On 8/10/2021 at 10:32 PM, flinn said:

 

 The problem I have with people who dish on D and D is this... what exactly do they expect?

 

 GRRM completely, 100%, screwed over D and D.

 

 It seems some GoT fans expected D and D to quit tv, spend a few years learning to write novels, become best selling novelists, finish GoT novels for GRRM, then quit being best selling novelists, go back to TV, become producers again, adapt the best selling novels they wrote for GRRM and make a great ending to his series.  Btw, by the time they do all that, the actor playing Bran is 102 years old.

Something people might not realize, GRRM is still to this day screwing them over. Martin had them over to his home for an entire weekend as he outlined for them the future plotlines of the books before they began breaking the rest of the story for seasons 6 and onward. That's what they based those seasons on. And GRRM at first backed D and D on the veracity of their story, allowing for differences based on the variations caused by who was alive or dead on the show that wasn't in the books. But as time passed, and more so in recent months, GRRM has basically stabbed them in the back by making many in the public believe that the books would be ending very differently from the show. If George's statements leading to this belief are true, then it seems he saw how much fans rejected Dany going mad and torching King's Landing, Jon killing her, and Bran ending on the Throne, and decided "hey, I can't do that, they'll eviscerate me!" and decided to change his mind and thus the story (something many feel RJ did with Taimandred, who originally killed Asmodean in his notes, btw). This would explain why GRRM is still writing book six, after 11 freaking years and counting (with no travelling and conventions he had to do over the last year and a half thanks to Covid).

On 8/11/2021 at 6:33 PM, Thrasymachus said:

He wrote zero homosexual characters

Page 290 of The Wheel of Time Companion (and I quote from the second paragraph of the entry for Galina Casban) "She was a lesbian; she was very interested in Erian Boroleos."

What's this about "zero homosexual characters" and only one queer character? The text of the series made it pretty clear she was a lesbian as well, but in case your reading of it wasn't good enough, I figured the Companion should solidify that fact. And I'd say the Companion is a better authority on the matter than anyone posting in these forums, unless someone from Team Jordan hops in and directly contradicts the book.

3 hours ago, Thrasymachus said:

The Forsaken are "bisexual" mostly as a way to illustrate that their appetites are unconstrained. 

Sorry to break it to you, but they're still queer (even if you don't want to call them bi or some other "blank-sexual" term) which you said there was only one of. 

15 hours ago, Beidomon said:

I’d tell Rafe….

 

1. Don’t go woke, bro. Tell The Story. The Story ain’t woke. So Don’t. Go. Woke.

Not sure what books you were reading. We've got a world where a person's skin color, or the fact they are a woman, does not make them a second class citizen. We have two arguably bisexual characters in prominent roles (Moiraine and Siuan) for the plot, and there are undoubtedly other LGBT characters in the series. The power dynamics of the world are much more balanced between men and women than were seen in just about any other Fantasy literature at the time, or even now (as far as I can think of off hand), if not leaning a bit towards the women's side. You've got at least one culture that the woman controls who gets married, and when (the Aiel). There at least two Body Positive cultures in the series (Aiel and the Fal Darans), if not a third (the Domani). The Domani economy appears to be dominated by women instead of men. At a time when women were still not allowed in combat under US military regulations, Jordan had female warriors taking center stage numerous times in this series..

All this starting 30 years ago when none of this was taken lightly or considered common place.

So, exactly what the FRAK is "not woke" about this series? Or are you just being an antiWoke troll, with misogynistic, homophobic, racist and/or transphobic tendencies (as those are the only reasons to object to "wokeness")? I'm not accusing you of those, mind, I'm just asking if your motivation for saying "don't go woke" is because you're antiWoke, and thus have one of those mental disorders.

Finally, you live in the 21st Century. This Century is FRAKKING WOKE. GET USED TO IT, cuz that ain't going away. It's called progress, that's what happens as civilization grows and evolves, and becomes more mature, not the petty little boys club those who object to wokeness want it to remain. That's the realm of nematodes like Putin, Stephen Miller, the Proud Boys, and Trump.

On 5/25/2021 at 2:49 AM, eva.reves said:

 

Tv Shows still look like Tv Shows even in 2021)

Um, what? Sorry, but it seems you haven't been paying attention. Television for the past 20-21 years looks nothing at all like television of the 20th Century, with a handful of exceptions from before 2000. The style of writing, filming, acting and directing are all vastly different for a great chunk of the television that is currently on the market these days, at least when it comes to scripted television. And a lot, but not all, of modern television goes for a more theatrical approach, which separates it even further from the 20th Century style of TV. As to unscripted, well even that is different than most of the 20th Century's fare, since many styles and formats we see today of unscripted content was invented in this century, or at least popularized in it.

