Why not follow the books more closely?

[Cipher]

4 minutes ago, Elder_Haman said:

@Cipher also consider that there may be thematic reasons that the Tower will look more or less white depending on the context of the scene or arc of the story. Television is a visual medium.

 

For example, in the shot you posted the shadows in the foreground sort of bisect the picture, enhancing the yin/yang themes. The Tower itself is pictured as (1) obviously white, (2) covered in shadow, and (3) with certain bright points shining amidst the shadows. In that one shot, you have a visual description of the state of the Tower and its politics as the story begins. The way the Tower is shot in these larger shots will probably change in ways to reflect the ebbs and flows of power throughout the series.

Overall it is a beautiful shot with Mount Fuji, ;), in the background.

[SinisterDeath]

22 hours ago, Cipher said:

 I watched episode 5 in real time and the image I posted is from the opposite view than the one you posted..  It did not look white when I watched the episode.

Ep5 @5:45 


Ep5 @8:06, Rand & Mat Arrive


Ep5 @8:34


Ep5 @45:54

It looks pretty white to my eyes.
We see it in a variety of different types of lighting, which hugely impacts how something like this looks in reality. The taj mahal can look just as "dirty" depending on the the time of day the picture was taken, and what color correction methods were used.

We should consider what @Elder_Haman mentioned regarding the thematic reasons behind the various lightings used through out the show. (It was LITTERED with yin-yang symbolism!)

We're allowed to have our opinions,  and you're entitled to believe the tower looks dirty and wrong according to how you imagined it from the book descriptions. Just like it's okay that @DojoToad was okay with the coloring, but wasn't impressed with "chonky toad shaped" tower.

For me, it works. It could be better, but I also recognize that the island in the books has always looked like a Vulva, and the tower has always been a massive Phalic symbol, and in that regard they succeeded on a detail a lot of book fans still miss. 

[DreadLord31]

On 5/31/2023 at 11:33 AM, WhiteVeils said:

LOTR, Harry Potter, and some of the Dunes (Haven't seen the most recent) vary /widely/ from the source material. There were huge complaints with all of them from fans of the books, back on the message boards of the day.  They were successful adaptations though, and so people forget how much of a change they were....many of the people doing the complaining about WOT now watched LOTR before reading the books, for example, so they don't care or even take note of the critical differences that the bookreaders experienced when the movies came out.
WOT is much, much more difficult to adapt than LOTR or Harry Potter.  So many of its important themes are based on people's thoughts as described through the POV chapters. In other works, thoughts aren't as essential to the character development of the story.   How do you convey thoughts in a TV media?

The mechanism for WOT allows for multiple turnings of the Wheel, so it's just as adaptable in its world setup as comic books.

But I think you miss the most essential reasons why they are doing this.  They're not doing it to 'get' the book reader audience....the audience is small, for starters. The part of the book reader audience whose vision of the books contrasts with the showrunner's vision of the books is smaller still.  The part of the book reader audience whose vision doesn't align with the showrunners AND can't handle the changes that are needed to make the books into a show is smaller.  The part of the book readers that handle the changes necessary to bring that story to a new audience is very very small indeed.   In exchange for that small number of book readers as an audience, this version opens the story up to new US and International audiences, including audiences in many, broader demographic groups than the original books' audience.  The themes of reincarnation, for example, are very appealing to an Asian audience, but would any Asian audience outside the US care about the show enough to reach those themes unless there are Asian leads in the show?  Unless they make the themes very apparent in the first episode in a way that makes it clear the show is honoring those themes not denigrating them?  How do you do that?  You add the Lantern scene. You make Lan the amazing Daniel Henney. You use Asian theme costuming.  That audience is many times the size of the US audience...of course Amazon will care about them more.

 The story for Wheel of Time has broader appeal when presented well, but that's not the reason Judkins is making it.  He /loves/ these books. He has since a child. They spoke to him, as a young gay boy growing up in Utah, in a different way than they might speak to another reader. But he loves them. He wanted to bring what he loves to the world, and he is.  You can choose not to like the show, you can decide you can't handle the changes.  That's your choice.

