On 10/20/2023 at 10:08 AM, Mirefox said:

Poor writing can be evaluated objectively and this show has objectively poor writing.  If you enjoy it, that’s great for you.  I enjoy some shows with bad writing.

 

I for the life of me, though, do not understand the writing apologists.  Why can’t we demand better?  Why can’t we point out that every single episode is packed full of nonsense?

 

 

You nailed it.  Very much the way I see things too.  I want the show to be good, but IMHO it won't be truly great until they get better writers and showrunner.  

What I think irritates most of us who don't really like the show is that it could have been much better than GOT as it has better and more complete source material.  It is also a story that more people will relate to.  However since they gave it to questionable writers who either don't have much talent, or can't shrug off studio interference then we have what we have now.  

This isn't a problem just with this show.  Even Starwars, The Witcher, and Marvel have all taken their turns recently with abysmal writing.  You have people like Timothy Zahn and Brandon Sanderson sitting on the bench with hits galore and this is what we get on screen?  They could do much better with better writing. 

On 10/20/2023 at 1:38 AM, trw1972 said:

 

I dread to think how many times i read the series. I was obsessed when young - i read the first book in 1992 and like many people i would re-read every previous book when a new book came out. 

 

It is a different experience as a middle aged man to be honest and yes i think its a common criticism of RJ, his writing of female characters.

 

Despite that, they do have their moments to shine, i loved the golden crane scene for example, and although i spent much of the series finding Egwene a bit annoying .. her final scenes definitely hit me.

Haven't read through them that many times, but I am listening to the audio books now which are fun.  Definitely picking up a lot more and being 20+ years after my first readthrough as a kid.  I'm thinking the lack of plot advancement in books 7+ won't hit me as hard as my early 20s.  I rage quit ISOIAF too on book 4 when they introduced Asha as the 1000th non-useful POV character.  Picked it back up later on audio books and while not as good as books 1-3 books 4-5 did have decent lore.

Hopefully being older and having more patience will serve me well like it did you.   Now having a wife and kids I can see how his writing of female characters is a bit repetitive, but I don't think it rises to the point of bad, or book breaking.  They still stand out as unique and nuanced.  I think some of the criticism of Jordan over that an other things is overblown.  

On 10/14/2023 at 1:11 PM, Elder_Haman said:

Yes. But also, HE NEVER SAID HE DIDN’T LIKE THE SHOW. 
 

Criticism is not condemnation.

I agree with you he was very fair to the show.  

I haven't fully finished the episode (about 3/4 of the way through) as it is kind of hard to watch 3 guys watching a show that isn't on screen and I don't have much in the way of free time. 

From what I have seen Brandon was very respectful of the show and even pointed out where he thought it did better than the books.  Even the ones he wrote.  

What he did do however is correctly point out that the writers went for "cool factor" over story and coherent plot.  He mentions many times where he tried to tell them not to do things because fans won't like it, or that it didn't make sense, but was ignored.  That is what all of us would do if we were in his place.

I'm actually even more impressed with him after this show as he could have easily went full melt down on them for ignoring his advice since not only did he write 3 of the books and was a huge super fan, but is probably THE most popular current fantasy writer of today.  His skill and experience is much greater than any writer on the show and maybe all of them combined.  (For an example watch "The Sword and Pen Reflections" video on S2E1 and trying to figure out Moraine and the Fades.  questionable writing, bad editing and directing all around)   

General question to the thread: Imagine if you were trying to mentor a bunch of new people  in wherever you work and saw them making questionable choices on a project related to one you once were in charge of and successfully finished.  You being very established in your profession and have direct and relevant knowledge of the project offer them advice when you seem the going towards a trouble spot.  Their response is: "no thanks we are good."  How would you respond?  

Most people I know with that much experience and skill would respond much more negatively than Brandon did.  

1 hour ago, HeavyHalfMoonBlade said:

No, I am quite sure you would not enjoy show. 

 

Though I do not see why you appear to be attempting to speak for the whole of the community who enjoy the book. You are taking your opinion and applying it to everyone. You are wondering why anyone could think it is a good adaptation, but you are so sure of your opinion that I don't think you will manage to see someone else's perspective. 

 

If watching a few minutes can convince you that they have not understood the books, that would appear to speak volumes of how you view the books, far more than anything it might say about the show itself.

