regarding what AI is already capable of this "trailer" was made by a single person in one week. I am not an expert, but I don't see any quality difference with stuff made with real actors for large budgets. In 20 years from now, perhaps one of the people posting here will be able to make his own adaptation. which we will all be allowed to shot down as not close enough to the books, too close to the books, too dark, too light, or whatever.

------ Ahahahhahahahha! No. Thread is Locked. "W" Discussion is done, you've all had an opportunity to vent it out, and we lost a member because of it. Starting Today, any posts that start talking about "W" will be removed/edited. Don't like it, take it up with the other admins.". ......... There are a fair few more examples, I mean many people weren't happy with how the show was going, people were going to be critical...Things like that happen, they WERE NOT well received. Personally I just thought the show wasn't very good. weird. i didn't knew that, and i've seen people use the word woke since then. maybe it was an instance of the word used as an insult that triggered and excessive reaction that was later tempered. I've certainly seen people express very strong criticism of the show, and nothing bad happened to them - except perhaps this forum seem to appear to have a majority of people who liked the show, so people arguing against would get less votes.

this is a really bad thing to say. this forum doesn't ban people on opinions, and there are posters on both sides of the argument. every discussion I've seen has been civil and respectful. nobody is banned for expressing opinions respectfully. what kind of people are chased off by civil discussion? I guess those that would like a discussion to be something like " - the tv show is turd, ruined by rafe being a woke flagbearer! - yes, rafe better not show his face around here! - we should burn his house! - we should hurt his family! " Yes, I can see how such people would be put off by a civil discussion. And frankly, such people should reexhamine their life and try to find some purpose - if they need their safe space to hate something as harmless as a tv show without contradictory, there's something deeply wrong with them. people tend to congregate with those of similar opinions, and to an extent it's unavoidable and positive. But when people can't stand having someone challenge - respectfully and with arguments, no less! - their opinion on a tv show, it goes too far. it means those people can't think and can't form reasoned opinions. Even in the best case, some of those people are simply there to vent some rage at the world in general. some people go to the gym and punch a mattress to unwind after work, some people go on the internet and rage at random stuff. even in that best case, i'd argue those people's opinion do not count, as they are merely venting - just like the guy in the gym punching a punching ball is doing it because it makes him feel good, not because he really wants to punch someone. Hopefully.

is that 1/8th also exaggerated for comedic effects? stepin has 10 minutes of screen time, 15 at most. and elyas is an interesting story only if you get the full wolfbrother picture. which clearly they wanted to wait to introduce. and i will say that i know a single non-reader who watched the show and commented on stepin, and was very positive about it.

the donning kruger studio showed both effects: ignorant people overestimaging their skill, and capable ones underestimating it. I assumed the effect included both, but apparently only the first part is generally referenced. weird.

you keep repeating that, but i do believe you suffer from donning kruger effect here. you already know the lore, you already know which bits of exposition are important and which are fluff, and you already know how each bit fits into each other bit. you also know very well the main plot, so you are not distracted by trying to follow up what happens to rand & others while also getting blasted by seemingly random pieces of unrelated exposition. it reminds me of my first teaching experiences, where I kept insisting that the stuff I was teaching was easy and I was summing up a whole topic in twenty minutes. sure, it's easy for me because I studied chemistry for years and sure, it can be summed up in twenty minutes if you understand each and every point and their logical relatonships at the first try. eventually, I had to accept that if everyone was insisting chemistry was hard, it probably really was; that, and having worked in academia for years I was living in a social bubble of smart people and I was overestimating the average kid - who is the target of my lessons, they must be understandable by him, not just by the smart people I hang out with. if chemistry becomes easy after reaching a certain level of proficiency, well, that's what being proficient means. If I give a simple explanations, and the students insist that it's hard (the good students who put actual effort and have some brain, not the bad students who pay attention exactly once, the day before the test, and then get surprised when they don't pass), I learned to accept that the students are right, and try a better approach. because, due to donning kruger effect, I am not a reliable judge of whether some bit of chemistry is hard, or not. I suggest you do the same. If most everyone here insists that on their first reading they didn't get the lore, maybe it's because getting it on the first read is actually hard, and not because this forum is populated by liars and dummies. If you find it super easy, maybe it's because you already know it, and not because it's actually easy.

