5 minutes ago, Ralph said:

Were you concerned about this potential before the show started, due to Rafe's comments about being a feminist and updating certain parts of the gender divide in WOT? 

 

I'll be open about it and say that, yes, I suspected that this was the way it was gonna go from the beginning. I was calling that the show would turn out the way it did 4 years ago when Rafe's first interviews were coming out (or whenever that was). 

However, if this is confirmation bias, and I am just looking for this stuff, Rafe certainly didn't make it hard on me. 

If there was an adaptation of Misborn that "emphasized the ensemble" and pushed Vin to the side in favor of Kelsier, Elend, or Sazed, people would be incensed. When it happens to the men of WoT, it's only Tuesday. 

5 minutes ago, Weird_Old_Lady said:

There was no wrong in this situation. A group of consenting adults have a relationship. Yes. That could be reversed and I would be fine with it. Why is it wrong in your opinion?

Well then, all the women from old James Bond movies were also consenting adults in a relationship and there's nothing wrong with their portrayal either. So long as we agree on that, we're golden. 

25 minutes ago, WhiteVeils said:

Every single thing that people have labeled misandrist about the series would not be called misogynistic if it happened for a female character.

Mmmmmm... wrong. 

The difference is that this is an adaptation of existing source material. 

If I was watching an original work and the same scenes that I've called out happened just the way they do in this show, I wouldn't have a problem with them. Honestly, it doesn't bother me when women are treated as objects in media, and I care even less when men are treated as objects. If you're writing an original story, make the women as awesome as you want and the men as useless as you want. Go for it. 

But with WoTTV, we have a point of reference. We can look to the original and see that the men have been downgraded across the board. So, yes, standing on its own legs, there's nothing explicitly misandrist about WoTTV. However, when viewed in relation to the original and taking into account that these were intentional decisions made by the writing staff which all seem to march in lock step with a certain ideology, it's hard not to see what's going on. 

In short: 

It's not a problem to cut a man's balls off on TV, but it is a problem if that man is Lan, a canonically huge ball-haver. 

Hope that clears things up for ya. 

3 minutes ago, Weird_Old_Lady said:

It is a small step in the right direction. 

I mean, now we get into the issue of whether or not two wrongs make a right. In my opinion, a "step in the right direction" would be to remove these scenes entirely rather than just start debasing male characters as some sort of retribution for decades of poorly depicted female characters. 

Funny you say "if" WoT had a GoT level budget because season 1 WoT had a higher budget than GoT season 1 and somehow looks significantly worse than a show that's 10 years old haha 

Anyway, I actually think that 8 episodes should have worked just fine. 10 would have been ideal, but 8 is plenty. 

My Fantasy Rewrite: 

Episode 1: Winternight and leaving Emond's field

Episode 2: Baerlon (Introduce Whitecloaks

Episode 3: Shadar Logoth 

Episode 4: Team is Separated and out on the road. 

Episode 5: Rand and Mat in Caemlyn by themselves. Egwene and Perrin with Whitecloaks. 

Episode 6: Team meets up in Caemlyn and sets off through the Ways

Episode 7: The Ways and Fal Dara. Ends with the Team going off into the Blight. 

Episode 8: Eye of the World and Tarwin's Gap. 

I think an extended/two part first episode would have definitely been welcome, but my sense with the series wasn't that 8 episodes was too few. It was that the showrunners wasted so much time on show-original bullcrap that they then had to rush all the stuff that was actually in the books. 

However, if you were gonna add two extra episodes, I think expanding on the stuff that happens while the group was separated would have been nice. 

8 minutes ago, 7th age said:

Plus character development scenes in general arent the most costly ones, as you usually dont need CGI and the actors are already paid. Plus it is what Rafe wanted and what Im sure 99% of all fans they mightve asked before would have told them.

Right? Like, these are just scenes of people talking. They're cheap, and they go way farther towards creating an emotional attachment with the audience than a CGI extravaganza does. 