On 5/25/2021 at 9:34 AM, SinisterDeath said:

Either way, shows like this won't just drop the episodes as soon as they finish. They look to find a good release date. A Time when people are likely to sit down and watch it. Historically, they aim for Fall/Winter, over Spring/Summer, as they expect people are going to be outside and not watching TV during the Summer months.

This is the main reason Americans (and Canadians I believe) use the term "season" for a set group of episodes of a television show instead of the UK term "series;" everything started in the Fall Season, and ended in sometime in Spring (in the early days of television, shows would go 26 weeks, or even more!). Then they would air reruns (for the kids out there, that is an already aired episode being played again ??) until the new Fall Season.

16 hours ago, eva.reves said:

To be blunt, these numbers are pathetic. Under 2 or 4 million and they talk about gigantic success. But then everything is a gigantic success even when it just got cancelled. Worldwide numbers: when the weakest soap operas from Korea/Turkey/Germany/Italy/Mexico/Brazil can get bigger numbers easily...
 

Viewing numbers don't mean nearly as much these days as you think they do. You should read this article (or this one) where they talk about the changed concept of a successful television show in the modern era. Today there are probably a multiple tens, if not a hundred (or maybe even more), times as many TV shows "on the air" (I put it that way cuz I include streaming services like Netflix, Disney+, and Amazon Prime as television) as there were 25 years ago.* Look at how many more cable channels there are today than in 1996. Look at the number of streaming services we have now. And all of them have their own original content, as well as old IP that is being rebroadcast. All of that divvies up the population, which I grant is larger (but not that much larger), even more than we were in '96. There are only so many people to go around for all those shows. And, as that article I linked above discusses, there are other methods of watching that do not get counted in many of the audience share counting systems (like the Nielsen rating system, which has lost a lot of its previous influence).

* Compare the Wikipedia pages for TV shows debuting in 2021 and 1996 and compare the number of shows on each page. That is just shows debuting, not even counting returning television shows. That will give you a solid impression. You can also look at the "1996 in American television" page with the (at time of posting) INCOMPLETE and NOWHERE CLOSE TO FINISHED "2021 in American television" page. And those are just America, note. Not including Canada, the UK, or anywhere else.

5 hours ago, Rissanen said:

Blood and ashes, that's the longest post I've seen yet! 

Blood and bloody ashes, that's the longest post that I have ever seen. Anyways, yeah that does make sense. Although, doesn't the Horn of Valere call back heroes the have been in every Turning of the Wheel, doesn't the Dark One always comeback, which signifies the end of one Turning, and Bridgette is always reunited with her husband, Gaidal Cain?

You clearly haven't seen some of my monstrosities! Talk about "Wall of Text." I took lessons in verbosity from Jordan, and oft put them to good use ?.

On 10/7/2020 at 8:14 PM, Fano'Lan Redux said:

 

For you both, kudos on the replies and the patience exhibited.

Thank you. I've been down this road before on this very topic, and that's the very reason why I titled this particular thread the way I did. I've spend all my energy getting riled up over this issue that I intend to. Done with that. The two videos I shared say it all, nothing more needs to be said.

5 minutes ago, bmarluke said:

Ultimately, what you prefer has no bases on how the characters will look and feel on screen. Your reading bias is like all bias, often inaccurate and entirely dependent on personal experience. 
 

I recommend you: 

1. Write down a character description from memory. 
2. Listen to the books on tape so you can focus on how the characters are written. Stop of the book when they are described. Write that down.

3. Compare your version to what is written. 
4. Sit back and gaze in wonder how your bias somehow changed what was actually written.    Mind blown 

If there was a thumbs up button I would be slamming it right now...

On 10/4/2020 at 6:33 AM, Sawyer said:

When I heard Amazon planned on adapting 'The Wheel of Time,' it caught my attention big time. 

 

Like most people, I care more about a show's casting when I have read the book(s) it is based on. I did not read 'The Witcher,' so I barely noticed the casting in that show. But I did read the 'Game of Thrones' and was satisfied with the casting and most plot adaptions -  Very faithful to the books, especially early seasons  - obviously.

 

My impression of the casting:

 

.........

3) Edmond Field characters casting: Not faithful to author's description or vision. The author made a particular point about how the Edmond Fielders looked compared to Rand and why that was so- not just a passing mention either. Clear foreshadowing from the descriptions/appearances were completely ignored as far as I can tell.