it's not much a matter of "possible", but of "economically convenient". bringing wot to screen requires a lot of money. to do it properly, it also requires advanced planning - you have to make an outline for all the season and stick to it, you need to pay the actors in advance to avoid having to change the plot because an actor becomes unavailable, you need to film the seasons back to back to be able to make one season per year, because at the pace they were using the viewers had mostly forgotten that the show even exhisted, after two years since the previous season. and this even reduces some costs - it's cheaper to gather all the actors and workers and film two seasons in a row than having to restart all over every time - but it involves considerable risk. it means pulling out 500 millions or more without any certainty that you will have a return on investment, and without having any way of recouping any of those if things go wrong. and then those costs have to be justified. the show must be successful enough to bring new viewers, enough to pay its cost. which is a problem of its own. there are hundreds upon hundreds of tv shows on amazon prime. how many people are going to pay the membership just for one of those? quite hard to establish, but with so much stuff being produced, it's kinda hard to justify a single project bringing in so many new viewers. GOT is often used as a benchmark, but GOT had it easy; at its time, there were no large fantasy projects, so people interested in those only had one choice. at the moment, how many fantasy shows are there? I don't know because i don't follow, but I know there are many. it's easier to attract new paying customers when you are making a big fantasy show where there are none, than when you are making a big fantasy show in addition to a dozen others. so, making a wot adaptation is possible; in fact, they were doing it. But making a wot adaptation that is economically convenient? making a good wot adaptation with the restrictions placed by limited fundings, by a studio that is hedging its bets because it wants to be able to pull the plug on the project with minimal losses if things ever start going downhill? Finding a studio that is willing to bet the money on the production, knowing that most likely it won't be successful and will go at a loss? Good luck with that. And frankly, if someone pulled that kind of money and effort, I'd rather they adapt the mistborn trilogy or the stormlight archive - both of which probably would be a lot easier to adapt and work better on the screen, due to cinematic action sequences.

the warder that was going to die in the end was a good story, and it served a purpose to build up tension for when lan will be without bond. people who didn't read the books liked that arc. tossing egwene in the river, on the other hand, was eminently pointless and should have been cut even if there was nothing else to put in its place.

the foretelling, by itself, wouldn't work. not when the people have no idea who this dragon is supposed to be. but i would have included it. after prolonged discussion, i was convinced that a version of the book prologue could be used - provided that ishamael really cuts down on the flowery speech and lews terin cuts down on the madness answers. make it clear. you want to convey that there was the dark one, and the dragon sort of defeated the dark one, but caused the taint on saidin and went mad. oh, and some people were woring for the dark one. lay it out as straight as possible. second scene, the foretelling. show gitara moroso with the foretelling. use conversation with moiraine and siuan to better hammer the whole reborn thing. this couple scenes, in less than 10 minutes, should set up the foundation, and do it clearly. now you can either make a montage sequence of moiraine traveling around the world looking for the dragon, or you can cut to the two rivers directly. but i'm imagining the montage sequence, and i'm liking it a lot. moiraine arrives in a village. talks with people, just a couple sentences shown. says to lan "he's born two weeks too late". strikes the name. jumps on the horse. repeat a couple times, then show increasingly shorter jumps of moiraine arriving in new villages and striking names. Until in the final cut, she arrives at emond field.

Of course you don't get a scene-by-scene conversion. You know that. This feels like a bad faith argument. Moving the goalpost, too You complained about the lack of t'a'r visions, i pointed out there were several, so now you shift on a specific one. You may as well complain that there wasn't the scene of mat and rand doing gleemen tricks for food for the tenth time.

That's simply not true. The first seaseon has at least a scene with "ba'alzamon" for rand and one for perrin, and i don't distinctly remember one for mat but i think he also had one Three sequences, with the premium on screen time, is a pretty good investment As for shadar logoth, it got more or less the same time that it got in the books, in proportion.

That's simply not true. The first seaseon has at least a scene with "ba'alzamon" for rand and one for perrin, and i don't distinctly remember one for mat but i think he also had one Three sequences, with the premium on screen time, is a pretty good investment As for shadar logoth, it got more or less the same time that it got in the books

what rafe wanted, what the executives wanted, what was pitched, or the tv beginning working even less, all this has absolutely zero bearing on whether the book prologue would have been a good start, or not. I argue that the book prologue, as it is, is needlessly confusing to first time readers, to the point that even many who became long standing fans of the books didn't like it. I argue that, for a tv adaptation, a different scene, or at least a version of the book prologue heavily edited for clarity, would have been better. whether the prologue was changed in the tv show because rafe put a lot of thought on where to start introducing this massively expansive world, or because rafe is secretly a far right extremist with a convoluted plan of ruining the wheel of time with a woke retelling to cause people to rage against it, or because the executives saw that only men were involved in the first scene, and the only woman was a corpse, and deemed it would have been discriminatory, that's completely irrelevant for the purpose of the argument.

