Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power [Amazon] *Spoilers*

johnny_ultimate

The reviews for the most part have me cautiously optimistic there’s something at least solid here (albeit with some dodgy dialogue by most accounts), but Grace Randolph giving it a bad review is even more encouraging!

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119551365#Comment_119551365

She's one I just can not listen to.

BruteStock

The Irish Times also called the Hobbits "filthy child-like simpletons"

silverharp

You can guess that the ratings will settle with critics in the 80s and audience in the 60's

sekiro

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119549507#Comment_119549507

This reads like a bit of a troll review.

"It is so cinematic and grand that it makes House of the Dragon look as if it has been cobbled together on Minecraft."

"If that doesn’t sound like much fun, wait till you see what she does to a snow troll."

"Now, I just need to find someone with a huge telly to let me watch with them."

Haha.

Loafing Oaf

So the first episode drops at 2 this morning and the second one...2 tomorrow morning?

Nody

Had a glance at Rotten Tomato this morning and 83% / 50% 49% 47% and dropping is not exactly what I'd have hoped for honestly (house of dragons is currently 84%/84% for comparison). Looking at the audience comments (and ignoring the usual troll 1* and shill 5* one liners) the consistent message is that it's really great looking, stunning views but story & characters are lacking (I think the best definition I saw was "big, bland, beautiful "corporate" entertainment"). I'm still going to wait as it stands and if by the end of season 1 the reviews gets better I'll watch it but it's another miss for me as it stands on the initial reviews.

RoryMurphyJnr

Loved the first episode, not sure why they gave Lenny Henry an Oirish accent as it doesn't work.

Looking forward to lunchtime when I get to watch EP 2

Hurrache

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119557971#Comment_119557971

Rotten Tomatoes and IMDB are more or less useless as a yard stick for anything like this. They often get spammed by groups with stupid little grievances over minor things. There's a pile of people upset since trailers were released because there were black people in it which they insist is because Tolkien's world wouldn't have had any.

breezy1985

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119555671#Comment_119555671

It sounds like a lot of the appeal is the imagery which is grand for an episode but will get old fast.

I'm looking forward to watching tonight despite the Galadriel warrior princess ad looking like sht.

Nody

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119558411#Comment_119558411

I agree score alone can't be used; hence the review of comments and yes it has it fair set of trolls/shills doing the "Woke garbage" / "Best thing eva!" approach. But even reading those who give low scores, and high scores, the consistency on both sides was summarized above. It looks great, stunning vistas from both sides but on the negative side the story/dialogue kept coming up and it was not often mentioned as a positive on the other side. Having comments such as "Nice to be back in Tolkiens world" does not exactly praise the show per say or 10/10 "Better than the hobbit but worse than LoTR" etc. I don't take the score as some absolute guide but the simple fact is reading the user reviews they are showing consistency in certain complaints and praises is what I'm looking at.

silverharp

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119558411#Comment_119558411

I'd disagree, it would show a lack of enthusiasm if what passes as the general public on RT cant push it back to where it "ought" to be. Generally a show is going to have some serious flaws if the critics give it a high score and the audience is much lower. If a company spends a billion on a show and the reaction is meh from the public, that's the company's problem and fault not the audience.

breezy1985

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119558792#Comment_119558792

The idea though is that RT users are not a good graph of the general public because there is an overwhelming amount of fanboys and anti "woke" morons signed up.

For instance IMDB had The Dark Knight rated as the greatest movie of all time before it even came out in cinemas. The opposite then for the likes of Star Wars who get coordinated attacks from disgruntled basement dwellers.

Body is right you need to read a number of reviews both public and critic and pull out the common comments from the reviews not written by losers.

Hurrache

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119558792#Comment_119558792

It's not accurate though. As the guys say, you need to delve right into the reviews to get some sort of general gauge to the movie/show.

And secondly, people like different things so what one person may thoroughly enjoy, others don't. Doesn't mean the subject of the review is necessarily bad.

