The Lord of The Rings: The Rings of Power

They have Plenty of ways to do that, my friend.
And also extremely easy to do when you have a group of people constantly whispering in your ear to reimagen something but to make sure it lines up with a narrative that fits the political fart that's floating in the wind.
 
After 5 episodes, it is a turd. They should remove the name of Tolkien from it, and the LOTR from the title as they are inventing a totally different story (a boring one). Missing important characters, for invented new ones, changes of thousands of years in the timeline, and of miles in the events locations. A disgrace.
The compressed timeline.. I cannot stand it.. such a missed opportunity to write a story that spans centuries and a couple of millennia.. they could have split the story up by season and covered 5 specific important periods of time. Told the story of history through the eyes of the elves as all the other middle earth creatures die and new ones are introduced. Instead they are trying to tell a story that takes place over 2 thousand years in the timespan of a human life. I agree that this is not Tolkien. Galadriel is insufferable. Her character is so badly written. Why are they making her so unlikable? She was one of the most powerful elves by her magic and stoicism. She was so above all the pettiness she exudes in this show. N E ways.. you know what they say about opinions.. Amazon has 4 more seasons they can use to fix the show. They can keep applying lipstick to the pig they have made or they can work to transform it by hiring better writers. I am glad that some people are enjoying it. I am not one of them yet.
 
I'm giving up on it. It feels like a run of the mill drama that happens to be set in Middle Earth. A lot of the situations are very forced and hackneyed (ex. the rock splitting contest, Galadriel besting the soldiers sword fighting, etc...). Most of all it feels directionless, like random story bits thrown together. I also find it visually lacking compared to the Peter Jackson films. Technology has advanced but the RoP looks cheesy to me.

Lest I forget, the dialog is often really bad.

Hopefully it improves with time but for now I'd rather practice than watch it.
 
I'm giving up on it. It feels like a run of the mill drama that happens to be set in Middle Earth. A lot of the situations are very forced and hackneyed (ex. the rock splitting contest, Galadriel besting the soldiers sword fighting, etc...). Most of all it feels directionless, like random story bits thrown together. I also find it visually lacking compared to the Peter Jackson films. Technology has advanced but the RoP looks cheesy to me.

Lest I forget, the dialog is often really bad.

Hopefully it improves with time but for now I'd rather practice than watch it.
The scene where she "battles" the guards and throws them into the cells was hilarious. They cut away from the action right as it starts and cut back as she is pushing 4 guards into a cell 2 seconds later and we are expected to believe that in 2 seconds she overpowered them, got them to line up in a row so she could push them all into the cell with a light push.. It is really bad.
 
I've looked at screen shots and summaries, and that's more than enough to see it clearly.

As a swords-and-sorcery basher, as a prequel to Willow, it's probably okay.

As a representation of Tolkien, the thing is vomit, and dogs will return to it.

But, this is what we should expect, given the substantive difference between the soul of J.R.R. Tolkien, and the souls of the showrunners.

Of course there is no "soul-quality detector," no Metaphysical Geiger Counter we can point at the chests of the showrunners (let alone Tolkien's remains) to discern what is there. But we can use what climate-scientists call "proxies" to make a rough-and-ready evaluation, and that'll be sufficient when the difference is so...stark.

Tolkien could write as he did because he was a man with a certain temperament, and certain natural talents and interests, and he had experience of harshness of the world. And (given his temperament, talents, interests, and experience), he confronted the world's injuries and perversities, and reacted to them in a particular way.

He could have reacted in various ways: He could have become a bitter, miserable antagonist (most-likely, given his temperament), or a Vichy collaborator (rather less-likely). He could have allowed his soul to become warped in the process.

Instead, he opted to love transcendentally, and to pursue (in his own individual idiom) Truth, Goodness, and Beauty.

In so doing, he confronted the heartbreak of damaged or distorted Beauty, of crushed and punished Goodness, of warped speech that mocked Truth...and yet, he remained loyal to Truth, Goodness, and Beauty without losing sincerity.

This is the kind of soul which could write the eucatastrophe of The Lord of the Rings.

The reason that Peter Jackson came so close to perfection in his adaptation of The Lord of the Rings was because he allowed Tolkien to speak through him (especially in the dialogue). He didn't "edit Tolkien's mail": That is, he didn't interject his own voice. On the rare occasions where he did so (e.g. the modification of the character of Faramir, the early lack of resolve in Aragorn) the fans could excuse it because they were otherwise too-similar and too-unchanging for cinematic purposes...and because the very paucity of such exceptions bore witness to Jackson's loyalty to the source material.

