5 ms·

I love this show so much. I'm reading some criticisms from tolkien purists on rings of power. My thought is: the details are changed from the silmarillion but t

by cm2012 4y ago

I love this show so much. I'm reading some criticisms from tolkien purists on rings of power. My thought is: the details are changed from the silmarillion but there is so much love for the work in this show. A lot of respect for the feeling and themes of the source material Ex. How some things are meant to be by a higher power in Arda. If you havnt read the books - believe me, this plot is going exciting places. Highly recommend!

Tagbert 4y ago
I agree. Really enjoyed watching the first two episodes. Was a little frustrated that the next episode wasn’t ready to watch. Most shows, I’m fine waiting. Yes, there are changes from the Silmarillion. How could there not be. That is a massive book written more as a reference for Tolkien than as a single cohesive narrative. It’s not the kind of writing that would translate directly to video. It needs some translation. I got out my 1977 edition to peruse after the shows, but am not surprised if there are differences. Also, yes, there are some dark skinned people in this new work. Big deal. If that kind of thing “takes you out of the story” then perhaps you should ask yourself why that is.
- ShannonLimiter 4y ago
  FWIW The show is based on the appendices of Lord of the Rings and not the Silmarillion, which they don’t have the rights for and have to avoid infringing upon.
  - Tagbert 4y ago
    Thanks. I’m mainly going over the maps and looking up names to remind myself. Plus it’s been a while since I revisited this book.
- spaceman_2020 4y ago
  > Also, yes, there are some dark skinned people in this new work. I’ve never understood why people get so worked up about stuff like this. Nothing changes within the narrative itself. In-show characters don’t acknowledge the character’s newfound darker skin tone. The character stays true to the original vision - except that their skin is darker. I would be outraged if Dev Patel played an English knight and then was shown eating Indian food or wearing Indian clothes. That’s breaking the consistency of the narrative and the authenticity of its world. But Dev Patel simply plays an Englishman - with English habits and speech. Nothing within the world is changed to match the actor’s skin color or heritage. Rather, the actor’s skin color blends into the narrative’s world.
  - throwaway27727 4y ago
    Because it breaks with how we always imagined Tolkien's world to look.
    - Tagbert 4y ago
      time to expand your imagination
      - throwaway211995 4y ago
      - DiggyJohnson 4y ago
        To what end? For the sake of telling a good story?
        spaceman_2020 4y ago
        People will say that its for “diversity”, but as a brown person, including black/brown actors really does nothing for me. As I said, these are not “brown” people - they’re brown actors playing white characters. Except for their skin color, they have nothing in common with me. I find it mildly offensive when they reduce my identity to the color my skin. My identity is far richer and includes everything from food and clothing to customs and traditions. An Indian actor playing an Egnlishman with English customs and traditions does nothing for me. It would take an Indian actor playing an Indian man for me to take this “diversity” seriously. Of course, that would mean creating entirely new narratives and stories, which, of course, Hollywood can’t and won’t do. So we get brown and black actors shoehorned into pretending to be white - the lowest common denominator of “diversity”.
    - lentil_soup 4y ago
      Who's "we"?
- midoridensha 4y ago
  >Also, yes, there are some dark skinned people in this new work. Big deal. If that kind of thing “takes you out of the story” then perhaps you should ask yourself why that is. The dark skinned people are fine. I especially like the diverse proto-hobbits. The thing I really, really hate, that takes me out of the story, is the lens flares.
  - tsimionescu 4y ago
    > The thing I really, really hate, that takes me out of the story, is the lens flares. What, have you forgotten the tale of the ancient cinematographers of the elves preferring it for its authenticity, even going so far as to commission elven spell-smiths to add it in their visions?
jpeloquin 4y ago
Yeah, changing the details is fine. Tolkien wrote in his letters, "I would draw some of the great tales in fullness, and leave many only placed in the scheme, and sketched. The cycles should be linked to a majestic whole, and yet leave scope for other minds and hands, wielding paint and music and drama." We're getting work from other minds and hands now. It's normal for a tale to change in the retelling. Given Tolkien never stopped revising and retconning his own work—the Lord of the Rings itself starts with a major retcon to the Hobbit—there's no single source of truth anyway. Points of difference are often interesting to discuss, but their mere existence is not automatically a bad thing.