 

I am enjoying seeing the books be brought to life, I am enjoying the actors' performances overall and I am very happy that they are making the show and hope that they make the full series and that they might allowed to have more/longer episodes per season. That does not mean that I agree with everything the show is doing, far from it, and some of it is very frustrating. But I cannot say the books were different, and the show per se has a lot of stuff to deal with with the funding, time limits, need to keep number of locations down, etc, etc, before you even start on the artistic decisions. And I can disagree with those decisions without insulting anyone, or feeling cheated. 

I'm not speaking about people's enjoyment of the show.  I have freely admitted that I do not like it and have no problem with people that do.

What you are doing is conflating objective truth to opinion.  

Liking the show or not is opinion.  

Saying it isn't a good adaptation is objective truth.  This shouldn't be a point of contention.  You may rationalize the changes and may be ok with them, but they still exist and are many.  Change is ok and expected.  Changing main plots and characters to the point where it isn't coherent to the larger narrative is why Amazon's WoT it isn't a good adaptation.  Even if people like the changes.

The 1978 Bakshi Lord of the Rings was nearly a 1:1 adaptation of the books dialog wise, but it is extremely mixed if people like it.  Peter Jackson changes way more in his adaptation, but it kept the spirit of the books alive and people consider it one of the best examples of a fantasy adaptation.  

Saying the writing is low quality is objective truth.  That really shouldn't be a point of contention either.  In no universe is the writing on this show good.  People may like it, but it isn't good.

People need to get past the need to say something is objectively good because they like it.  I like many shows that aren't good writing.  I liked Ready Player One the book.  The writing in that book is objectively not good, but I enjoyed it.  That movie while ok wasn't a good adaptation either though it didn't seem to go out of its way to twist the entire story. 

I liked the original dune 1985 movie as well because I was younger and hadn't read the books yet.  Doesn't mean that it wasn't fairly poorly written and very cringe.  It did at least try to stay true to the story if by taking way to many short cuts to fit into a 2+ hour movie.  They freely admit this when they talk about it.  That is why they had the Irulan voice over added to the beginning.  Which seems to be copied by everybody now.  😄

3 hours ago, trw1972 said:

 

I got a fantasy loving friend to watch the show and he went on to try the books.

He commented on how the series felt 'very 90's' as well.

 

Personally i have read the series lots of times, but not for a couple of years and my memory is not as good as it was (too much radiotherapy to the head!).

 

I do remember there was a general obsession with breasts and spanking and a very odd storyline with Tylin that did not work for me at all. But i still loved the overall story

 

I have just started a reread, and i am on the hunt for the horn (the great hunt), it will be interesting to see if these things bother me this time around.

 

 

You will be amazed at how much more you pick up on a re-read.  He lays out a ton of stuff for you if you know what to look for.

Once criticism of Jordan's writing which I do agree with is his oversimplification of many characters including female characters.  Like every female character was based off of his wife, or one of his close female relatives.  For instance he likes to describe females as "plump."  People may do so in their head, but Elayne describing Else to Lanfear as plump out loud just seemed wrong.  

34 minutes ago, HeavyHalfMoonBlade said:

Do you mean you have not even watched the show? Just seems to be what you are saying.

You are correct.  I have watched more of the show through other people doing break downs than I have of the show on Amazon.  The first episode was THAT bad.  I was going to go back and give it a chance until S1 E8 came out and I have no intention of watching it after that travesty.  There is literally no excuse for what they put on screen other than malice or laziness.  COVID didn't make them completely alter the final battle there and after S2 E8 they just confirmed they are going to keep on doing it. 

I have had fun watching things from people like The Sword and Pen reflections among others so have seen many scenes from the show.  In no way have those scenes made me want to go back and give it a chance.  

I'm assuming the reply will be how can you judge the show without watching the whole thing?  The  answer is easy.  If I bite into a steak and find out it is actually tofu without seasoning and I don't finish it it the reason is because I ordered steak.  I'm not offended by people who like tofu (I even like it with seasoning and vegetables), but when I order steak I expect steak.   In this case I ordered Wheel of Time and got something else. 

This whole trend of updating for modern audiences, or subverting expectations is getting old.  The reason why people like classic works is because of the works themselves.  When you give them something else why are you surprised when they don't like it?

On 10/8/2023 at 3:00 PM, Elder_Haman said:

Yes it does. Those that evaluated both seasons preferred season 2. It’s just not mathematically significant. 
 

I’m not saying it’s proof, I’m saying it is evidence. Those things are not the same. 

