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

[Victοr]

Behold, the Billion Dollar Budget!

This actually looks pretty good...
I'm not too versed in Tolkien lore, so I have no opinion on the story, the actors however, do look somewhat un-charismatic...

That's an understatement. I could find more charismatic actors by grabbing a random assortment of STEM undergrands, drunken hobos and a couple of "ladies of the night"...

 

[loki2371]

Regardless of whether or not you are versed in Tolkien lore, as a fan of the genre you shouldn't support a show/company that desecrates the original lore and its creator. A timeless franchise beloved around the world for 85 years now revamped to fit "todays" ideals.

 

[abake]

Regardless of whether or not you are versed in Tolkien lore, as a fan of the genre you shouldn't support a show/company that desecrates the original lore and its creator. A timeless franchise beloved around the world for 85 years now revamped to fit "todays" ideals.

True enough. I suppose it all depends on whether the story is any good.

 

[chrisstbh]

Regardless of whether or not you are versed in Tolkien lore, as a fan of the genre you shouldn't support a show/company that desecrates the original lore and its creator. A timeless franchise beloved around the world for 85 years now revamped to fit "todays" ideals.

They already have my money, I may as well watch it.

I’d rather form my own opinion.

 

[Khev]

I have Prime but based on everything I've heard and seen about this show I'll just watch it through Pitch Meetings. He can have my views instead of the idiots in charge of this show.

 

[loki2371]

They already have my money, I may as well watch it.

I’d rather form my own opinion.

That's a bad way of thinking.

By watching, your giving them ratings via hours viewed. So by that metric they can use it against any negativity they receive. Whether the show is good or bad.

If you have cable, in some way you are paying for every show that airs on every channel that is part of your package. Impossible to watch everything.

I have Prime & D+ too (as well as Netflix, Hulu & HBOMax). I've barely watched anything MCU related on D+, and skipped Kenobi too. The only way I can show them i am displeased on how they are handling these franchises.

 

[chrisstbh]

That's a bad way of thinking.

By watching, your giving them ratings via hours viewed. So by that metric they can use it against any negativity they receive. Whether the show is good or bad.

If you have cable, in some way you are paying for every show that airs on every channel that is part of your package. Impossible to watch everything.

I have Prime & D+ too (as well as Netflix, Hulu & HBOMax). I've barely watched anything MCU related on D+, and skipped Kenobi too. The only way I can show them i am displeased on how they are handling these franchises.

Yeahhh… but I don’t care. I’m interested in the show, if I don’t like after giving it a chance then I’ll say as much.

 

[JMT1979]

Regardless of whether or not you are versed in Tolkien lore, as a fan of the genre you shouldn't support a show/company that desecrates the original lore and its creator. A timeless franchise beloved around the world for 85 years now revamped to fit "todays" ideals.

I'm with you there. If this was their own original franchise, I'd almost certainly watch it and give it a chance, but I definitely don't want to support this desecration of Tolkien.

 

[greygoose]

They already have my money, I may as well watch it.

I’d rather form my own opinion.

 

[ObiGlennKenobi]

Am really looking forward to this series full of hope.
It has potential to be really good.
I'll also seek my own judgement after seeing this,but if it turns out anything like the BoBF and Obi wan threads,it should be a fun ride

 

[pixletwin]

I’ll be watching.

 

[greygoose]

I have no knowledge of the lore outside the film trilogy so it would be unfair of me to make an accurate opinion until I've watched it.

Some of the things in the trailers look questionable however I'll remain open minded until I've watched the first episode at least.

 

[jye4ever]

Is Kilmonger returning as the villain?

 

[Galacticat]

The review's I've seen do not look promising- although the worst that I've heard is that there isn't enough "grit" and the actors look too much like they are wearing costumes and not "real." That said, I'll probably give it a try. I'm pretty sure Tolkien won't mind.

 

[ObiGlennKenobi]

Is Kilmonger returning as the villain?

apparently..

 

[Wor-Gar]

Eager to start reading reviews from you guys...

 

[greygoose]

Is Kilmonger returning as the villain?

 

[lordnastrond]

Even if the show turns out to be hot garbage I see no harm in giving it a chance.

A lot of the criticisms i've seen online - that aren't just thinly veiled misogyny or racism - have mostly been about things not being true to the text.... despite many of the elements they are complaining about - warrior Galadriel, Wizards in the 2nd Age, Hobbits in the 2nd Age, "Politician" Elrond, etc actually DO have textual foundations. Galadriel is explicitly a rebel, warrior and very angry when she first comes to Middle Earth, in the Peoples of Middle Earth Tolkien changed the arrival of the Istari from the Third Age to the Second Age around the time Sauron's power is rising, Elrond as the herald of the High King Gil-Galad is absolutely a politician - herald is an important and prestigious post.

The Tolkien lore, like real life mythology, is sprawling, exists in fragments, conveys information in both what is said and in what is not said, and at times directly contradicts itself as it is edited, changed, retconned, and rewritten. There is no single pristine canon that flawlessly characterises and relates every detail of Tolkien's universe from its creation to its end - there are vast swathes of time skipped, or left relatively obscure outside of the most important events - such as much of the Second Age.

