

Agreed in terms of “mainstream” appeal. It’s interesting to me though because if fantasy/sci fi is simplified by defining it as anything that isn’t apparently realistic in our current world, then plenty of platforms have attracted large audiences. Take for one example the matrix. All the super hero movies. Really most content designed to entertain. Regardless of how much real life relatability, there are plenty of examples of media that have attracted the attention of the masses in spite of or because of their fantasy foundation. Escapism in my opinion can be achieved by any genre if the masses embrace it. 

[king of nowhere]

yeah, it's kinda weird because if we go by any definition of fantasy, big classics like the iliad or odyssey are fantasy, with magic and god interventions. shakespeare is fantasy, with ghosts and fairies and such.  and yet you'll find plenty of "intellectuals" praising those great classics while dismissing fantasy as stupid and childlike.

It really does seem like prejudice is at work here; apparently mainstream and critics like fantasy as long as it's not labeled as such.

[WheelofJuke]

6 hours ago, king of nowhere said:

yeah, it's kinda weird because if we go by any definition of fantasy, big classics like the iliad or odyssey are fantasy, with magic and god interventions. shakespeare is fantasy, with ghosts and fairies and such.  and yet you'll find plenty of "intellectuals" praising those great classics while dismissing fantasy as stupid and childlike.

It really does seem like prejudice is at work here; apparently mainstream and critics like fantasy as long as it's not labeled as such.

Well, I think classics like The Illiad or The Odyssey, or all of Shakespeare's works,  are written at such a higher artistic level than 99.9% of fantasy, that the distinction must be made.  

[Samt]

Time filters.  I have easy access to tons of bad literature that was created recently, but any literature from hundreds or thousands of years ago that I can easily find is probably at least of some merit.  

Fantasy is a newer genre.  Older fantasy like Tolkien and C.S. Lewis does get some respect.  But it will take some time for newer fantasy to get respect.  

 

It's not like modern romance literature gets much respect.  On the average, it probably gets more disdain than fantasy.  

[king of nowhere]

58 minutes ago, Samt said:

 

 

It's not like modern romance literature gets much respect.  On the average, it probably gets more disdain than fantasy.  

I was thinking more of a comparison with popular movie genres. like superhero movies, which as far as I can tell are full of the worst traits of bad fantasy but appear to be incredibly popular nonetheless.

[ForsakenPotato]

Maybe there's just not that much overlap in people who care about Wheel of Time and people who care about Goop?

[Guire]

1 hour ago, ForsakenPotato said:

Maybe there's just not that much overlap in people who care about Wheel of Time and people who care about Goop?

That venn diagram has razor thin overlap.  This entire thread also butresses my recent conclusion that most fantasy should just be animated.  Animation removes lots of obstacles and allows more opportunity for quality.  Take recent animated Spiderman.  It has made 500 million with a production cost of 100 million.  Not sure of break even cost but it has definately been profitable.  Most recent live action movies have been really struggling.  Imagine how amazing well written RoP or WoT with 16 hours per season of beautiful animation could have been.  

[Lightfriendsocialmistress]

Reading through this thread triggered a thought about the fantasy/sci fi genre that I hadn’t considered before. I’m putting it out there on the spot so admittedly I haven’t thought it through and I may very well be off base. That being said, I think that most of the fantasy and sci fi books that I can think of that have been successful in their mainstream appeal, especially in terms of adaptation to film or television, have been categorized or marketed as young adult. I acknowledge that I simply might not have been exposed to content that would prove otherwise. The main examples of adult geared fantasy that come to my mind off the bat are game of thrones and lord of the rings. Sci fi has more but the ones I can think of were not based on books, screen only (such as the matrix). Then when I look at the other big adaptations, they seem to have mostly been initially made for young adult audiences. Harry Potter, the hunger games, the divergent series, maze runner series, the superhero genre is mostly based on comics, which I would suspect are typically thought of by the majority of society who don’t read comics as being consumed by kids, or at least the initial interest began in childhood. The interesting thing to me about this, if indeed my observation has any truth to it, is that adults seem to enjoy the content as much if not more than the original audience they were made for. Even many of the animated so called children’s movies are actually in my experience more enjoyable to adults and contain humor and themes that really can’t be fully understood and appreciated by children. So this long and rambling train of thought is basically just a curiosity that occurred to me, is fantasy more likely to be accepted by adults if it’s presented as being created for children or young adults? Are most adults (not our community obviously 😂) ashamed of their affinity for imagination and fantasy unless they can label it as kid stuff? Who knows and probably who cares! I just posted the thought on impulse. 

Edited June 23, 2023 by Lightfriendsocialmistress

[Scarloc99]

On 6/17/2023 at 3:03 PM, DojoToad said:

I know fantasy isn't for everyone, but I didn't think it was this niche.  Five articles of Rosamund Pike throwing shade at Gwyneth Paltrow - between them they mention seven of Pike's past/present projects, but not one mention for WoT.  What the hell! 

 

https://pagesix.com/2023/06/15/rosamund-pike-shades-gwyneth-paltrows-goop/

 

https://www.usmagazine.com/celebrity-body/news/rosamund-pike-shades-wellness-industry-gwyneth-paltrows-goop/

 

https://www.foxbusiness.com/entertainment/gone-girl-star-rosamund-pike-slams-goop-style-brands-all-being-conned-by-wellness-industry

 

https://people.com/rosamund-pike-shades-gwyneth-paltrow-goop-we-are-conned-wellness-industry-7511472

 

https://etcanada.com/news/998647/rosamund-pike-says-were-all-being-conned-by-the-wellness-industry-when-asked-about-gwyneth-paltrows-goop-company/

One thing to remember about these articles is that they are made to happen by whatever it is she is promoting at the time this might include that company paying the publication in some way to get the mention. So I imagine whichever production company/studio worked on all those programmes is possibly linked to this story being published. 

Also, this is an article attacking someone Amazon may have clauses in Pikes contract that state she can't throw shade in there name so there may be a very specific reason they are not mentioned.