Quote from: Ratman_tf on February 14, 2022, 03:41:24 PMBecause it's not enough to create a new IP (which would take talent and effort), they have to "smash" the existing hegemony.

To qoute myself: SJW's see the existing order illegitimate:

Quote from: Shrieking Banshee on February 11, 2022, 06:03:35 PM

Quote from: Reckall on February 11, 2022, 05:25:19 PMAt the end it is always the same story: they want to do the "show for contemporary sensibilities" but they are scared by the idea of letting go of the BIG NAME and come up with their own franchise.

This comes from a profound misunderstanding of SJW principles. SJWs have a 'we wuz robbed' view of the world and history. In their mind, Tolkien being loved came at the expense of a rightful love of a black ladies series of books, that should have existed. LotR's is a USERPER from the rightful way history should have been.
They see it as righting a historical wrong. Adding all the black ladies that SHOULD have been there. They are in fact the rightful owners of that property, and are fixing it.

The wrong will not have been fixed until LotR is forgotten and 'Trans of the Shlongs' is #1. Either LoTRs is tarnished, and thats a win, or LotR becomes TotS, another win.

Quote from: Reckall on February 14, 2022, 12:46:42 PM

Quote from: VisionStorm on February 12, 2022, 01:18:51 PMThe fact that people are even discussing this is already a "win" for them, because causing "discomfort" in presumed "white people" is primarily what this is all about, and taking delight in that discomfort is all the pleasure they really want to get out of this series.

If so, they fail at failing. Right now the internet is full of PoC who are roasting Amazon, because of course they are the very first to understand that this has nothing to do with their (alleged) cause and a lot to do with checking boxes.

They've been failing at failing for a while now. Hence, the expression "Get Woke, Go Broke!" But they always comfort themselves with the baseless assertion certain knowledge that anyone who criticizes them is a bigot and that "PoC" who don't agree with them are Uncle Toms who've made white supremacy "work" for them.

Hopefully, this constant state of failing forward will stop working for them soon, cuz it can't be sustainable in the long run.

Quote from: VisionStorm on February 14, 2022, 06:05:14 PMHopefully, this constant state of failing forward will stop working for them soon, cuz it can't be sustainable in the long run.

Once all media is woke, customers will have no choice but to support woke media. At least that looks like the plan, which is why you see the activists trying to force companies and organizations (like the Oscars) to implement mandatory diversity policies.

Quote from: hedgehobbit on February 14, 2022, 10:32:09 PM

Quote from: VisionStorm on February 14, 2022, 06:05:14 PMHopefully, this constant state of failing forward will stop working for them soon, cuz it can't be sustainable in the long run.

Once all media is woke, customers will have no choice but to support woke media.

I don't think that all the media will become woke. First, there will always be smart people who seek the alternatives and smart people who provide them. These alternatives will be sunk by MSM but, at the end, thrive via word of mouth (see Dave Chappelle).

Second, Hollywood and the like are losing billions chasing the barely existent woke-crowd. To be honest, I'm baffled by current Hollywood behaviour. I remember when "Mars Needs Mom" flopped and immediately "John Carter of Mars" was renamed simply "John Carter" because "obviously Mars leads to a flop". Today, woke-production after woke-production just sinks with everybody and no one is learning a thing.

Actually, some noticed how the shill-media articles about "diverse LotR angers toxic trolls" appeared only a couple of hours after the first pics dropped (with a thud). The only possible explanation is that these articles were already written and thus that these negative reactions were expected. While nothing can satisfy everyone, no creator for money (nothing wrong in this: Leonardo da Vinci got paid) produces something starting with the idea of angering his own public - exp. Something with the price-tag of nu-LotR. That mega-fiascos like nu-Star Wars failed to teach some basics about the reality of our World vs. the delusional woke-vision of it is truly baffling.

Quote from: Ratman_tf on February 11, 2022, 06:27:22 PM
*Gender and race swapping doesn't bother me. The woke mania about race and gender does.

There was a push to make one of the hobbits female for the movie so its nothing new. Hollywoods always doing this. Either swap an existing character, or just insert a new one. Ive seen now at least 3 adaptions of 20000 Leagues that added in a female character or in one case replaced the main narrator with a woman.

Looking at this 'thing' they are making I just come back to the same question as had with the Rocketeer remake.

"Why didn't they just set it forward and have characters be the sons and daughters of the ones from the books?"

But we all know why.