The overall score/percentage on IMDB and Rotten Tomatoes don't mean much when it comes to big shows like this.

johnny_ultimate

All audience scores on the internet should be ignored IMO. I count everything from the unholy mess that is Rotten Tomatoes to more enthusiast spaces like Letterboxd. None of them represent the actual public anyway, just the userbases of the respective platforms. Reading user reviews is another thing entirely, where you can at least somewhat filter through the rubbish - but the scores themselves are a meaningless, easily manipulated metric.

The show's out now. Just watch it and make up your own mind. Or don't, if you'd prefer. But dwelling on audience scores is a pointless exercise given how prone they are to manipulation, grievances and false consensus - especially for big franchise shows or films that are seemingly automatically enrolled in tired culture wars and fanbase battles.

pixelburp

The idea you can assign percentage-point accuracy to something as inherently subjective as art-entertainment is - and will always remain - deeply flawed, reductionist and prone to obvious abuse or bias. Especially when considering controversies like Captain Marvel that necessitated a change to the code so obvious Bad Faith Morons could no longer review-bomb a movie that hadn't come out yet. Or leaving aside the false metric of anything over 3/5 being "fresh". Three out of five used to be "meh" - now it's as valid as 5 stars?

By the very nature of the technology and its user-base, you will tend to have an over-representation of those either wildly hyped, have a chip on their shoulder - or something that's a reaction to either of those extremes. You completely lose the myriad of shoulder-shrugs and "meh"s cos obviously - if something's aw'right, nothing special - you're unlikely to be moved enough to "score" it. Thus all that's left are polar opposites requiring filtering. At least professional reviews have to give an opinion, no matter how mediocre or forgettable the thing might be.

I said it before, and I'm probably biased 'cos I use the site myself ... but at least something like letterboxd will show the grading "curve" across all the star ratings; so you can get a better understanding of how reviews spread across the overall userbase; not this One Score to Rule Them All aspect, wielded like a cudgel.

RT scores aren't a proof. They're just ... I dunno, MeowMeowBeenz for media

pixelburp

TL:DR? This is why Rotten Tomatoes is patent nonsense. Neither score is accurate. Clearly both should be 100%, and any argument to the contrary provably false

Honestly I want this to be good. By that I mean good Tolkien.

If it's a good stand alone fantasy, well that's pointless to be honest.

A good stand alone fantasy would be great, I would encourage it. Just be honest with your audience and call it something else.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119559013#Comment_119559013

100% for Grant, alone

breezy1985

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119558994#Comment_119558994

Im giving this post

silverharp

funny aside, one reviewer jokingly said they must not have seen this Steve Coogan sketch "we rise at daybreak"

https://youtu.be/K8BPP4ASQWo

corkie

The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power - 5 things to know about Nori Brandyfoot

1. Her character isn't inspired from Tolkien's works
2. She is an ancestor of the Harfoot Hobbits
3. Nori was an unusual, inquisitive, and adventurous hobbit
4. She is played by Markella Kavenagh
5. She was the voice behind the teaser narration

https://lotr.fandom.com/wiki/A_Shadow_of_the_Past_%28episode%29

https://lotr.fandom.com/wiki/Adrift

Watch both episodes today, it was good and enjoyable watch, but a bit predictable because of been a prequel.

The White Wolf

I'd agree with the reviews that are saying in some parts strong and other parts weak so far.

Elrond, the Dwarves, and the Black Elf/Men plot are a highlight. The visuals of course as well but for 60m per episode I'd expect nothing else. The Harfoots and Galadriel plot need to pick up fast.

Ultimately I would say quite an admirable start but there are concerns there, but having said that I'm just a grump before his time in his 30s. I've no doubt it will be a smash for Amazon, there's enough there.