by cm2012 4y ago

Tagbert 4y ago

I agree. Really enjoyed watching the first two episodes. Was a little frustrated that the next episode wasn’t ready to watch. Most shows, I’m fine waiting. Yes, there are changes from the Silmarillion. How could there not be. That is a massive book written more as a reference for Tolkien than as a single cohesive narrative. It’s not the kind of writing that would translate directly to video. It needs some translation. I got out my 1977 edition to peruse after the shows, but am not surprised if there are differences. Also, yes, there are some dark skinned people in this new work. Big deal. If that kind of thing “takes you out of the story” then perhaps you should ask yourself why that is.

ShannonLimiter 4y ago
FWIW The show is based on the appendices of Lord of the Rings and not the Silmarillion, which they don’t have the rights for and have to avoid infringing upon.
- Tagbert 4y ago
  Thanks. I’m mainly going over the maps and looking up names to remind myself. Plus it’s been a while since I revisited this book.
spaceman_2020 4y ago
> Also, yes, there are some dark skinned people in this new work. I’ve never understood why people get so worked up about stuff like this. Nothing changes within the narrative itself. In-show characters don’t acknowledge the character’s newfound darker skin tone. The character stays true to the original vision - except that their skin is darker. I would be outraged if Dev Patel played an English knight and then was shown eating Indian food or wearing Indian clothes. That’s breaking the consistency of the narrative and the authenticity of its world. But Dev Patel simply plays an Englishman - with English habits and speech. Nothing within the world is changed to match the actor’s skin color or heritage. Rather, the actor’s skin color blends into the narrative’s world.
- throwaway27727 4y ago
  Because it breaks with how we always imagined Tolkien's world to look.
  - Tagbert 4y ago
    time to expand your imagination
    - throwaway211995 4y ago
    - DiggyJohnson 4y ago
      To what end? For the sake of telling a good story?
      - spaceman_2020 4y ago
        People will say that its for “diversity”, but as a brown person, including black/brown actors really does nothing for me. As I said, these are not “brown” people - they’re brown actors playing white characters. Except for their skin color, they have nothing in common with me. I find it mildly offensive when they reduce my identity to the color my skin. My identity is far richer and includes everything from food and clothing to customs and traditions. An Indian actor playing an Egnlishman with English customs and traditions does nothing for me. It would take an Indian actor playing an Indian man for me to take this “diversity” seriously. Of course, that would mean creating entirely new narratives and stories, which, of course, Hollywood can’t and won’t do. So we get brown and black actors shoehorned into pretending to be white - the lowest common denominator of “diversity”.
  - lentil_soup 4y ago
    Who's "we"?
midoridensha 4y ago
>Also, yes, there are some dark skinned people in this new work. Big deal. If that kind of thing “takes you out of the story” then perhaps you should ask yourself why that is. The dark skinned people are fine. I especially like the diverse proto-hobbits. The thing I really, really hate, that takes me out of the story, is the lens flares.
- tsimionescu 4y ago
  > The thing I really, really hate, that takes me out of the story, is the lens flares. What, have you forgotten the tale of the ancient cinematographers of the elves preferring it for its authenticity, even going so far as to commission elven spell-smiths to add it in their visions?

jpeloquin 4y ago

Yeah, changing the details is fine. Tolkien wrote in his letters, "I would draw some of the great tales in fullness, and leave many only placed in the scheme, and sketched. The cycles should be linked to a majestic whole, and yet leave scope for other minds and hands, wielding paint and music and drama." We're getting work from other minds and hands now. It's normal for a tale to change in the retelling. Given Tolkien never stopped revising and retconning his own work—the Lord of the Rings itself starts with a major retcon to the Hobbit—there's no single source of truth anyway. Points of difference are often interesting to discuss, but their mere existence is not automatically a bad thing.