Quote from: Omega on February 15, 2022, 07:29:42 AM

Quote from: Ratman_tf on February 11, 2022, 06:27:22 PM
*Gender and race swapping doesn't bother me. The woke mania about race and gender does.

There was a push to make one of the hobbits female for the movie so its nothing new. Hollywoods always doing this. Either swap an existing character, or just insert a new one. Ive seen now at least 3 adaptions of 20000 Leagues that added in a female character or in one case replaced the main narrator with a woman.

Looking at this 'thing' they are making I just come back to the same question as had with the Rocketeer remake.

"Why didn't they just set it forward and have characters be the sons and daughters of the ones from the books?"

But we all know why.

The most they were able to do in Jackson's original trilogy was swap Glorfindel out with Arwen. Which really didn't bug me that much, since Glorfindel is practically in the dictionary under 'throwaway character' and Tolkien kind of strained a bit to justify NOT sending him along with the Fellowship.

(Hilariously, in the animated version Glorfindel got swapped out with Legolas. So it's not like there wasn't precedent.)

But yeah. This looks like a dumpster fire just like the BBCA's Watch adaptation.

One idiot on youtube used the ridiculous argument that there were more black people than orcs and dragons in Medieval Europe so people criticizing the show are ignorant racists.  Except that this is supposed to be Middle Earth, sparky, not Medieval Europe.

With respect to Galadriel, who was one of the most powerful women in the history of Middle Earth, making her an Elven Joan of Arc not only shits on the lore, it disrespects women.  Basically, they're saying you can only be a strong, important woman if you assume masculine traits.  Talk about misogyny.

And then they take the Herald of Gil-Galad and make him a "canny architect & politician?"  Talk about a Master Beta job on Elrond....

Quote from: Ghostmaker on February 15, 2022, 08:11:39 AM

Quote from: Omega on February 15, 2022, 07:29:42 AM

Quote from: Ratman_tf on February 11, 2022, 06:27:22 PM
*Gender and race swapping doesn't bother me. The woke mania about race and gender does.

There was a push to make one of the hobbits female for the movie so its nothing new. Hollywoods always doing this. Either swap an existing character, or just insert a new one. Ive seen now at least 3 adaptions of 20000 Leagues that added in a female character or in one case replaced the main narrator with a woman.

Looking at this 'thing' they are making I just come back to the same question as had with the Rocketeer remake.

"Why didn't they just set it forward and have characters be the sons and daughters of the ones from the books?"

But we all know why.

The most they were able to do in Jackson's original trilogy was swap Glorfindel out with Arwen. Which really didn't bug me that much, since Glorfindel is practically in the dictionary under 'throwaway character' and Tolkien kind of strained a bit to justify NOT sending him along with the Fellowship.

It bugged me a bit because shoehorning Arwen into the "stronk womyn" didn't work for me. It didn't help that Liv Tyler has all the acting talent of a turnip.

Despite the forced diversity in casting, the actual production looks cheap.  It looks like something from the 80's, like "Hawk the Slayer" only blacker.  There's also a trend in casting mediocre looking actors and making them look even more mediocre.  It was very noticeable in Rian Johnson's "The Last Jedi" where they stuffed Kelly Marie Tran in a potato sack and messy up her hair.  Both Galadriel and Elrond look like they were just stocking groceries before dressing up in cosplay.

I'm very happy the Peter Jackson made The Lord of the Rings 20 years ago, before the Dark Times.

Quote from: AtomicPope on February 16, 2022, 10:01:06 PM
It looks like something from the 80's, like "Hawk the Slayer" only blacker.

I have no doubt rewatching Hawk the Slayer and Krull would be x100 more fun that whatever this shitshow will turn out to be.

Quote from: AtomicPope on February 16, 2022, 10:01:06 PMI'm very happy the Peter Jackson made The Lord of the Rings 20 years ago, before the Dark Times.

We'll never get a better version.

Quote from: Ratman_tf on February 16, 2022, 08:03:33 PM

Quote from: Ghostmaker on February 15, 2022, 08:11:39 AM

Quote from: Omega on February 15, 2022, 07:29:42 AM

Quote from: Ratman_tf on February 11, 2022, 06:27:22 PM
*Gender and race swapping doesn't bother me. The woke mania about race and gender does.

There was a push to make one of the hobbits female for the movie so its nothing new. Hollywoods always doing this. Either swap an existing character, or just insert a new one. Ive seen now at least 3 adaptions of 20000 Leagues that added in a female character or in one case replaced the main narrator with a woman.