Will Pavee Point be protesting Amazon for its cultural appropriation of the Irish Travellers with the Oirish Harfoots

odyssey06

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119561684#Comment_119561684

I enjoyed it. Slow. Not sure if it will grab non-Tolkien fans. Watching some of the flashback scenes I makes me think it is a pity it's not the Silmarillion as an anthology series :(

Amazon did the same with accents in Wheel of Time with the Oirish Tinkers.

I found the accents a bit overdone...

Elves - Received pronunciation, stilted at times, with added rolling Rs that Tolkien used when reading LOTR e.g. Morrrdorrr

Humans - Northern English (Yorkshire?)

Harfoots / Halflings - Oirish brogue... even some of the phrasings are Hiberno-English: "Where is this you're from"

Dwarves - Scottish thick like porridge

I'm not cheerleader of The Wheel Of Time but there's good reason to give them Irish accents, going by the books inspiration for their name

corkie

https://comicbook.com/tv-shows/news/the-lord-of-the-rings-amazon-suspends-user-reviews-for-rings-of-power/

suspended reviews due to bombing.

breezy1985

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119561971#Comment_119561971

It's odd they didn't do the English West County accent for the Harfoots like Sean Astin.

I like it

TomSweeney

Awful shite, not Tolkien at all ...

TomSweeney

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119549507#Comment_119549507

Thats complete propoganda, you'd think she'd reign it in just a little, to make it more believable ..

End of first episode.

None of this makes any sense.

No Feanor, Kinslaying, Ungolianth, Thangorodrim, or bloody Silmarils.

Breezing over the Two Trees with no explanation

Gil-Galad reduced to that and he is the one to offer passage back to Valinor?

Outside some names this is not Tolkien, so far

And screw these Oirish accents

TomSweeney

And those Irish accents are awful, whats the story with that ??

My wife, who is not a Tolkien reader, understood nothing of the motivations or actions of the characters or lore

She's actually just asked if I would mind her not watching anymore, if I'm carrying on with it.

Can't believe it, honestly thought it might pull it out of the bag, but I'm out though.

That actually disappointed me in how bad an adaption it is.

Surprisingly I quite liked the actor playing Galadriel

silverharp

just watched the first episode, boring! and forgettable. 5/10, i'd give it to episode 4, if it doesnt pick up I'd give up on it

TomSweeney

And whats with the rolling of the R's ?

Galadrrrrriel ... and Saurrrrrron ?

naughtyboy

Dreadful stuff , the writing is so poor this show never had a chance

When they see that people see through the utter scutter they've put out they'll just do like they did with the latest star wars stuff. Not take any personal responsibility for the writing etc and just blame it on a so called toxic fanbase.

They've destroyed star trek. They've destroyed star wars. Now it time to destroy LOTR...

silverharp

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119563105#Comment_119563105

on the plus side it might redeem the Hobbit trilogy somewhat. lol

is_that_so

The real positives in this are the absolutely stunning visuals but as posted above that's where the money went. The not so-good list is a lot longer and it is a distraction. The lethargic pace is one of those and that could kill if off very quickly. I am not all that sold on Galadriel showing up in every second scene, in one as a brilliant mountaineer and then inventing the crawl to do an Olympic style ultra swim across an open sea and always doing the grim warrior queen. She's getting all the action but to what end?

It is early days and they do need to set the chessboard but that can be done without the Harfeet and their really atrocious and irritating accents. Equally something could be done on the massive roster of characters who bring nothing to the story at all.

Like The Hobbit there's just not enough material and quality imagination to fill this tale. One nice little nugget was the Frankie goes to Holywood/TS Eliot reference but otherwise the dialogue bounces between comic relief and the actors being really serious with some iffy lines.

So far really not brilliant at all and it has some really low dips but its real problem IMO is that it is just all over the place and that the writers have just built a world but with a very limited and, for now, incoherent story. I hope it gets better but I have never really been convinced about this concept anyway. There's a lot of hubris to this project with Bezos just exploiting his vast wealth to show he can, no matter what way it turns out.