I appreciate both of your back and forth as it is well argued.  

Let me point out that using Season 2 ratings as evidence isn't really useful right now due to a lack of sample size.  There is such a small sample it actually points to statistical dilution as represented earlier.   That makes it hard to draw conclusions as your sample set isn't drawing from the same pool as season 1 so you can't really have a direct correlation.  

What it may be pointing to is the fact that many viewers didn't pick back up for whatever reason.  We will have to wait and see when the final numbers come out.  

On 10/7/2023 at 11:39 AM, grayavatar said:

My metric is my experience watching the show. It was slow and boring, also illogical, inconsistent, cringy and ridiculous. Season 2 was even more so. Long overly dramatic emotional scenes about nonsense took up most of the season when it should have had a much faster pace. It was a drama when it should have been an adventure.

 

Also I don't put much stock in sites like Rotten Tomatoes or IMDB ratings and neither should you.

I have to agree with this point.  For certain shows the numbers tend to get skewed, but you can absolutely tell that Amazon sent people out in force to plant many positive reviews of the show when S2 dropped.  Same as they did for S1 and Rings of Power (another Amazon stinker).  Too many generically positive  10/10 reviews citing things like great adaptation and don't listen to the haters.   They also keep the ratio at a certain 3.x or 7.x ratio.  As soon as enough real reviews come in to drop the score a half dozen generic fake 10/10 reviews show up to bring it back up.

First if you don't like haters don't listen to them.  There are definitely some of those reviews that are off base and some people are just there to be negative.  They don't add much value, but neither do fake positive reviews.  

Second I'm truly baffled at people who think this show is a good adaptation.  I have no problem with people liking the show, but to think it is a good adaptation is a bit of a stretch.  

On 10/13/2023 at 2:47 AM, ilovezam said:

This was a very interesting watch, I'm surprised Sanderson was as overtly negative as he was with the writing and the themes.

I'm surprised he is as well since in general he seems to try and be very positive.  However his professional integrity was probably taking a hit as the writing on the show is very low quality.  He was most likely getting called out by his peers and friends so had to say something.  

Remember that Brandon was chosen to finish WoT partly because he was a well known super fan and and up and coming author at the time.  

On 10/13/2023 at 5:41 AM, fra85uk said:

 

 

Credit where it is due: ofc the admins of this forum are supporting the show (for many reasons) but still they give room for opposing reasonable opinions.

Very much give props to the admins here.  They allow people to express their opinions which is something WOTShow does not do.  I remember seeing a post where someone said can we at least talk about the poor writing quality?  That was coming from somebody where the rest of the post was full of glowing comments on the show.

On 9/26/2023 at 5:09 PM, WheelofJuke said:

This very much sums up where I stand on the matter; however, I decided not to give S2 a go...I literally pulled it up the night of release, looked at it paused and ready to go for like 10 minutes just staring...and then said, nah I got too much other stuff going for me right now. 😛😄

 

That is nearly 100% of how my experience went with Season 1.   Flipped it on for 5 minutes.  Got confused on why it was called Wheel of Time as it appeared to be something completely different.  Turned it on again later and right back off after Rand and Egwene did the horizontal mambo.   It took them 15 minutes to show they missed the entire point of the books.  

Some people here like it which is great.  When I talk to people at work and friends who watch things like GoT and Foundation they are either like what is Wheel of Time?, or watched it and thought it was forgettable, or couldn't get into it.  There were no people I talked to that liked it and they watch other fantasy and SciFi shows.  Some binge watched it because they were bored, but thought it was generic at best. 

On the positive side I'm now going through the books on audio and remembering how good they are.  Full disclosure I gave up after the 1000th pov side character was introduced in book 7 or 8, but am now jazzed to finish.  I last read them 20 years ago with the exception of the comic which was about 5 years ago or so.  

On 9/4/2023 at 9:31 PM, Elder_Haman said:

I’ll do that. You’ll probably have a better experience over on Reddit. 

Actually some of what I've seen on Reddit is so comically positive that it is hard to believe that 90% of it aren't Amazon employees and probably show staff personally.  

Even for universally loved shows they usually have a lot of negative Nancy's.  That is the way the internet rolls. Evidently not in WotShow since every thing is rosy there and every episode is the best ever.  