As to the casting in Game of Thrones, no, it wasn't accurate. Ned Stark and Arya are both clearly described as having long lean faces (I think "horse-faced" was even used a time or two), and Ned as having dark black hair. That was not lived up to with the show. Tyrion Lannister was described as having very pale, almost white, blond hair, was exceptionally ugly of face and having eyes of two different colors. That was not the case (and most women I know call Dinklage a rather good looking man). He was also much shorter and more deformed than was portrayed on the show. So please, do not call it accurate. Especially with what you have to say about the casting for the show based on Jordan's work.

On to The Wheel of Time.

You definitely need to watch these two videos (at least the first one), in which they draw upon the AUTHOR'S own notes and texts to prove that your interpretation is wholly inaccurate.

And THAT should be the end of that particular aspect of the casting conversation in this thread. Check and mate.

3 minutes ago, imlad said:

 

"...you're posting..."

 

??

Someone had to say it...

(and for a while, I was "Someone Else" so that basically means me)

On 8/23/2020 at 11:56 PM, SinisterDeath said:

External links, like to stories/news/etc are fine.

 

Advertising something not so much. Specially if your posting a "hey, join my forum!".

"...you're posting..."

??

On 8/26/2020 at 6:59 PM, Thrasymachus said:

Here's another thing about those "theories".  Every feature of human technology, all of the things that we can do, including contributing to this discussion with others scattered around the globe in more-or-less real-time, depends on those "theories" being almost entirely right.  Is there stuff missing?  Sure.  But there's virtually no chance that what's missing is going to radically alter our understanding of the natural world.  Particularly the nature of things like entropy and the Conservation Laws

Well, there's actually one thing that could actually (potentially) "radically alter our understanding" of Conservation Laws, and that is the solution to whatever the heck Dark Energy is, because that already seems like it may be violating them on a Universal scale.

As to the rest, no, WoT doesn't take place in our world's future, but in the future of a parallel Earth. That Earth is one of the seemingly infinite (but not quite infinite) parallel worlds accessed via Professor Burrough's "continua device" in Robert Heinlein's The Number of the Beast. Those who have read that book see why that is totally obvious and makes perfect sense. Those who don't should read the Wikipedia article, or better yet, read the book.

On 8/22/2020 at 5:34 PM, Elessar said:

I don't personally think she looks that old myself either, but then again it is often difficult to judge age and my impression (being a westerner) is that Asian women often look somewhat younger than they are..

 

I was not sure if it were allowed or frowned upon to post external weblinks here at DM, but since you ask I presume it is fine. The info I found was in a UK newspaper article (reputable/respectable London Evening Standard) where it says in an article called 'Meet the new generation of acting stars on the rise this autumn' posted on 6 September 2017:

 

 

Kae Alexander

 

GoT fans, look closely and see if you recognise Alexander. Granted, it’s not easy, given that the 32-year-old played one of the Children of the Forest, Leaf, in series six: so heavily made-up, with prosthetics glued onto her entire body, that ‘I was getting picked up at midnight to get into make-up at 1am, to be on set for 10am!’ Born in Kobe, Japan, at the age of 10 she moved to north London, where she became obsessed with Pineapple Studio classes and, aged 14, got into acting after she was dragged down to an opening day at the BRIT school by a friend..

 

 

This is the beginning of the part about Kae in the article, you can read the rest about 1/3 down the page in the link below:

 

https://www.standard.co.uk/lifestyle/esmagazine/meet-the-new-generation-of-acting-stars-on-the-rise-this-autumn-a3627211.html

 

As mentioned, I can't confirm if this info is correct, but it looks like a serious article on up and coming acting stars from 2017 from a pretty reputable source.

 

Hey thank you! And I've never run into any issues posting links to external sites. In fact, if you look at the features across the top in the editor when writing a post you will see a button specifically for links (just to the right of the Strikethrough button). I've posted dozens of external links, links I know moderators have read and nobody has ever said anything to me about them. So no worries on that.

Anyhow, thank you for the link, good to have the information at hand now.

6 hours ago, Elessar said:

There is nothing wrong with looking up info on persons/celebrities on the internet. Millions do this out of natural curiosity and a wish to know more about people they admire. In this time and age we are told to feel shame/guilt about so many things in life and I think that is wrong.

 

According to a UK news article I came across on the internet (I have the link) this actress was 32 years old in 2017 which would make her around 35 years old now, presupposing the article was correct. But as someone said before, age will not matter here since make up artists will have no problem making her look a bit younger if that is necessary.

 

I am more intrigued to see how the showrunners are going to make the Aes Sedai faces smooth and ageless (and thereby clearly different from that of other women incl. the female Forsaken) like it is depicted in canon.

 

As for Min, I am glad she is finally cast and hope she will stay the same character in all ways as in the books.

