New user, came to vent.

[Skipp]

14 hours ago, Kevin Ray said:

I came to say this very thing.  I've never been a joiner in the WoT online community.  I picked up WoT when book one came out and have re-read the entire series every time a new book was released.  I have listened to the audio books a few times as well.  I have been a long-standing fan of the series since its inception.  Years ago, there were teasing's of a series, but it never came to pass.  However, when this started to come about, I was absolutely ecstatic.  I waited with bated breath for the first episode and was sorely disappointed from episode 1.  The cast is horrible; the script writing is pathetic; the character development is abysmal; the acting is mediocre at best; the sceanery is crowded; and the series itself is rushed to conclusions.  I think Amazon decided to do this as cheaply as they could and refused good production studios in favor of cheap ones.  As a result, this garbage was produced.  I wish I could apologize to Robert Jordan for the hatchet job these people did to the beloved story he produced and touched so many people with.

It does really suck when something you are excited for doesn't meet your expectations.

 

And while I agree that the script writing and direction needs some solid improvement I find the casting and acting to be just a joy to see on screen.

[Jake Sykwalker]

On 1/29/2024 at 8:07 AM, DojoToad said:

I've never understood the 'it is a different turning' perspective.  If it is a different turning, change the names of the characters.  Would make it easier to swallow the other story changes because the differences in the adaptation from the book would be more obvious - for me at least.

 

Birgitte, for example, had many different names and adventures that were tied to her through the Ages.  So if it is another turning change Rand, Egwene, Logain, and etc.  There can be some overlap from events in the books because there are no beginnings, but the differences wouldn't be as jarring and maybe even welcome because it is obviously not the books that were adapted, but the world.  We would expect changes but still have a familiar world that we could comfortably sink in to.

 

🤷‍♂️ Just Monday morning quarterbacking...

 

That would have been a great idea.  I think people would have been a LOT MORE forgiving if they had done something like a prologue explaining that this was a different turning of the wheel and introduced us to Band, Pratt, and Gerrin a trio of Ta'Veren from the 3 rivers.  

[Jake Sykwalker]

On 3/13/2024 at 1:44 PM, Elder_Haman said:

 

First, if you are truly contemplating self harm, please seek help. 
 

Second, I’m not sure what I’ve decided or how I’ve been “high handed”. I asked a simple question. 

While I'm guessing my take and Elder_Haman's takes on the show are wildly different.  I have not personally seen any kid of moderation that has been bad.  In fact I think this website is a lot better than the official Reddit areas where you get banned for anything but effusive praise for the show.   

[Youss99]

I haven't posted in a long long time, but read in the forum periodically.  I remember years ago I wrote a post about a scene in my head that I imagined would be awesome in a show and I was destroyed by almost EVERYONE on the site for posting fan fiction that wasn't in the story.

 

I mean every post was an assault which was pretty much the last time I posted something significant.  Now most of the  posts are defending fan fiction that deviates so far from the original that it blows the mind!

 

Maybe people are jut happy to be getting something and to them I hope you get all the good from it that you can.  But anyone being honest who loves this series cannot agree in good faith that the show and the book series are telling the same story.  The names sadly, have not been changed to protect the innocent.

 

I think also a disclaimer from any post or citing data from someone who was PAID for their opinion should be required.   Paid opinions must always be suspect - good or bad.

 

I have loved Robert Jordan's series for the majority of my life and I won't check my criticism at the door because at least we got "something".  Robert Jordan deserved better treatment by the show runner and not the disrespect he showed towards it.   We should honor Robert Jordan by demanding better accountability for a work of fiction that has affected all us in so many ways. 

 

It disheartens me to so how easily people give up on something to get a pittance of what they really wanted.  But I understand also that other people can't understand why people like me care at all, so I get that too.

 

Just wanted to let the OP and others know that there ARE lots of people out there who are very supportive of RJ, but not the show.

[Elder_Haman]

17 minutes ago, Youss99 said:

Just wanted to let the OP and others know that there ARE lots of people out there who are very supportive of RJ, but not the show.

I think everyone is aware of that at this point. Though I find it curious how people wrap themselves in the mantle of “supporting RJ against the show” as if they have any idea of what RJ’s opinion of the show would have been. 

