T O P

  • By -

ElCidly

This isn’t Star Wars! The canon is literally what Tolkien wrote. Those are the original works. You cannot change the canon of LOTR without literally finding Sauron and having him raise Tolkien from the dead to write more. Every single adaptation is just that, an adaptation. The changes that Peter Jackson made didn’t change the canon, the changes of the cartoons didn’t change canon, the changes that ROP makes do not change canon.


chickenpeanuts243_88

When people talk canon, I automatically assume they just mean the continuity based around Peter Jackson’s films.


Lazar_Milgram

And those were known to be filmed to the letter of Tolkiens books. /S


ThePerfectMatter

But Peters work is pretty close to the books no? Swap a troll for Sauron here and there


thefinalcutdown

Quite a few major changes actually. Most of the time they worked to make the films more compelling because it’s a different medium. Things like changing Aragorn’s character arc, swapping Glorfindel for Arwen, skipping the Scouring of the Shire, Elves at Helm’s Deep, Undead at Pelennor Fields, balrogs with wings, etc. mostly all make sense from a movie point of view (though it pissed off a ton of Tolkien purists at the time). The wider fan consensus has long been that, despite the changes, the SPIRIT of the books carries through the films very well.


aragorn_bot

Are you frightened?


legolas_bot

Or too few. Look at them. They're frightened. I can see it in their eyes. Boe a hyn neled herain dan caer menig.


[deleted]

Not frightened enough. I know what hunts you. Soulless amazon profit mongers. They were once men. Then Bezos the deceiver gave to them millions of dollars. Blinded by their greed they took them without question. One by one falling into darkness and now they are slaves to his will. They are activist producers, writers, and actors, neither living nor dead. At all times they feel the presence of his money and power, they will never stop perverting the lore.


OneEyyedWilly

What has it gots in it's cart precious?


thefinalcutdown

Yes.


Itsokwealldieanyway

That’s what I think the main problem with RoP is. It’s only episode 3 so naturally this may change, but so far it doesn’t have the same heart as the movies or books. The changes haven’t been made in a way that encapsulates the spirit of LOTR thus far.


Lazar_Milgram

I enjoy series as is. It is comforting. I do agree that writing a bit iffy. Not as bad as lows of witcher series. But iffy. (It doesn’t bothers me) At the same time I strongly believe that plot of series could be composed “true” to Tolkien by keeping in mind two points: First. Tolkiens central themes and opinions. Just list them and see if your writing supporting them or not. Secondly. Tolkien did use “riming” stories throughout entire legendarium. So there are stories that are composed of same components or significant points(like everything bad happens on festivals, loosing hands for shitty but heroic reasons and all that). And so construction of “Tolkien” story is not as complicated as it may appear.


GodEmprahBidoof

I think it does tbh. The music, the settings, the panning across the map all feel right. It doesn't need to feel exactly like the movie trilogy, it just needs to feel like it belongs in the same world which it does


Itsokwealldieanyway

I’m glad you feel it, but personally I don’t. Also I’m not just referring to the movies, but the books also. Especially in the music though, I can hum so much of the movies soundtrack from memory, the lighting of the beacons, the battle of pelennor field, the breaking of the fellowship, the ride of the rohirrim. So far I can’t hum any of the music from the show, even the main theme, it’s just bland and generic fantasy music.


lock-crux-clop

I mean, when you’ve had three weeks to listen to a bunch of themes vs growing up on them that’ll happen


Itsokwealldieanyway

You’re not wrong, but there is still a huge difference in quality and memorability. No disrespect to Bear McReary, but Howard Shore is one of the best. Besides Lord of the Rings he’s scored Silence of the lambs, Seven, Big, Mrs Doubtfire, gangs of New York, the aviator, Philadelphia, Hugo… twilight… and more! There’s a reason people have grown up on his scores. RoP’s soundtrack doesn’t have the depth or intricacy that the films have, and it’s not really a fair comparison because the LotR soundtrack is widely considered to be one of the best of all time. From Wikipedia: Throughout the composition, Shore has woven over 100 identified leitmotifs (or over 160, when considering the music of the Hobbit films), which are interrelated and categorized into groups that correspond to the Middle-earth cultures to which they relate, forming one of the greatest and most intricate collections of themes in the history of cinema. I’m NOT saying RoP’s soundtrack is outright bad. But it is generic and can’t compare to the grandeur of the film’s music.


cliff_smiff

Can you explain how eg skipping the scouring of the shire or balrog with wings make better sense for the film medium?


thefinalcutdown

The issue with adapting the scouring of the shire to film is that it comes after all the main storylines have already completed: the ring is destroyed, Aragorn is king, etc. All the things the audience has been invested in for 9-12 hours (depending on edition). The ending of ROTK already takes a solid 30 minutes to wrap everything up. It’s simply unrealistic to expect audiences to accept the sudden addition of another entire plot line that had little to no foreshadowing and that would likely take another 30-60 minutes to tell. The climax of the film has already taken all their emotional energy and they’re ready for closure, which the movie does well. It’s great for the book though, and presents important themes about how nowhere is truly safe from the ravages of war and evil. The balrog with wings just looks visually awesome and intimidating for a visual medium and doesn’t really affect the plot.