Could you share the link please, I'd like to see some corroboration on her age (not that I don't believe you, I just want to see it for myself, ya know? No offense to you, mate). Because she sure doesn't look that old. I tried searching for her age for a good amount of time, and got nowhere.

On 8/12/2020 at 3:43 PM, Thrasymachus said:

I could see her as Verin.  I don't think I've seen her in a role as scatterbrained and "Brown Ajah" as Verin affects, but I don't doubt that Imelda Staunton could do that.  I don't doubt she could pull off Verin's sharpness/devious cleverness either.

Well, I contend that in the case of Verin, the "scatterbrained" Brown Ajah persona was entirely an act, that she was never scatterbrained or a nutty(professor) type person in the series at all, that she never really was distracted by something "interesting" that easily. I'd say she was possibly the most observant, sharpest (as you stated), quick witted and intelligent of all the Aes Sedai we saw during the entire series. I mean, she freaking outsmarted the entire Black Ajah, the entire White Tower, and Ishamael himself. And managed to get the entire roster of who was in the Black Ajah, when nobody, and I mean nobody, but the Head of the Supreme Council knew who all the members of the Ajah were. And she figured out who Rand was pretty darn quickly in Fal Dara (although, I concede, she may have been at the DF Social as one of the Aes Sedai we saw, or someone that was better disguised, and had seen Ishy's little One Power produced multimedia display, or had been flat out told who Rand was at some other point by one of the Forsaken or another DF, or even a Fade).

That's why Verin = Badass

On 8/3/2020 at 3:56 PM, SinisterDeath said:

What about one of the sisters in book 2? That Moiraine goes and visits?

Also I imagine this as Cadsuane:

I totally think Imelda Staunton needs to be in the show (even though she's gonna be starring as QEII on The Crown for the remaining seasons of that show apparently). I just think she is more Verin Mathwin material (even happens to be the exact same height as Verin). She even comes with a tad bit of "baggage" that fans of the Harry Potter movies will bring, them not knowing if they should trust her or not (I mean, Dolores Umbridge! come on! that's kinda scarring).

7 hours ago, Samma3l said:

I think it´ s important, as i said, if you read what i wrote, it´ s about details and to me details matters and if you ignore large details like that you will in the end ignore the smaller details.

Just look at the witcher series, alot of details were ignored specially when it came to the characters and it´ s a fucking mess and avarage at best, but who cares right, not that important.....stupid thing to say

Superfluous details like skin color, eye color, and hair color matter not at all outside of Rand and his similarity to the Aiel. The details with Rand are the only ones that have any plot relevance. There is no plot thread hinging on Lan's eye color, or on Fain's skin color. Nor is there any plot that relies upon the skin/hair/eye color of anyone other than Rand.

Get over your superficial nitpicking of details that have no real bearing on the story. Concern yourself more with "can the actor chosen perform the part they were cast for better than anyone else that auditioned?" That is what is important here, not matching up every character perfectly to their physical description in the books. If that was the primary objective in the show, Rafe would be screwed, because I'm pretty sure there aren't many ~20 year old men with broad shoulders that stand 6'5"/6'6" tall with grey eyes and red hair (or blond with a red dye job) that can act well enough to be number one or two on the call sheet, and handle the demands that the role of Rand calls for down the road. Mostly because there really aren't that many men that fit that physical description, and very very few of those men have gone into acting. And Perrin? Hell, Jordan describes him as being more bulky and muscular than freaking Dwayne Johnson! How many guys with that build that stand 6'2" can act well enough to portray Perrin do you think there are?

Are you willing to sacrifice acting ability just for physical appearances? If so, then you really want the show to fail, because bad acting is a sure fire way to get the show cancelled after one season due to poor viewer ratings. So use the brain evolution gave you and get over the superficialities.

And none of those details are "large details" at all. They are small, minute details. A large detail would be Rand being tall, or Perrin being fairly strong looking, or them being from a small remote village. Or Lan and Moiraine being strangers who come into town dressed nicer than anyone had seen before, with Lan wearing a strange color changing cloak.

Seriously, your priorities are considerably frakked, mate.

47 minutes ago, Thrasymachus said:

While being somewhat prone to erudite loquaciousness myself, I was likewise lost as to the meaning of the above post.  The best I can reckon is that he wishes to recommend to make sure to establish a kind of character for the show.  Something that's not quite a theme but more of a style or aesthetic.  I think.

Oooh, nicely used vocabulary there! ???

Uh... what? I know I didn't smoke that much, that I'm not that high right now*, but I know you're trying to say something, and you used a lot of great words and phrases, but I don't get how they fit together and say anything as a cohesive whole. I'm totally lost reading that. Sorry mate. What did you say? ?

