The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power | Amazon Prime Video - September 2, 2022

Collector Freaks Forum

Help Support Collector Freaks Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Absolutely true, the modern style of storytelling is very orderly and reflects the modern love of order - especially in narrative action.
Our culture loves order so, to the degree we apply it retroactively - pretty much any modern book on mythology, any mythology, tends to assert a single creation story, this god did this and was related to this god, this hero did these things.... which just isn't the reality - Even when we look at the Greeks who wrote so much down, in truth what we have inhereted is fragments, and even from those fragments we can tell that the stories we now teach today as "Greek myth" never had a stable identity, chronology, characterisation or cast - there are versions of the myths in which Zeus and Hades are the same being, where Poseidon is the King of the Gods, where Hades doesn't exist at all and Persephone is Empress of the Underworld, where the entire stories completely change... all are equally true, all were asserted as equally plausable versions of the stories by those telling them, all equally adapted by those tellers from stories they were told and they shaped to suit their audiences of choice.....
Myths, legends and the epic style of story-telling and history relating we see in Tolkien reflects the works of the other epic poets such as Homer in this regard, you are completely correct.
Its such an alien way of storytelling to most modern audiences these days that they struggle to get their heads around it. I discussed this with a class of mine once regarding Tolkien and they raised the point about how many Balrogs there were as depending on which Tolkien text you read there are as few as 7 and as many as tens of thousands and they asked me which is the right number and I think they expected me to say the "right" answer is the later one as Tolkien "changed their mind" but I told them that BOTH are true as they are both numbers given as part of the stories the characters are relating, rather than through an accurate reflection of some unknown "factual" number. Both are true for the speaker of the story in question - fact never enters the equation as it is an anachronistic concept in such epic style storytelling.
Same with Beowulf or King Arthur, both are figures whose stories are tales that merge history and legend in order to chronicle the stories inherited by the speaker, which is in turn transcribed and deciphered by the writer, who in turn presents them to the reader.
As Tolkien himself states, he doesn't consider himself the true author of his own Legendarium, but rather a "sub-creator"/instrument in which the "true" author (Eru Iluvatar/God) can transcribe a certain form of "truth", not fact, but that ever philosopically indefinable "truth".
Or as Tolkien himself rather mind-bendingly puts it:
"We differ entirely about the nature of the relation of sub-creation to Creation. I should have said that liberation "from the channels the creator is known to have used already" is the fundamental function of "sub-creation", a tribute to the infinity of His potential variety [...] I am not a metaphysician; but I should have thought it a curious metaphysics — there is not one but many, indeed potentially innumerable ones — that declared the channels known (in such a finite corner as we have any inkling of) to have been used, are the only possible ones, or efficacious, or possibly acceptable to and by Him!"

With respect to narration there's one big clue to Tolkien's process.

The question of Gollum's colour has been a popular conundrum. He's alternately described as either pale or as black as a shadow. There's no singular narrative voice within the texts to define which is true, so we see Gollum from the perspective of those who witness him.

That ties into the different peoples of the world writing their own history as they see it, and evolving their own legends.

Oddly enough, the theme of my A-Level thesis on Tolkien was perceptions of reality as expressed through fantasy. The idea was inspired because one of my English Literature teachers despised fantasy and could see no value in it. She also said I was destined for a red brick college at best. I accepted both challenges, ended up at an old stone built one, and came out with the best degree possible. Not that I ever did anything with it though. :lol
 
Fantastic stuff, and some people in academia are completely unreasonable ***** let me tell you.
Sorry you had such a **** for a Lit teacher.
I know it seems like a trite platitude but it really is never too late to use something like your degree, from this conversation with you I can tell you have a lot of insight and passion for the subject and you articulate your points in a very engaging manner.
Just my 2 cents - its been an absolute pleasure to talk Literature with you.
 
Having slept on it, I still feel the same however I'm still eager to jump back into the story and see where it goes. I spent the first 2 seasons of Game of Thrones being in a confused state. :lol So much World building going on with new characters popping up every episode too.

Please let us see more of the dwarves too - easily my favourite race in Middle Earth. The Durin and Elrond scenes have been my favourite so far.

Lastly, The Stranger is definitely going to be
Gandalf.

A video review that questioned the stranger threw me off the scent, because the obvious identity is the one he most appears to be physically.