But was the adaptation financially successful for Amazon? Absolutely.  Does it convey what the showrunner wanted to convey? Mostly...there were Covid-driven problems in the last couple of episodes that he wants to fix, and he wanted 10 episodes with a 2 hour pilot and Amazon wouldn't let him.   Does it bring across the major themes of the series very well? In my opinion, yes, it does. It carries all the themes from EOTW across very well.  Does it give the essence of the EOTW plot, albeit with changes? Yes. It has 5 young men and women from a remote village who are dragged out of that village by a woman with great magical powers and her guardian to protect them, knowing that one of the five will have to face the Dark One who plans on destroying the world.  They travel with her, get separated, one gets corrupted with an evil dagger, one learns he can communicate with wolves, two learn that they have great magical power inside them, and one learns he is the Dragon Reborn, who will face the dark one.  He goes to do so at the end of the season, thinks he defeats him, but, we all suspect, he didn't really.  The rest of the series will show us all how much more will be involved.

That's literally the plot of Eye of the World.  

But...oh, Merry and Pippen met Sam and Frodo on the road in the show instead of meeting properly in Buckland. And Jackson made them /thieves/. Thier characters are ruined now. And it was important that they set up that Frodo was really moving to Buckland because otherwise the hobbits would have looked for them. And Sam didn't see the elves on the way to Buckland, so how does Frodo know they are leaving Middle Earth anyway? Would Sam do the same things if he didn't see them?  And then no Old Man Willow? Thom Bombadil was my favorite part....it's important to show not everything can be controlled by the ring.  And everyone knows Tomatoes are from South America and Middle Earth is supposed to be England so that's obviously wrong. And Aragorn just finds the magic swords lying around?  What is he? A graverobber? And that's not even getting to how they massacred Gimli's character and turned him into cheap comic relief!

 

Yeah, like that.

 

I will say - I was pretty hyped about the WoTTv series prior to it coming out. I even got all three of my non-reader brothers to watch and two friends, one of whom read until Winter's Heart and then stopped and never finished (he got burnt out on the infamous 'slog'). And, my emotions through S1 we're so up and down, because there were a lot of (and I know it's been argued elsewhere what qualifies as this) "changes" from the books. But I was rolling with it, because it was good-enough Tv that my brothers were watching it and liking it. But then the Finale fell waaay short of expectation and I was pretty devasted and critical, and all the non-readers I got to watch - basically felt the show was "eh". 6/10. 

 

I just finished a re-watch of S1. And I was too critical. WoTTv is such a massive challenge to adapt and to bring in the non-reader audience and to only have 8 episodes. And then there was a Covid. And then - and I think despite all those other challenges - this was actually the biggest challenge to the writers - Barney Harris left the show part way through S1. And because of that, we didn't get the ending that the writers originally wrote. Which is really too bad. 

 

Because I agree with @Elder_Haman and @WhiteVeils  NOW - I really didn't earlier - and last year after Ep8 - I would have been TIIICKED hearing those responses. But even as they point out, supposedly "faithful" adaptations have major changes and that's hard for hard-core book reader fans. For example, I remember being ticked about the LOTR because they cut Glorfindel so that Arwin could actually "do" something. And they cut Tom Bombadil because he's not really necessary for the story. But at the end of the day, even hard-core fans like me will let that stuff go if it's a good movie - if it's good Tv. 

 

And upon a rewatch - S1 was really inconsistent - in my opinion - in it's quality. But, for most part, it was pretty good Tv. All of the actors, did amazing. They captured the ethos of the characters perfectly for an adaptation that needs to move the story and character development along a whole lot faster than the books. The costuming (with the exception of Loial - and that's what I'm talking about with inconsistencies) was AMAZING. The CGI (was really, really inconsistent - Ep4 and Ep7 cold opens - amazing. Ep8 Finale - horrible. Ep1 Bel Tine attack - pretty decent) was overall ok. The writing (and here's where I've been suuuper critical) was actually pretty good, except that we didn't get the final product that they wrote. And that's what really bites. Because it fundamentally changes everything going forward too. We were obviously supposed to get a Matt/Fain show-down. Matt be linked to the dagger and the horn. Perrin was probably supposed to have a scene with the wolves and (maybe the girls?) at the end - or perhaps he was taking off with Min and Loial and going the way-of-the-leaf but conflicted about it. I dunno. And we'll never know. 