[expat]

If it sounds like I'm going on a rant here, I apologize in advance.  

 

I am getting very tired of this lazy argument that the show is against RJ because some individuals don't like it.  Fine, everyone is entitled to their opinion and there are certainly things about the show to dislike.

 

I call it lazy because these individuals never present arguments, but simply state they don't like it and that shows the bad intent/incompetence of the writers and proves the conspiracy against Robert Jordon.  There are 3 factors that come into play that have to be accounted for in deciding how well the show is adapted.  These are production constraints (e.g., budget; transforming a series as sprawling as WoT into maybe 64 episodes; routine filming issues like sets, costumes, actors, locations, and stretched out real world running time etc.; and WoT specific issues like the number of characters and the use of internal monologue for much of the character and plot development), the need to produce an interesting TV series, and inspiration from the source material.

 

I and others have repeatedly invited the commentors who think that the series is an affront to Jordon to address how to better adapt the series while taking all three factors identified above into consideration.  Yet, time after time, they only address the third point that the series is not faithful enough to the original and that shows that the series is insulting Robert Jordon.  I, at least, would be far more open to their arguments if they addressed the show holistically instead of from the comparatively narrow perspective of book fidelity. 

[Mailman]

On 6/5/2024 at 2:21 AM, expat said:

If it sounds like I'm going on a rant here, I apologize in advance.  

 

I am getting very tired of this lazy argument that the show is against RJ because some individuals don't like it.  Fine, everyone is entitled to their opinion and there are certainly things about the show to dislike.

 

I call it lazy because these individuals never present arguments, but simply state they don't like it and that shows the bad intent/incompetence of the writers and proves the conspiracy against Robert Jordon.  There are 3 factors that come into play that have to be accounted for in deciding how well the show is adapted.  These are production constraints (e.g., budget; transforming a series as sprawling as WoT into maybe 64 episodes; routine filming issues like sets, costumes, actors, locations, and stretched out real world running time etc.; and WoT specific issues like the number of characters and the use of internal monologue for much of the character and plot development), the need to produce an interesting TV series, and inspiration from the source material.

 

I and others have repeatedly invited the commentors who think that the series is an affront to Jordon to address how to better adapt the series while taking all three factors identified above into consideration.  Yet, time after time, they only address the third point that the series is not faithful enough to the original and that shows that the series is insulting Robert Jordon.  I, at least, would be far more open to their arguments if they addressed the show holistically instead of from the comparatively narrow perspective of book fidelity. 

I don't know if RJ would have personally liked the show or not. The only metric I have to support my opinion that he would not have liked it is in comparison to the books, as in my opinion the show is barely recognizable to it's source material, and I feel that a creator would enjoy something closer to their creation rather the mess we have been delivered. It is however possible that he would have liked the show more than the books as has been the case for some creators who have had their works adapted.

 

You are free to disagree with me. It is however disingenuous to claim that there have not been cogent arguments made that solely rest on the faithfulness to the books.

 

It is also not our job to come up with solutions on how to better adapt the show. I am judging the series on the delivered goods. Also there have been numerous suggestions made in the episode breakdowns of people critical to the show about suggestions on how the show could have better handled the adaption so again a false assertion from you.

 

Against your factors the show has one of the highest budgets for a TV show in history and has failed across the board maybe with the exception of the costumes and the blood snow fight. The battles have felt small the world feels tiny and the sets are poor.

 

And before you come in and place the blame on covid I understand it had an impact, but I can only judge on the presented final product and that was very poor. At some point you have to be accountable for the product you deliver.

 

The last 2 factors seem to be basically the writing of the show. Which again I would argue has been poor with the exception of Egwenes parts in the Eyes without Pity episode being an exception while not perfectly in line with the books as an episode of TV I though it was good.

 

And here we must mention some of the things that truly decimate it as an adaption and that does relate to differences between the source and the adaption which I would also argue it is the most important part of the rating how good the adaption is, and which you seem to have not included.

 

Rand makes a deal with the Forsaken that directly leads to numerous deaths of innocents.

Rand sleeps with Lanfear repeatedly.

Mat is turned into a coward and a thief.

Perrin is a wife killer.