Looking at this 'thing' they are making I just come back to the same question as had with the Rocketeer remake.

"Why didn't they just set it forward and have characters be the sons and daughters of the ones from the books?"

But we all know why.

The most they were able to do in Jackson's original trilogy was swap Glorfindel out with Arwen. Which really didn't bug me that much, since Glorfindel is practically in the dictionary under 'throwaway character' and Tolkien kind of strained a bit to justify NOT sending him along with the Fellowship.

It bugged me a bit because shoehorning Arwen into the "stronk womyn" didn't work for me. It didn't help that Liv Tyler has all the acting talent of a turnip.

I think that putting Arwen in that scene was a good choice. It showed her importance as a character in the story - something that Tolkien never properly developed (come on: let's not pretend that everything he did was perfect; Tolkien even admitted that Tom Bombadil could have been cut from the book).

When it was rumbled that Arwen was at the battle of Helm's Deep, however, the reaction was fierce. Interestingly enough, Peter Jackson didn't attack the fans but cut her from the battle (there are stills that show her, blurred, in the background).

To me the real error was to write Eowyn as a "love alternative" for Aragorn. It never worked and it totally missed the real meaning of Eowyn's "love" for Aragorn in the book - something that Tolkien, later, spells very clearly so there can't be doubts about it. And of course Jackson totally fumbled the ball with Faramir. It was the biggest mistake he made in his adaptation.

Quote from: Reckall on February 17, 2022, 03:29:54 AM

Quote from: Ratman_tf on February 16, 2022, 08:03:33 PM

Quote from: Ghostmaker on February 15, 2022, 08:11:39 AM

Quote from: Omega on February 15, 2022, 07:29:42 AM

Quote from: Ratman_tf on February 11, 2022, 06:27:22 PM
*Gender and race swapping doesn't bother me. The woke mania about race and gender does.

There was a push to make one of the hobbits female for the movie so its nothing new. Hollywoods always doing this. Either swap an existing character, or just insert a new one. Ive seen now at least 3 adaptions of 20000 Leagues that added in a female character or in one case replaced the main narrator with a woman.

Looking at this 'thing' they are making I just come back to the same question as had with the Rocketeer remake.

"Why didn't they just set it forward and have characters be the sons and daughters of the ones from the books?"

But we all know why.

The most they were able to do in Jackson's original trilogy was swap Glorfindel out with Arwen. Which really didn't bug me that much, since Glorfindel is practically in the dictionary under 'throwaway character' and Tolkien kind of strained a bit to justify NOT sending him along with the Fellowship.

It bugged me a bit because shoehorning Arwen into the "stronk womyn" didn't work for me. It didn't help that Liv Tyler has all the acting talent of a turnip.

I think that putting Arwen in that scene was a good choice. It showed her importance as a character in the story - something that Tolkien never properly developed (come on: let's not pretend that everything he did was perfect; Tolkien even admitted that Tom Bombadil could have been cut from the book).

When it was rumbled that Arwen was at the battle of Helm's Deep, however, the reaction was fierce. Interestingly enough, Peter Jackson didn't attack the fans but cut her from the battle (there are stills that show her, blurred, in the background).

To me the real error was to write Eowyn as a "love alternative" for Aragorn. It never worked and it totally missed the real meaning of Eowyn's "love" for Aragorn in the book - something that Tolkien, later, spells very clearly so there can't be doubts about it. And of course Jackson totally fumbled the ball with Faramir. It was the biggest mistake he made in his adaptation.

I didn't read the book until after the first (maybe second) movie, so it never had the impact on me as it seems to have had on the people who love it, and I actually liked the films better than the book. The book was perhaps the most tedious fiction book I ever read. It was like 80%+ about the characters WALKING on their way to Mordor, and going into excruciating detail about every blade of grass and flower that they saw along the way. Then every time there was an action scene or some type of meaningful interaction it lasted for like two or three paragraphs tops, then it was back to more WALKING.

And the relationships were DULL--specially the one between Aragorn and Arwen, which was barely even touched on and we basically had to be TOLD that the relationship was there. I always felt that Aragorn and Eowyn worked better precisely because she got orders of magnitude more pages in the book--with actual interactions with Aragorn--than Arwen ever did. Hell, she was the ONLY female character with any meaningful role or significant involvement in the book, as far as I recall (it's been like two decades by now). Aragorn's involvement with Arwen felt predetermined, like Tolkien chose that it was going to happen before hand no matter what actually transpired in the actual pages.