Its ok to like the show, but that reeks of Amazon interference to drive positive show reaction.  Much like their IMDB reviews (Amazon owns IMDB) and their own reviews.  They absolutely pump it full of fake positive reviews whenever bad ones come in.  To pretty much always keep the score at the same point.  

On 9/6/2023 at 1:24 PM, DigificWriter said:

@Rolan Salvane Nice quote. I hadn't heard it before, but it echoes something that I'm fond of citing, which is a statement from Lucasfilm Story Group member (and inspiration for Rebels supporting character Mart Mattin) Matt Martin that the concept of Canon is only relevant to the people responsible for actively working on the creative side of any given IP.

 

Well, the Lucasfilm Story Group is the absolute worst people you could be quoting for me.  These are the same people that turned a very successful business to one that hasn't made money on movies since Disney bought them and is currently on life support. 

Some smart people put together what Lucasfilm published for figures in Europe to get tax credits (not what they claim they spent) and did some interpolating on what standard profits are for movies.  If they made money on all of their Disney films put together it wasn't much if anything. 

Remember these are the people that tried to take over the reigns from successful people like Timothy Zahn who sold books in the millions even on re-issue to books that sell in the thousands and Movies and Shows that are mixed at best.  

On 9/16/2023 at 5:19 PM, Pukel-man said:

coming in late, i haven't visited in some time.

 

For me, having read the book or not isn't the biggest issue. I'm less bothered about changes from the books, than I am about plain poor writing overall. Heck, TV Lan is my favorite character in the show, and he's one of the most different from the book. But the show is internally inconsistent, the story doesn't tie together well, it doesn't show compelling progress through episodes to keep the viewer engaged. IMO. And some of the writing errors just defy any suspense of disbelief. Much of what happens in the show doesn't follow logically from anything in the story, things just happen, seemingly at random. The acting is really inconsistent, the directing is too. Maybe those are weak because the writing is poor.

 

For comparison, I love the Shadow and Bone show, although that's hugely different from the books. The acting is solid, the story maintains a solid course of development and keeps viewers engaged.

 

I just feel like the Rafe of Time team forgot that a compelling series is about only one thing - the story.

You nailed it spot on.  Many of the changes from the book could have been ok if they told a compelling story.  IMHO they did not.  Unfortunately it is a common problem in too many Movies and TV shows lately.  Its like modern writers have never watched the Godfather, or even something as straight forward as The Village from M. Night Shyamalan.  

Not trying to take away from other people's enjoyment of the series, but I find its plan and direction very poorly thought out.  Like they just grab random quotes and try to fashion a story from it without understanding what actually made the story great.  If you enjoyed it that is great.  

Lets look at One Piece.  They did a fairly decent job of staying close to the source material, but did cut and change things to fit into a TV show.  However they kept the spirit of the show and characters alive.  Luffy and Zoro (Nami looked almost exactly like I'd think) may look a bit different than their book and cartoon counterparts, but acted fairly close.  Well, at least from my read the manga a while ago memory.  

The reason they had success?  1) The author was involved.  2) The show producers got destroyed on their previous effort of adapting Cowboy Bebop and decided to take the feedback and course correct for their next show.  

12 hours ago, WoTwasThat said:

While I appreciate the folks trying to stay positive about this - maybe some of you even mean it - at some point we gotta call this for what it is.

 

 

I actually look at it slightly differently.  Amazon is making 8 one hour episodes per season.

However this turns into many more hours of enjoyment of watching videos of people critically deconstructing the episodes and how bad the writing is and how poor they follow the lore.  So instead of only 8 one hour episodes I can get nearly unlimited entertainment!  

There is a very interesting one that is new called The Sword and the Pen Reflections. It is from an editor that is reading the books for the first time and watching the show at the same time.  She is completely new to TWOT and judges it on what she sees.  It is a very interesting take.  

I'm happy for the people who enjoy this  show, but I'm not one of them.

Definitely would have given the show a chance if I hadn't read the books and the comic and listened to the audio book.  However IMHO the show was so poorly done compared to those things it was unwatchable.  On its own it may have been a B- level sci-fi/fantasy show that I may have been ok with.

However RJ was very smart in his writing.  He linked things together through his narratives that show up later in books exactly as he set up.  He played around with Societal roles and made comments on them that tried to examine and swap around traditional roles.  It wasn't always well done and sometimes simplistic, but he had a plan.  His style was not for everybody, but he had a talent for painting a picture of characters and their world.