Lan is a shadow of the character not the best fighter and outdone by Nynaeve as a tracker including in regard to tracking Moiraine someone he has accompanied for nearly 2 decades, and also now basically an emotional mess.

Moiraine is robbed of her drive and intelligence.

 

Also setting Moiraine up as basically the main character with the highest star in the cast was a terrible decision.

 

There are lots of other things that have been talked about ad nauseum in various posts but to suggest that you have invited commentators to offer opinions and been left wanting is wrong.

 

Edited June 6 by Mailman

[DojoToad]

19 hours ago, Youss99 said:

Maybe people are jut happy to be getting something and to them I hope you get all the good from it that you can.  But anyone being honest who loves this series cannot agree in good faith that the show and the book series are telling the same story.  The names sadly, have not been changed to protect the innocent.

 

Very true.  I remember comments going back several years now in which some folks were just happy to get something (in the lead up to S1 and beyond).  'Better than nothing' was often implied and said outright.  More WoT was automatically better - even if the product was garbage.  At least that was the impression I got.

 

I'm not saying the show was garbage, but it is definitely not for me.  I watched the first 4 episodes of S1 (twice each) and the 1st episode of S2.  In my case, I'd rather have nothing than this 'turning' of the wheel.

 

Maybe next time will be more up my alley.

[HeavyHalfMoonBlade]

I don't think the argument is that anything, no matter how rubbish, is better than nothing. I think it is more about having a bit of jealousy of other IPs complaining that their 15th film in the franchise does not live up to the rest. That it would be nice to have more work added to the collection even if it isn't the absolute best. That it would be nice to have something to criticize at least. Obviously, I cannot put words in other people's mouths but I think that it is something like that. The wonderful @CaddySedai made such a point in one of the contentious threads on the subject, but with eloquence and stuff like that.

 

One of the things I find most annoying is that certain members of the community absolutely decide that they are the gatekeepers of WoT. Like a new fan to the books going on at length that I, amongst many others, am not a real fan of the books despite me having read them pretty much my entire adult life. People proudly declaring that the show is not the same story - not that it it deviates too much for their taste - but that it objectively is not the same story and anyone that thinks otherwise is not a real fan of the books. And much more. 

 

There is a lot that is disappointing about the show, I can completely empathize with anyone that feels it does not live up to their expectations. And that is really sad. But in my opinion, there is a lot of really good stuff in the show as well. A lot that I could enjoy, and it just feels so childish to have so many people throwing tantrums and telling me that that means that I am objectively wrong and not a real fan. 

[DigificWriter]

14 hours ago, Mailman said:

It is also not our job to come up with solutions on how to better adapt the show.

 

It is when you're arguing that the books haven't been adapted 'correctly' and that the adaptation as presented is an 'afront' to the books.

 

On 6/4/2024 at 9:10 AM, Youss99 said:

anyone being honest who loves this series cannot agree in good faith that the show and the book series are telling the same story

 

Newsflash: You aren't some 'holy arbiter' as to how faithfully the show has adapted the books, nor do you have the authority to decide that people like Matt Hatch, the hosts of the Wheel and Chill Show (KritterXD, Winespring Cafe, and TavarenTavern), Rob from Malkier Talks, Jon from WotUp, Lauren from Unraveling the Pattern, and even the people who run this site and its associated accounts 'cannot agree in good faith that the show and the books are telling the same story' when they positively analyze and compare the novels and the show in relation to one another and make the exact claim that you're raging against.

 

On 6/4/2024 at 9:10 AM, Youss99 said:

Robert Jordan deserved better treatment by the show runner and not the disrespect he showed towards it

 

Unless you're secretly Harriet McDougal or are somehow authorized to speak for her, you don't get to make this argument.

[fearbrog]

On 6/4/2024 at 7:21 PM, expat said:

I call it lazy because these individuals never present arguments, but simply state they don't like it and that shows the bad intent/incompetence of the writers and proves the conspiracy against Robert Jordon.  There are 3 factors that come into play that have to be accounted for in deciding how well the show is adapted.  These are production constraints (e.g., budget; transforming a series as sprawling as WoT into maybe 64 episodes; routine filming issues like sets, costumes, actors, locations, and stretched out real world running time etc.; and WoT specific issues like the number of characters and the use of internal monologue for much of the character and plot development), the need to produce an interesting TV series, and inspiration from the source material.