My theory is that part of the reason these scenes were so few is because the writers were afraid of bogging down the show with exposition and just completely overreacted. 

Also, scenes like this require a great deal of risk. If the writing isn't strong, they WILL be totally boring. It's just my sense of things, but the writers for this show don't come off to me as particularly confident. The writing is just too generic, too down the middle while also being weirdly over the top at times. Just seems amateurish. 

5 minutes ago, Jaysen Gore said:

Did Perrin kill his wife in the book?

Did Matt steal from Edmond's Fielders in the book?

Did Abell sleep around on his wife and not protect his family in the book?

Did Nynaeve get a knife to Lan's throat in the book?

Did Tam kill multiple trollocs in the book?

Did 5 women kill 500 trollocs in the book?

Did LTT act from desperation in the book?

Did Lan decide to take them to SL in the book?

Did women fight at Fal Dara, or did they evacuate in the book?

How many people did Nynaeve heal with channeling in the book? More or less than in the cave?

Did Lan have to be told by village girl Nynaeve how to track his own Aes Sedai? 

Did Egwene get to stab Valda while a terrified Rand runs away from a short woman? 

Was Lews Therin the Tamyrlin Seat? 

Was Agelmar respectful of Aes Sedai and also one of the Five Great Generals? 

Was Amalisa not a minor character of far less importance than her husband? 

Didn't Logain need 6 women to shield him in the books but in the show it's only 3? 

Does Loial open the Ways or is it Moiraine? 

Does Nynaeve have a block in the books? 

Are Warders treated as tools for sex in the books? (Okay, gotta expand on this because no one has mentioned it. But, like, in episode 4 there's those two gay warders who are lounging by the fire and then their Aes Sedai comes over and is all like, "Time for sex" and they just get up and go to service her. Can you freaking imagine if this scene was gender swapped??? Of course, "problematic" material often only goes one way.) 

Anyway, the list goes on and on and on. And the tragic irony is that these attempts to prop up the women actually totally backfire. The writers' desperate attempts to make them cool are so transparent as to be laughable and actually make the female characters seem somehow more pathetic than their book counterparts. 

5 minutes ago, divica said:

In the end what matters is people's opinion and not critics. And wherever you look it is low. And that is worrying for wot... 

Here is some supplementary evidence for you, my friend! 

https://www.metacritic.com/tv/the-wheel-of-time/user-reviews

Basically anywhere you go, the reaction to the show has been pretty meh. Amazon is pushing the heck out of it, but we'll see how long they keep that up while reactions like these begin to mount and the discussion begins to turn. 

16 minutes ago, Ralph said:

One of the main themes of the series is that men and women both look down on the other sex and do not trust them. Everyone discovers that only combined efforts can be truly successful.

You are correct, which is why many of us knew from the beginning that Rafe (a self-described, proud male feminist who's shown that he has no qualms about changing WoT to align it with his own beliefs) was going to grossly mishandle this adaptation. 

Rafe IS one of these feminists you mention. He's not going to write a show that ends up being a critique of himself or his worldview. 

On 12/30/2021 at 5:19 AM, fra85uk said:

Wow on metacritic this episode has 1.6, 6.2 on imbd. On rotten tomatoes, after the last episode, the series is down to 67%, 54% for top critics.

Now that we have the whole season, it seems preeeeeeetty obvious why Amazon only gave out the first 6 episodes for review. 

1 hour ago, ilovezam said:

The notion that Lews Therin was testosterone-addled thrill-seeker who just wanted to do something risky and unprecedented that "serves only (his) pride". Latra (who is now his superior in this iteration) chides him, predicting exactly what would go wrong, asking him to stop acting like he is invincible.

Don't forget all the people on this forum who saw this coming from the teaser trailer where Moiraine mentions that the arrogance of men caused the Breaking of the World. We were discarded and told that we were being hasty and that this was simply a flawed, unreliable Aes Sedai narrative. Fast forward to episode 8 and it turns out that Rafe and co. are exactly who they told us they were from the very beginning. 

