If you sat down a wrote the line 'The sea is always right' and used it repeatedly, then you shouldn't be working on the most expensive TV series ever and neither should anyone who is quality checking scripts. I couldn't get past a couple of episodes of season 1 and I loved the Lord of The Rings book and film trilogy because they were as good as the Rings of Power is bad.
So, you found Mary Sue allegations unfounded. You didn't think, "the writers made another magical Mary Sue creature that is flawless, all powerful, surrounded by either hapless men or morally corrupt evil men?" That didn't come to mind when she easily killed that ice monster? You didn't go, "OMG, she is undefeatable, she is Captain Marvel of Middle Earth, or maybe Star Wars Rey of Middle Earth?"
Yeah, everything you describe is pretty much an unfounded misreading of the show. No, I didn't particularly like the scene of her easily killing the ice troll. But I also didn't like when Legolas singlehandedly killed a Mumakil in Return of the King. Both are silly superhero moments. But they're also tiny parts I can easily overlook. Do you really think Galadriel was portrayed as "flawless" this season? If anything, people who think her character has been made too flawed have a better case. Her headstrong and obsessive behavior blinded her to Sauron's deception.
You think Amazon is paying somebody with less than a thousand subs to give a mixed review of their show? Alternatively, I might just have a different opinion and you lack the interest or calm to engage with that directly. You make up ridiculous accusations because that's easier.
Thank you! That's what I was going for. The series has issues for sure and I don't blame anybody for deciding it isn't for them. But at the same time, harsh, overly dismissive criticism is too common now. This show is clearly trying and they appear to have some good ideas and instincts.
Season one was worth it just for the reveal that the ancient sword was a key to activate a mechanism that would destroy a dam, and that this was employed to detonate Mt. Doom. I was watching with wide eyes, mouth open, edge of my seat, and I belly laughed when it erupted. Absolute camp. It's a fun show, but even without caring that much about fidelity to the lore it can be painful. Season two felt like a big step down in a lot of ways. I'm looking forward to your thoughts on it.
It's so surreal to me how the LOTR movie trilogy has grown in stature since it was released, to the extent that it's *more* well known and / or familiar than the novel itself to many people. I mean, I saw all three when they were originally released in theaters (I was in my 30s at the time) and while I thought they were extraordinarily well-made, acted, etc., I had seen *lots* of really well made movies by that point in my life, yet most of those aren't viewed as the cinematic milestones that these films are.
I saw them for the first time as a kid. I think a lot of people who are very reverent toward the films probably had that experience. But more than that, it was a special time for filmmaking and the cultural zeitgeist. We hadn't had the influx of "nerd culture" media that we have today. So they were much more special and singular back then in addition to being well done. And they've held up today in a way that a lot of genre fiction adaptations haven't.
I will have to disagree a bit about Elronds characterisation in the 1st season. I liked his character a lot, until they made him somewhat of an oathbreaker from weak story writing and scene editing. Don't mistake my comment for a negative one. I just focused on the couple of things that I disagreed with, because I pretty much agreed with everything else that was argued in this video. Which I liked very much. I may be a bit pickier or more critical about certain aspects, but I generally liked the way you put things and I agree with you. I would have loved nothing more than to adore this show, I just could never bring myself to overlook such mediocrity
Thank you! That's all fair. I had a more negative outlook initially but rewatching the season in preparation for the new one gave me a slightly different, more positive perspective. I see what you're saying about Elrond. I think the way I took that was he didn't break his oath but Gil-Galad was able to ascertain what he wanted to know by Elrond's denial. In spirit, Elrond would have never gone back on his word. It's messy, but that's politics and diplomacy.
@DEBUGMODE Also, in my initial post I made another point which I now see I edited out by mistake, cause I did it through phone. My other disagreement was the casting of Morfydd. She's a great actress, but I fear her lack of physical stature made them overcompensate in showing Galadriel s Amazonian qualities and physical prowess in other more cringy ways, that combined with the rest of the characterisation done, came off very bad and unlikeable.
I want this show to succeed, but I don’t even have a fools hope 😞 This show should have focused on Elrond and Sauron. Their storylines could be the jet fuel that pushes the plot forward sadly we have 5 plot lines that kill the pacing of the show and almost EVERY episode is a slog… Not to mention the lore breaks/time line crunch. Creating the rings out of order is just mind boggling. Don’t mind changes that need to be made to drive the plot forward, but wow these mystery boxes and dull characters is so tough AND your main character being one of the most unlikeable ever doesn’t help. They keep saying five seasons - but I just don’t see that happening
The hobbit failed because it is a little book that was padded out to make money over 3, 2 plus hour movies and to fill that they had to... You guessed it, add original content. You mentioned the love for the original movies in your intro, but what parts of those movies were less amazing? For me it was the parts that were added by the screen writers and directors, like the fight between gandalf and Saruman, like it was street fighter. Anyway, I am getting away from my original point, the hobbit sucked because there was no source material. This rings of power has this issue tenfold. I have read all of Tolkiens works extensively, and I struggle with these massive breaks in lore. Creating the rings of power out of order and letting Sauron be involved in the making of the three rings is just to lore breaking for me to remotely take seriously. Durin's were incarnations of each other so two at once would never exist, mithril was used by Fëanor in his crafting so had nothing to do with balrogs and unnamed elf kings fighting on a mountain, there are so many lore breaking plot points. The whole show is was bad and I mean really really bad. I am out, I can't do more of that dreadful character assassination. I won't be back for season two. I enjoyed your video, well it brought back bad memories but I enjoyed your optimism.
