Rings of Power

Yappi said:
What I find interesting about this show is that I'm on more equal footing with most of the people watching it. I watched the LOTR movies but just casually. Didn't know the characters or the storyline. Enjoyed the movies but forgot about them almost as soon as I left the theater. Just didn't have enough interest to delve into them deeply. Never read the books either.

With this show, it appears that the story isn't following a book or a story that most people know. Yes, they have future characters that everyone seems to know but it is not necessary for the casual viewer like me. My only "gotcha moment" is when the stranger crash landed. Said right away that was Gandalf. Looks like I was right. Also assumed the Harfoots were the future Hobbits.

That is why I have enjoyed this show more than the movies. Sitting at the movies was like being the one outsider when a bunch of inside jokes were being told.
Click to expand...

I certainly think to an extent that the show is more geared to the lovers of the movies for two reasons:

1) there’s frankly far more familiar with the movies than the books

2) the die hard book readers seem to be too attached to the lore.

Jackson’ movies are considered some of the great cinema of our time, and even those, many book readers can’t accept because of changes made. I think a point is reached where you have to just accept that those people won’t accept any adaptation, and move on to appeal to as many others as you can.

Then, as you get into further seasons you start diving into the lore more, telling a compelling story for the casual fan that also includes more of the deeper lore that the book readers know more fully.

At the end of the day, it’s an adaptation and the aim is to tell a compelling and entertaining story.

Is it going to be completely more accurate? Not at all, and for anyone whose read the books, it frankly shouldn’t be.

When I watch a movie or tv show, I always try to focus on what it IS, not what it ISN’T. This isn’t the books, but that doesn’t mean what I’m getting can’t still be really good.

Furthermore, no matter how good or bad an adaptation of something is, the source material will still always be there to be loved by those who love it.
 
Yappi said:
What I find interesting about this show is that I'm on more equal footing with most of the people watching it. I watched the LOTR movies but just casually. Didn't know the characters or the storyline. Enjoyed the movies but forgot about them almost as soon as I left the theater. Just didn't have enough interest to delve into them deeply. Never read the books either.

With this show, it appears that the story isn't following a book or a story that most people know. Yes, they have future characters that everyone seems to know but it is not necessary for the casual viewer like me. My only "gotcha moment" is when the stranger crash landed. Said right away that was Gandalf. Looks like I was right. Also assumed the Harfoots were the future Hobbits.

That is why I have enjoyed this show more than the movies. Sitting at the movies was like being the one outsider when a bunch of inside jokes were being told.
Click to expand...

Also, I’d still put money on The Stranger not actually being Gandalf. I think it’s another misdirect.
 
ogealbhain said:
Saruman?
Click to expand...


Possible, though he wouldn't have been there yet either based on the source material.

That said, I'm more interested in Saruman's backstory than Gandalf's.


If I had to guess, it's likely Alatar or Pallando. The two of the 5 wizards mentioned that the least is known about, and who would have arrived during the time that Rings of power is taking place.

Second Age​

"Their task was to circumvent Sauron: to bring help to the few tribes of Men that had rebelled from Melkor-worship, to stir up rebellion... and after his first fall to search out his hiding and to cause dissension and disarray among the dark East... They must have had very great influence on the history of the Second Age and Third Age in weakening and disarraying the forces of the East... who both in the Second Age and Third Age otherwise have... outnumbered the West." —J.R.R. Tolkien
Click to expand...
https://lotr.fandom.com/wiki/J.R.R._Tolkien
Alatar was originally a Maia of Oromë the Huntsman. Other servants of Oromë included later Pallando, a friend of Alatar, and whom he later chose to journey with him. At some point in the Second Age, around the forging of the Rings of Power, Alatar and Pallando were chosen to become the first of the Istari, and were sent to the east of Middle-earth to stir up rebellion against Sauron and assist the few tribes of Men who had refused to worship Morgoth in the First Age.[2]
Click to expand...

