On 1/22/2022 at 4:40 AM, fra85uk said:

First half Ep. 1

Cold open LTT

 

YES YES YES!

So I had not read any of the books when the show started. Watching, I found myself seeing holes in the storytelling, and my husband the book fanatic (@Yojimbo ) filled in explanations. And it was those explanations that made me want to read "The Eye of the World," because what he was describing to me wasn't what I was seeing onscreen.

Now I have finished "The Eye of the World." I could talk at length about changes the film makers made and why I agree with those who feel their beloved story is not being represented onscreen. But in short, it is the sheer volume of changes--both large and small, deletions and inventions--that is simply staggering.  The best way I can describe is that it feels as though the makers read the book and liked it, but then thought "but it would have been SO much better if it was THIS way."  It feels like fanfic tbh.

After finishing the books, I forced poor yojimbo to rewatch the first two episodes to see how they compared to the book story and YIKES. All the critical plot point, most interesting character reveals, teases about Rand's mysterious background, etc. etc. gone, replaced by new content that doesn't seem to support or develop the original story. 

More than anything, it feels as though the showmakers bought a property that they liked, but didn't have enough faith in their source material, and so they decided to use it as a springboard for a story they liked better. 

On 12/26/2021 at 1:54 PM, Gypsum said:

Non-book reading OH was baffled by the opening scene with Lews Therin and even more baffled by Ishamael. "Is he the Dark One? What?? Really??" Expecting the Dark One to be a little scarier than a dude with a beard, vaguely dressed like a rabbi.

 

I gave him the short-and-sweet cliffnotes on the War of Power, Lews Therin, and the Forsaken, adding, "So he's not the Dark One. He's just a guy. One of the most powerful channelers ever, who's over 3000 years old and causes a lot of hassle, but still, just a guy."

 

The impression I get from OH is that if you didn't know what was going on, you wouldn't know what was going on, and the show isn't properly investing viewers in the stakes or the characters, or explaining clearly why various aspects of their world -- i.e. the bifurcation of the One Power, Lews Therin himself, the seals, a bunch of other stuff -- really matter.

Just adding my "Me too" to this.

10 hours ago, Jaysen Gore said:

This is one of the big Hollywood-isms. They can't tell the difference between YA and all ages anymore.  Same reason the kids are now definitely adults. So everyone gets more serious, more "grown up", and with darker motivations, especially in the Sci Fi / fantasy world, since that's already assumed to be childish.

 

Another big Hollywood-ism is all main characters must have a character growth arc.  So no one is allowed to be good just because they're good and to do the right thing without learning right from wrong, or overcoming some weakness first.  I"m amazed Tam survived untouched.

 

I don't know if I should blame Hollywood or the audience for those, but that's basically why I don't hold these types of changes against Rafe specifically. they're almost all guilty of it.

Agree, this is the way of Hollywood for some time: all antiheroes, all the time. I think people miss straight-up good guys, even if they don't think they do. Reminds me of when Captain America: The First Avenger premiered in theaters. @Yojimbo and I were the two middle-aged adults in a theater full of tweener boys, and we were anticipating them being disruptive and noisy tweeners. But when the movie started, all was silent. And at the end of the picture, those boys got to their feet and gave it a standing ovation. 

2 minutes ago, DigificWriter said:

For all of the posters on here who are hardcore book fans and are criticizing the show and actively finding things to dislike about it, there are dozens, if not hundreds, of other hard-core book fans who don't post here but are expressing their overall positive thoughts and feelings on the show elsewhere, so there is nowhere close to a universal dislike of the show amongst the hardcore reader community.

 

There isn't even a universal dislike of the show amongst the people who do post here.

Um.  Correct?  And nobody is wrong because personal opinions of art are just that: opinions.

16 hours ago, Wolfbrother31 said:

 

IMO the Prologue is definitely "core" because it immediately introduces us to the significance of the Dragon, that the Dragon is LTT reincarnated, that the Dragon killed his own wife/family, that male aes sedai went insane and broke the world, that the Dragon has a male-channeler nemesis, that Dragonmount is tied to the Dragon,  that the Dark-one wants to break the wheel of time, ect... all from the get-go ... which is ALL very, very much so "core" to the story. And a non-reader who is watching the show - could literally read just the Prologue and then go --- OHHHHH I get it now...

YES!  This non-reader complained to her reader husband that the show hasn't effectively presented what The Big Bad is or who/what the Dragon Reborn is/might be. (And before anyone starts listing the times it's been mentioned: I get that it IS mentioned; I'm saying it just hasn't been described or shown in a way that inspires fear or dread to the viewer.)

But then I started to read the first book, and right there in the prologue was everything I was missing: the primary conflict in a nutshell, the horrify possible consequences of the Dragon Reborn. Context.

8 hours ago, DigificWriter said:

 

Your read on all of this is incorrect based on what the show presented us with with regards to Perrin, Egwene, and Rand going back to Episode 1.

 

You missed the obvious and correct point of that scene and ended up drawing the wrong conclusions from it.