Gandalf was associated with light and fire, much like Varda - "Valaquenta: Of the Maiar", The Silmarillion.

It would form another point of familiar contact, bridging the timeline to the LOTR.

https://lotr.fandom.com/wiki/Gandalf
 
Fantastic stuff, and some people in academia are completely unreasonable ***** let me tell you.
Sorry you had such a **** for a Lit teacher.
I know it seems like a trite platitude but it really is never too late to use something like your degree, from this conversation with you I can tell you have a lot of insight and passion for the subject and you articulate your points in a very engaging manner.
Just my 2 cents - its been an absolute pleasure to talk Literature with you.

Thank you. 😊


Saying I never did anything with it isn't completely true. What I learned from the English and History degree changed my whole outlook, and the way I look at the world. I question everything, and look beyond the surface of things because they aren't always exactly as they appear. My style of essay writing was to peel back a novel, play or poem layer by layer, and once I'd started it became a natural process that could be applied to any text.

I found my niche, and the lecturers liked it, but finding a place to put that to work in the real world was a different matter. Now I wouldn't have the energy to do it. I abandoned my Ph.D because Conrad became too dark a muse.
 
I’m sure some people genuinely don’t like this as with all things but to me it does seem like some want to hate it and were never going to allow themselves to like it from the beginning (because that would involve admitting they were wrong, ew).

Everything has to be the best thing ever now or it’s the worst thing ever.

Nitpicking to that extent, going over ever seam line on an outfit etc., shows an unhealthy investment in hating the show imo :lol. But most people that seemingly hate it will continue to watch it anyway; and guess what? Amazon don’t care if you don’t like it as long as you’re giving them those sweet sweet numbers.
Yep. A perusal of my youtube recommended videos has some pretty laughable titles with all the usual capitalizations for emphasis (and clickbait) - DISASTER! ABYSMAL! TOTAL COLLAPSE! FANS HATE! FANS BLAMED! etc etc.

Zzzzzzzzzz at this point.
 
Yep. A perusal of my youtube recommended videos has some pretty laughable titles with all the usual capitalizations for emphasis (and clickbait) - DISASTER! ABYSMAL! TOTAL COLLAPSE! FANS HATE! FANS BLAMED! etc etc.

Zzzzzzzzzz at this point.
RINGS OF POWER KILLED MY DOG AND BURNED MY HOT TOYS COLLECTION!
 
I can't say this thread's been very helpful. Most of the posters here either watched one episode and bailed, didn't watch at all, or are just making jokes/comments/assumptions based on other reviews.

Unfortunately, this is what people here do. It's just the way it is. They all know who they are and they all know they are doing it.

I dunno, I feel like the noise surrounding the show has conditioned people to receive it a certain way. ROP could very well have problems, but I wonder how it would've been taken had people jumped in cold. It's probably not a 1-star show (nor a 4- or 5-star either), but you'd think it's the worst thing in the world based on the user reviews coming out.

Same thing happened with She-Hulk; on launch, those who liked it gave it max scores. Those who were rubbed the wrong way by some small aspect of it gave it the minimum in hopes of sending a message of their own.

Same with this, unfortunately.
 
I don’t agree with this guy fans absolutely complained about these issues he brings up both with LOTR and The Hobbit!

Fool lol

E2FA85A1-EA67-48A8-87C6-7C1D3DD67D2F.jpeg
 
Last edited:
That's the rub here

One could argue The Hobbit needed more depth than three films to do it justice but less than 5 full seasons at 10 episodes each. But it might have been a better idea anyway to just reboot The Hobbit into a full fledged TV series.

I'm going to be honest, the LOTR Trilogy as books were a tough read. Honestly, if you tried to publish them today if there was no fame and it was just unknown, it would be rejected. They are poorly written from a technical sense. ( The core themes and core plot set up is good and interesting, but the execution is really rough...) But The Hobbit is a legitimately good novel all on it's own.

I agree with this. The books are pretty poorly written and a real struggle to get through (for me). And I say this as an avid reader.

I have read it through twice (the second time was a bind) and can't find the desire to try it again.

It's a shame because, like you say, the underlying story is excellent. It's just told in such a messy and bloated way.
 
Bait that you fell for. Again typical. You can't help yourself but reply.