Rafe's version is just a quickly thrown together trope filled stream of consciousness.   Even with a WoT expert and Brandon Sanderson he still got TONS of stuff wrong.  Things that didn't have to change, but he chose to change because he wanted to put his own spin on things.  Unfortunately for me his 'spin' on things was very juvenile and uninteresting.  It appears Rafe either lacks talent, or just really doesn't like the books and wants to write his own version.  

TLDR:  Robert Jordan (flaws and all) was a passionate and talented writer.  Rafe thinks he is a talented writer, but is really not.  IIRC he wrote E1 and E8 some of the most panned and worst structured episodes.  Judkins is way out of his talent depth here and it shows.  Lets hope he got a lot of studio 'help' for S2.  

On 5/31/2023 at 2:50 AM, Lightfriendsocialmistress said:

I respect your viewpoint and thank you for sharing it! Let me be clear that I genuinely enjoy hearing what people think and sincerely appreciate and honor the opportunity to learn from every perspective and have no personal opinion/investment in terms of believing in one thing being more true or superior to another. That being said. Just curious, did you ever get into Star Wars and I suppose even the marvel universe? If so. How did you feel about those worlds being reimagined, handed over, and/or redefined/expanded upon in ways that weren’t originally intended?

I can take a swing at that question.  First I agree with the OP in that if you are going to 'adapt' something at least have a plan on what you are going to do and how it fits in with the overall source material.  Some adaptions are trying to squeeze a huge story into a 2.5 hour movie slot, others are trying to bring a new 'spin' on the old tale.

For Starwars the movies came first so the books were the adaptation.  Honestly some of them worked very well while others didn't as much.   IMHO the Timothy Zahn Trilogy staring with Heir to the Empire is vastly superior to episodes VII, VIII, and IX.  Zahn is a fantastic writer and had a plan.  It was obvious the writers for Starwars  7-9 did not have any kind of plan.  I know that because they said so.  

For Marvel it is also hit and miss.  Age of Ultron was a terrible mash up crossover comic.  The movie was mediocre, but a decent way to spend 2 or so ours.  Mediocre may sound bad, but that is much better than the quality of the comic.  The first few movies ranged from decent (Thor) to outstanding (Iron Man, Captain America).  None of those movies were straight adaptions of the comics.  However they were a presentation of the traits and heroic attributes of the characters.  Thor was a brute, but ultimately caring.  Steve Rodgers was selfless and brave.

When Marvel strayed away from presenting the characters how they were in the comics and tried to tell 'their own stories' using established characters things started going off the rails.  People know and understand the characters and how they need to be.  Changing them both physically and trait wise just upsets fans as you can just create a new character for that.

To me this is where Wheel of Time went off the rails.  They took established characters and then changed them willy-nilly to fit 'their story.'  Fans of books want to see the characters they know and loved.  Instead they got to see whatever that was they are calling Wheel of Time.

It is ok to change and prune and streamline for a movie, or TV as it is a harder medium to show inner dialog.  However when you change the appearance and traits of the character so much they are barely recognizable there will be a problem.  IMHO the WoT TV show basically just created a new bunch of characters to tell their story with the names of the old characters.  The only one that really was similar to the books was Nynaeve as they made her super annoying just like the book character.  They couldn't have gotten the boys more wrong.  Lan and Moraine weren't as bad, but still not like the books. 

None of this will matter as much if the story that is told through the adaptation is good.  People will forgive differences and changes for a good story.  They will just look at it as an alternative telling and enjoy it for what it is.  For this version I think the story is exceedingly poor and done by a bunch of wannabe soap opera writers.  None of the intelligence of RJ is showing through.  When you re-read the books you can see him setting up things extremely well and foreshadowing a ton of stuff that you miss the first time through.  The TV version is just tropes and cheap drama with a WoT skin on it. 

My question for the writers is this:  "How can a comic book with only 35 issues telling the tale of the whole EotW book soundly outperform your 8 one hour each episode series that only tells a fraction of what the comic does?"

On 3/7/2023 at 11:33 AM, DojoToad said:

Case in point - some of my favorite movies are: Shaun of the Dead, Napoleon Dynamite, Equilibrium, Last Samurai, etc.  Others will think some or all of them are trash - maybe for some of the same reasons you outlined above.

 

Agree with you on all of those movies.  Even though they are all flawed they tried to take an interesting concept and go with it.  They took an original idea and pushed their vision with passion.  Equilibrium is criminally under rated and I laughed a lot a Napoleon.  