 

I and others have repeatedly invited the commentors who think that the series is an affront to Jordon to address how to better adapt the series while taking all three factors identified above into consideration.  Yet, time after time, they only address the third point that the series is not faithful enough to the original and that shows that the series is insulting Robert Jordon.  I, at least, would be far more open to their arguments if they addressed the show holistically instead of from the comparatively narrow perspective of book fidelity.

People actually addressed your three factors, they just met with nu-uhs. But let's take one scene and "analyse" it through your three factors.

 

Season 2, showrunner's favourite character breaks free from a-dam by herself, alone without any help. This is failure by third "inspiration from the source material" cause not only it contradicts books lore and theme of help all characters learn to accept, that scene betrays internal theme in show itself. Writers insert all characters into confrontation between Rand and Ishy to show viewers how Rand needs help and can't do stuff alone, but Egwene actually don't need anyone to resolve her problems.

 

It doesn't make sense by first "production constraints" factors. Nyn and Elayne actors already in Falme set, there is no need for more budget to transfer characters to Falme location, to give more time for actors. What Nyn and Elayne do instead of helping Egg? Play with arrow in the leg. Would cutting arrow from show and inserting girls into Egwene fight cost more or take more time? Don't think so.

 

And most vague and subjective factor "the need to produce an interesting TV". I guess it really comes to viewer to decide how interesting and meaningful. Was decision to let Egwene break metaphysics of the Wheel truly interesting? For her fans probably yes. But she had interesting moment in s1e8 by healing Nyn, and would get more interesting moment by stopping Ishy. Is this decision worth taking moment from other girls? For their fans probably no, given they didn't do that much anyway. 

 

I hope I'm not lazy anymore

[Mailman]

5 hours ago, DigificWriter said:

 

It is when you're arguing that the books haven't been adapted 'correctly' and that the adaptation as presented is an 'afront' to the books.

 

Rubbish.

 

I am not the showrunner.

I am not a professional writer.

 

So unless I can personally come up with a better alternative I am not allowed to criticize the delivered product as being poor.

[expat]

Lazy, maybe.  Disingenuous, yes.  The whole thrust of my argument was to look at the series holistically instead of looking at pieces in isolation.  Your counterexample to prove me wrong is to take an isolated scene and determine that it could be rewritten to be closer to the book without breaking anything else (ignoring any knock-on effects the rewrite may cause).  Congratulations, you win.  I'm willing to concede that you can take isolated scenes and rewrite them to be closer to the book, but this doesn't come close to showing that the adaptation as a whole, not isolated scenes, is better if written to more closely follow the source material.

[expat]

8 minutes ago, Mailman said:

Rubbish.

 

I am not the showrunner.

I am not a professional writer.

 

So unless I can personally come up with a better alternative I am not allowed to criticize the delivered product as being poor.

You don't have to show anything and can criticize the series anyway you want.  The rest of us will just think that your criticisms are shallow and uninteresting.

[Mailman]

24 minutes ago, expat said:

You don't have to show anything and can criticize the series anyway you want.  The rest of us will just think that your criticisms are shallow and uninteresting.

So you are saying a valid criticism of a scene or episode is invalid unless it is accompanied by a fix for said product.

 

LOL

[fearbrog]

6 hours ago, expat said:

Lazy, maybe.  Disingenuous, yes.  The whole thrust of my argument was to look at the series holistically instead of looking at pieces in isolation.  Your counterexample to prove me wrong is to take an isolated scene and determine that it could be rewritten to be closer to the book without breaking anything else (ignoring any knock-on effects the rewrite may cause).  Congratulations, you win.  I'm willing to concede that you can take isolated scenes and rewrite them to be closer to the book, but this doesn't come close to showing that the adaptation as a whole, not isolated scenes, is better if written to more closely follow the source material.

How we supposed to show you what more literal approach beter than fanfiction other than look at scenes? I took one of the most unnecessary changes and try to argue against your budget and engagement factors. You saying I try to rewrite scene "ignoring any knock-on effects", but scene is ALREADY rewrite of book, rewrite what had funny knock-on effect of making Nyn useless in climax of S2. You know, completely opposite of finale of S1 there writers changed Rand story to make every character relevant in climax of season. 