In the still, yes I can see the difference if I search it out. On TV not so much, but I' not looking plastic looking armor I'm actually watching the show and the story it's telling, not looking for things to nit pick the show for on a online forum.

Actually you did clamor for them to dress up in proper armor. Galadriel's armour has gaps at her wrists. The whole reason you're wearing gauntlets is to protect your entire hand and wrist. Has nobody in the entire production studied any actual armours?

You even clamor for it in this same post I am replying to. You complain about the fake looking plastic armor and leggings, but yet begin by saying you aren't asking for them to dress in proper armor.

You not wearing armor is indeed relevant. You accuse the makers of the show of not studying armor, but yet put forward your opinion as if you know more about it then they do. As we now see you don't know more or have more experience then they. Wearing armor isn't some simple easy thing to do, especially metal armor that you are clamoring for (or not clamoring, I can't tell cause you contradict yourself). It's heavy (a kit I wore was 70 lbs), it's restricting in movement, it's loud, it's crazy hot, way hotter then the the plastic armor they currently wear, and that plastic armor is already super hot to wear. So if a show cuts corners to make the actors comfortable so they can have more range of motion, not having to break multiple times a day to cool everyone down, and not have to constantly scrub the film due to the noise, I and most of the viewing audience is ok with them using alternatives to real armor.

If you want realistic fantasy armor, I suggest you just stick to books. If you aren't asking for realistic armor, then what exactly are you complaining about?
I don't keep an eye out for plastic armour or anything, but a fine example of real armour worn by actors is Excalibur. Sure, some of the fighting may look "clunky" to a modern audience, but it still looks amazing to this day. You can "see" the weight of it.
 
I don't keep an eye out for plastic armour or anything, but a fine example of real armour worn by actors is Excalibur. Sure, some of the fighting may look "clunky" to a modern audience, but it still looks amazing to this day. You can "see" the weight of it.
And you can hear the noise of it too even if they toned the sound down some so you can hear the ADR dialog.

Everyone knows Hollywood has instilled a image of what things look like in people. They think the Katana is the ultimate sword, that sword fights are these long drawn out back and forth fights, reverse grip is a viable fighting style, and that Gun Fu is a real thing. None of that is true, but its what the general public believes to be true. LoTR and the fantasy genre falls prey to this too.

Excalibur is men, not Elves. It's also more grounded in reality then LoTR, you wouldn't be able to get away with the slow moving clunkiness of real combat with casual LoTR fans/Fantasy fans, especially with the Elves who are suppose to be quick and graceful no matter what they are wearing.
 
This feels like the opening act of a movie and thus I don't think its fair to completely judge it by the metric of a complete whole yet. Its a bit like turning off the extended cut of LOTR trilogy after the first 15 mins.

Also anyone calling this series cheap looking because they are scrutinizing a still photo of a costume rather than waiting to see the costume and scene in question isn't being genuine.
There is nothing cheap here, the costumes, settings, effects are all clearly richly produced and meticulously crafted. You can see the money on the screen. If you don't want to watch the show - fine, no one is making you. But don't resort to blatant bull like this to "justify" your opinion. Its your opinion, you don't need bull reasons to not watch something.

Completely agree - my bone is with people who are using something so small, relatively inconsequential, and not even SHOWN ON SCREEN yet to judge an entire series when it is very evident to anyone who has watched even these two episodes that this show is ANYTHING but cheap.
Its not an objective observation and attempts to portray it as such are, in my opinion, un-genuine.
It is also, as you demonstrate in talking about the impact of practicalities above, holding things to an impossible standard, its an exercise in LOOKING for reasons to hate something which is something I can't stand - if you don't like it, just say so, there is no moral imperative to like something - but don't try to use this pseudo-evidence to "justify" your opinion by making the case that the media is itself objectively bad.
And again, as you say, immersion is a singular experience, which is why I find it un-genuine when people use an arbitrary piece of evidence that affects them on something as personal as immersion to say that a series is objectively bad
, poorly rendered or un-Tolkienian.

Its a pet peeve of mine, just say you don't like something, that something about it doesn't click with you, that this specific thing here broke my immerison etc. instead of going "here is a small error and that is proof this show is BAD" like your opinion must always be aligned with the objective truth or something.