I don't think your comparison works fully for WoT TV though.  There was an interesting concept, but instead of using it they decided shelve it and write their own uninteresting one.  I don't see the passion for the story with this creative team.  I do see somewhat of a passion for them to tell their own different story.  

Your comment on some people will just devour any content is spot on though.

On 10/8/2022 at 3:42 AM, king of nowhere said:

I disagree. I am not an expert, but i am sure there are instances of successful undaithful adaptations, and unsuccessful faithful adaptations. As a partial example, movie!aragorn was by many acclaimed as better than book!aragorn.

Sure, there is a correlation between faithfulness and success, but it's not a sure thing.

 

Also, the border line between necessary streamlining and executive meddling is not clear. A lot of apparently needless changes have to do with actor issues, budget limitations, copyright.

 

There have been several unfaithful adaptations that were successful.  Forrest Gump was extremely unfaithful, but it was well received.  Starship Troopers was as well.

What do both of those have in common?  They were well written and interesting.  They may not be the style for everybody, but they were creative and well thought out.  Both did retain the theme of the books they were based on even if they did take several liberties with the settings and characters.

There have been faithful adaptations that didn't do well like Bahksi's version of LOTR.  I liked it when I was a kid because it was the first one I had seen and I was a kid.  

On 9/23/2022 at 4:06 PM, king of nowhere said:

It's quite funny to read the back and forth between those that love the silmarillion and those who find it boring. it puts things in perspective of individual tastes. To further keep things into perspective, a lot of tolkien hardocore fans disliked the lotr movies.

 

I haven't watched rop and I have no idea how it is, but all this further reinforces my impression: nothing will ever be as successful as got because now there are too many competitors. got came out and it was the first tv show of its kind, and everyone who wanted that kind of content had to watch it. now we have lots to pick from, so the fans will be more dispersed

It actually boils down to faithfulness to the original work. GOT was very faithful in the early seasons.  It was successful.  It wasn't in later seasons and it started to go downhill.  The mystery is why people still make unfaithful adaptations.  There is a difference from editing to 'save time' to changing characters and arcs entirely. 

Most fans will give writers slack when they understand the shortcut they have to take.  They are less thrilled when they make new stuff up out of whole cloth and change their favorite characters into something unrecognizable.  

19 hours ago, Chivalry said:

Maybe I'll try the audio as a sleep story. 

 

But seriously, I'm not a comic book guy, but I'm thinking a graphic novel/comic book might be more tolerable.

That would be great actually.  There are illustrated versions of the Silmarillion, but not nearly a graphic novel.  

The Wheel of Time did have a comic book series for EOTW that was great.  I would recommend it.  

6 hours ago, templar7 said:

I found it very difficult until I got the unabridged audio book. Its exceptional in its presentation and read with near perfect pronunciation and delivery.  Once I got through all 14 hours. was hooked. since then ive read it a dozen times and listened to it again a dozen more. you'll thank yourself when you do.

Great suggestion.  The audiobook is very helpful to get through it.  That is what eventually got me through the first couple of chapters.  Even then I had to pause and rewind many times because it is so dense and moves so fast.

The hardest part of the Silmarillion is the first couple of chapters.  If you can force your way through them there are very good stories in there.  The first part is the creation of the universe and the Valar.  It is very dense and covers a ton of ground quickly.

If you just wanted to get some history on Galadriel and the Elves for the show you could read "of the Darkening of Valinor" and "of the Flight of the Noldor."  You would be missing a bunch of back story on the elves, but it would get you to the point of the beginning of the intro where Melkor wounded the trees which provided light to the world.

The problem is the Galadriel and Finrod in the show are not like what is in the book.  In the show Galadriel is an angsty American teenager and her brother is a throwaway we know nothing about.  They basically fridge Finrod and ignore that he was a king and did other things.  Tolkien's world is very rich with history, but they don't use much of it.  Not sure if that is due to licensing, or lazy writing.  

From of the flight of the Noldor: 

" But Finarfin spoke softly, as was his wont, and sought to calm the Noldor, persuading them to pause and ponder ere deeds were done that could not be undone; and Orodreth, alone of his sons, spoke in like manner. Finrod was with Turgon, his friend; but Galadriel, the only woman of the Noldor to stand that day tall and valiant among the contending princes, was eager to be gone. No oaths she swore, but the words of Feanor concerning Middle-earth had kindled in her heart, for she yearned to see the wide unguarded lands and to rule there a realm at her own will. Of like mind with Galadriel was Fingon Fingolfin's son, being moved also by Feanor's words, though he loved him little; and with Fingon stood as they ever did Angrod and Aegnor, sons of Finarfin. But these held their peace and spoke not against their fathers."