it would be awesome if it worked like you say. And as I said, maybe you are just a more perceptive reader than I was when I picked up the first book the first time. You probably were, at the time I was in my late teens reading in a foreign language on which I wasn't fully proficient. The fact remains that I, within the first 50 pages, hadn't understood much of what you say. What hooked the book for me was winternight and what followed. Yes, thinking in retrospect, the pieces of the lore were there. The problem is, just like with the prologue, they were drowned in so much irrelevant fluff, I didn't pick them. You could understand all that stuff in the first 50 pages, in the same way that you can figure out who is the murdered in a detective book is within the first 50 pages if you follow the right clues. If it was only me having this problem, you could just dismiss it as me having no experience with big fantasy sagas at the time. But a lot of people are saying they had a problem with the prologue. Face it, the execution was botched. RJ had an awesome idea for a setup, but he put so much fluff around it, it left many readers utterly confused and unable to pick up the actually important stuff.

maybe you are a super-perceptive reader, or maybe you just know what to look for. yes, of course, now that we know what the prologue is about, it's easy to find the references. just like it's easy to spot the clues once you already know the solution to a mistery. what i remember of my first experience reading the prologue is an endless sequence of name-dropping. Lews Therin. Elan Morin. Ishamael. Ilyena. Shai'tan. Lord of the morning. Great Lord of the dark. Betrayer of hope. Hundred companions. Kinslayer. Some of those are probably the same person, but for my first reading it was too much information to keep track properly. The Voice? Singing? Those are capitalized, they clearly means something special. First among Servants? nine rods of dominion? Paaran Disen? Ring of Tamyrlin? In retrospect, I don't need to know what any of this means. However, I had no way to determine which of those was important, and which wasn't. Traveling? Wheel of Time? Creator? True Source? One Power? Sure, now I know that stuff is important, but the first time I read the book, the One Power seemed no more, no less important than Paaran Disen. Besides, we are in the viewpoint of someone clearly unhinged. Are we even supposed to trust what this guy is experiencing, or are we supposed to watch for clues of unreliable narrator? All in all, it was too much for me. I just decided to completely ignore the prologue for the time being. Now that I write the issues like this, I think the scene could work, provided that Ishy cuts down with the flowery speech and everyone sticks to one single name. Yes, I know you need to convey that those characters have many names and appellations, but it could be better to give it some time. And it could actually work better on television than on book, because television would remove the problem with the unreliable narrator the book was accidentally giving, and it would force Ishy to cut down with the fluff and stick to what's important.

Is it actually explained? For real, not "there is a piece of fine print and you can ask in internet forums what it meant"? I honestly don't remember because the first two books are my least favorite and i have been skipping them in my latest rereads. Anyway, most of that is explained later. The eye was made during the breaking according to prophecy, and we see that in rhuidean. We also see the green man in rhuidean. My impression is that it was a (very successful) author saving throw to justify a weak ending. It works in the books, after you read all of them. It left me utterly confused when i read it first. Oh, and i don't accept "rand is channeling with ltt memories"; he didn't got those until later books. Now, it could have been done more faithfully in the tv show. Explain that the eye was made during the breaking because it was foretold it was needed. Takes one minute of exposition. Cut the green man; his one contribution was sacrificing to kill a foresaken, so just remove the green man and one foresaken and the scene plays out the same. Explain that you have 4 ta'veren, and they warp chances, so you are counting on them to stumble on the eye. Again, takes one minute. Then it can play more or less like in the books. Make rand a bit less cheesy; he can overpower a foresaken with raw strenght with a pool of pure saidin to tap, but traveling and entering t'a'r is a bit too much, plus viewers wouldn't understand it. Anyway, you can use ishi as the foresaken at the eye, so no need for rand to access t'a'r. That's how i would have tried it

you do realize the whole LOTR is roughly 1000 pages, and peter jackson had 9 hours (increased to 11 in the special extended edition), and running the numbers it means jackson had twice the ratio of screentime to book pages?