People need to let the nerd rage go for once, worst case scenario you are proven right the show is terrible, Amazon wastes a billion dollars and Tolkien's work remains the pillar of fantasy it will always be.
Best case its an epic series that takes creative licenses (Just like the LOTR films which made MANY changes) but produces something beautiful, that awakens a new generation to Tolkien's world and is something worthy of longevity... and Tolkien's work remains the pillar of fantasy it will always be.
Most likely scenario - its just okay with some stunning visuals and a few breakout performances. At the very least it will give us a chance to see events in live-action we have never seen before such as The Two Trees, Numenor, and the First Kinslaying/Aftermath of the War of Wrath/Dagor Bragalach/whatever Galadriel's vision is. That alone might be worth the price of entry.

You have nothing to lose by giving this a chance.

 

[Sassafras]

This actually looks pretty good...
I'm not too versed in Tolkien lore, so I have no opinion on the story, the actors however, do look somewhat un-charismatic...

As far as I recall, Peter Jackson deliberately wanted lesser-known actors for his films; and with these series there's the issue of getting actors to commit to years of their lives, as opposed to films.

From the trailer, think the actor/actresses are reasonable, tho continue to hate the modern haircuts. Thinking about an elf barber shop

The outrage is hilarious - I remember the squalling over the Hobbit dwarves being "too hawt", Tauriel, etc. Remain a Hobbit movie fan. But that outrage is a dust mote compared the firestorm over Rings of Power. Some of that I find questionable, as neither LOTR or the Hobbit were book-faithful. Still remember my shock at my first look at Bernard Hill's Theoden - a favorite of mine; but he's nothing like the Theoden I envisioned from the book. I desperately wanted to see Glorfindel, but all I got was a lot of Arwen, etc.

For myself, looks like there has been some effort put into this as far as connections to mythology, folkore, Tolkien. Don't think it will be mind-blowing. But possibly enjoyable.

 

[Sassafras]

Even if the show turns out to be hot garbage I see no harm in giving it a chance.

A lot of the criticisms i've seen online - that aren't just thinly veiled misogyny or racism - have mostly been about things not being true to the text.... despite many of the elements they are complaining about - warrior Galadriel, Wizards in the 2nd Age, Hobbits in the 2nd Age, "Politician" Elrond, etc actually DO have textual foundations. Galadriel is explicitly a rebel, warrior and very angry when she first comes to Middle Earth, in the Peoples of Middle Earth Tolkien changed the arrival of the Istari from the Third Age to the Second Age around the time Sauron's power is rising, Elrond as the herald of the High King Gil-Galad is absolutely a politician - herald is an important and prestigious post.

The Tolkien lore, like real life mythology, is sprawling, exists in fragments, conveys information in both what is said and in what is not said, and at times directly contradicts itself as it is edited, changed, retconned, and rewritten. There is no single pristine canon that flawlessly characterises and relates every detail of Tolkien's universe from its creation to its end - there are vast swathes of time skipped, or left relatively obscure outside of the most important events - such as much of the Second Age.

People need to let the nerd rage go for once, worst case scenario you are proven right the show is terrible, Amazon wastes a billion dollars and Tolkien's work remains the pillar of fantasy it will always be.
Best case its an epic series that takes creative licenses (Just like the LOTR films which made MANY changes) but produces something beautiful, that awakens a new generation to Tolkien's world and is something worthy of longevity... and Tolkien's work remains the pillar of fantasy it will always be.
Most likely scenario - its just okay with some stunning visuals and a few breakout performances. At the very least it will give us a chance to see events in live-action we have never seen before such as The Two Trees, Numenor, and the First Kinslaying/Aftermath of the War of Wrath/Dagor Bragalach/whatever Galadriel's vision is. That alone might be worth the price of entry.

You have nothing to lose by giving this a chance.

Nice post. IMO it's pretty obvious the production is laced with THE MESSAGE - and I don't agree, at all, with the attitude that this production "should reflect modern times" and like that. Because that's not what Tolkien was attempting to construct.

But, at the same time, IMO there's some room for re-interpretation. For instance, since the female dwarf Disa is both beardless, and black, there's a lot of insistence that dwarves wouldn't have dark skin because they live underground, and Tolkien said dwarf woman have beards, depending on the text you look at.

On the other hand:

Dwarves emerged in Middle-earth in the Years of the Trees; after Elves but before Men. When the Seven Fathers of the Dwarves awoke in far-flung corners of Middle-earth, some of them found themselves in Rhûn, and there they founded kingdoms in the East. In the First Age, it is said that some Men had met Dwarves of the East who had fallen under the Shadow and were of evil mind and were distrustful of their race.[13]:323 n.28

The distance between their mansions in the East and the Misty Mountains, specifically Gundabad, was said to be as great or greater than that of Gundabad's distance from the Blue Mountains in the West. These four clans are the Ironfists, Stiffbeards, Blacklocks and Stonefoots.

Tolkien never spent that much time with the dwarves; not even detailing the families as much as the beginnings of the Hobbits. Who also had distinct characteristics depending on which of the 3 groups they came from. So who is to say, IMO logically, that at least 4 of the dwarf groups would NOT look like the dwarves of the North?

For me, the changes will depend a lot on how it's presented. Like, it'd be nice if Disa was flat-out said to be a dwarf from the East. It makes sense that a king would marry a royal from another kingdom, for trade and alliances. That went on in Europe all the time. It makes less sense to have her be a Northern dwarf, you know, that dresses and looks completely different than all those hairy, leather-wearing, Longbeards. Although, her name alone isn't a great sign. Someone just borrowed the name of Dis, the only female dwarf Tolkien ever mentions. Which IMO is lame. Not like there aren't plenty of dwarf names you could come up with.

Anyway, will wait and see. So far it doesn't look like an absolute abomination, you know, like the last season of GOT.