 

This is a long post, and I'll make it even longer rather than post twice, but ... I do wish that the writers/showrunners were more committed to important source material that would NOT be that hard to keep and would make things more compelling for non-readers as well. For example, the Tigraine fight scene (which I think was the best scene in the show): have her keep her veil on whilst fighting, kick serious butt like she did, take it off because now it's time to have a baby, and then get stabbed whilst trying to put it back on rather than fight. Then the audience is asking: why would someone who is such a good fighter rather die than fight without their veil.? Gives you a compelling question about the Aiel and it introduces you/sets up their culture. But no, we changed it because, we want to see the actresses face for that scene for this medium. Well, if that's your reason, then none of the Aiel going forward should fight with veils - we want to see their faces as they act! The finale scene: Seanchan invasion sends a massive wave at one girl on the beach? What?? Why? Instead have: Seanchan invasion sends a wave and wipes out an opposing fleet. They collar an Aes Sedai and she screams. End Season. Now the audience is introduced to the Seanchan, and knows they are THE threat to the White Tower/Aes Sedai. 

 

It's stuff like that...that is sooo frustrating. But. I'm hoping S2 gets better!

Not just me who thinks that - here's one of the most popular reviewers of the WoT on Youtube:

 

Edited June 12, 2023 by DreadLord31

[DreadLord31]

Oh, but also, some of that probably isn't actually a criticism of the writers. It's probably more of a criticism of Rafe. Because veil or no veil, enemy fleet or one girl, Aglamar speared after they ride out on calvary just to man the wall and then the women don't help until the men are all dead?  

... 

Probably none of that is up to the writers.

Lines like "Gleeman is just a silly name that helps make it so people aren't so afraid of us. Because there's nothing more dangerous than a man who knows the past." That's writing that is legit. Let's get some more of that! 

[expat]

6 hours ago, DreadLord31 said:

The finale scene: Seanchan invasion sends a massive wave at one girl on the beach? What?? Why? Instead have: Seanchan invasion sends a wave and wipes out an opposing fleet. They collar an Aes Sedai and she screams. End Season. Now the audience is introduced to the Seanchan, and knows they are THE threat to the White Tower/Aes Sedai. 

  

I think that you are missing the meaning of the final scene.  The Seanchan aren't sending a wave at the girl on the beach.  They are sending a signal to the inhabitants of Falme and the local villages to not resist them because they have overwhelming might.  Given the force of the demonstration (to get the tidal wave of sufficient height, it will necessarily be very wide), it is likely that there are people that will be caught in its destruction, signified by the little girl.  The alternative would be to invade and destroy a number of villages until the local inhabitants stop resisting.  I'm guessing that there will be a shot of the local leaders on top of the crest in season 2 watching the incoming wave.  The scene was meant to show both their power and their ruthlessness.

[king of nowhere]

8 minutes ago, expat said:

I think that you are missing the meaning of the final scene.  The Seanchan aren't sending a wave at the girl on the beach.  They are sending a signal to the inhabitants of Falme and the local villages to not resist them because they have overwhelming might.  Given the force of the demonstration (to get the tidal wave of sufficient height, it will necessarily be very wide), it is likely that there are people that will be caught in its destruction, signified by the little girl.  The alternative would be to invade and destroy a number of villages until the local inhabitants stop resisting.  I'm guessing that there will be a shot of the local leaders on top of the crest in season 2 watching the incoming wave.  The scene was meant to show both their power and their ruthlessness.

yes. I can see the scene

city of falme. palace of the governor. the governor and a few seanchan officers watch the wave. the governor is shocked and terrified. The seanchan make some threat, maybe vague, maybe overt, not that there's much need when they showed already they could level the city with a tsunami. the governor kneels and swears allegiance to the seanchan. the seanchan board a toraken and go back to the ships.

 

Such a scene would totally recover that final scene, that looked a bit silly otherwise.

[DreadLord31]

The fact that they need to "totally recover" a final scene, is my point about silly writing/decision making. 

 

Yes. I understand that it's suppose to be a hook for season 2. There's strange invaders that use the OP as weapon & we should fear them.

 

Sending a massive wave at a lone little girl on the beach ... is similar to ... having calvary ride out in full battle armor to man a wall and be overwhelmed. You scratch your head and go ... What? 

 

All that is needed to fix this scene is for their to be "enemy" ships that their sending the massive wave at - and I think, having them collar an Aes Sedai would have really added to the intrigue. 

 

It's little details like that, that most hurt my confidence in WoTTv decision makers. 

[DojoToad]

I wonder if the wave scene would have been more effective as a cold open for S2.  An almost two year long cliff-hanger seems excessive.