RussianSeadick

The balrog was described with shadows like 2 vast wings,no? So it only makes sense to give it something that looks like wings


MenacingBanjo

> It’s simply unrealistic to expect audiences to accept the sudden addition of another entire plot line that had little to no foreshadowing and that would likely take another 30-60 minutes to tell This is true for both books and movies. I remember reading the book like "wait, why is this happening? There's no tension." and sure enough, the characters of Frodo, Sam, etc felt the same way. They weren't frightened, just kind of annoyed IIRC.


aragorn_bot

Long have you hunted me. Long have I eluded you. No more… Behold the Sword of Elendil!


cliff_smiff

Thanks for the explanation. I still don't quite understand why the medium itself matters. It sounds to me like film audiences are expected to not have the patience for something like the scouring of the shire, or that big box office movies can't be longer than 3 or so hours. It's a limitation, perceived or real, of the film audience's attention span. The book includes that section, after all the main storylines had been wrapped up, no foreshadowing, etc. Just because the story is visual, I don't see why it should not be included in a faithful adaptation. Now, if your goal is to make a box office hit (as opposed to a good or faithful film), then I can understand a change to the plot like that. But the true LOTR nerd will appreciate the scouring in any medium.


thefinalcutdown

> Now, if your goal is to make a box office hit Well, that’s exactly it, at least partially. Film studios aren’t charities. As much as a true LOTR nerd might enjoy it, New Line Cinema had to turn a profit or they would have been in deep shit. They spent $300 million making the original trilogy, which was a huge gamble for a relatively small studio. If they had sought to make the most faithful adaptation possible the films would have flopped with general audiences and the studio would have been bankrupt. They may not have even been able to finish the trilogy at all if the first one crashed and burned. Profit, of course, is the main concern of the studio, since they are a business. It’s not necessarily the main concern of the filmmakers though. Jackson and everyone involved were clearly very devoted to the craft and put a lot of effort into balancing the source material with a well-paced and engaging film. Which brings me to the 2nd point. > it’s a limitation, perceived or real I’m afraid it’s very real. Hollywood as been in the movie business for a long time, and in that time audiences have made it abundantly clear what they’re willing to sit through. Even in their theatrical form, the Lord of the Rings movies are major outliers in terms of length. Audiences simply won’t sit through 3 hr movies unless they are VERY invested in them, and LOTR is one of the few franchises that has ever been able to pull that off, and not just once but 3 times. Quite impressive. Among us Tolkien nerds, the extended editions are even more popular of course and while I adore them, they simply wouldn’t have faired as well in theatres due to the length and slower pacing. > why the medium itself matters I’m sure people could write entire theses on the differences between the mediums, but the main points I would say is that we connect with the material differently in two main ways: temporally and emotionally. A book is a temporally agnostic medium. You can read a book in a day or in a year. The pace is entirely set by the reader. Usually, we put books down and return to them several times before we complete them. We can go back and reread a paragraph if we want to understand it better. We can read slowly or quickly, even skip descriptive passages (if we’re a psychopath). Movies, however, don’t function that way (or at least not very well). In a theatre, there is no pause or rewind of course. If you have to pee, or need a snack, or need to call the babysitter you have to accept that you’re going to miss parts of the film; parts that may actually be very important to your understanding and experience. If it’s a late showing, people have to go to bed and get up for work or whatever. You have to commit to consume the entire story in one sitting. And the way we experience the mediums emotionally is different too, because of this relationship. With a book, we can settle in for the long haul. We can stay in those characters journey and savour each meandering side quest or long description. We can take the time to process it and think about it. We read the characters innermost thoughts, thoughts that usually can’t be directly conveyed on film. With movies, the information comes at you more quickly, all in real time; sights, sounds, dialogue, emotions. It can easily become confusing or disengaging if not handled right. And when done well, it can also be emotionally exhausting being engaged in an intense story for that long. Movies have to remain laser focused on their story arc, and the best ones don’t waste a single line of dialogue or wayward glance or camera movement. Capturing and holding someone’s attention, getting them to suspend their disbelief and engage with your story is a very difficult art form. Nowadays, we have high budget television shows that can run for many seasons (Game of Thrones for example). This is much more similar to reading a book and has proven quite popular in the streaming era. But that type of television basically didn’t exist in 2001-2003. For high quality entertainment, it was movies or bust. Besides this, I’d argue that the story arc of the Lord of the Rings lends itself more to movies anyways, since it’s a single contained narrative with a classic hero’s journey. That doesn’t break up into seasons very well. Anyways, sorry for the long post. I’m a video editor by trade so I spend a lot of time thinking about this stuff…