Character​


When Alatar came to Middle-earth, he was clothed in flesh and had the appearance of a wizened old man, though he did not look as old as Gandalf. He and Pallando were dressed in robes of sea-blue, which was why they were named "the Blue Wizards".[2] He had a white beard which was not as long as Gandalf's or Saruman's. He carried a staff, as did the other Wizards, which he could use to channel his magic.
Click to expand...

lotr.fandom.com

Alatar

Manwë summoned the Valar for a council at which it was resolved to send out three emissaries to Middle-earth and he asked who would go... Only two came forward; Curumo and Alatar... and Alatar took Pallando as a friend.Prior to the arrival of the Istari in the West Alatar was a Maia and an...
lotr.fandom.com lotr.fandom.com




The source material also seems to imply that there were more than 5, and just that only 5 were mentioned, so they could take liberties and create an entirely original character.
 
Last edited:
Saruman not Saluman? Wish they'd make up their mind. I'm a casual fan, there's "source material?

So who is this Morgoth they were supposed to have a war with and why did they need all those rings?
 
Doesn't matter if it's Gandalf or Saruman, they didn't exist until 1,000 years after Sauron's defeat.

There were two blue wizards sent together and they do go east, but they fail - really Gandalf is the only successful Wizard. On top of it, there are two origins, one for the time of the rings and one around the same time as Gandalf and Saruman, neither story Amazon would have the rights to since they're not in the Appendices. There's <1% chance they included the blue wizards.
 
Last edited:
Marcus Aurelius said:
This show has no business being associated with JRR Tolkien. On moral grounds, it pushes shallow, immature modernist philosophy and ideas of power and society, a complete affront to his Catholic faith.
Click to expand...

For real. It's quite obvious this show has no idea how to handle the story because it's fundamentally a Catholic story, and there are most certainly zero hardcore Catholics or people willing to treat that respectfully writing for this show. The ideals and morals that are beyond fundamental don't even register, and the few viewers who actually think this show is good are most likely in the same boat.
 
Crusaders said:
Doesn't matter if it's Gandalf or Saruman, they didn't exist until 1,000 years after Sauron's defeat.

There were two blue wizards sent together and they do go east, but they fail - really Gandalf is the only successful Wizard. On top of it, there are two origins, one for the time of the rings and one around the same time as Gandalf and Saruman, neither story Amazon would have the rights to since they're not in the Appendices. There's <1% chance they included the blue wizards.
Click to expand...
Which defeat? Wasn't there more than one? The one where they find the only thing needed to defeat him is to lop off his finger. That from the three movies. Then from this series, whatever put him on the raft. Was there another before that? They mention some battle against a baddy named "morgath." That another name for Sauron?
 
eastisbest said:
Which defeat? Wasn't there more than one? The one where they find the only thing needed to defeat him is to lop off his finger. That from the three movies. Then from this series, whatever put him on the raft. Was there another before that? They mention some battle against a baddy named "morgath." That another name for Sauron?
Click to expand...


Morgoth and Sauron are separate. Sauron was basically Morgoth's top lieutenant. The opening of Episode 1 dealt with the defeat of Morgoth and rise of Sauron in his place (video below). The way it's presented in the opening episode, most of the world believes Sauron long dead from the centuries long battle, with only Galadriel and those who were following her in Episode 1 believing (publicly at least) that he was still alive (as Sauron left his mark on her brother after killing him). We as the audience of course know he still lives and has been amassing an army in the shadows.

The "finger" defeat is presumably what will be the end of the show and is the opening to the movies (also video below)




 
Last edited:
Forgot that Will Poulter was supposed to be in the show (he was going to be Elrond) and had to back out due to a scheduling conflict.

I think it was a blessing in disguise as Robert Aramayo killed it in the role.


will_poulter.png
 
PantherProud said:
Forgot that Will Poulter was supposed to be in the show (he was going to be Elrond) and had to back out due to a scheduling conflict.

I think it was a blessing in disguise as Robert Aramayo killed it in the role.


will_poulter.png
Click to expand...
Poulter too jacked. He does have those "elvish" eyes. Nerdy guy was the way to go.
 