[DaddyFinn]

2 minutes ago, DojoToad said:

I wonder if the wave scene would have been more effective as a cold open for S2.  An almost two year long cliff-hanger seems excessive.

Did they know that S2 would take so much time? Maybe, maybe not.

[DojoToad]

1 minute ago, DaddyFinn said:

Did they know that S2 would take so much time? Maybe, maybe not.

I'm just not a fan of cliff-hangers, from season or season or book to book.  Internally, between episodes or chapters, seems okay but never liked it when there was a natural 'hard' stop.  Just a personal thing...

[SinisterDeath]

14 hours ago, expat said:

I think that you are missing the meaning of the final scene.  The Seanchan aren't sending a wave at the girl on the beach.  They are sending a signal to the inhabitants of Falme and the local villages to not resist them because they have overwhelming might.  Given the force of the demonstration (to get the tidal wave of sufficient height, it will necessarily be very wide), it is likely that there are people that will be caught in its destruction, signified by the little girl.  The alternative would be to invade and destroy a number of villages until the local inhabitants stop resisting.  I'm guessing that there will be a shot of the local leaders on top of the crest in season 2 watching the incoming wave.  The scene was meant to show both their power and their ruthlessness.

I like to think that the Seanchan crossed the ocean, specifically to kill that one little girl. Then they're like. "Well, while we're here..."

[DreadLord31]

I don't know why I hadn't seen this earlier... but it's not just me, but also Brandon freaking Sanderson that said that these are not the best changes:

A) fridging Perrin's wife - bad call, have nowhere lower to go, S1 they did Perrin dirty.

B) Egwene and Nynaeve killing all the trollocs at the end - bad call, should have had them not be able to channel that well and then deciding they need to train in the Tower.

C) having Lan do NOTHING in the season finale.

D) "I'm not sure why they decided to throw a giant wave at a little girl."

 

Now, to be fair, he does say multiple times "Rafe did a good job." or "Rafe has done a pretty good job." 

I like that you also get to see how poorly the show did at communicating - hearing the non-readers comments. It's also interesting - and perhaps a rebuke to us hard-core readers - that the non-reader really liked the Steppin episode and the mourning scene. 

 

But, it's really too bad about Covid and Barney Harris leaving --- my hope for S2 rises quite a bit --- I think it would have been a much better season if that stuff hadn't happen. If they had taken Sanderson's advice here (or had consulted him) then ep8 and the whole season would have been about 20x better. 

SO please. Consult Brandon for S3!!! 

 

 

Edited June 13, 2023 by DreadLord31

[king of nowhere]

14 hours ago, DreadLord31 said:

The fact that they need to "totally recover" a final scene, is my point about silly writing/decision making. 

 

Yes. I understand that it's suppose to be a hook for season 2. There's strange invaders that use the OP as weapon & we should fear them.

 

Sending a massive wave at a lone little girl on the beach ... is similar to ... having calvary ride out in full battle armor to man a wall and be overwhelmed. You scratch your head and go ... What?

now, let's not go too overboard on that. the final scene works well enough. You do get a sene of dread. At least, I did. We just saw 5 channelers wipe an army, and now those people have dozens? omg how strong are they? and what can stop them?

the scene is meant to evoke those feelings, and it does.

it's only when one stops and think "why they threw that massive wave at a deserted beach?" that it becomes silly.

 

on the other hand, using a powerful weapon on a deserted place as a demonstration of might is something that's totally done. just think of all those nuclear tests they did in the cold war, nuking empty places to threaten "we could do that to your cities too". military excercices; armies posting videos of dozens of cannons or rockets firing at once. Ever since the stone age, where people would wave their weapons and try to look dangerous. A display of might is a most natural step towards aggression.

which is why throwing a weapon of mass destruction at a deserted place and being seen doing it is a perfectly workable way to push some cities to submission.

 

as such, the final scene of season 1 is more incomplete than anything else.

[Samt]

I think we have to also acknowledge that the buck has to stop somewhere for the poor quality of the finale.  If a bridge falls down, the engineer doesn't get to blame COVID.  When the patient dies on an operating table, the doctor doesn't get to blame COVID.  

 

I see this as similar.  The end product is very poor.  Rate and Amazon have to take responsibility for that.  We don't need excuses. 

[DreadLord31]

31 minutes ago, Samt said:

When the patient dies on an operating table, the doctor doesn't get to blame COVID.  

 

Actually ... There was like, literally, a million doctors that did exactly that.