By contrast, Peter Jackson utterly failed at delivering The Hobbit at the same level. Possibly because The Hobbit is a very different book with a very different tone, but most-certainly because it didn't provide nearly enough source material to fill a trilogy, so Jackson had no option but to "get creative" to fill the gaps: And even he, talented though he was, just wasn't up to that task. He's probably a good man and is certainly a good artist, in his own way; but he isn't Tolkien.

And how much less so, the current Rings of Power showrunners! (Beside them, Jackson is both Michelangelo and Francis of Assisi.)

The problem with the "Bitch Queen of Angmar" is right there, in her online moniker. She is, temperamentally, an orc, full of orc-talk: Not because she was born that way, but because she made herself that way. I don't know what heartbreaks, crushing defeats, and lies she has encountered in her life: But (even without a Metaphysical Geiger Counter) the evidence is pretty strong that she has not woven those themes into a more-beautiful music, a more-heroic virtue, a more piercing truth. (Those who know the Ainulindalë will recognize where I am coming from.)

Tolkien saw himself as a sub-creator: Doing for the world of story what the Valar did, each in their own way, as they sang at the direction of Ilúvatar. Tolkien did not even wish to err as Aulë had, in the matter of the dwarves. He therefore sang his part of the song with humility: And the music rang true.

The showrunners of Rings of Power are at the opposite pole. They seem to have purposed to sing as Melkor did: With their own dissonant brashness, a kind of sneering dismissal of the rest of the music. They have certainly reacted to the criticisms of the fans with a sneering dismissal, an utter lack of humility, an utter unwillingness to be teachable. That they should thus pattern themselves after Morgoth is all-too-fitting.

But I suspect they aren't wise enough to recognize this pattern in themselves. (The man who resists a temptation to the very end, knows the temptation in its full strength. The man who gives in early, hasn't fought his enemy long enough to know it well. The man who fought alcoholism and is now twenty years sober knows alcohol; the man who is twenty minutes into his latest bender doesn't know much of anything.)

So I don't think they know what they are doing. (One wants to say, "Father, forgive them.") Too-long-divorced from truth, goodness, and beauty, how could they be reconciled to it, and betroth it again? What could possibly be their path back to its door? They would need a change-of-heart, a radically-altered direction-of-life. If the whole lot of them left their homes and joined convents and monasteries...? That, after a decade or so, might be enough.

But they aren't going to do that, and they aren't going to make a good cinematic representation of Tolkien, either; and that's that. We make our choices, and they form us. These showrunners should never have undertaken this project. We can't all be Dante Alighieri, or Fyodor Dostoevsky, or J.R.R. Tolkien.

Let them make another Conan movie.
 
Last edited:
I've looked at screen shots and summaries, and that's more than enough to see it clearly.

As a swords-and-sorcery basher, as a prequel to Willow, it's probably okay.

As a representation of Tolkien, the thing is vomit, and dogs will return to it.

But, this is what we should expect, given the substantive difference between the soul of J.R.R. Tolkien, and the souls of the showrunners.

Of course there is no "soul-quality detector," no Metaphysical Geiger Counter we can point at the chests of the showrunners (let alone Tolkien's remains) to discern what is there. But we can use what climate-scientists call "proxies" to make a rough-and-ready evaluation, and that'll be sufficient when the difference is so...stark.

Tolkien could write as he did because he was a man with a certain temperament, and certain natural talents and interests, and he had experience of harshness of the world. And (given his temperament, talents, interests, and experience), he confronted the world's injuries and perversities, and reacted to them in a particular way.

He could have reacted in various ways: He could have become a bitter, miserable antagonist (most-likely, given his temperament), or a Vichy collaborator (rather less-likely). He could have allowed his soul to become warped in the process.

Instead, he opted to love transcendentally, and to pursue (in his own individual idiom) Truth, Goodness, and Beauty.

In so doing, he confronted the heartbreak of damaged or distorted Beauty, of crushed and punished Goodness, of warped speech that mocked Truth...and yet, he remained loyal to Truth, Goodness, and Beauty without losing sincerity.

This is the kind of soul which could write the eucatastrophe of The Lord of the Rings.

The reason that Peter Jackson came so close to perfection in his adaptation of The Lord of the Rings was because he allowed Tolkien to speak through him (especially in the dialogue). He didn't "edit Tolkien's mail": That is, he didn't interject his own voice. On the rare occasions where he did so (e.g. the modification of the character of Faramir, the early lack of resolve in Aragorn) the fans could excuse it because they were otherwise too-similar and too-unchanging for cinematic purposes...and because the very paucity of such exceptions bore witness to Jackson's loyalty to the source material.

By contrast, Peter Jackson utterly failed at delivering The Hobbit at the same level. Possibly because The Hobbit is a very different book with a very different tone, but most-certainly because it didn't provide nearly enough source material to fill a trilogy, so Jackson had no option but to "get creative" to fill the gaps: And even he, talented though he was, just wasn't up to that task. He's probably a good man and is certainly a good artist, in his own way; but he isn't Tolkien.