Feanor swore revenge on Melkor (or Morgoth as he came to be known), but Galadriel left because she wanted to see the world.  With the trees gone the only light left was in the Silmarils that Feanor created and Melkor stole after slaying Feanor's father the king of the Noldor.  The Valar wanted the Silmarils to heal the trees, but Feanor wanted revenge and his gems back.  

Finrod did die after fighting with Sauron personally, but it was at the hands of a werewolf after he was imprisoned.  It wasn't on a generic battlefield, but on a quest for a Silmaril to help Beren whose family he swore an oath to.  He died after killing the werewolf protecting his friend and keeping his oath.  The story is called The lay of Leithian. 

On 9/14/2022 at 8:24 PM, Skipp said:

 

Considering Moiraine's relationship with Suian is actually canon, they had just broken it off earlier in the books. I actually quite like the fact that they brought it to the forefront for the characters.

 

While fridging is a problematic trope I think it was used well in Perrin's case.  Most of Perrin's development and conflict is almost entirely internal monologue and is very difficult it show on screen.  Having Perrin kill his significant other immediately allows the audience to know where his head is at.  It also gives a reference point for his journey his growth to detesting violence but finding it necessary.  I thought it it was a nice touch considering Perrin says he would have likely married Layla had he stayed in the Two Rivers.

 

But I completely understand why people would not like what they did with Perrin and Layla but I know the writers considered the repercussions of it.

Don't care about Moiraine and Siuan's relationship in the show other than it a) wastes screen time on something not even remotely useful to the plot and b) contradicts them trying to avoid each other in the books to throw people off.  Their mission is their #1 priority because it is to save the world.  Unless they need some random together time that could wreck the whole thing.  

In Perin's case we have another poor choice in fridging compounded by the fact that they didn't do much useful with it.  Its not like he had much of an arc out of it.  Just sad face for a while and then moving on.  If Brandon (don't say anything bad about people) Sanderson is telling you it was bad then it was bad.  

If these writers are around for season 2 I wouldn't expect much out of it.

On 9/15/2022 at 1:57 AM, DojoToad said:

 

 

I think all three of the relationships could have been handled better, but that is based on my own opinions/sensitivities.  Other folks probably think they should have gone further...

I wasn't a fan of the changes either, but my guess is a lot of people would have had less issues with them if they were done well.  They simply were not written well and only thrown in for shock "Game of Thrones" value.  None of the relationships were earned, or led to anything rewarding.  Relationships have to be built and earned between characters if you want audiences to care about them.  

15 hours ago, mogi68 said:

 

I'd prefer each season to be somewhat self contained in it's own era & storyline, like a set of mini-series. Obviously they don't have the rights to the Silmarillion so it's a moot point.

 

And the History Channel hasn't been good since they stopped doing all that WW2 history 🙄

That is how the Silmarillion is written.  Basically each chapter is a different self contained part of the history.  Amazon really messed up when they didn't get the rights to the Silmarillion.  They could have done 1-3 episodes on each relevant era and made a good and entertaining tale.  

Instead they went mystery box generic fantasy approach with a vaguely Tolkien skin on it.  It comes across as more ignorant of lore than it does as trying to burn it down.  If any of the writers read the Silmarillion it doesn't show in their script.  Most of its shortcomings are from the terrible writing and making elves act like generic humans. 

On 9/14/2022 at 9:05 AM, holger said:

AppleTV's adaptation is an extremely loose adaptation, to the point that it should probably not even be called an adaptation, but more of a "TV show inspired by ...". Other than the names of the main characters and places, and the overall concept of psychohistory, almost everything is different. Neither plots nor character arcs were maintained from the original, and most of the show plots were invented for the show. It looks like they intent to use some sci-fi tropes like cryogenic sleep and cloning to carry some of the main characters forward across multiple Seldon crises, so they don't have to swap out the whole cast for each crisis.

Feels like you just described the WoT show to a T. 

Side note I have a friend that has read the Azimov books and said basically the same thing.  I told him about the upcoming WoT show and his basic comment was don't get your hopes up for it given recent 'adaption' track records.