Dufflecoat Fanny

It's just too boring. It looks great at times but it's lifeless. The dialogue is awful they're not even trying to sound like Tolkien. Galadriel seems to be another Mary Sue character like Michael Burnham from star Trek.

I read the books when I was a teenager and I got lost in Tolkien's magical world. There's nothing in this that resembles it.

Oh ya and there's an awful lot of actors with punchable faces in it especially Elrond.

breezy1985

I was tired watching it so only got half way through but I can't concentrate because my brain is constantly trying to remember what various names and places from the books are. I would almost prefer that this was just "Elf Wars" or something with no link to LotR.

Surprised with myself that my favourite part is the actress playing Galadriel.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119563105#Comment_119563105

They can't destroy anything. If you don't like the new stuff just ignore it.

TomsOnTheRoof

Dreadful stuff altogether. The acting is so overwrought. What's with the mispronunciation of anything with an r? It's Tolkien not Shakespeare. The lore is all over the place. Jesus, it's embarrassing. Whether you're a fan of the original trilogy or not there's no denying that they were infinitely more faithful to the source material. Tolkien must be spinning in his grave.

And the less said about that battle with the troll the better.

sekiro

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119562189#Comment_119562189

It's funny how preferred media outlets getting early access and VIP treatments is seen as "critics loved it and they can totally be trusted" but some nerds giving it 1 star because they hated it are painted as evil internet trolls. Of course all the member of the public who want to give it 5 stars are just being completely reasonable and honest.

It's pathetic to see a company who paid so much to make this show and invested so much in getting positive mainstream media coverage run and hide because normal people don't like their product.

breezy1985

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119563770#Comment_119563770

It's not normal people though. It will be an avalanche of horsesht about Mary Sues and how the world is gonna end because there is a black Hobbit.

breezy1985

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119563734#Comment_119563734

The rolling R was always there. Just listen back to Aragon or Gandalf speaking Elvish words.

sekiro

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119563883#Comment_119563883

Haha. Well, I can only go with what was quoted in the article and the worst example they could come up with is ""an affront to true fans, the person responsible for this disaster should be arrested."

Now, that's obviously a pretty dumb review from a "not normal" (your words, not mine) person but are they not entitled to that review and that opinion? Is there a list of criteria to be met before being allowed to give a 1 star review?

Amazon is loaded with rubbish 1 star reviews for all kinds of products. "My product arrived late, 1 star." "The postman left it with a neighbor and my neighbor stole it, 1 star." Those reviews are allowed on Amazon. There are loads of books on the site with 1 star reviews because the reviewer ordered the wrong language. "I thought this was the English language version but it's French, 1 star." That kind of review is allowed of course.

Amazon should ban users who are openly racist etc on their platform. Simple as that.

Acting like you can only give a 1 star review to something only if the logic behind the review is sound is such nonsense. Like your review needs to be graded by an English teacher to make sure that it's passable before you can say that Rings of Power is trash?

They should just be honest. Amazon is blocking reviews of their own products because they fear negative reviews could affect the amount of money they make. However, they do not extend this service to other products being sold on their site.

Why bother pretending that this is being done to stop "trolls"? It's being done to protect their profits.

The bought and paid for critic reviews are the only REAL reviews, right?

Yoystan is a Lord Of The Rings super nerd, gives fantastic reviews and character insights.

Probably the most diplomatic person in the public fandom.

If he's, politely, ripping your project to shreds, you've fucked it up

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=I6J3C311S3E

johnny_ultimate

Watched the first episode last night and the second this morning. I'd definitely advise watching them as close together as you can as the two together give a much better idea of what the show's shooting for than the first alone.

The first definitely struggles from having to lay down some tricky groundwork. Funny that this was released the same weekend as Michael Flatley's Blackbird, because in their way they're both vanity projects: rich men using their wealth to push themselves onto a particular stage. At least Bezos had the good sense to hand the creative side of things over to actual creatives, but even at that the team are on the back (har)foot given the very nature of this absurd project. They need to make a compelling story out of feckin' appendices, live up to a beloved series of books & films, and even need to justify the project's mere existence. And it's in the very nature of prequel stories that they're kind of fundamentally redundant: very few turn out to be as rich and necessary an extension as, say, Better Call Saul.