* It is legal where I live (as it should be), so please, don't kavitch. ?

Pretty darned interesting. Not sure I can totally buy into the concept just yet. I'll need to think on it, and perhaps get sold on it some more.

You know, I think you're doing this on purpose. Initials for people's names are common across multiple languages. In fact, I have yet to hear of a language that uses the Latin alphabet that doesn't initialise people's names as in the example given (Mat Cauthon = MC, or Moiraine Damodred = MD, or Perrin Aybara = PA). Why the frak would "main character" be capitalised, it is not a proper noun? You say you never saw anyone do names like MC for Mat Cauthon, well had you seen anyone do MC for main character? I didn't think so.

And again, how many frakking thousands of times did you see the name Moiraine in the books when you read them? I know it wasn't spelled Morain in the copies you read, unless you got some incredibly black market hand written copies in a back alley somewhere. It is Moiraine Moiraine Moiraine Moiraine Moiraine MOIRAINE MOIRAINE M-O-I-R-A-I-N-E. Do you get it yet "Eldir"? Huh Endir? Can you see yet how it is spelled Elnir? Say it with me... em oh eye ar ay eye en ee. If you want to be taken seriously and not as some crackpot who can't read or has no reading comprehension, spell the name correctly. 

And why are you talking about characters missing from upcoming books? The books are done and over with. Do you mean the television show? Television shows have seasons or series. Books are written word. Video, you know, moving images, are on the screen, and are different from books. Nobody else around here is talking about stuff in upcoming books, we are all talking about the first season/series and beyond. Why can't you? Okay, sure there could be a language difference, but follow the lead of others, the example others are setting throughout the forums here when talking about the show. That should be an excellent guide to teach you the appropriate words to use. You don't just get to make up your own terminology (or spelling of a character's name, or initialision of a term, "main character") as you wish.

tl;dr -- MC is an initialisation of a name which would be a Mat Cauthon (in the context of the show). Moiraine Damodred is how her name is spelled. A television show is broken up into seasons or series (depending on which country you live in), not books. You have had it explained to you. This is how it works in English. If this isn't your native tongue, now you know. If it is your native tongue, what the frak is wrong with you. Use it correctly from now on please, or just keep it to yourself instead of making youself look silly. Twice now you've had this all explained to you. At least.  

4 hours ago, Elendir said:

Mat

 

What Mat where? Mat is "zombie" during second book. He is hardly MC="Main Character" of the second book. When I wrote about second book, I wrote about Rand.

 

 

 

Morain is then another case. Her disappearance from the pages in the book can be a nice help in shifting emphasis on Rand in the serie, of course, after the events in Fal Dara. They can easily base the story of the first book on an acclaimed actress and give space to other actors to profile themselves. We all know however that the book is not about Morain, which, after some time, leaves the story for a long time.

 

When I read "MC" I read it as Mat Cauthon as well, just as Effete did. Typically, initials are for people's names. If you want to say "main character" (which is not capitalised) then say main character, or at the least don't capitalise the letters as one would for a person's initials. I've got to say the cause for this miscommunication was yours.

Oh, and that Aes Sedai... her name is "Moiraine," not "Morain." I mean, how many times did you read that name with just one read through of the series? You can't lay the blame for that on any potential language barrier. 

For Be'lal, the most useless of all the Forsaken, I think Malcolm McDowell fits rather well. He's a great actor, excellent at playing the baddies, and even matches the physical description of the character.

23 hours ago, SinisterDeath said:

What trips me out is that Egg Plants, Tomatoes, Peppers, and Potatoes are all in the Nightshade family of flower plants. (Potatoes even grow a poisonous fruit!)

If that trips you up, this will probably blow your mind...

On 1/31/2020 at 3:56 AM, redgiant said:

I will say Ruth Wilson is wonderful as a clever, witty, dangerous baddie in Luther.

 

I thought she would play a Liandrin or Elaida very well.

She's scary in Luther and His Dark Materials. She'd make a great baddie, that's for sure, if she was available, but it appears she'll be tied up with HDM for a couple years. So I'm settling on my original Elaida pick of Maria Doyle Kennedy (who many are thinking is either Verin or Siuan for some reason, despite not being anything like either of them in any way, whether in looks or roles played -- besides, Siuan is about the same age as Moiraine, and Kennedy's a fair bit older than Pike).

On 1/30/2020 at 11:57 PM, Vincent Vinchova said:

Okay it’s finally come to me. 
Galad: Gavin Drea

I'm straight, but I'll concede he's rather pretty.