The Lord of the Rings - Second Age - Amazon Prime

[Dave]

I'm really not sure who this tv series is for. It's missed the peak interest with the movies, and the clamour for fantasy in general doesn't seem to be as much as when GoT was at its height.

I would have said the same when Star Trek: Enterprise began, or the Mandalorian (Star Wars TV) but look how much Star Trek and Star Wars is being consumed now. It is hard to keep up with it now.

There is a market for quality fantasy, and if you want to make TV within a fantasy universe franchise, then there is no fantasy universe that is bigger, deeper, more well known, more colourful, or more fleshed out, than Middle Earth. I can see exactly why they want to make this, and why so many people (including myself) are interested in it.

The only fly in the ointment is what the quality will be like! It isn't just a question of money or of talent. There needs to be some spark there too.

 

[paranoid marvin]

I would have said the same when Star Trek: Enterprise began, or the Mandalorian (Star Wars TV) but look how much Star Trek and Star Wars is being consumed now. It is hard to keep up with it now.

There is a market for quality fantasy, and if you want to make TV within a fantasy universe franchise, then there is no fantasy universe that is bigger, deeper, more well known, more colourful, or more fleshed out, than Middle Earth. I can see exactly why they want to make this, and why so many people (including myself) are interested in it.

The only fly in the ointment is what the quality will be like! It isn't just a question of money or of talent. There needs to be some spark there too.

Regardless of how the stories go and the characters interact, I think that we are very likely to get impressive and accurate representations of the locations featured in Silmarillion. To see Minas Tirith, The Shire, Moria etc brought to life on screen, just as I imagined them, was almost worth the admission fee alone, and made up for many of the shortcomings in the original trilogy. I'm still hoping though for a 'true' telling of LOTR; perhaps that may come in episodic format if the 'prequel' series is succesful.

 

[farntfar]

You say its missed the peak interest from the films.
I'm not sure it has.
There are probable 3 types of people who saw the films.
1. People who were already keen Tolkien fans from the books and who came away with fairly positive feelings but also various levels of disappointment as to the faithfulness of said films.
2. People who hadn't read the books and who enjoyed the films a great deal.
3. People who disliked the film having never heard of Tolkien before, or because the disparity between the films and the books was more than they could stand.

Yes Group 3 are lost on this one.

Of the other 2, I count myself in group 1 and my daughter (*) in group 2.
She now goes to every LOTR event that appears in London; The symphonic "music of the LOTRs (films)" event at the Albert Hall in March or April, for example, being the latest.

She will watch this new series keenly, without prejudice about it's faithfulness to bits of the Silmarillion. (Which, incidentally she hasn't read, although she has read LOTR now more than once)

As a member of group 1, initially fairly cross about the differences with the books, I will watch this series with interest. I know that I'll shout, "No! That doesn't conform to the book." several times as I watch it. But I doubt I'll stop watching it for that. The lack of accuracy of films and even more the Hobbit have dulled the vehemence of my disgust at such things. (The level of my disgust at the Hobbit films remains very high, however.)

So I think they still already have a big prospective interest group.

* Possibly a common characteristic of group 2, she's pretty fanatical about Harry Potter as well. It's certainly an age thing.

 

[Teresa Edgerton]

I'm in group 1. But as for the Hobbit trilogy, I was about 50/50 as far as the first movie -- there were parts I thought very well done and parts I didn't care for at all (I liked the idea of some of the changes, like including the White Council, but felt they were poorly executed, and other changes I felt were ill-conceived from the start), but the second and third appalled me to such an extent that instead of dulling my reaction to changes to canon actually tainted my memories of Jackson's LOTR, which until that point I had for the most part loved. So I don't know how forgiving I can be with this new series. Naturally I want to love it, and hope I will, but I don' t know how long I'll stick with it if it disappoints me too much or too often.

 

[reiver33]

I first read LOTR when I was 12/13 and had to request the 3 (hardback) volumes in sequence via the school library. ROTK is the only book where I’ve skipped to the end to see if Frodo survived, and was left none the wiser - serves me right. Coming late to The Hobbit I found it more ‘childish’ by comparison, but still enjoyed it.