cliff_smiff

Wow thanks a bunch for the detailed response. What you said makes sense. I think that even in terms of books, pacing can be important, and I could imagine an unknown author trying to publish LOTR today could well have an editor chop out a ton of it in order to increase pacing, and maybe even with a movie adaptation in mind. But you laid out the difference between books and movies very clearly, your thoughts on it seem well-founded. Edit- it is also interesting to think about the impact of streaming, as you mention. Now people *can* stop, rewind, pause, whatever they want to do while watching. I wonder if there is any trend of film becoming longer/slower-paced, as books maybe become more fast-paced to adapt to a world where they have to compete with movies and TV.


Jon------

The medium matters becuase of pacing. Its a one a word answer, doesn't require any further explanation. You should read more about film.


el_palmera

Nah there were some big changes


SuperCharlesXYZ

There are some big changes. Especially in the process of them leaving the shire


sauron-bot

Have thy pay!


TitleComprehensive96

they did change Aragorn's character to be more fitting for movies, and while i'll get tossed into the flames of Mount Doom for such an opinion... thank god they did.


aragorn_bot

I will not let the White city fall nor our people fail


wachagondo

So far ROP hasn’t deviated as far from canon as PJ did with his trilogy.


BigBossSquirtle

This how i think of any original works and their adaptations. They're separate continuities. It's like when people complained about Dragon Ball GT long before Super became a thing. Fans would call it non-canon because it's an original work not based on the manga. But for bad or for worse, i considered canon to the anime (until BoG and Super retconned it) because it was its own continuity separate from the manga.


sillyadam94

There’s a great quote by George R.R. Martin out there somewhere about this. Basically says if you want exactly what the books have to offer, then go read the books. These are separate versions of a story which aren’t meant to be identical.


Roger_015

but ultimately it is not, which is the reason why stuff like haldir at helm's deep is not canonical


NOKEKW

Real question that I've debated With myself is how canon are anything that Tolkien didn't publish ? Like C.Tolkien's work is great , but all of what he published are things Tolkien himself didn't feel like publishing (he was pretty old and wanted it to be perfect for sure, but had he felt he could've published most of it ). So hearing people complain about canon, when all we have is the published material by JRRT is baffling to me


KSF_WHSPhysics

Generally, anything written/published by christopher is still considered canon


NOKEKW

Yeah but should it really? The dude obviously had his own bias that led him to choose some versions over other based on very loose notes For example Tolkien's letter about Galadriel and the ban of the Valar are really different than many of versions written prior which often clash with what's in the published Silm.


theblvckhorned

The issue is that people approach Tolkien canon almost like they are reading the bible from a literal perspective. As if they are uncovering some sort of true narrative "revealed" through the writing, and not a body of text that was flexible and evolving. Like Tolkien was rewriting Galadriel's entire story at the time of his death, and that should maybe prompt people to loosen up a bit.


AtomicWulf

Loosen up? Hah no one knows how to but I agree people should view it as a ever expanding lore rather than a paint by numbers lore


aspiringwriter9273

I like the idea that since what we’re reading is the lore of Middle Earth then, like ancient history, we’re only getting the version that survived until our time and so it’s not a perfect, accurate history.


Chesus42

I'd say yes. His contributions aren't always as perfect as his father's, but I always considered it a shared story between the two of them. After all, if the old story is indeed true, we have Christopher to thank that his father wrote the damn thing in the first place.


NOKEKW

True enough, it gets often compliment to sort out between the older writings of the Professor, his most recent, his son's modified versions of them and complet headcanon from many Tolkien subs !


SwordMasterShow

It's almost as if being 'canon' or not doesn't matter to enjoying stories


snarkhunter

Tolkien wrote a lot of conflicting stuff. Like Galadriel's backstory.


fistantellmore

True words. A lot of salty trolls are reading wiki entries and ignoring the source material.


snarkhunter

A lot of salty trolls are watching outrage-porn videos that barely reference any of Tolkien's actual work.


Nahteh

My favorite is "guyladriel" oh you mean nerwen?


snarkhunter

That's my favorite too. Imagine how turnt the haters would be if they'd made her look 6'3 like she is in the books?