Your interpretation may be the right one, but the fact that viewers have come away with such different interpretations indicates that the point is not so obvious. Speaking as a non-book reader, I can take your word for it that the clues you mention are all there, BUT for me they were presented in such an inconsequential way that 1) they made no impression at the time and 2) even when others are now describing them, I can't recall those scenes.

I do think that book readers are in some cases filling in blanks without even realizing it--that is easy to do when you are so well-versed in a subject. 

On 12/19/2021 at 11:12 AM, flinn said:

 

 I want my fantasy to be realistic.. yes I understand why that is confusing, but even fantasy has rules. You build a world and you create the rules, once you make a rule, you don't get to change it to fit a plot you cant figure out how to write properly.

Yes this right here!!

Having said all that, between intuiting missing bits and Yojimbo explaining stuff, I am finally motivated to read the books and have started the first one--and was instantly gratified to receive a prologue that sets the stage and introduces the evil force that drives the plot.

7 hours ago, notpropaganda73 said:

I'd love to see Ruth Negga cast in the show. I'm Irish so very biased but I think she is one of the best actresses around at the moment. I saw her playing Hamlet in Dublin a few years ago and it is honestly one of the greatest experiences of my life. She was electric. 

 

Ruth Negga in ANYTHING; she is brilliant.

8 minutes ago, KakitaOCU said:

What is the number that is "A significant number of viewers"

A quick glance lists WoT as the most watched this year for Amazon and in their top 5 period.  VS the numbers that actually spoke up or even just gave a score in RT or such.

People like us on these forums?  Heck, even people who actually go give reviews.  We're a minority.  We're not the majority, we're not even a significant overall number.  For everyone of us here making our opinions known there's another 10 or more that aren't saying a word.

I'm honestly not sure what you're arguing with me about.  I'm sharing my experience of the show. I'm not denying your experience, or that of any of the many folks who are clearly enjoying this show very much.  We may disagree on the program's quality, but our personal opinions are just that: opinions. 

2 hours ago, KakitaOCU said:

No, if you need an explanation that means the scene was poorly done for you.

I would argue that if a significant number of viewers need an explanation of the scene, the writers have failed to communicate their intent. Especially for us viewers with no previous exposure to these characters, you can't make your subtle hints so subtle that they fail to make any impression and can't be recalled later. 

33 minutes ago, DigificWriter said:

 

Good, because you weren't supposed to.

 

The point of that argument wasn't that Perrin had always secretly been in love with Egwene, it was to show Nynaeve Jumping to false conclusions (just like Lord Agelmar had when Moiraine and the group arrived in Fal Dara) and prompting an already emotionally compromised Rand to lash out with baseless accusations.

Okay, but they also didn't show us any reason why Nynaeve would jump to that conclusion. I can accept your interpretation may be correct, but the screenplay does a poor job of presenting it.

23 hours ago, Elder_Haman said:

To do something new with the story. The books still exist. The story you care so deeply about isn't worse because someone chooses to tell it in a different way.

Sure, the books still exist. But I don't think it's unreasonable for lovers of those books who have long looked forward to seeing their beloved story translated into film to be disappointed when that translation doesn't feel like their beloved story.  (For example, The Hobbit trilogy broke me heart.)

16 hours ago, KakitaOCU said:

That's not how the scene went.  Nynaeve accidently slipped that she's tired of them acting like she was a prize.  Then Rand points out that Perrin didn't show real interest in Laila until AFTER Rand and Egwene were an item.

This isn't, Perrin lost Laila then started connecting to Egwene.  This was Perrin always had an interest and put it away because she chose someone else.

(Non-book reader here)

I found these scene jarring and I fault the screenplay here: Until that moment, I hadn't seen anything that implied that Perrin had feelings for Egwene. I literally turned to my husband and said "Wait, what? Did I miss something? Is this from the books?"  I could see no reason for Nynaeve's accusation or Rand's. If we were meant to believe Perrin had these feelings, they should have shown his growing affection when they were together. If he doesn't have feelings, we at least should have shown some sort of behavior that would have inspired Nynaeve's and Rand's remarks.

I have not read the books and have watched all the eps with my beloved @Yojimbo. I... have not been impressed. I feel like the show runners have done a poor job of fleshing out the characters: they've broadcast in general who everyone is, but the characters are not showing us who they are in any meaningful way, and so I remain detached from them. I don't blame the actors so much as the director and screenwriter, who seem to have made a choice to tell and not show.

They've also done a terrible job IMO of defining the major conflict of the story: the nature of the Source and its two halves, the breaking of the world by the dragon, how the world changed after that event, and what the danger is now with the threat of a new dragon. I can only articulate that conflict because of clarifications @Yojimbo gave me as we watched, and because I finally broke down and started reading the first book in the series, which began with an exciting prologue that set the stage for the coming story. The TV show would have benefitted from opening in a similar manner. (And LOTR effectively used this strategy in Fellowship with Galadriel's monologue/flashback introduction.) Without this clarity, there's no real sense of foreboding to lend meaning/urgency to the search for the dragon or the kids' choosing to go on this quest, leaving their loved ones and the (isolated, insulated) world and everything they've ever known behind (with apparently nary a thought or any wonderment at the larger world they encounter).