Quote from: Reckall on February 17, 2022, 03:29:54 AM

Quote from: Ratman_tf on February 16, 2022, 08:03:33 PM

Quote from: Ghostmaker on February 15, 2022, 08:11:39 AM

Quote from: Omega on February 15, 2022, 07:29:42 AM

Quote from: Ratman_tf on February 11, 2022, 06:27:22 PM
*Gender and race swapping doesn't bother me. The woke mania about race and gender does.

There was a push to make one of the hobbits female for the movie so its nothing new. Hollywoods always doing this. Either swap an existing character, or just insert a new one. Ive seen now at least 3 adaptions of 20000 Leagues that added in a female character or in one case replaced the main narrator with a woman.

Looking at this 'thing' they are making I just come back to the same question as had with the Rocketeer remake.

"Why didn't they just set it forward and have characters be the sons and daughters of the ones from the books?"

But we all know why.

The most they were able to do in Jackson's original trilogy was swap Glorfindel out with Arwen. Which really didn't bug me that much, since Glorfindel is practically in the dictionary under 'throwaway character' and Tolkien kind of strained a bit to justify NOT sending him along with the Fellowship.

It bugged me a bit because shoehorning Arwen into the "stronk womyn" didn't work for me. It didn't help that Liv Tyler has all the acting talent of a turnip.

I think that putting Arwen in that scene was a good choice. It showed her importance as a character in the story - something that Tolkien never properly developed (come on: let's not pretend that everything he did was perfect; Tolkien even admitted that Tom Bombadil could have been cut from the book).

When it was rumbled that Arwen was at the battle of Helm's Deep, however, the reaction was fierce. Interestingly enough, Peter Jackson didn't attack the fans but cut her from the battle (there are stills that show her, blurred, in the background).

To me the real error was to write Eowyn as a "love alternative" for Aragorn. It never worked and it totally missed the real meaning of Eowyn's "love" for Aragorn in the book - something that Tolkien, later, spells very clearly so there can't be doubts about it. And of course Jackson totally fumbled the ball with Faramir. It was the biggest mistake he made in his adaptation.

It could be worse. Did you ever see the John Boorman and Rospo Palienberg script?

But yeah. Denethor and Faramir got done dirty by the LOTR movies. It's the most glaring unforced error in the films, IMO.

Quote from: Reckall on February 17, 2022, 03:29:54 AM

Quote from: Ratman_tf on February 16, 2022, 08:03:33 PM

Quote from: Ghostmaker on February 15, 2022, 08:11:39 AM

Quote from: Omega on February 15, 2022, 07:29:42 AM

Quote from: Ratman_tf on February 11, 2022, 06:27:22 PM
*Gender and race swapping doesn't bother me. The woke mania about race and gender does.

There was a push to make one of the hobbits female for the movie so its nothing new. Hollywoods always doing this. Either swap an existing character, or just insert a new one. Ive seen now at least 3 adaptions of 20000 Leagues that added in a female character or in one case replaced the main narrator with a woman.

Looking at this 'thing' they are making I just come back to the same question as had with the Rocketeer remake.

"Why didn't they just set it forward and have characters be the sons and daughters of the ones from the books?"

But we all know why.

The most they were able to do in Jackson's original trilogy was swap Glorfindel out with Arwen. Which really didn't bug me that much, since Glorfindel is practically in the dictionary under 'throwaway character' and Tolkien kind of strained a bit to justify NOT sending him along with the Fellowship.

It bugged me a bit because shoehorning Arwen into the "stronk womyn" didn't work for me. It didn't help that Liv Tyler has all the acting talent of a turnip.

I think that putting Arwen in that scene was a good choice. It showed her importance as a character in the story - something that Tolkien never properly developed (come on: let's not pretend that everything he did was perfect; Tolkien even admitted that Tom Bombadil could have been cut from the book).

When it was rumbled that Arwen was at the battle of Helm's Deep, however, the reaction was fierce. Interestingly enough, Peter Jackson didn't attack the fans but cut her from the battle (there are stills that show her, blurred, in the background).

To me the real error was to write Eowyn as a "love alternative" for Aragorn. It never worked and it totally missed the real meaning of Eowyn's "love" for Aragorn in the book - something that Tolkien, later, spells very clearly so there can't be doubts about it. And of course Jackson totally fumbled the ball with Faramir. It was the biggest mistake he made in his adaptation.