 

This alteration changes book lore, ignores in-show themes, alters behind-the-scene motivation to rewrite source material. 

 

Maybe i simply don't understand you, but as i see it, your words can be interpreted as following: 1.you don't know how current budget affects actual filming. 2.just because you can alter scene you can't know how it affect overall show, so you need to alter all script. 3. Therefore unless you create adaptation yourself you cannot show that adaptation as a whole is better if written to more closely follow the source material.

Edited June 6 by fearbrog

[HeavyHalfMoonBlade]

I think the problem of using a scene by scene example of how it could be closer to the book, is that it does not take into account the bigger picture. Obviously this doesn't make it invalid - for example, the last embrace of the mother scene was set-up, it was filmed, and then cut. Taking this point alone, you can easily see the show would have been improved by keeping it in. But the reasons it was cut - which might be timing, about keeping the focus somewhere else, pacing, I mean, I dunno, not a TV director myself - is not taken into account.

 

Also for things like Egwene and the a'dam, that could be more related or partially at least to the decision to make the tower the climax point of the episode. Again, I cannot comment on why they might do this, but it could be that this decision was made before how is Egwene rescued. 

 

Simply making every scene as like the books as possible I don't think would lead to good television any more than only focusing on how each scene looked visually would make good television. Not least as the underlying connection of scene to scene is totally ignored there. While everyone complains about the lack of runtime - it seems many people ignore the impact that alone has on being able to tell any story. That doesn't mean that the show is as good as it possibly could be, or makes it immune from criticism, but it does feel like many are not willing to accept how difficult a job adapting the book, which is famous for its slow pacing, its beginning as a completely different story, the innumerable characters, its huge length, into 8 hours per book and a bit. 

 

But yes ultimately everyone is allowed their own opinion about how well it has been done, also those that like this attempt.

[fearbrog]

59 minutes ago, HeavyHalfMoonBlade said:

it does feel like many are not willing to accept how difficult a job adapting the book, which is famous for its slow pacing, its beginning as a completely different story, the innumerable characters, its huge length, into 8 hours per book and a bit. 

 

59 minutes ago, HeavyHalfMoonBlade said:

huge length, into 8 hours per book and a bit. 

Surely adding donut steel characters of Stepin and Anvaere, and creating engaging storylines like "who's dragon" and "shielded Moiraine" really helpful in condensing story into tv format

[HeavyHalfMoonBlade]

Undoubtedly. But perhaps it is not entirely straight forward as that? In that being true to the book is not the only criteria of good TV, and that condensing the story line is not the only issue. 

 

I mean I agree in that I have no idea really what was the goal with Stepin. I mean I though it was fairly entertaining, but I don't really see what it highlighted about Warders. 

 

The Anaevere section was about showing you the effects of being an Aes Sedai, in a way not previously seen in the books. That is suitably ambitious and I think is a noble attempt. Much of the Moiraine is the main character stuff did not work for me. Not only did it seem rather uninteresting (Anaevere aside, a definite piece of great casting in my eyes) but it took far too much screen time, imo. But it is worth noting that it seems likely the successful pitch of the show probably depended on Rosamund Pike and her role as Moiraine, so again it is difficult to judge that not in context. 

 

I get people did not enjoy the show, I really do. But sometimes it appears they did not give themselves much of a chance to enjoy it either. But of course that is anyone's right to have high or particular standards. 

[Kaleb]

3 hours ago, HeavyHalfMoonBlade said:

I mean I agree in that I have no idea really what was the goal with Stepin. I mean I though it was fairly entertaining, but I don't really see what it highlighted about Warders. 

Y'all have already heard this before, but I really like several things about the Stepin arc, so...

 

It highlights that in addition to turning men into wolfish killing machines, the warder bond also introduces an extreme vulnerability in the form of a suicidal impulse. Stepin was a likable guy who was offered what seemed like reasonable options to move on with his life after Kerene died, and he instead invested a lot of effort to fool his companions and kill himself. Getting that up front makes the audience understand the risk it poses to Rand later in the story.