Liked the LOTR films, but not 2 and 3 of The Hobbit - too much padding based on comments concerning ‘off camera’ events and needless sub-plots.

In terms of the new series I fall into the ‘hope this is good, but...’ camp. The whole fake ‘superfans’ thing and taking down negative comments on the trailers, plus playing the racist/sexist card to criticise detractors, does worry me that the ethos behind Rings Of Power (if not execution) is using diversity simply as a means of expanding the potential customer base, rather than enhancing the narrative.

You want multi-ethnic elves, hobbits, whatever? Sure, fine, but conspicuous by their absence in the canon LOTR films, that’s all I’m saying...

 

[BAYLOR]

I enjoyed the books and I liked the films .

 

[AE35Unit]

I'm really not sure who this tv series is for.

At a guess I'd say LOTR fans...

 

[thaddeus6th]

The orcs look good.

Warrior Galadriel is a stupid idea. And she's not young. Oh, and her hair has changed from something so sought after that Feanor asks for a strand and she tells him to sod off and Gimli prizes three hairs more than anything else to something she'll let a stranger manhandle so there's a little pointy-ear reveal moment in a trailer.

Reiver, especially dumb as they could've set it in the lands south/east of Mordor (Harad?) which are, canonically, non-white but human-inhabited areas. Origins of ringwraiths could've been included, without contravening existing lore, and/or the doings of the blue wizards.

 

[paranoid marvin]

I'm in group 1. But as for the Hobbit trilogy, I was about 50/50 as far as the first movie -- there were parts I thought very well done and parts I didn't care for at all (I liked the idea of some of the changes, like including the White Council, but felt they were poorly executed, and other changes I felt were ill-conceived from the start), but the second and third appalled me to such an extent that instead of dulling my reaction to changes to canon actually tainted my memories of Jackson's LOTR, which until that point I had for the most part loved. So I don't know how forgiving I can be with this new series. Naturally I want to love it, and hope I will, but I don' t know how long I'll stick with it if it disappoints me too much or too often.

I think part of the issue was that they had to somehow split a (relatively) short story into three movies. Not only that, but three movies with an average runtime of over two and a half hours. From a commercial point of view it was absolutely the right thing to do, because (according to Wiki) from a budget of $700-$745m the box office takings were a staggering $2.938 billion. From an artistic point of view it was absolutely the wrong thing, because they turned what would have been a perfectly delightful story into an epic adventure, which lost all sight of what Tolkien's tale was about and bored the pants off me for much of the screen time, particularly (as you point out) in the second and third instalments.

And I agree that because the Hobbit trilogy is so similar in style to the LOTR, it tarnishes my memory of those movies too.

 

[paranoid marvin]

You say its missed the peak interest from the films.
I'm not sure it has.
There are probable 3 types of people who saw the films.
1. People who were already keen Tolkien fans from the books and who came away with fairly positive feelings but also various levels of disappointment as to the faithfulness of said films.
2. People who hadn't read the books and who enjoyed the films a great deal.
3. People who disliked the film having never heard of Tolkien before, or because the disparity between the films and the books was more than they could stand.

Yes Group 3 are lost on this one.

Of the other 2, I count myself in group 1 and my daughter (*) in group 2.
She now goes to every LOTR event that appears in London; The symphonic "music of the LOTRs (films)" event at the Albert Hall in March or April, for example, being the latest.

She will watch this new series keenly, without prejudice about it's faithfulness to bits of the Silmarillion. (Which, incidentally she hasn't read, although she has read LOTR now more than once)

As a member of group 1, initially fairly cross about the differences with the books, I will watch this series with interest. I know that I'll shout, "No! That doesn't conform to the book." several times as I watch it. But I doubt I'll stop watching it for that. The lack of accuracy of films and even more the Hobbit have dulled the vehemence of my disgust at such things. (The level of my disgust at the Hobbit films remains very high, however.)

So I think they still already have a big prospective interest group.

* Possibly a common characteristic of group 2, she's pretty fanatical about Harry Potter as well. It's certainly an age thing.

Tbh I didn't appreciate that there was such a fanbase still for the movies. But I suppose that considering I'm still a fan of Star Wars going on for 50 years after it first premiered, I shouldn't have been surprised.