And how much less so, the current Rings of Power showrunners! (Beside them, Jackson is both Michelangelo and Francis of Assisi.)

The problem with the "Bitch Queen of Angmar" is right there, in her online moniker. She is, temperamentally, an orc, full of orc-talk: Not because she was born that way, but because she made herself that way. I don't know what heartbreaks, crushing defeats, and lies she has encountered in her life: But (even without a Metaphysical Geiger Counter) the evidence is pretty strong that she has not woven those themes into a more-beautiful music, a more-heroic virtue, a more piercing truth. (Those who know the Ainulindalë will recognize where I am coming from.)

Tolkien saw himself as a sub-creator: Doing for the world of story what the Valar did, each in their own way, as they sang at the direction of Ilúvatar. Tolkien did not even wish to err as Aulë had, in the matter of the dwarves. He therefore sang his part of the song with humility: And the music rang true.

The showrunners of Rings of Power are at the opposite pole. They seem to have purposed to sing as Melkor did: With their own dissonant brashness, a kind of sneering dismissal of the rest of the music. They have certainly reacted to the criticisms of the fans with a sneering dismissal, an utter lack of humility, an utter unwillingness to be teachable. That they should thus pattern themselves after Morgoth is all-too-fitting.

But I suspect they aren't wise enough to recognize this pattern in themselves. (The man who resists a temptation to the very end, knows the temptation in its full strength. The man who gives in early, hasn't fought his enemy long enough to know it well. The man who fought alcoholism and is now twenty years sober knows alcohol; the man who is twenty minutes into his latest bender doesn't know much of anything.)

So I don't think they know what they are doing. (One wants to say, "Father, forgive them.") Too-long-divorced from truth, goodness, and beauty, how could they be reconciled to it, and betroth it again? What could possibly be their path back to its door? They would need a change-of-heart, a radically-altered direction-of-life. If the whole lot of them left their homes and joined convents and monasteries...? That, after a decade or so, might be enough.

But they aren't going to do that, and they aren't going to make a good cinematic representation of Tolkien, either; and that's that. We make our choices, and they form us. These showrunners should never have undertaken this project. We can't all be Dante Alighieri, or Fyodor Dostoevsky, or J.R.R. Tolkien.

Let them make another Conan movie.

an utter lack of humility. That is what I precisely wrote in my review of the series in Amazon, which I expect not to reach its publication.

Tolkien spent almost a whole life creating a Universe which was at the same time complete and containing mysteries and unresolved riddles, enough space for the imagination of any intelligent being to fill by himself. But the authors of this crime decided they were better than him, and invented a history of the Silmarills that makes no sense, of Mithril, the stupidity of the Palantirs that the father of Elendil owns in the books, and a million other changes that are absolutely unnecessary for the porting to TV of the books, they did it because they are shameless arrogants and rather than paying respect to a lore that has inspired generations, they twist it to turn it into a soulless show with no narrative interest.
 
I'm waiting to see what company is going to bring an unlikeable hero series to life. Thomas Covenant or an Elric series could be pretty interesting. They would probably cut the respective rape and cannibalism elements, I'm guessing.

Or just from the Moorcock side, if a company did an Eternal Champion series with different seasons being Elric, Hawkmoon, Jerry Cornelius, etc. Multiverse and gender ambiguity is all the rage these days so it would probably do well.

All that said, I'm "enjoying" the Rings series so far. The cinematography on the landscape shots is stellar. I was never a Tolkien superfan though so I'll never feel like I've been personally insulted by the show's creators. It's better than yet another crappy 4th wall breaking sitcom with a canned laugh track.
 
Last edited:
Or just from the Moorcock side, if a company did an Eternal Champion series with different seasons being Elric, Hawkmoon, Jerry Cornelius, etc. Multiverse and gender ambiguity is all the rage these days so it would probably do well.

With all the reboots and regurgitations we see with Marvel, DC, etc., I still scratch my head at why no one has developed these mythos. Moorcock's Multiverse (the OG) has enough content to provide multiple series and/or movies that could keep a studio occupied for years. I'd include this with Zelazny's Amber (esp. Corwin's story) as my most coveted adaptations. That said, I would hope we'd get a development team in the spirit of Jackson, Walsh, Boyens, Taylor, and the team as they were for the original LOTR trilogy. I have low confidence that we would, but one can hope.
 
Last edited:
With all the reboots and regurgitations we see with Marvel, DC, etc., I still scratch my head at why no one has developed these mythos. Moorcock's Multiverse (the OG) has enough content to provide multiple series and/or movies that could keep a studio occupied for years. I'd include this with Zelazny's Amber (esp. Corum's story) as my most coveted adaptations. That said, I would hope we'd get a development team in the spirit of Jackson, Walsh, Boyens, Taylor, and the team as they were for the original LOTR trilogy. I have low confidence that we would, but one can hope.
Cugel the Clever, anyone?
 