first, i was answering several things simultaneously, it would have helped clarity to delete from the quoted section the things that you weren't replying to. on to the point, you are failing to make your point in any meaningful way, and you are getting many details wrong anyway. so everyone in randland knows the prophecies? not really. they know that the prophecies exhist. in the beginning of book 1 we see people in the two rivers mention the prophecies, and being very hazy on what they entail, some even claiming the dragon will serve the dark one and destroy the world iirc. even noblemen and other learned people don't know much about the prophecies besides "the dragon will be reborn, he will save the world, but deal so much collateral damage in the process, you'll wish he didn't". Even Moiraine, who dedicated her WHOLE LIFE to searching the dragon, and made her WHOLE LIFES WORK to find him, and was literally right there for the foretelling of the birth of the dragon, is absolutely clueless about most details in the prophecies. the prophecies said that the dragon will be "of the ancient blood, and raised by the old blood". moiraine had absolutely no idea what it meant, to the point that it took her 20 years to go to the two river to look for someone with red hair. moiraine had no idea rand would be half aiel and half andoran prince, she had no idea he would have to go into rhuidean and lead the aiel, she didn't even knew what "born to a maiden wedded to no man" meant! which was actually pretty easy, if one had any superficial grasp of aiel culture. Let's face it, even moiraine, who was one of the world foremost experts on he dragon, knew little besides the basics. so, making the change that they would know even a bit less, and be unsure whether the dragon would be a boy or girl? a little thing, mostly. but the main reason i say your argument is irrelevant is that 90% of readers never grasp the lore. you are used to your internet forums with a few dozen equally hardcore fans discussing the minutiae as if they were the biggest thing, but in truth, the casual readers - that make up a majority of readership - never even notice those details. and in a tv adaptation, you always lose a lot of lore. lore is the kind that makes things complicated and requires a lot of exposition, and most people don't get anyway. besides, tv audience generally has a shorter attention span than book readers. so, while knowing that the dragon will be a male - doomed to go crazy from the taint - is a mildly important fact in the overall lore, very few people in randland know the full prophecies enough to know the difference between "the dragon will destroy because he will go crazy" and "the dragon will destroy because he will be naughty". adding a whole additional layer of uncertainty on the aes sedai themselves hoping the dragon could be a woman, therefore one they could better control, doesn't change the story much - in fact, it helps to show why the red ajah is still adamant on gentling every male channeler, and why the majority of aes sedai aren't hot on bending their knee to the forgotten sign. and all this goes completely over the heads of the majority of people actually watching the show. the ones whose viewership numbers decide whether the show is successful or not. I disagree. The end of book 1 felt like a long sequence of ass pulls. "and then a bunch of unexpected, unforshadowed things happen", over and over again. rand spends the whole book running from a forsaken, then he get angry and burns him? just like that? when you go outside of the "fantasy readers" social bubble, and see what others say about fantasy, you'll find that kind of stuff "the plot being inexplicably solved by a sudden burst of magic" to be the number one complaint against fantasy literature.

and i loved the concept instead. look, all stories have massive plot convenience. things happen at just the right time, characters are in just the right place. like, take star wars. there's a whole galaxy, and the droids carrying the schematics of the death star take an escape pod and just happen to fall close to the secret son of darth vader. what are the odds? are they even smaller than the odds that all the stormtroopers that took shots at the protagonists never managed to hit once, not even by accident? take lord of the rings. the ring is lost for 3000 years. then gandalf and sauron locate it at the same time. gandalf wonders if bilbo has the one ring, leaves to do research, stays away for 17 years, comes to warn frodo. meanwhile, sauron tracks gollum, tortures the information out of him, follows the hints to the shire. and after those 17 years (or 50+ years if we count from when bilbo took the ring, or 3000 years if we count from when the ring was first lost) gandalf manages to reach the shire just a few hours before the nazgul. he could have arrived there one month earlier, and made the trip in safety. or he may have arrived one week later, finding frodo already dead. ta'veren is perfect to have all those kind of contrived coincidences that always happen, and have them being justified. characters are aware of this plot armor and plan around it. i loved the concept, a lot more than the whole reincarnation thing which incidentally shows once more that adapting wot is so hard. what to you is a minor thing that you didn't care much for, for others it's the main selling point of the saga.

ok, here we find some common ground. I agree on that, they should have pushed more on this concept (EDIT which the prologue absolutely failed convey to me, as that information was lost among so much weirdness that I had no idea what was supposed to be important and what was just decoration). which was weakened by their attempt to present a dragon woman as a viable alternative. i don't know, i think the issue of "the prophecies are translations of translaions or second-hand copies of third-hand quotes, so we are unsure of the details" also work. I liked it, and find that the question of "is this prophecy exact, or was it misquoted at some point" is missing from the books. i believe the reds are thinking along the lines of "if he's the real dragon reborn, then his ta'veren nature will prevent us from gentling him. something will happen. we don't really risk killing the real deal by acciden" incidentally, i blame the show for name-dropping ta'veren without explanation, then never explaining well what it means, and never mentioning the concept in the next seasons when it would make a lot of sense.