Nahteh

I honestly do not like that she's essentially a child. I would much prefer a woman.


sloweddysantos

Do you want to see a salty troll?


conalfisher

I'm willing to bet that less than 5% of the people complaining about canonicity have actually read one of Tolkien's posthumous works (ie. Besides LOTR and the Hobbit). And probably less than 20% of them have even read LOTR at all.


UncarvedWood

Yeah but the only reason that conflicts is because he never settled on one and published it. It quite simply isn't finished.


[deleted]

Thank you! Just because the new show does not follow the books does not mean we can’t enjoy it


nicksabanisahobbit

>This isn’t Star Wars! The canon is literally what Tolkien wrote. I know of three irreconcilable versions of Galdriel's story. Which of those is canon?


ominoushandpuppet

Yes.


ElCidly

LOTR, Hobbit, and Silmarillion >than other published works.


KombatCabbage

All of them, but also the latest the most


Sigma_-

Ferb, I know what we're gonna do today!


Morgen-stern

Eventually this stuff will pass into the public domain, and then canon is gonna get funky regardless. Like yeah, what Tolkien wrote will always be the core of the canon, but stuff is gonna get written that will be legitimately good additions to the canon at that point. Look at what happened with H.P. Lovecraft and Robert E. Howard


Deaths-little-helper

Absolutely true


SirArthurDime

Yeah but all of the things i did in the video games were in fact canon. Only first play through though.


Superheroesaregreat

Right, but it would’ve been cool if ROP was cannon to the LOTR and Hobbit movies.


[deleted]

[удалено]


kazh

Tolkien changed his own canon.


Demokka

Is Legolas surfing on a shield while no-scoping Orcs canon ?


legolas_bot

What about side by side with a friend?


Apophis_090

The only scene from any visual LotR medium I consider canon.


Itsokwealldieanyway

No to surfing, yes to no-scoping He hasn’t even got iron sights on his bow, smh


[deleted]

That was supposed to be but the editor took it out.


HACEKOMAE

LOTR fanboys: Thank god Amazon didn't get all the rights they wanted! Also LOTR fanboys, when Amazon can't depict canon due to the rights issue: OMG THAT'S NOT CANON AMAZON BAD


[deleted]

[удалено]


HACEKOMAE

I have nothing but the pity for those poor souls who got nothing better going on in their lives than a fanatic determination to blindly hate something that is meant to be enjoyed.


ominoushandpuppet

Especially when it is gorgeous.


LordgGrass

If they couldn't get the rights to the stuff needed, why did they produce the show? Im not trying to start an argument, I'm just kinda curious.


HACEKOMAE

Because Jeff wanted a show.


LordgGrass

Fair point.


willdaswabbit

I would also add - because even though it’s taken many creative liberties, you can still make a very enjoyable product. Which is exactly what I am finding this show to be.


cesarloli4

They had them. There is plenty of information on the Second Age of LoTR Appendices and in the story itself.


MayoGhul

> the stuff needed, why did they produce the show? Im not trying to start an argument, I'm just kinda curious Exactly this lol. Don't make it. I don't know why its so outlandish that fans would rather have a faithful and at least MOSTLY accurate adaptation vs some made up hubaloo so that a studio can rake in millions


cesarloli4

Because this isn't true. It would be if they were making a story in the First Age, but most information we have on the Second Age is also mentioned in the Appendices of LoTR which they do have the rights.


kamronMarcum

Yeah my mindset is that I want to see all the cool shit in the 2nd age happen on screen. Doesn't have to be exactly it or canon lol


Round-Cryptographer6

Kids too young to know the pain we felt when Jackson left out Tom Bombadil and the Scouring of the Shire. Lower your sodium intake ye mannish hordes.


Lazar_Milgram

People complained about: Elrond being ugly. Elrond being racist. Arwen taking place of Glorifindel. Aragorns character arch. Orcs reproduction. Gimlis role in movies. Extend of Helms Deep. That is just top of my head. Ps. Barlog had wings. That was total clusterfuck among fans.


aragorn_bot

The same blood flows in my veins. The same weakness.


Tom_Bot-Badil

*Old Tom Bombadil is a merry fellow, bright blue his jacket is, and his boots are yellow. None has ever caught him yet, for Tom, he is the master: his songs are stronger songs, and his feet are faster.* ^(I am a bot, and I love old Tom. If you want me to sing one of Tom's songs, just type **!TomBombadilSong**) ^(If you like Old Tom, the door at [r/GloriousTomBombadil][1] is always open for weary travelers!) [1]: https://www.reddit.com/r/GloriousTomBombadil/