So I finally gave this thing a watch and it was good but not great. A few thoughts on it cinematically:

Good:
  • Visually a great watch, there is just so much going on and because the fighting was a smaller scale I think they pulled it off better then some of the Jackson LOTR battle sequences.
  • Liked the use of the maps as a narration tool, epic story telling with many characters and places can get very confusing and sometimes you need a guide to show you what is going on.
  • I didn't mind the use of an ethnically diverse cast and actually liked it, if it connects more folks to the story that is a good thing. I did have a couple problems with the depiction of some characters, more on that in another post.
Not So Good:
  • Looks like they spent few $s on the Directing talent as the pacing was really off. I get that they wanted to jam a lot into the 8 episodes but it felt like they rushed through somethings and stretched out others. The word I would use is disjointed.
  • Acting was nowhere near what the Jackson trilogy had, it looks like AMZ shot their budget load on special effects and just went to England and grabbed who didn't make the cut for House of Dragons.
  • There were some not so believable plot lines/devices. I get that it is a fantasy epic but you can only take so many saved just in time scenes or very little guy keeping up with a bad ash.
I actually would like a Sauron origin story, stay focused on the guy and limit the outside clutter to only the important details. Get folks to relate to the evil side then spring all the other stuff around him in season 3.
 
Auggie said:
So I finally gave this thing a watch and it was good but not great. A few thoughts on it cinematically:

Good:
  • Visually a great watch, there is just so much going on and because the fighting was a smaller scale I think they pulled it off better then some of the Jackson LOTR battle sequences.
  • Liked the use of the maps as a narration tool, epic story telling with many characters and places can get very confusing and sometimes you need a guide to show you what is going on.
  • I didn't mind the use of an ethnically diverse cast and actually liked it, if it connects more folks to the story that is a good thing. I did have a couple problems with the depiction of some characters, more on that in another post.
Not So Good:
  • Looks like they spent few $s on the Directing talent as the pacing was really off. I get that they wanted to jam a lot into the 8 episodes but it felt like they rushed through somethings and stretched out others. The word I would use is disjointed.
  • Acting was nowhere near what the Jackson trilogy had, it looks like AMZ shot their budget load on special effects and just went to England and grabbed who didn't make the cut for House of Dragons.
  • There were some not so believable plot lines/devices. I get that it is a fantasy epic but you can only take so many saved just in time scenes or very little guy keeping up with a bad ash.
I actually would like a Sauron origin story, stay focused on the guy and limit the outside clutter to only the important details. Get folks to relate to the evil side then spring all the other stuff around him in season 3.
Click to expand...


I agree that I'm surprised they didn't get any big name actors for the cast.
 
As for the Woke aspects...

As mentioned above I didn't mind the ethnically diverse cast and making Galadriel and ash kicker, it was like Wonder Woman blended with Dirty Harry which for moist scenes was cool. What I did have a problem with was the Elf & Dwarf Kings being portrayed as stubborn old white guys that thought they were the only ones who knew what was right to the point that their decision making was clouded. I also didn't get the Rasputin like guy on the Island, talk about a stereotyped trope. if you want equal representation then we needed a compromised female ruler too, there were many women leading the way and they all were very heroic and only did the right thing. Also was hoping for some female Orcs, only dudes?
 
Sauron's origin story isn't that entertaining. He's a third tier god created by Eru (big chief god) at the beginning of time. He was originally known as Mairon and was a Maiar (third teir god, like Gandalf and the other wizards) below Aule (a Valar - second tier god), who was more of less the god of material creation and alteration - he created the dwarves, the master smiths of the world. Mairon defected to Melkor (a Valar, also known as Morgoth) at some point due to his growing desires for domination.

I don't exactly know how this would translate to film or TV. Stuff dealing with gods can be weird.

For tens of thousands of years Sauron was Morgoth's second hand man. That's where the more interesting stuff lies, IMO.
 
Crusaders said:
Sauron's origin story isn't that entertaining. He's a third tier god created by Eru (big chief god) at the beginning of time. He was originally known as Mairon and was a Maiar (third teir god, like Gandalf and the other wizards) below Aule (a Valar - second tier god), who was more of less the god of material creation and alteration - he created the dwarves, the master smiths of the world. Mairon defected to Melkor (a Valar, also known as Morgoth) at some point due to his growing desires for domination.

I don't exactly know how this would translate to film or TV. Stuff dealing with gods can be weird.

For tens of thousands of years Sauron was Morgoth's second hand man. That's where the more interesting stuff lies, IMO.
Click to expand...
No idea that Tolkien got that deep. Nonetheless it looks like AMZ is using some serious poetic license with their take on the source material so they can jazz things up to makie for good storytelling. It might not connect with you as a fan of the literature but it could with casual fans of the cinema that just want to see some cool D&D type stuff on a screen.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top