 

Best choice of how to spend limited time? I doubt it, they probably could have cut 5-10 minutes from Stepin's 25-minute arc and still gotten what was needed from it. But worthwhile worldbuilding that will pay off later? Absolutely. His arc also introduced the Forsaken totems and a lot of exposition about general Aes Sedai culture that needed a place to be told. Really, Stepin's arc is mostly about giving depth to Lan and his relationship to Moiraine (and why Nynaeve shakes him up so much), what kind of man he is beyond just the granite carving that is all Rand perceives in the first couple books.

[books of Robert Jordan]

Robert Jordan:

 

(Perhaps New Spring could be done in a three hour feature length movie.)

"I'm not saying that it will be done, but it could."

 

"It's a chancy thing. I would not support anyone doing a feature film of, say, The Eye of the World. I do not think it could be compressed into three hours. Certainly not into two. That would make it incomprehensible.

But... [end of this side of the tape]...

the screenwriter makes further changes, because, although it's a collaborative effort, if the director says I don't like this, do it some other way, do it this way, and the screenwriter does that. And if the screenwriter doesn't do that, they'll get another screenwriter.

And then the actor says 'I don't believe this character would say this.'

And the actress says I don't want to do that, see, I want to do it this way, so they change the dialogue, and they change the scene.

And the director, again, comes up and says 'I think it should be done in this fashion' and he shapes it.

And what goes up on the screen bears, you hope, some resemblance to what was on the page."

 

"I used to think that it might be impossible for a movie to really encompass any of the books, but since seeing The Lord of the Rings, I've changed my mind. In any case, Harriet says (and Plato agrees with her) that the only thing to do when you sell a book to Hollywood is to take the money, walk away very fast before they can take it back, and never, ever go to see the movie."

 

[The underlined text is a very wrong approach...]

 

And reading Jordan's objections and advices on the graphic adaptation of New Spring, one can presume Robert Jordan's reaction to the promo pictures, the trailers, or even just an episode...

[HeavyHalfMoonBlade]

One can presume? His comments show he understands that putting the story on screen would change the story, and definitely that he would not be hugely keen on this. 

 

But presuming as to how different he would accept or what he thought about any of the specific changes is, well, presumptuous. Nowhere in that quote does it say "and because of this I really hate the Prime adaptation of my story." If you think it is implied, that is coming from you, not the author himself. 

 

I can imagine he would not like the changes being made but he would respect the efforts of those involved - but that says nothing about what he actually would have thought. 

[DigificWriter]

On 6/22/2024 at 3:50 AM, books of Robert Jordan said:

Robert Jordan:

 

(Perhaps New Spring could be done in a three hour feature length movie.)

"I'm not saying that it will be done, but it could."

 

"It's a chancy thing. I would not support anyone doing a feature film of, say, The Eye of the World. I do not think it could be compressed into three hours. Certainly not into two. That would make it incomprehensible.

But... [end of this side of the tape]...

the screenwriter makes further changes, because, although it's a collaborative effort, if the director says I don't like this, do it some other way, do it this way, and the screenwriter does that. And if the screenwriter doesn't do that, they'll get another screenwriter.

And then the actor says 'I don't believe this character would say this.'

And the actress says I don't want to do that, see, I want to do it this way, so they change the dialogue, and they change the scene.

And the director, again, comes up and says 'I think it should be done in this fashion' and he shapes it.

And what goes up on the screen bears, you hope, some resemblance to what was on the page."

 

"I used to think that it might be impossible for a movie to really encompass any of the books, but since seeing The Lord of the Rings, I've changed my mind. In any case, Harriet says (and Plato agrees with her) that the only thing to do when you sell a book to Hollywood is to take the money, walk away very fast before they can take it back, and never, ever go to see the movie."

 

[The underlined text is a very wrong approach...]

 

And reading Jordan's objections and advices on the graphic adaptation of New Spring, one can presume Robert Jordan's reaction to the promo pictures, the trailers, or even just an episode...

 

None of this supports your attempt to argue that the adaptation is somehow an affront to Robert Jordan's memory and legacy; it actually completely undermines that argument, but I suspect that you don't care.

Edited June 23 by DigificWriter

[Vermont]

interesting

[Sabio]

I would say a good example was Stephen King successfully suing to prevent his name being used for the Lawnmower man movie, saying it bore no resemblance to the book.