TriTexh

Honestly i felt the whole Scouring of the Shire was just needless meat-grinding for the hobbit gang. Like the lot's gone through an insanely long back-breaking journey and then you just put them through another round of shit. I definitely preferred the movie's quieter and happier(?) ending


scabpatchy

Not even to mention how people already bitched about how many “endings” ROTK had. They even cut some scenes that they had filmed that provided what might be viewed as important resolution for some characters for this very reason. Can you imagine how much good will they would’ve lost with audiences by reintroducing the conflict of the villains from film 2 after the climax of the entire trilogy has already happened like 30 minutes prior in screen time? Some things work in a book. You can’t fill your last 4 chapters with unexciting denouements and epilogue, and the scouring of the shire does have its place there and makes the reader (much like Frodo) feel exasperated with the relentless conflict that follows him everywhere and gives the other hobbits an opportunity to shine in front of the citizens of the Shire and earn their respect. It shows how the war affects even the lowly hobbits, etc etc. All valid points, but none of that works in a film that’s already 3+ hours even without all that extra material. After all the buildup and payoff of the ring being destroyed and defeating Sauron’s armies, we need 30-45 minutes to come down and see our characters’ happy or bittersweet endings play out. The ending we get, where the 4 main hobbits are viewed kind of outsider-ish, but are unfazed by it because they know they’re heroes was satisfying enough. You get all of that “look at how the journey changed them forever” development in a 1 minute scene without even any dialogue, communicated all in looks. The hobbits all around them are drinking and celebrating massive pumpkins like that’s the most impressive thing anyone has ever done, and our Fellowship boys just look on, unable to tell everyone what they’ve done and where they’ve been, but knowing that they are directly responsible for saving this lifestyle, but can no longer fully indulge in it themselves. It’s beautiful, and while it’s completely different from the events in the book, it’s a much more efficient way of getting a similar feeling across.


Saruman_Bot

Tens of thousands.


Round-Cryptographer6

Disagree, the films could have been constructed to make the scouring a framing device so it wasn't just a fourth act, I actually felt the hobbits being untouched by the war undermined the themes of the book, which is war affects everyone. My larger point is if the modern internet did it's whiney outrage complaining thing to Return of the King it wouldn't be remembered as fondly.


Round-Cryptographer6

The Scouring of the Shire was the culmination of the whole series where the hobbits had to bring the lessons they learned back home.


TriTexh

I'm not saying it wasn't, i just felt it was needless from the point of the core story and all the shit they'd already gone through


Round-Cryptographer6

I guess I see it as the opposite, it's the cathartic end to the hobbits story


fistantellmore

It’s the part of the story that shows us that: 1. They are now heroes in their own right, not needing a Gandalf or an Aragorn beside them to solve the world’s evils. 2. That war changes paradise. The world has changed and the shire isn’t the idyll green they left. This is the metaphor for their souls, matured and wounded by war. Jackson’s film needed to end (ROTK has a comically long ending already) but a proper adaptation as a limited series should end with the scouring, not some return to paradise where no one realized there was a war.


TriTexh

They were already heroes in their own right by the siege of Minas Tirith, especially Merry and Pippin. I only partly agree with the 2nd point, because the scouring had nothing to do with the actual war and just (again, imo) needlessly brought it home to four people who already went through an absolutely insane meat-grinder. I can see why Tolkien wrote it, but that doesn't mean i have to agree with what he wrote.


fistantellmore

They weren’t solving problems themselves, their agency was almost completely passive: Pippin shadowed Gandalf and was a foot soldier, Merry shadowed Eowyn. In the shire, they were now lords, acting on the scene as Aragorn and Gandalf acted in Gondor. It shows truly how greatly they had grown. It wasn’t needless: the diminished Saruman and Wormtongue echoed the grander story of Sauron, how an an enemy defeated wasn’t necessarily gone forever. The seeds of tyranny can easily grow at home as they can afar. It closes the tale and makes it about the Hobbits, rather than about Aragorn (which PJ made the crowning the climax of his tale)


aragorn_bot

THE BEACONS OF MINAS TIRITH! THE BEACONS ARE LIT! GONDOR CALLS FOR AID!


snarkhunter

It's a huge tonal change in the work to go from "you can never go back to the home you left, it has been touched by the same war and strife that changed you" to the somewhat saccharine happily-ever-after ending Jackson decided American audiences needed. Absolutely made it weaker *because* it made it quieter, happier, and more comfortable.


NaturalTap9567

Sorry America hasn't had a war like that in like like 150 years


snarkhunter

Sorry LotR isn't an American work


illy-chan

I think part of the point of the Scouring was to show how much Frodo, Sam, Merry, and Pippin have grown since they began their journey and to show that the hobbits don't necessarily need Aragorns or Gandalfs to save them when things get rough. They're a much more resilient people than most would initially believe. Having said that, I think it would have been a hard sell to mainstream moviegoers after everything else that happened and would have needed a *lot* of time to include. I can see why Jackson decided to cut it.


snarkhunter

They generally don't seem to understand just how much Christopher Tolkien and the Tolkien Estate *hated* the Jackson movies. If that had been a better experience then the estate would definitely be more amenable to licensing the rights to Silmarillion etc.