With all the reboots and regurgitations we see with Marvel, DC, etc., I still scratch my head at why no one has developed these mythos. Moorcock's Multiverse (the OG) has enough content to provide multiple series and/or movies that could keep a studio occupied for years. I'd include this with Zelazny's Amber (esp. Corum's story) as my most coveted adaptations. That said, I would hope we'd get a development team in the spirit of Jackson, Walsh, Boyens, Taylor, and the team as they were for the original LOTR trilogy. I have low confidence that we would, but one can hope.
No! We need another Batman movie!
 
Apparently I'm not the only one seeing the amoral worldview of the writers shining through the writing in Rings of Power:


Meanwhile, there is another possible take, offered by this person (about whom I know nothing else), who has learned how to enjoy Rings of Power by treating it as a lighthearted comedy:
Rings of Power is the Best (comedy) Show on TV!
Rings of Power: More Comedy Gold!
Rings of Power Episode 5: Best Comedy Yet?!

Now the only thing missing is Mr. Plinkett from Red Letter Media doing a review for Rings of Power along similar lines to his famous review of Star Wars: The Phantom Menace. He hasn't done it yet, but if he ever does, it'll be entertaining.
 
Hmm that comedienne is worse and more annoying than the series.
 
Hmm that comedienne is worse and more annoying than the series.

Comedienne? You mean that YouTuber? I never thought she was trying to be that. I assumed her role was supposed to be that of someone making a reaction video. It isn't that she's funny; it's that she's "An Average Joe" (uh, make that "An Average Joan") ...watching an unintentionally-funny, incoherent show. (But, I see how there could be some overlap.)
 
Last edited:
It’s hard to compare her in any way to the extraordinarily beautiful and talented Kate Blanchett and her majestic portrayal of Galadriel.
I’ve watched several episodes and it’s the most grating part.
Galadriel is loving, compassionate, powerful, and spiritual. This character is everything but. It’s hard to root for her.
 
It’s hard to compare her in any way to the extraordinarily beautiful and talented Kate Blanchett and her majestic portrayal of Galadriel. ...
Galadriel is loving, compassionate, powerful, and spiritual. This character is everything but. It’s hard to root for her.

Yep. I guess it's just barely possible that they're trying for a character-arc where Galadriel starts off as a very bad person, and eventually obtains redemption sufficient to explain her good character by the time of Lord of the Rings. (Sort of like Eustace Clarence Scrubb in Lewis' "Narnia" books.)

But somehow I don't think that's what's happening. I think the showrunners are expecting us to identify with, and even admire, Galadriel. I don't think they realize that she's obnoxious and a "Mary Sue," and that the audience are losing patience with her crap.

If I had to guess from the clips and summaries I've seen, the showrunners are thinking something along these lines: "Well, y'know, she'll turn out to be proven right in the end. This justifies the way she's acting entitled and obsessive and needlessly uses or sacrifices others in pursuit of her single focus. There'll be a big dramatic vindication in which everyone else will be saying, Yes, O Great Galadriel, We Should Have All Listened To You, What Were We Thinking?" The showrunners believe that this eventual vindication, which we haven't yet seen, is sufficient to justify all her dumb behavior happening now...and that we should therefore interpret her as a "good guy."

The truth is that, of all the characters in Tolkien's legendarium, this "Galadriel" doesn't resemble Tolkien's Galadriel at all. She bears a more-than-passing resemblance to Tolkien's hubristic character Fëanor, but rewritten as a girl. (Henceforth, I dub her: "Gal-ëanor.")
 
Last edited:
This is the problem with people that are trying to reimage a reality that doesn't need to be reimagined! This series really seems disconnected from the LOTR. How far into the past is this supposed to take place?
 
Galadriel has been put in the center of a storyline where she does not belong, why? only the writers know, and given the totally new writing of the fall of Numenor, it is no wonder that she has become an irritating character, as the High Elve Lady she was originally has no place in that context.
 
Galadriel has been put in the center of a storyline where she does not belong, why? only the writers know, and given the totally new writing of the fall of Numenor, it is no wonder that she has become an irritating character, as the High Elve Lady she was originally has no place in that context.
Agreed! It might be a fatal mistake for the series unless it's recognized and changed up to fall more in line with her original character.
 
Gosh, why don't you folks tell us how you really feel ;) I admit it's not great, as I stated above but jeeezzz, it's TV, it's Amazon, what did you really expect?
The only thing I actually enjoyed out of all of it was Galadriel, so to each his own. I have stopped watching though.....I found it too "all over the place."
 
Back
Top Bottom