So, for clarity, this is Tolkien's world but a completely new story with some of his original characters now interacting with newly created ones? Like what Disney is doing to Star Wars?
The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power | Amazon Prime Video - September 2, 2022
- Thread starter chrisstbh
- Start date
Help Support Collector Freaks Forum:
Is that inherently a bad thing? It's not like Disney was never going to create new Star Wars characters and many of them have been great additions to the roster.
I'm just trying to understand what this show is.
Other than RO and Mando, I'd say Disney has failed at capturing the magic that Star Wars is.
I don't know, that's why I'm asking.
I mean, if the story centers around his (Tolkien), like Jackson's did mostly, then I'd say yes even if there are modern deviations. But problems often come when the deviations are many more than the original storyline/beats; when the filmmakers feel that classic timeless material is somehow dated and they can do better.
Well, yeah. That's really all this is.
jye4ever
Broke and happy
Hey Victor Water is Wet lol
Rumor has it that if this doesn't perform well Bezos will shut down Amazon Studios. Dunno if I believe it, but we'll see. IIRC this is supposed to be a 5 Season story, so lots more money to be spent.
In my parts water is actually hot because it's lava.
I mean yeah essentially that's what it is from what I know.
Sassafras
Super Freak
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2016
- Messages
- 8,381
- Reaction score
- 3,143
I don't know, that's why I'm asking.
I mean, if the story centers around his (Tolkien), like Jackson's did mostly, then I'd say yes even if there are modern deviations. But problems often come when the deviations are many more than the original storyline/beats; when the filmmakers feel that classic timeless material is somehow dated and they can do better.
Luv the Hobbit films, while skating through the stuff where I think Jackson jumped the shark. There's stuff I really don't like about LOTR or Jackson's take. But for me, both these series, the positives outweigh the negatives. In particular with casting, a lot of the script, sets, and costumes and design aesthetic.
For me there's so many original characters, or the characters like Galadriel or other characters are behaving in ways I think strains credulity (based on how I interpret the books) that for me it's like watching a series that has nothing to do with Tolkien. This could be anything some independent writer self-published on Amazon. Fan fiction like the way Meteor Man behaves.
Folks have complained about the use of CGI in the Hobbit films, and to a lesser degree in LOTR, but I'd say, overall, all the films keep their tone, as they switch from CGI to real sets....here it's kinda weird, you get these really nice RL shots, some really good CGI, and then something that looks pretty cheap. Even the editing is uneven, you get kind of slingshot from region to region.
People have complained about the Harfoots, but being a fan of folklore and mythology, I found them pretty appealing. But that's because it reminds me of various Western European myths, not because of Tolkien. For me, pretty much, my brain switched off and thought, OK, generic fantasy. That doesn't make it completely bad. It doesn't make it a worthy prequel to Jackson's work either.
I'm all for generic fantasy -- just call it that. I don't like the use of IPs just for justification.
If they made Jaws today, they'd call it Moby **** just because, and someone in the movie somewhere would reference "Moby ****" and Hooper's first name would be Ishmael.
If they made Jaws today, they'd call it Moby **** just because, and someone in the movie somewhere would reference "Moby ****" and Hooper's first name would be Ishmael.
Sassafras
Super Freak
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2016
- Messages
- 8,381
- Reaction score
- 3,143
I get that. And I get fans' anger.
Peter Jackson did enough that ticked me off (Faramir, for one thing - a favorite character of mine in the books). Other stuff he just left out.
Think I'm more sanguine about this series, because, to me the whole concept was sketchy to being with. Trying to pull from the Appendices and having to dodge mentioning this or that. Which PJ did as well, but nothing like this. The hubris of the whole thing is breathtaking really
. But there's enough, as telling a story goes, to have engaged me. I keep getting the feeling of inexperienced people made this (people who don't know how to do a regional scene transition, for one thing, and have a nice flow to it), but they tried really, really hard. So some stuff is pretty good; other stuff not so much.
- Joined
- Mar 13, 2010
- Messages
- 28,004
- Reaction score
- 31,973
The first episode wasn't easy to get into, but the scenery and locations were very Tolkienesque. By the end I could start to see the potential. The second episode was the one that really drew me in.
Even if it does become practically fan fiction, with the condensing of the chronology and characters from different times, it's giving me the same sense of authenticity I got from Peter Jackson's LOTR. With a world as vast and complex as Tolkien's there's going to be some liberties with the story telling, as there was in those earlier films.
It isn't a series to dip into lightly, but one that demands your attention to everything that's going on or being said, so you definitely have to be in the right frame of mind.
Even if it does become practically fan fiction, with the condensing of the chronology and characters from different times, it's giving me the same sense of authenticity I got from Peter Jackson's LOTR. With a world as vast and complex as Tolkien's there's going to be some liberties with the story telling, as there was in those earlier films.
It isn't a series to dip into lightly, but one that demands your attention to everything that's going on or being said, so you definitely have to be in the right frame of mind.
- Joined
- Apr 19, 2013
- Messages
- 10,935
- Reaction score
- 4,829
Well I don't hate it.
But I'm familiar with the source material and so far this doesn't really evoke it outside of names and places. It feels like well done generic fantasy, whereas something like Fellowship of the Ring felt like the books.
Galadriel's portrayal is weird. Sometimes she's an unstoppable superhero, at others she's just a "normal" person just because.
So far it feels like Wheel of Time with more money, rather than anything truly Tolkien-esque.
But I'm familiar with the source material and so far this doesn't really evoke it outside of names and places. It feels like well done generic fantasy, whereas something like Fellowship of the Ring felt like the books.
Galadriel's portrayal is weird. Sometimes she's an unstoppable superhero, at others she's just a "normal" person just because.
So far it feels like Wheel of Time with more money, rather than anything truly Tolkien-esque.
Oh man... none of this is helping motivate me.
Are there any good bad guys?
Are there any good bad guys?
Sure. The Enemy™.
We haven't seen them yet apart from a brief glimpse and Sauron looking cool.
There's been one Orc that commits a home invasion that they gave more of a horror vibe which I think was pretty well done.
Amazon erasing any reviews below 6/10 on IMDB is a bit ridiculous. I guess you’re not allowed to have a voice if you think it’s worse than that. I canceled my Prime membership. This entire fiasco is such a turn off.
Just finished. Not as good as HotD, much better than Wheel of Time, and at this stage doesn’t have the gravitas of the Lotr movies. But I’ll stick around. All the storylines were able to hook me in except Galadriel’s. Kind of wanted those scenes to push off.
7/10
7/10
Similar threads