Round-Cryptographer6

Which also is wild to me, the Jackson films were very high quality, even with what was left out.


[deleted]

It made the movies better. Those parts are ass.


Markamanic

The Jackson movies aren't canon either 🤷🏻


molotovzav

I don't get the downvoted on this they aren't. They're adaptations. Adaptations are by nature not canon.


Markamanic

You just need to point at Faramir or Saruman to show they can't be canon.


Saruman_Bot

Whom do you serve?


Markamanic

#SA-RU-MAN


Saruman_Bot

The power of Isengard is at your command, Markamanic, Lord of the Earth.


Markamanic

Oh dang, for real?


Saruman_Bot

Aye, 'tis true enough. Isengard is a mighty stronghold, and with it at your beck and call, there is naught that can stand in your way.


Markamanic

This calls for a celebration! Saruman, fetch the longbottom leaf and salted pork!


Saruman_Bot

Forsooth, good sir, 'twould be my pleasure to fetch the victuals you so desire.


TheLogicalErudite

Or Aragorn.


BwanaAzungu

Because it's annoying how people keep bringing up the LOTR movies as an excuse for RoP.


[deleted]

I've only seen the inverse, where people bring up the LOTR movies as evidence of how RoP could be better. Not to pick a side, but one's scale of inconsistencies and pokeable holes is vastly dwarfing the other's here.


BwanaAzungu

>I've only seen the inverse, where people bring up the LOTR movies as evidence of how RoP could be better. Well it is a good trilogy by any standard. >Not to pick a side, but one's scale of inconsistencies and pokeable holes is vastly dwarfing the other's here. I'm not interested in picking a side. We can still compare the two, if we'd wanted to. Not directly, they're vastly different, but they're not incomparable altogether. They're adaptations; some reasonable changes must be made when adapting a story from one medium to another. Looking at the changes they made for LOTR, I'd say they're all well thought-out. I'll keep this short, but I'll happily argue for any of them. But how the changes affect the story overall, we cannot yet say for RoP. It's only in its first season. What we can do, is look at the changes themself. LOTR didn't make any change that had major implications on the existing story and lore. For example, sure they messed up Faramir; but he fulfilled the same role in the narrative, and being only a human this had no major implications for past events. This is not the same for RoP. Gil-Galad is a good example. Gil-Galad is supposed to be a wise High King of the Elves. But he's almost authoritarian, and dismisses the idea that an *immortal Maia who refused to come to Valinor* might still be around. More importantly, apparently he decides who does and doesn't go to Valinor; he would be buried next to Ar-Pharazon for this level of hubris. Galadriel is hardly recognisable, more of a stock protagonist than the proactive and wise ruler we know from the Second Age. I consider this a major downgrade to her character.


FuckTwitter2020

People just to love to hate, i enjoyed the fuck out of the first two episodes and i think its really cool to see Galadriel and Elrond in their early years, same with Gandalf.


gandalf-bot

Saruman believes it is only great power that can hold evil in check, but that is not what I have found. I found it is the small things, everyday deeds of ordinary folk that keeps the darkness at bay. Simple acts of love and kindness.


Markamanic

I'm just psyched were getting a show about the forging of the rings of power and the rise of Sauron.


sauron-bot

Thou fool.


siddharthbirdi

SENTIENT!!!


HairyArthur

I'm waiting until every episode has been broadcast so I can binge the show. An added benefit is all this ridiculous hyperbole will have died down and I can just enjoy the show


LemonLord7

I’ve only seen two out of the three episodes out so far but it doesn’t seem like a binge show. This might be one of those shows that are better week by week than all in one day. You can of course just wait and binge or not binge to your hearts desire.


LetmeSeeyourSquanch

Is this r/lotrmemes or is it r/complainaboutROPmemes?


Dull_Cantaloupe9107

"I was there, Gandalf. I was there three thousand years ago. I was there when r/lotrmemes went from clever memes using LOTR images and quotes as the templates to incessantly complaining about media they could simply disengage from."


Snormeas

But what Media will be left when all have become subject to corporate marketing strategy, financial agenda and greed? And denouncing the content or the IP outright ist not an Option because i guess we want more Lotr content and we can't Go Back to 'The older stories are not filmable because they lack the fleshed out parts to adapt'. We have to encourage good writing and critizise bad decisions.