Okay, so hear me out: 

10 episode season 

8 million per episode rather than 10 (Literally the only reason this wouldn't have been an option is Amazon's suits. Same amount of money, but the data probably says that 8 episodes is more bingeable than 10). 

Tell episode 1 from Rand's perspective. Don't show the fight at Emond's Field, just show the aftermath like in the books. Save tons of money. Rely on building interesting characters to hook the audience rather than an action scene. 

Don't cast Rosamund Pike as Moiraine. Lose some instant marketing, but gain financial and creative flexibility (don't have to pay her. don't have to shoehorn her into season 2). 

Stop trying to make the show a mega-hit overnight. Start smaller and build an audience. Tell a straightforward adventure story with an interesting twist (women use magic or whatever). 

Maybe don't spend half your budget building an entire Emond's Field just to burn it down in episode 1 (this was hyped so much that I can only imagine it was a stunt for marketing purposes). 

Cut the scene with the Seanchan at the end of Episode 8 which I'm sure was also expensive and also pointless. Just show the sails on the horizon. 

Obviously, these are just areas where I feel money could have been saved on a per-episode basis. I don't actually know how any of the finances here shake out. But still, it's odd to me that the number which Amazon seemed unwilling to change was not the $80 million total budget for the season but the $10 million budget per episode. 

Why not go slightly cheaper and make 10 episodes if that's what Rafe really wanted? 

On 12/24/2021 at 3:38 AM, Mailman said:

'disappointed darkfriends' out there who are acting like Rafe and his team killed their grandmother.

So what am I to make of this bloody knife I found next to my grandmother's body and the note which said, "From Rafe with love GAHAHAHAHA"? 

22 hours ago, ArrylT said:

From Reddit - here is the full Screen time, word count & talkative totals for S1

 

To which I would reply with this breakdown of the POV's from Eye of the World. 

Unique POV Breakdown
Character                     # of POVs    
Rand al'Thor                 44    
Perrin Aybara               8    
Nynaeve al'Meara        3    
Lews Therin Telamon 1    
Egwene al'Vere            1    
Moiraine Damodred    1    

Everyone is all "Wheel of Time is an ensemble cast! derka derka!" but the reality is that for the large part of the first half of WoT, Rand is unquestionably the MAIN character. He gets the most POVs and most of the biggest moments go to him. 

So yeah, if you put up a graph showing that Rand had the second most screen time and a comparative amount of focus to the other characters, it looks even, but it's not, because he's gone from being unquestionably the focus of the story to just some redheaded guy whose character is barely explored. 

On 12/27/2021 at 9:57 AM, futurehermit said:

Edit: but, hey, the viewers know who Kerene and Stepin are, now both dead with no ongoing impact on the story.

Actually, it's even worse than that. 

Everyone here on DM was theorizing that the Stepin stuff was put in to set up for Moiraine's "death" when she passes through the archway with Lanfear. 

Actually, it now seems that the Stepin stuff was there to setup for a totally pointless show-original plot involving stilled Moiraine and Lan in S2 which was invented by Rafe in order to justify keeping Rosamund Pike around for marketing purposes. 

On 12/26/2021 at 8:16 AM, TheDreadReader said:

You can segment existing fans into two buckets.  The ones who will be reasonably getable and the ones who are not. 

Don't forget the third bucket: Fans who literally just do not care and would watch a flaming dumpster if it was branded as WoT. 

Rafe knew he had those in the bag (a not insignificant number, as things turned out), so he did the bare minimum to pick up some of the reasonably gentle people and threw everyone else to the curb in an attempt to draw in casual watchers. 

Oof. Those leaks... yikes. 