But I agree with your ultimate point - which is - S1 was ... "eh" & utlimately that's got to fall on (not necessarily Rafe) the final/top decision makers. Because especially the final episode just felt ... in @king of nowhere 's words about that last scene ... "incomplete". Half-baked. Like it needed more time.

But I think S2 will be better - I do. I think Rafe has more of a feel of how much time he has for this adaptation. I don't think they'll have a main character leave part-way through. I don't think they'll not be able to do scenes and shoots that they intended to do but literally couldn't. 

 

 

[Jake Sykwalker]

On 5/31/2023 at 2:50 AM, Lightfriendsocialmistress said:

I respect your viewpoint and thank you for sharing it! Let me be clear that I genuinely enjoy hearing what people think and sincerely appreciate and honor the opportunity to learn from every perspective and have no personal opinion/investment in terms of believing in one thing being more true or superior to another. That being said. Just curious, did you ever get into Star Wars and I suppose even the marvel universe? If so. How did you feel about those worlds being reimagined, handed over, and/or redefined/expanded upon in ways that weren’t originally intended?

 

I can take a swing at that question.  First I agree with the OP in that if you are going to 'adapt' something at least have a plan on what you are going to do and how it fits in with the overall source material.  Some adaptions are trying to squeeze a huge story into a 2.5 hour movie slot, others are trying to bring a new 'spin' on the old tale.

 

For Starwars the movies came first so the books were the adaptation.  Honestly some of them worked very well while others didn't as much.   IMHO the Timothy Zahn Trilogy staring with Heir to the Empire is vastly superior to episodes VII, VIII, and IX.  Zahn is a fantastic writer and had a plan.  It was obvious the writers for Starwars  7-9 did not have any kind of plan.  I know that because they said so.  

 

For Marvel it is also hit and miss.  Age of Ultron was a terrible mash up crossover comic.  The movie was mediocre, but a decent way to spend 2 or so ours.  Mediocre may sound bad, but that is much better than the quality of the comic.  The first few movies ranged from decent (Thor) to outstanding (Iron Man, Captain America).  None of those movies were straight adaptions of the comics.  However they were a presentation of the traits and heroic attributes of the characters.  Thor was a brute, but ultimately caring.  Steve Rodgers was selfless and brave.

 

When Marvel strayed away from presenting the characters how they were in the comics and tried to tell 'their own stories' using established characters things started going off the rails.  People know and understand the characters and how they need to be.  Changing them both physically and trait wise just upsets fans as you can just create a new character for that.

 

To me this is where Wheel of Time went off the rails.  They took established characters and then changed them willy-nilly to fit 'their story.'  Fans of books want to see the characters they know and loved.  Instead they got to see whatever that was they are calling Wheel of Time.

 

It is ok to change and prune and streamline for a movie, or TV as it is a harder medium to show inner dialog.  However when you change the appearance and traits of the character so much they are barely recognizable there will be a problem.  IMHO the WoT TV show basically just created a new bunch of characters to tell their story with the names of the old characters.  The only one that really was similar to the books was Nynaeve as they made her super annoying just like the book character.  They couldn't have gotten the boys more wrong.  Lan and Moraine weren't as bad, but still not like the books. 

 

None of this will matter as much if the story that is told through the adaptation is good.  People will forgive differences and changes for a good story.  They will just look at it as an alternative telling and enjoy it for what it is.  For this version I think the story is exceedingly poor and done by a bunch of wannabe soap opera writers.  None of the intelligence of RJ is showing through.  When you re-read the books you can see him setting up things extremely well and foreshadowing a ton of stuff that you miss the first time through.  The TV version is just tropes and cheap drama with a WoT skin on it. 

 

My question for the writers is this:  "How can a comic book with only 35 issues telling the tale of the whole EotW book soundly outperform your 8 one hour each episode series that only tells a fraction of what the comic does?"

 

 

 

 

Edited June 21, 2023 by Jake Sykwalker

[DaddyFinn]

4 hours ago, Jake Sykwalker said:

For this version I think the story is exceedingly poor and done by a bunch of wannabe soap opera writers.  None of the intelligence of RJ is showing through.  When you re-read the books you can see him setting up things extremely well and foreshadowing a ton of stuff that you miss the first time through.  The TV version is just tropes and cheap drama with a WoT skin on it.

I guess you missed most if not all of the foreshadowing in S1. There's a lot.