Considering the post I just made regarding the budget vs box office for these movies (even the terrible Hobbit trilogy), I kind of answered my own question. This series isn't for anyone in particular, it's there to make a huge wedge of cash and increase Prime's membership figures.

Out of interest, what did your daughter make of The Hobbit trilogy?

 

[Teresa Edgerton]

especially dumb as they could've set it in the lands south/east of Mordor (Harad?) which are, canonically, non-white but human-inhabited areas. Origins of ringwraiths could've been included, without contravening existing lore, and/or the doings of the blue wizards.

I absolutely agree. And if they wanted to make up some of their own material, this would have been a way they could have done so without messing with the original tales.

Considering how insular and few the dwarves are, it did seem like it was an odd to choose the dwarves for racial diversity. On the other hand, Tolkien himself established that Hobbits had brown skin and it was rare for them to be fair-haired*, so it wouldn't have been a big leap for the little pre-Hobbits they've injected into the story (though none appear in the Silmarillion or the other Tales) to have brown skin and dark brown hair.

_____
*Jackson and his team, on the other hand seemed to have a penchant for blond hobbitses

 

[farntfar]

they could have done so without messing with the original tales.

Of course, so far we don't know that they have messed with the plot.
We know that certain characters that we already know of are included, possibly in very minor cameo roles.
We assume that Celebrimbor and Sauron, plus Galadriel and a Durin (probably D IV from the teaser) appear because they were either involved in the creation of, or were eventual given one of the rings, and the title is "The rings of power". But other than that, we know very little.

We've been shown some scenery, but little recognisable action, and I think this is very deliberate. They could all be rehearsing for an inter species battle of the bands for all we can see so far.
This lack of plotline given to us has had exactly the desired effect.
We've all been discussing the hell out of it and making all sorts of possibly wild and mostly negative assumptions.
If, when it comes, it doesn't do all the terrible things we've been assuming/expecting, we'll all be terrifically relieved and give it 5 stars.

 

[reiver33]

Don’t sweat it, now he’s not buying Twitter, E Musk Esq. will snap up Amazon and revamp the entire enterprise via the force ghost of JRR...

 

[ctg]

A fat elf and a hobbit astronomer, man ... I just have to go with a very open mind into this one and forget everything.

 

[CupofJoe]

Now we are getting, teasers, for the Teaser for the show.
But at least we saw Lenny Henry...

 

[thaddeus6th]

ctg, you do have a choice as to whether to watch it or not.

It's the Tolkien world that draws people in, but if they just rewrite it (not filling in gaps that exist within lore but actively changing the lore) then how Tolkien is it?

I'm not saying don't watch it, or watch it (a joy of having no subscription service is that I don't have to consider it either way) but if I order a cheese sandwich I want a sandwich with a cheese filling, not someone's re-imagining of a cheese sandwich which is cucumber and pancreas, with a few gratings of cheddar.

 

[ctg]

Just tell me, how can you have a fat elf, when all they eat is green stuff, and they're not keen on deserts or sweeties?

 

[HareBrain]

Just tell me, how can you have a fat elf, when all they eat is green stuff, and they're not keen on deserts or sweeties?

According to The Hobbit, they get through a fair amount of wine. That'll do it, especially over hundreds of years.

 

[farntfar]

Since we were told they can fall in love with Dwarves, I refuse to rule anything else out.

 

[ctg]

Since we were told they can fall in love with Dwarves, I refuse to rule anything else out.

That's more of exception than a rule. I can get the hobbit astronomer reference, because there was a vague reference on it in the LOTR, but thing is they came down from Blue Mountains at around the end of Second Age, Beginning of Third.

A fat elf is probably more of an exception than a norm as well. It's still very unlikely to happen in the light of how Tolkien and Fantasy lore has framed them. I also do get that they have to adapt the story or threads of it, since there wasn't time for the Tolkien to fully develop everything.

Who knows, maybe it'll flop and become a monster-of-the-week journey instead of a grand development to fill in the details of why Middle-Earth looks so ruined. And those ruins to look absolutely majestic.