The first episode here is definitely very mixed. They wisely at least spend a lot of time with Galadriel right out the gate - her character (well-realised here) is both familiar and immediately determined, centering the audience and at least giving one major character clear motivation. The other subplots... less immediately compelling, to put it diplomatically. A few of the central characters, particularly Arondir, are honestly pretty bland, and the lack of immediate stakes or purpose for them creates an episode that often drags when we're not with Galadriel. The Rings of Power has a fundamental issue: it simply does not have a hook as compelling as the Lord of the Rings nor one as simple & accessible as The Hobbit. That's a hell of a hurdle to leap. Add to that some dodgy dialogue that betrays the writers' relative inexperience, and things are off to a messy start.

Thankfully, things improve in episode two, even if it doesn't necessarily completely clear that aforementioned hurdle. We get a much better idea of where these characters are at and the kind of challenges they're facing. That's largely done by some solidly staged setpieces (Bayonra a smart hire in that respect), but there's also some fun world-building such as the sojourn to the dwarf city (the dwarves themselves, much like in LotR itself, add much-needed levity and energy to proceedings). The episode clips along at a much better pace, and sets a more interesting groundwork for what's to come. But like with all shows this is simply the opening chapters, so it's hard to say how successfully they'll expand from here.

What is clear at least is that this is definitely operating on a different level aesthetically speaking to other big-budget fantasy shows. It looks and sounds like the most expensive show ever made: a back-handed compliment, yes, but a compliment nonetheless. When you see something like Obi-Wan Kenobi looking like it was shot in a crappy backlot, this at least has put the money on screen - easily out-spectacling even the likes of Game of Thrones. This is a blockbuster show that wouldn't look out of place on a cinema screen, but more importantly marks a welcome return to a more grounded, 'earthier' take on Middle Earth than the weightless, CG-obsessed one of The Hobbit trilogy while still having some flavour and texture of its own to separate it from the Jackson take (even if that take is a major, major influence). That's not to say there isn't CG spectacle here, because of course there is: it's just better balanced with actual physical sets, locations and design choices than the dreadfully hollow Hobbit films. And even some of the CG stuff here lends certain scenes a sort of shiny, otherworldly aura befitting the events they're depicting. I was worried by some of the effects shown off in the trailers, but in this final, properly mastered version it all looks undeniably impressive, with McCreary enhancing it with a suitably grand soundscape.

Whether TV needs blockbuster-scale spectacle on this level is another question, given how that will ultimately make producers more conservative in the sort of creative and business choices they make: we've seen how vanilla Hollywood blockbuster filmmaking has become, and even how the chase for an automatic hit has led to several franchises (The Walking Dead, Game of Thrones, Marvel, Star Wars) getting mountains of broadcast resources that'd be much better spent on more original endeavors. At least at this stage there's no shortage of great prestige TV out there, so it's not as if the mega-projects are sucking in all the resources. But there is a concern if massive projects like this inflate budgets to a preposterous degree that'll hurt the medium more broadly.

For now, at least, Rings of Power mostly clears one low bar: more Lord of the Rings, but on TV this time. It has a lot more work to do over those next six episodes, and there are plenty of rough edges and basic challenges (not least: why does this need to exist?) to overcome. But at least there's enough there that I'll be back next week, which is honestly more than I can say for several other big-budget TV shows these days.

The Irish accents are bloody terrible, though.

The White Wolf

Galadriel, who seems to be central to the main plot and also the BIG name that they're counting on, seems to be the least interesting character.

The subplots are more interesting so far (bar the Harfoots) and you can tell they took extra care in inserting these characters into the mythos. Makes you wonder if they took things for granted with Galadriel and thought the name alone was a win.