[DigificWriter]

@Jake Sykwalker There is no 'right' or 'wrong' way to adapt something; the notion that there is is a fallacy.

 

Rafe and his team have made adaptational choices that you clearly disagree with; that doesn't mean that said choices are wrong or that they lack purpose or indicate a lack of understanding of or appreciation for the WoT novels.

 

It also doesn't mean that the TV series is a bad adaptation of said novels.

[Samt]

I think it might be more productive to talk about this in terms of a faithful adaptation vs a reimaginative adaptation.  There will always be some changes for time and format.  But the WoT Amazon series goes way beyond that in terms of making changes.  Regardless of how good you think those changes are, I don't think you can really justify them as being required by the medium.  Abel Cauthon doesn't have to be a drunk for the series to work on TV.  Perrin doesn't need a wife. Rand doesn't have to run away at the end of the season.  Moraine doesn't need to be stilled/shielded.  

 

Add on the fact that the season really fails to stick the ending and you start to get the feeling that changes are being made willy nilly without a cohesive vision.  The more the creators throw out the original source material, the more they bear responsibility when the story points and arcs that they are trying to put together fall flat.  

[SinisterDeath]

23 minutes ago, Samt said:

The more the creators throw out the original source material, the more they bear responsibility when the story points and arcs that they are trying to put together fall flat.  

I think this ultimately comes down to WAFO. 
How far it ultimately strays from the source, is going to depend on what they do in season 2 and beyond.

S1 of WoT currently has a variety of "easter eggs" and foreshadowing layered throughout the show.
That those things exist, means that some of the writers/artists/etc have definitely read the source material. They successfully managed to inject those elements into the show despite everything else that went on that contributed to the show deviating from the books.

 

Looking at the Witcher & the Expanse, both are guilty of wildly deviating from the source material. They both went so far as to create "entirely new plot lines".

I can't speak for fans of the Witcher but I don't think most fans of the Expanse would call it a poor adaptation. (Particularly since the author(s) helped write the tv series).

[DigificWriter]

2 hours ago, Samt said:

I think it might be more productive to talk about this in terms of a faithful adaptation

 

The entire concept of a 'faithful' adaptation is a fallacy.

 

Ten Things I Hate About You is no more or less 'a faithful' adaptation of William Shakespeare's play The Taming of the Shrew than the 1967 Franko Zeffirelli film that starred Elizabeth Taylor and Richard Burton, the Peter Jackson Middle-earth films are no more or less 'faithful' adaptations of The Lord of the Rings and The Hobbit than the Ralph Bakshi Lord of the Rings and Rankin/Bass Hobbit and Return of the King animated movies, and the upcoming HBO/MAX live action Harry Potter television series will be no more or less a 'faithful' adaptation of the Harry Potter novels than the already-existing live-action films.

 

TLDR: The Wheel of Time is not somehow an 'unfaithful' adaptation of Robert Jordan's novels because Rafe Judkins and his team of writers and producers have made adaptational choices that some fans of the novels object to, and would not be a more 'faithful' adaptation if they had not made said choices.

Edited June 21, 2023 by DigificWriter

[Samt]

4 hours ago, DigificWriter said:

 

The entire concept of a 'faithful' adaptation is a fallacy.

 

Ten Things I Hate About You is no more or less 'a faithful' adaptation of William Shakespeare's play The Taming of the Shrew than the 1967 Franko Zeffirelli film that starred Elizabeth Taylor and Richard Burton, the Peter Jackson Middle-earth films are no more or less 'faithful' adaptations of The Lord of the Rings and The Hobbit than the Ralph Bakshi Lord of the Rings and Rankin/Bass Hobbit and Return of the King animated movies, and the upcoming HBO/MAX live action Harry Potter television series will be no more or less a 'faithful' adaptation of the Harry Potter novels than the already-existing live-action films.

 

TLDR: The Wheel of Time is not somehow an 'unfaithful' adaptation of Robert Jordan's novels because Rafe Judkins and his team of writers and producers have made adaptational choices that some fans of the novels object to, and would not be a more 'faithful' adaptation if they had not made said choices.

Frankly, this is an entirely unhelpful post.  You haven't stated any justification or explanation of your conclusion.  You just don't think an adaptation can be more or less faithful.  And then you list a bunch of adaptations and say that can't be more or less faithful because you said so.  

