site banner
orthoxerox  I realized I can change my flair color to Barbie pink  1yr ago (acoup.blog)   1810 thread views

Collections: Why Rings of Power’s Middle Earth Feels Flat

acoup.blog

Submission statement for Southkraut: Bret Deveraux discusses everything The Rings of Power creators did wrong other than the culture war stuff. TLDR: they understand neither geography nor economics nor anthropology. Also, they are racist towards the Irish.

23
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

I think there's a lot of reasons there, but the main reason is simpler. This is a thing made by people that aren't in love with Tolkien and his world. They are doing it for money, or for culture war reason, or for any other reason - but their primary goal seems to be something other than to cherish and enhance the Professor's legacy. This is the only way I can explain the decisions that were made and the approaches that were taken there. Dissecting the details can have its own fascination, but for me the main reason stays the same.

This is why, as a long-time (since the 80s, probably?) Tolkien fan, I am not even mad at them. As noted above, and I agree, it's just not Tolkien. It's using Tolkien for... whatever, I can't even care about it. Best thing that can be done about it is to file it to a dusty shelf of history where the weird curiosities are stored, and only take it out when we need to feel better by looking at something extremely cringe-worthy.

I don't know if it's necessarily that - it's that writing a really well-crafted story difficult. I'm sure there are lots of passionate fans of Tolkien who couldn't replicate his genius. The difference is that they don't get (jesus christ) half a BILLION dollars to realize their terrible vision. To me, it's that lack of appreciation for the craft that is the issue. Peter Jackson is a born filmmaker. He appreciates the craft that goes into making something great - that 'scenes' and 'stories' are the emergent property of lots of tedious, difficult, practical work. That's why even though he heavily alters many key scenes and characters, his work stands on it's own feet. The writers of Rings of Power are unwilling to do any work.

Yeah, the Peter Jackson LOTR movies aren't especially great adaptations of the book, but they are great movies on their own merits. By most accounts, this Amazon show is a bad adaptation and it's bad on its own merits.

Peter Jackson is interesting because he got his start making completely insane horror comedy movies on no budget.

The showrunner for Rings of Power is fucking nobody. Not even kidding. The guy basically has no other credits and he was given half a billion dollars to go nuts with. It's mind-boggling.

When I heard Jackson got the job, I was "Wait a minute, that guy who made The Frighteners? Okay, I enjoyed that movie, but adapting Tolkien?"

Well, it worked out fantastically. There are decisions Jackson made with the adaptation that I don't agree with, and things I definitely would not have done, but in the end - he wanted to make a Tolkien movie, not a Peter Jackson movie.

Payne and McKay, whatever they may say about being huge fans and going back to the books, want to make their own version.

I watched Meet The Feebles sometime after LoTR, and I could definitely see how Jackson turned his ability to get people invested in a storyline into heading up the greatest movie shoots of all time. There's just something about how he didn't shy away from pain and character motivation which suited his adaptation.

What is this place?

This website is a place for people who want to move past shady thinking and test their ideas in a court of people who don't all share the same biases. Our goal is to optimize for light, not heat; this is a group effort, and all commentators are asked to do their part.

The weekly Culture War threads host the most controversial topics and are the most visible aspect of The Motte. However, many other topics are appropriate here. We encourage people to post anything related to science, politics, or philosophy; if in doubt, post!

Check out The Vault for an archive of old quality posts. You are encouraged to crosspost these elsewhere.


Why are you called The Motte?

A motte is a stone keep on a raised earthwork common in early medieval fortifications. More pertinently, it's an element in a rhetorical move called a "Motte-and-Bailey", originally identified by philosopher Nicholas Shackel. It describes the tendency in discourse for people to move from a controversial but high value claim to a defensible but less exciting one upon any resistance to the former. He likens this to the medieval fortification, where a desirable land (the bailey) is abandoned when in danger for the more easily defended motte. In Shackel's words, "The Motte represents the defensible but undesired propositions to which one retreats when hard pressed."

On The Motte, always attempt to remain inside your defensible territory, even if you are not being pressed.


New post guidelines

If you're posting something that isn't related to the culture war, we encourage you to post a thread for it. A submission statement is highly appreciated, but isn't necessary for text posts or links to largely-text posts such as blogs or news articles; if we're unsure of the value of your post, we might remove it until you add a submission statement. A submission statement is required for non-text sources (videos, podcasts, images).

Culture war posts go in the culture war thread; all links must either include a submission statement or significant commentary. Bare links without those will be removed.

If in doubt, please post it!


Rules


Recommended Posts And Communities

Recommended Realtime Chats