17 minutes ago, Elder_Haman said:

Because they like the things they are seeing that are also in the books? Isn't that ... expected? If you're generally enjoying the show and not bothered by the changes, there's no reason to disentangle any feelings. If you're having a hard time enjoying the show, disentangling feelings about the books is a useful tool to try to change the filter for your experience. It's a one way street.

I would tend to agree. If the goal is to enjoy the series, then the show-lovers certainly have nothing to disentangle. 

However, in the context of "discussing the show on its own merits" I do think that both sides would certainly need to do some disentangling. 

Those who love the show would need to ask themselves, "How much of my enjoyment of this show is tied in with the dopamine hits I get from seeing something I recognize portrayed on screen?" 

Show detractors would have to honestly assess themselves from the opposite point. 

However, I think that the discussion here on Dragonmount is unique because we are all fans of the books. So removing that aspect of the conversation is sort of counterproductive because the whole reason we're here is to talk with other fans. 

My point is that I don't necessarily like the idea of discussing the show entirely on its own merits. As much as we're invited to do that (by the showrunners, Sarah Nakamura, and even Brandon Sanderson), I think it's much less interesting than discussing the show in relation to the books. 

I'm rambling. 

3 minutes ago, Elder_Haman said:

Who is trying to pretend that the original doesn't exist? Or trying to exclude it from the conversation? I don't understand.

My understanding of much of the pushback against show detractors has been that we aren't ignoring the books enough. "Take the show on its own merits" is all well and good, but as an adaptation, it calls attention to the original by its very existence. Critiquing via comparison is just another means of critique, no more valid or invalid than anything else. It's not the end all be all method of determining the show's quality, but it is a vector across which the show stands to be measured. 

I think this is doubly true because so much of the enjoyment that show-lovers get out of WoTTV is derived from seeing aspects of the original represented on screen. So people who like the show get to say, "Wasn't it cool when X thing from the book happened on screen" but detractors are largely dismissed for expressing the opposite sentiment. 

This invitation for show detractors to disentangle their feelings about the show from their relationship to the original books is something that show lovers throw out frequently but largely don't adhere to themselves. 

27 minutes ago, CaddySedai said:

Why is it fine only if it is not The Wheel of Time? So if it was a new series called Magicians in R-world it is ok? But because it is The Wheel of Time it is suddenly not ok?

Yep. You hit the nail right on the head. 

The showrunners themselves invited comparisons to the original when they decided to make a Wheel of Time show. Like, the whole reason that the show was greenlit in the first place was that it was based on a massively best-selling series with a devoted fanbase. It's very existence is predicated on the existence and popularity of the original. 

And now we're supposed to just pretend like the original doesn't exist? Please. You don't get it both ways. You don't get to profit off the reputation of the original and then exclude it from the conversation surrounding the new version. 

Sorry for this blank post

Sorry for the blank post. I'd delete it if I could. 

2 hours ago, Mnemosyne said:

Totally fair point. I love a slow burn story myself. But I felt the implication in the original post was that sex does necessarily cheapen relationships, without a 'waiting' period.

Also don't forget that any sex before marriage means a guaranteed case of AIDS, so Nynaeve and Lan have that to look forward to now. Egwene and Rand have been doomed from the start. By the time this show hits season 3 it's just gonna be a fantasy world version of Rent without the music. 

35 minutes ago, WheelofJuke said:

And, Lan's duty vs. love softening and Nyn's maturation were great individual growth arcs that made the eventual union all the more satisfying. 

Lan never even softened. He was soft and open from the get-go. ? I agree with you that Lan should have been pushing her away and talking about duty for at least 2 seasons. In a vacuum, the TV relationship progresses just fine, but when you consider that this is supposed to be Lan we're talking about, it's kind of rushed forward at the expense of his character IMO. 

11 hours ago, bringbackthomsmoustache said:

Also it was not necessary of reasonable to have her fighting at all - the books only indicate that she died in child birth (very common in a low tech culture especially without assistance of a midwife).

Women never die. That would be sexist.