The Jackson LOTR movies are fine, but I don't think any of the changes he made to the books are an improvement, though I can understand a couple, like compressing the time frame and cutting out Bombadil, as much as I love him.  Even there, it's rather important in that Frodo gets tested in the barrow mound.  And I was really bummed they cut the Scouring of the Shire because that reinforced the transformation of the hobbits into heroes and stewards of the Shire. 

There was zero reason to bring elves to Helm's Deep.  What alliance did the elves have with the Rohirrim?  If he was so desperate to show cool elves in battle just put in a scene of the fighting that was going on in Mirkwood.  Hell, they could have used that to create tension for Legolas.

But at least you can't say Jackson outright spit on the lore, with a couple minor exceptions in The Hobbit films.  And even in those movies, a lot, albeit not all, of the stuff Jackson added (looking at you, interspecies love triangle) had some basis in the writings of Tolkien, if not the actual Hobbit book.

Quote from: VisionStorm on February 17, 2022, 06:34:27 AM

Quote from: Reckall on February 17, 2022, 03:29:54 AM

Quote from: Ratman_tf on February 16, 2022, 08:03:33 PM

Quote from: Ghostmaker on February 15, 2022, 08:11:39 AM

Quote from: Omega on February 15, 2022, 07:29:42 AM

Quote from: Ratman_tf on February 11, 2022, 06:27:22 PM
*Gender and race swapping doesn't bother me. The woke mania about race and gender does.

There was a push to make one of the hobbits female for the movie so its nothing new. Hollywoods always doing this. Either swap an existing character, or just insert a new one. Ive seen now at least 3 adaptions of 20000 Leagues that added in a female character or in one case replaced the main narrator with a woman.

Looking at this 'thing' they are making I just come back to the same question as had with the Rocketeer remake.

"Why didn't they just set it forward and have characters be the sons and daughters of the ones from the books?"

But we all know why.

The most they were able to do in Jackson's original trilogy was swap Glorfindel out with Arwen. Which really didn't bug me that much, since Glorfindel is practically in the dictionary under 'throwaway character' and Tolkien kind of strained a bit to justify NOT sending him along with the Fellowship.

It bugged me a bit because shoehorning Arwen into the "stronk womyn" didn't work for me. It didn't help that Liv Tyler has all the acting talent of a turnip.

I think that putting Arwen in that scene was a good choice. It showed her importance as a character in the story - something that Tolkien never properly developed (come on: let's not pretend that everything he did was perfect; Tolkien even admitted that Tom Bombadil could have been cut from the book).

When it was rumbled that Arwen was at the battle of Helm's Deep, however, the reaction was fierce. Interestingly enough, Peter Jackson didn't attack the fans but cut her from the battle (there are stills that show her, blurred, in the background).

To me the real error was to write Eowyn as a "love alternative" for Aragorn. It never worked and it totally missed the real meaning of Eowyn's "love" for Aragorn in the book - something that Tolkien, later, spells very clearly so there can't be doubts about it. And of course Jackson totally fumbled the ball with Faramir. It was the biggest mistake he made in his adaptation.

I didn't read the book until after the first (maybe second) movie, so it never had the impact on me as it seems to have had on the people who love it, and I actually liked the films better than the book. The book was perhaps the most tedious fiction book I ever read. It was like 80%+ about the characters WALKING on their way to Mordor, and going into excruciating detail about every blade of grass and flower that they saw along the way. Then every time there was an action scene or some type of meaningful interaction it lasted for like two or three paragraphs tops, then it was back to more WALKING.

And the relationships were DULL--specially the one between Aragorn and Arwen, which was barely even touched on and we basically had to be TOLD that the relationship was there. I always felt that Aragorn and Eowyn worked better precisely because she got orders of magnitude more pages in the book--with actual interactions with Aragorn--than Arwen ever did. Hell, she was the ONLY female character with any meaningful role or significant involvement in the book, as far as I recall (it's been like two decades by now). Aragorn's involvement with Arwen felt predetermined, like Tolkien chose that it was going to happen before hand no matter what actually transpired in the actual pages.

If you think LOTR is slow and dull and overly detailed, I presume you haven't read the snooze fest that is Wheel of Time?  Or A Song of Ice and Fire?  Talk about overkill.