Spoilers Lord of the Rings TV series
- Thread starter Cyrus
- Start date
I would love to ask him what he felt would be "unwarranted material" in terms of an adaptation? Certainly there is an awareness that the adaptive process is as much a sub-creative act as Tolkien being inspired by ancient stories but bringing his own view as well. I don't immediately ascribed this to an evil intent.
I would ask him where the people of Middle-earth obtained tobacco and potatoes - although I suppose leaf-like substitutes for the former might have been available.
ETA: In a letter written to his publisher late in 1951, JRR Tolkien described the Second Age of Middle-earth as a "dark age, and not very much of its history is (or need be) told". That does seem to be one opinion of his that Amazon has ignored in its pursuit of profit.
ETA: In a letter written to his publisher late in 1951, JRR Tolkien described the Second Age of Middle-earth as a "dark age, and not very much of its history is (or need be) told". That does seem to be one opinion of his that Amazon has ignored in its pursuit of profit.
Last edited:
https://www.joblo.com/the-lord-of-the-rings-the-rings-of-power-tv-review/
A very positive review of the first two episodes. I still don't know what to make of this, but I'll certainly watch the first few episodes and see if it tickles my fancy.
A very positive review of the first two episodes. I still don't know what to make of this, but I'll certainly watch the first few episodes and see if it tickles my fancy.
A few negative reviews for balance:
Christopher Stevens reviews The Lord Of The Rings: The Rings Of Power | Daily Mail Online
‘The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power’ is beautiful, banal boredom - The Washington Post
[ETA]: Another negative review, this time from Entertainment Weekly, which has been promoting the series for months.
[/ETA]
I'll still watch it though and form my own opinion.
Christopher Stevens reviews The Lord Of The Rings: The Rings Of Power | Daily Mail Online
This reviewer is way off the mark on a couple of points as he's obviously never heard of, never mind read, The Silmarillion. That's par for the course for a Daily Fail hack though.
‘The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power’ is beautiful, banal boredom - The Washington Post
They're obviously not shilling for Jeff.
[ETA]: Another negative review, this time from Entertainment Weekly, which has been promoting the series for months.
The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power is kind of a catastrophe | EW.com
[/ETA]
I'll still watch it though and form my own opinion.
Last edited:
Heh, I wonder if he said that because he hadn't organized it a way that he liked, given his perfectionist tendencies.
And honestly, the whole "story needs to be told" is such an overwrought phrase. No story "needs" to be told. The Second Age is one aspect of Middle Earth that makes the work a more unique one in that it has a history stretching back very far. Despite his insistence it's a dark time with little to be told he did construct some fascinating ideas with Numenor being the basis of Atlantis, coming of Numenoreans to Middle Earth and other stories. Maybe it's not TV series worthy but when I read his letters talking about Numenor I think Tolkien is selling himself short in your quoted letter.
Wow. Those negative reviews are quite... negative. Do these people always use $300 words (price adjusted for inflation) in their review prose, as if they felt the need to channel Tolkien himself in their screeds? Lots of waxing poetic in there, like trying to convince the reader that they're the smartest person in the room. Whatever happened to The Critic's ubiquitous and concise "It sucks!"? Oh, well... I never pay attention to those folks in any case. I'll give it its day in court...
Critics do like to show off.
My favourite review was Walter Kerr's for John Van Druten's stage adaptation "I Am a Camera" based on "Goodbye to Berlin" by Christopher Isherwood. It consisted of the three words "Me no Leica".
My favourite review was Walter Kerr's for John Van Druten's stage adaptation "I Am a Camera" based on "Goodbye to Berlin" by Christopher Isherwood. It consisted of the three words "Me no Leica".
Now that's what I'm talking about! It doesn't ever need to be the length of War and Peace.
The world of online articles is sometimes the most painful for me. Half the articles I go "Why?" and the other half I go "You're just writing to fill air aren't you?"
Regardless, the wife is super excited for this so it could be rated low by all concerned and we would still watch it. It will get more than a fair chance in my house.
Here is one to combat the negativity:
https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-...ing-it-makes-house-of-the-dragon-look-amateur
https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-...ing-it-makes-house-of-the-dragon-look-amateur
It's not low. It's 83% on RT. The internet is trying to create a narrative again.
The key phrase in my statement was "could be".
I don't care what the narrative is/was/will be. I'm watching it.
It's got a 71 on Metacritic, with 28 positive reviews, 9 mixed, and no negatives.
I just finished watching the first two episodes and I was enthralled by it in a way I haven't been since seeing Jackson's LotR trilogy on the big screen for the first time. Bear McCreary's score, the gorgeous cinematography and production design, and the ominous building toward dread kept me on the edge of my seat. Morfydd Clark's Galadriel, Robert Aramayo's Elrond, Markella Kavenagh's Nori, and Sophia Nomvete's Disa are the standouts for me so far. You see every dollar spent on the screen as it rivals the production quality of any film. I'm hooked and can't wait to see more. "A"
In fact, I am going to watch it again now that the rest of the family is home.
In fact, I am going to watch it again now that the rest of the family is home.
Last edited:
I really enjoyed episode 2. I thought overall its pacing was stronger then the first part. But I still liked the first episode. Probably my biggest complaint is the pacing of episode one. The War of Wrath section felt rushed, while the opening and the rest of the episode (when arriving in Lindon) seemed far slower. Now I don't mind a more languid pace, and in truth that's a style far closer to how Tolkien wrote LOTR then how Jackson treated the material (Tolkien never seemed to linger much on action, but would delve deep into history, backstory and character interaction), but and this is completely personal bias, I really wanted a bigger chunk of the War of Wrath....So I might be more upset about not what was one the screen then what was on the screen.
And here is another review from a different perspective. It strikes SWMBO & me that we just plain need to see all eight episodes before we can really know how we feel about it all, good or bad. Bottom line: don't let TORN or EW or whoever tell you how you should feel. Watch it yourself and think for yourself.
https://ew.com/tv/tv-reviews/lord-of-the-rings-rings-of-power-amazon/
https://ew.com/tv/tv-reviews/lord-of-the-rings-rings-of-power-amazon/
Similar threads