I disliked the prologue the first time i read it. I was like "this makes no sense and I can't understand anything!". i read the book despite the prologue, not because of it. on the other hand, I will mitigate my opinion on this by stating that I have no flipping idea on what would be a good first scene. it's hard, when you have such a large world, to introduce it to readers. in fact, the starting moiraine voiceover was at least effective of conveying what the main plot would be about, it probably wasn't the best way to start but it was a fairly good one. on the other hand, following through with pushing egwene into a river was a terrible way to go on

no, it's an entirely different thing. with mat and tylin, we have the "fade to black". or mat thinking of what tylin did with the pink ribbons. it's not shown, but it's not just "implied". with sister wives it's mostly implied, and i suppose it depends on the specific marriage whether the two women have sex with each other, or they are merely very good friends. but we don't see much of the life of a sister-wife. elayne and aviendha are different because they are both main characters, and we spend a lot of time in their pow, even intimate moments. we never get any hint that the two are having sex, though i'd certainly call romantic some of what they do. compare with rand and his raging fire felt through the bond, or something like that. compare with nynaeve thinking her nights with lan are glorious. those are character that have sex, and they are shown very different than elayne and aviendha. also, i repeat: i don't have a specific problem with their relationship, if it was just that - well, except maybe that it was something unique. i have a general problem with several lines of dialogue in several places implying everyone in that world is a bisexual nymphomaniac. i have a general problem with a bunch of media trying to tell inclusive stories, but ending up with the implication that everyone is a bisexual nymphomaniac.

on the other hand, elayne and aviendha had a pretty unique relationship. on some level, they were closer than most married couples. they did everything together. they slept together hugging each other, they bathed together, they ate together, they lived together. sex was the one thing they didn't do together, and that made their relationship different and more interesting. if they become lesbian loves, they are just that; another romantic relation, not very different from dozens of others. i don't mind representation and diversity, but if there is one thing that turns me off (aside from when it's forced and poorly done) is how every relationship is turned romantical. how it seems you can't be close with someone without shtupping them. I have three very good friends, and if I was a woman, or they were women, i'd try to date them. but i'm a straight man, and i have absolutely zero romantic inclination towards them. I call them honorary brothers, i am extremely close, but i have no romantic inclination. but no, if my life was turned into a movie adaptation rafe would have me have gay sex with all three. I don't like how in baldurs gate 3 you can date each and every companion, regardless of gender or species. you have a dozen of them, and not a single one will tell you "sorry, you are a great friend but i'm not into women/humans/tieflings/whatever". i like how in mass effect 3 you have a bunch of romantic options that includes straight men, straight women, bisexual men, bisexual women, and even a straight gay and a straight lesbian. that's actual representation. everyone lusting over everyone else just isn't. and so, I didn't like how elayne and aviendha's special bromance was turned into just another couple of lovers. I didn't like how it was suggested that lan join the alanna trio and start having sex with other men without any consideration for whether he'd be interested in it - especially because, as far as i know, doing a similar suggestion telling a straight lesbian to try men would be considered rude and insensitive, especially when worded like that. I didn't like how ishamael made suggestions over perrin. each of the three elements, taken in isolation, i would accept without problems. but all together? they point not towards diversity and representation, but to a world populated entirely by bisexual nymphomaniacs. So, you are saying that the show failed not because of general first season weakness, pacing problems, the "who is the dragon" mystery resulting in poor characterization for the EF5, the bad ending they had to pull out because of covid and actor departure, poor special effects in S1, poor marketing, or any of the actual problems. no, you are saying that the show failed because moiraine didn't know whether the dragon could be a woman or a man - which doesn't even imply any change to the mythology, just that aes sedai lost much knowledge. there's even siuan saying at some point, the prophecies are translations of translations, who knows what they meant originally. not that people who didn't read the books would have much grasp over the whole mythology thing in the first place. let's be realistic. the decision to keep the identity of the dragon a "secret" worked poorly because it impacted characterization. but the stuff about gender, it had absolutely zero impact on the success of the show. at most it turned away a few bookcloaks, which would have been turned away by all the other changes anyway.

I'm now picturing - the wot white suprematist version, where every protagonists is whiter than a bedsheet and every darkfriend is portrayed as black or asian. - the woke version, where rand is a transsexual, min is a man and aviendha is nonbinary. - the blacksploitation version, where rand is black and lanfear never betrays him because she's too taken with his enormous "sausage" - the p*rn version, 8 season of rand with his mistresses - the sad*mas* version, that focuses on all the spanking, whipping and caning in excruciating detail - the extended version, adapting all the books in extreme faithfulness for the hardcore fans, with a run time of two or three months nonstop - the darker and edgier version, with lots of extra blood and more children caught in the blast radius Make your own version

I have also argued for this. The thinly veiled racist comments were others