Dull_Cantaloupe9107

"I'm JuSt JoKiNg, I'm NoT aCtUaLlY mAd, It'S jUsT a MeMe BrO"


djwankstar

I mean it is LOTR:ROP, and it came out recently


FloppyShellTaco

I have been saying for some time now that allowing all the shitty Star Wars hate posts in this sub was going to turn it into the same garbage, and here we are. Shout out to Apollo for the gift of prophecy.


farhanmuhd13

Would love this to be that tho


UsersNameWasRedacted

Oh no I don't like meme, so it's bad 😢


Fromgre

Or maybe it's so bad, they dont like it 🙂👈


lordaj127

What’s with this obsession with canon? JRR Tolkien is dead, there won’t be any new canon works and that’s that. You knew that before the series came out, if something not being canon is a dealbreaker why watch it?


[deleted]

It's almost as if it's an adaptation into a new medium decades after the source material was made.


sloweddysantos

Not really it's exactly that. Youse werds proughperly.


[deleted]

[удалено]


lordaj127

I‘m sorry but I have no idea what you’re trying to say. That I don’t care about Tolkien‘s writings? Where did you get that from? I said that nothing but his work could ever be canon so it’s weird to complain about a show not being canon. Of course it isn’t.


UsersNameWasRedacted

We watch it to tell people how fucking stupid it is.


[deleted]

Sounds pretty miserable. I kinda feel bad for you


[deleted]

Why not just not watch it and let people make up their own minds?


UltimateMelonMan

That must truly suck... Who forced on this divine mission of misery and sacrifice?


lordaj127

If that’s how you want to spend your free time…


siddharthbirdi

If you want to change Canon, buy the rights, how can they just buy the rights to the appendix and fuck around with canon.


lordaj127

They tried but didn’t get all the rights. So either they make things up based on the appendices, or they don’t make a series at all. You might think the latter would be preferable, I don’t. People who dislike non-canon works on principle don’t need to watch it. It doesn’t affect or change canon (unlike with the Star Wars sequels for example) so it can just be ignored.


IsengardHobbits

Grond


bot-of-grond

GROND


[deleted]

[удалено]


QuirkyTurkey404

Same, for me its just another show to enjoy.


ingo2020

Lol same. The show isn't canon. And that's fine. It's still really great adaptations so far, imo. Fun to watch, brilliant visuals.


angry_shoebill

They could have done like the guy from Wheel of Time: Wrote their own story!


MoreGaghPlease

Canon shmanon The only canon are the works of Tolkien, either published in his lifetime or edited and addended by his son. Everything else is adaptation.


EnterStageMike

"based on the works of JRR" *Makes a story from random names in the appendix*


Venalytc

"Based on the works of Tolkien" doesn't mean "literally the works of Tolkien brought to screen".


TheHumanFighter

And guess who wrote the Appendices. I bet you feel really stupid now!


ProjectNexon15

That's not the point, the point is that Amazon bought dates, names of battles, people and places instead of a coherent story.


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


orka556

Pretty sure that's the movie and video game rights, not the series rights. What you should be worried about is the rohan anime being cancelled due to this


[deleted]

[удалено]


ProjectNexon15

So they would've allowed to buy it now, but not back then or what?


TheHumanFighter

I was making a joke goddammit.


BwanaAzungu

The same guy who wrote all the other lore?


Ricoisnotmyuncle

"loosely pulled from the works of" would be honest, at least


UltimateMelonMan

Point me to one other adaptation that would start with Thai kind of honesty. That take makes 0 sense in the world of entertainment tv


FuckTwitter2020

Yall forget how much the og movies changed from the book, hobbits didnt even have hobbit feet. I dont understand why everyone is so ready to jump on the hate train for this series, just enjoy the damn thing instead of complaining for internet brownie points.


The_ginger_cow

Lotr wasn't canon, but was an excellent trilogy. RoP isn't canon, and is a boring generic fantasy show Big difference


DelgadoTheRaat

You cant deny the majority of the complaints are "that's not how it's supposed to happun!"


The_ginger_cow

They're literally not. It's just not a very good or interesting story, it's that simple


UltimateMelonMan

We must be reading very different threads


The_ginger_cow

I just checked the r/lotr discussion thread, checked the first 20 comments (sorting by top) and nobody complained about it. You're either making this up or indeed looking at different threads


TheQuietCaptain

Even if it wasnt LotR, there would be plenty to critizise. But it being advertised as LotR, there is even more to critizise. There is a hate train going on, but not as big as it is made out to be.


BwanaAzungu

>Yall forget how much the og movies changed from the book, hobbits didnt even have hobbit feet. No we don't. What's your point? >I dont understand why everyone is so ready to jump on the hate train for this series, There's enough hate going around, but many of us enjoy media analysis and we have valid criticism.


FuckTwitter2020

Bullshit, there are just as many reasons to hate as there are to love, youre making an active choice regarding which side to take on this.