The same reason as with the complaints about Galadriel's "woke" direction - because they already have these opinions, are already angry about these issues and rather than just admit its because of their own pre-existing opinions and prejudices they would rather pretend that the show is at fault, they are deferring to a greater textual authority and shirking the weight of their own opinion.
Just own it for Christ's sake.

Very few things are objectively ANYTHING - let alone such nebulous and subjective categories as "good" or "bad".
Which is why I prefer people keep an open mind, admit when they don't like something just because they personally don't like it and not try to disguise their perspective through the false justifications of saying something is objectively bad and asserting so despite other people thinking contrary to their opinion.


Your right that this is often the case, I don't entirely agree though as I feel when people approach things with an open mind I think they are open to seeing things from other peoples' POVs and can find themselves completely changing their opinion on something.

Thats why I dislike it so when people assert their opinion like its fact - it basically discourages against any dissenting opinions.

I’m sure some people genuinely don’t like this as with all things but to me it does seem like some want to hate it and were never going to allow themselves to like it from the beginning (because that would involve admitting they were wrong, ew).

Everything has to be the best thing ever now or it’s the worst thing ever.


Nitpicking to that extent, going over ever seam line on an outfit etc., shows an unhealthy investment in hating the show imo :lol. But most people that seemingly hate it will continue to watch it anyway; and guess what? Amazon don’t care if you don’t like it as long as you’re giving them those sweet sweet numbers.

So... many... truth bombs.

Just... truth.

Illuminating truth.

gods-honest-truth-red.gif


JUST DROPPING TRUTH BOMBS ON SO MANY OF YOU! YOU KNOW WHO YOU ALL ARE!

source.gif
 
Last edited:
And you can hear the noise of it too even if they toned the sound down some so you can hear the ADR dialog.

Everyone knows Hollywood has instilled a image of what things look like in people. They think the Katana is the ultimate sword, that sword fights are these long drawn out back and forth fights, reverse grip is a viable fighting style, and that Gun Fu is a real thing. None of that is true, but its what the general public believes to be true. LoTR and the fantasy genre falls prey to this too.

Excalibur is men, not Elves. It's also more grounded in reality then LoTR, you wouldn't be able to get away with the slow moving clunkiness of real combat with casual LoTR fans/Fantasy fans, especially with the Elves who are suppose to be quick and graceful no matter what they are wearing.
Oh, I'm not contesting any of that, I was just pointing out that there is one fine example of real armour being used, that's all.
I find most sword fighting in movies pretty ridiculous anyway. I'm not averse to "flourishes" or "spectacular" sequences, it's just that a great stunt director (or whatever they are called) can choreograph a spectacular fight without having it become risible in the process. One fight I like a lot, even though it has its own problems, is Troy's Achilles vs. Hector fight. Looks spectacular, yet believable within the movie's logic.
The brutal fight at the of the Last Duel is also very good. Or most of Conan's fights for that matter.

The fight against the Snow Troll is not very good, IMHO. Add to it the unnecessary portrayal of Galadriel's companions as useless and it becomes quite laughable.

But I do like the show so far, so I'm going to keep watching.
 
Based on most of the initial previews I watched critiquing the show before it aired I thought I wasn’t going to like it but with all things that come out now I always try to give it a chance before I make my own judgement call. After viewing the first two episodes I have to say I honestly like what I’ve seen so far and I’m interested to see the story play out.

It’s well done in terms of acting, sets, costumes, lore, character building, culture building, and special effects. Not sure I could ask for more. The arguments against the show seem to fall flat upon actually watching it.
 
I still have my nitpicks, but nothing that actually prevents me from enjoying it so far.
I did roll my eyes a couple of times, which prevents it from being actually great for me, but it's by far not as bad as I thought it would be.
 
I must say, reading lordnastrond and Asta's posts is like taking a very interesting class on the subject. I hope you two continue to shed light on this series here and on Tolkien. It's fantastic what you guys know. Seriously. I know I joke around a lot here -- that's my job -- but I'm dead serious about this. You guys should do a pod cast: Understanding Tolkien.
 
I must say, reading lordnastrond and Asta's posts is like taking a very interesting class on the subject. I hope you two continue to shed light on this series here and on Tolkien. It's fantastic what you guys know. Seriously. I know I joke around a lot here -- that's my job -- but I'm dead serious about this. You guys should do a pod cast: Understanding Tolkien.
I’d subscribe. :lecture
 
Back
Top