 

Regardless of what you want to call it, it is meaningful to consider how close an adaptation adheres to the original story, characters, world building rules, etc.  We can disagree as to what a significant change is and also as to whether or not a change was good or necessary.  But to simply state that it's not meaningful to judge an adaptation on how close it stays to the original is not helpful or reasonable.  

[Guire]

I think the misogynistic, male gaze, slightly gender unequal story that Jordan told would have made better TV if we are sticking to main story points.  Rafe said in a GQ article he was correcting the hyper masculine GoT presentatation.  Season 2 will show us if he can pull off a WoT that has a feminist slant.  War is filled with toxic masculinty.  I dont know if they will be able to create an interesting story that is a build up to world war and apocolypse with the time constraints, need to keep female characters in front, and story changes that correct problematic elements. Maybe Rafe and crew will pull it off.  I guesd we might get 5 seasons and a truncated Tarmon Gaiden.

[DigificWriter]

28 minutes ago, Samt said:

Frankly, this is an entirely unhelpful post.  You haven't stated any justification or explanation of your conclusion. 

 

I don't need to justify or explain an objective reality.

 

There is absolutely no way to quantify what does or does not qualify as a 'faithful' adaptation because if you were to ask 100 people to tell you what makes something a 'faithful' or 'unfaithful' adaptation, you would get 100 different - and contradictory - answers.

 

 

[Lightfriendsocialmistress]

15 hours ago, Jake Sykwalker said:

 

I can take a swing at that question.  First I agree with the OP in that if you are going to 'adapt' something at least have a plan on what you are going to do and how it fits in with the overall source material.  Some adaptions are trying to squeeze a huge story into a 2.5 hour movie slot, others are trying to bring a new 'spin' on the old tale.

 

For Starwars the movies came first so the books were the adaptation.  Honestly some of them worked very well while others didn't as much.   IMHO the Timothy Zahn Trilogy staring with Heir to the Empire is vastly superior to episodes VII, VIII, and IX.  Zahn is a fantastic writer and had a plan.  It was obvious the writers for Starwars  7-9 did not have any kind of plan.  I know that because they said so.  

 

For Marvel it is also hit and miss.  Age of Ultron was a terrible mash up crossover comic.  The movie was mediocre, but a decent way to spend 2 or so ours.  Mediocre may sound bad, but that is much better than the quality of the comic.  The first few movies ranged from decent (Thor) to outstanding (Iron Man, Captain America).  None of those movies were straight adaptions of the comics.  However they were a presentation of the traits and heroic attributes of the characters.  Thor was a brute, but ultimately caring.  Steve Rodgers was selfless and brave.

 

When Marvel strayed away from presenting the characters how they were in the comics and tried to tell 'their own stories' using established characters things started going off the rails.  People know and understand the characters and how they need to be.  Changing them both physically and trait wise just upsets fans as you can just create a new character for that.

 

To me this is where Wheel of Time went off the rails.  They took established characters and then changed them willy-nilly to fit 'their story.'  Fans of books want to see the characters they know and loved.  Instead they got to see whatever that was they are calling Wheel of Time.

 

It is ok to change and prune and streamline for a movie, or TV as it is a harder medium to show inner dialog.  However when you change the appearance and traits of the character so much they are barely recognizable there will be a problem.  IMHO the WoT TV show basically just created a new bunch of characters to tell their story with the names of the old characters.  The only one that really was similar to the books was Nynaeve as they made her super annoying just like the book character.  They couldn't have gotten the boys more wrong.  Lan and Moraine weren't as bad, but still not like the books. 

 

None of this will matter as much if the story that is told through the adaptation is good.  People will forgive differences and changes for a good story.  They will just look at it as an alternative telling and enjoy it for what it is.  For this version I think the story is exceedingly poor and done by a bunch of wannabe soap opera writers.  None of the intelligence of RJ is showing through.  When you re-read the books you can see him setting up things extremely well and foreshadowing a ton of stuff that you miss the first time through.  The TV version is just tropes and cheap drama with a WoT skin on it. 

 

My question for the writers is this:  "How can a comic book with only 35 issues telling the tale of the whole EotW book soundly outperform your 8 one hour each episode series that only tells a fraction of what the comic does?"

 

 

 

 

Thank you for your well explained and executed response! Whether or not I personally agree (I will refrain from commenting because I find my opinion irrelevant) it’s refreshing to see a viewpoint represented in a way that doesn’t preach personal bias and therefore it’s more likely to be considered and respected even if not agreed with.