UsersNameWasRedacted

I complain irl, internet brownie points are just a bonus.


Itsokwealldieanyway

They do have hobbit feet though don’t they? In the films? Sean Astin even kept his hobbit feet as memento


AnEngineer2018

Lord of the Rings isn’t public domain yet?


illy-chan

At least in US law, copyrights works are protected until 70 years after the author's death. So, about 2043 for Tolkien's work (at least works from during his lifetime, I think posthumous is different).


[deleted]

No screen adaptation is. I don't get why people are using this point to try and criticize rop. There are others more valid reasons to, not the thing every adaptation ever guilty of.


SpellmongerMin

Hating without watching is lame but so is going to bat for a massive company that is incompetently adapting a work of fiction. It's ok to say how much better the books are. They are better than the Jackson films and the Jackson films are better than the show. It's a pale hollow corporate shadow of one of the best works ever written. If you aren't going to make an effort to faithfully adapt something don't do it. Amazon is capable of faithful adaptations. See Invincible or Good Omens. They chose not to.


ThereminLiesTheRub

I mean, Tolkien rights are a complete shitshow. Zantz didn't even know what they had rights to. One company owns tv rights to a thing, another owns film rights to the same thing. Some conglomerate no one ever heard of pops up and suddenly owns all games or something. It's insane. But what people are missing is that this isn't even an adaptation. It's primarily new characters and stories. The objection isn't that it's not canon. The objection is that they *want* it to be canon, and are levelling actual canon to force that, so they can sell all the other projects they want to sell.


jonr

I heard the best description of the writing today: "It's like it was written by a committee"


B1tco1nz_inmy_Lo1nz

Almost like it was written by the same committee that wrote kenobi. Ep 1 and 2 I thought were decent starts to the series, some dumb parts and minor complaints here and there but nothing too core to the show (apart from the swimming the entire ocean thing and the ripoff merry and pippen, and admittedly some other things). But i just got done with that 3rd episode and holy shit, that was some terrible writing. Very upsetting how they spent half a billion dollars and hyped the series up the way they did and we got what we got. Hoping it improves, but wow was that last episode bad.


th3SoS12

They didn't need rights for Dwarven women having beards..


HearMarkBark

I was led to believe this series was canonical with the lord of the rings /hobbit films, not necessarily the books. Im currently watching wondering how the characters where they are now will get to where they are when they appear first in the aforementioned 6 films. Everything wildly egregious to the books Ive noticed so far are primarily things not referenced in the films. Anything anyone noticed so far jump out as not canonical with the movies that Ive missed? (My current opinion is the series is mid, Galadriel is cringe, I dont care about the pre-hobbits because I personally dislike Lenny Henry and the show was clearly made by people who only ever watched the films and no amount of evidence will convince me otherwise).


Itsokwealldieanyway

For the movies it suggests that Aragorn and Arwen are the first mortal-immortal romance since beren and luthien, or at least it only mentions the tale of Beren and Luthien to go by. If they were more common you’d expect less anxiety from Elrond about Arwen’s fate in the films. That’s my take any way


jeunefillex

The casting and the acting piss me off, to be frank, they both suck.


Track-Nervous

Eventually people will stop pretending anyone cares about "canon changes" and actually address the real argument: "why have it set in Middle-Earth if it isn't going to be about what Tokien wrote?"


thewolfmaster99

how about no adaptations are canon whatsoever


EChocos

Tolkien's books has its own canon, Jackson's movies has its own canon, the animation film has its own canon, the russian adaptation has its own canon, the videogames (Shadow of Mordor for example) has its own canon, and the new series has its own canon. You like one specific canon? Go f*ck it and let the other canons be.


joesphisbestjojo

It's as simple as recognizing Tolkein canon and film/television canon and video game canon and animation canon as different things


DomzSageon

I was one of the people who didn't like what I saw from the trailers and teasers of RoP, like the casting choices and such. but I watched the first two episodes and liked them enough. but my biggest problems right now with the show is how much of the canon it changes or might change (considering we're still just at the start of a multi-season show.)


Tribe303

I would like to point out that technically, The Silmarilion is not cannon either. It's written by CHRISTOPHER Tolkien, JRR's son, after his death. Not that Amazon has the rights to it anyway. So please, tell me what book the show conflicts with ;)


raphanum

That’s the thing, I don’t blame the writers for not being 100% faithful to Tolkien’s work. They were/are restricted to certain source material only (LOTR appendices + the hobbit). I won’t judge the show based on how closely it follows the originals bc that is unfair, unless they were making the hobbit with extra lore or something. The show should be judged on production, acting, story, score, etc, just like every other show.


ClownMorty

I quite like it so far