This show is just OK if you don't think twice about what's happening. As soon as you put it under any sort of scrutiny, it collapses. I get that you're trying to be balanced, but lines like 'Give me the meat and give it to me raw' really takes you out of the immersion. The flaws inherent in this show far outweigh any positives and you're reaching here.
Yeah, it's not the greatest show. It has problems. But aside from that, I fundamentally disagree with what you're saying. I had a more negative outlook on the show before I rewatched it and better understood what the show was trying to accomplish. I'm trying to meet the show on its own terms. I'm approaching it from the standpoint that I'd like it to succeed. That doesn't mean I'm overlooking its flaws but neither am I magnifying them. Every audience member is going to assign different weight to the individual elements of the show. If the line you cited is a big problem for you, then okay. The dialog is clunky sometimes although I hardly think that's the best example of what you're describing and it's far from the show's worst sin.
@@DEBUGMODE I think that's the fundamental problem we have currently. Everything is subjective and shades of gray. In some cases, yes, but It's like saying Ted Bundy always treated service staff good so even though he was a serial killer, he wasn't that bad and I put more weight on how you treat service workers, so he wasn't that horrible.. Things can be objectively bad.
@@nearsite Subjectivity and nuance are very different things. I'm against moral and factual subjectivity. But I'd also argue that most everything has some nuance to it because people are complicated and the world we've establish is complicated. When you break things down far enough, you see the black and white, but in totality, it's rarely that simple. There is truth and objectivity, but it's more difficult to know it definitively than we often assume. Exploring that is interesting. It's not always clear cut and obvious. Honest, intelligent observers can disagree. In this case, you're talking about evaluating a piece or art or entertainment. Where's the objective standard for that? This is where your example is really unhelpful and obviously hyperbolic. Murder is considered objectively wrong by every major culture, religion, and nation on earth. There's no such consensus on what makes good art. Thus the discussion. I'm not going to change your mind on this show. I don't even care to. That's not the point. Each of us have different experiences, knowledge, and values which furnish them with wildly different takes on subjective experiences like art and entertainment. And that's okay.
Harfoots are just hobbits I think the most hilarious thing about this series is the people making it try to act like there is some distinction. Yes they live differently and I understand it’s entirely because of rights issues. They can’t use the word hobbit but it’s amusing anyway.
What? Where did you hear they can't use the word "hobbit"? I'm pretty sure it's not a rights issue. They have the rights to The Lord of the Rings and obviously hobbits are all over that book. There were, I believe, three progenitor groups of hobbits that eventually settled in the Shire. Harfoots were one of those groups and another, the Stoors, will be featured in season two from what I understand. These groups are from Tolkien's original writing but the details are almost entirely made up for the show which is fair enough. I just question the utility of telling that story at all.
@@DEBUGMODE perhaps I heard wrong I guess but from what understood they only have rights to parts or maybe all of the appendices. The idea is that this limits the references they can make to the main series. So for example if this idea is correct and the stranger is supposed to be Gandalf they will never be able to refer to him as Gandalf. To me it’s not a huge deal I suppose but I did find it kind of funny they seemed to be treating them differently because as of LOTR the harfoots are treated as just another family of hobbits. Recall the “HARFEET” joke. To be fair now that I think about it I suppose one explanation they could try to use is that the word hobbit simply wasn’t invented by that point.
From a cursory search it looks like they have the rights to LotR and the Hobbit but nothing else. I knew they didn't have The Silmarillion or anything like that. I don't believe the Tolkien Estate has ever sold film/TV rights for any of the other work and seems like they aren't amenable to that right now. I would be shocked if there were specific restrictions on those right like they couldn't use the word "hobbit" or the name "Gandalf". But anything's possible, I suppose. I'm thinking you might be confusing Harfoots and Proudfoots? That's the line you're referencing from Fellowship. Bilbo says "Proudfoots" and gets corrected to "Proudfeets!" The Proudfoots are indeed just one family of hobbits, but the Harfoots are an entire ethnic group.
Galadriel is insufferable, Elrond is a pushover despite the fact that he is thousands of years old, has been captured for years and seen a lot of battle at this point. The dialogs are bad, bad. Halbrand should not exist at all, sauron was annatar during the second age, and he influenced the elfs for centuries. Celebrimbor would be a great interesting character, compared to that, he is an imbecile in this show.
It's understandable that the show has changed some details. For example, it would be difficult to convey multiple centuries of Sauron as Annatar in a TV series without numerous time jumps, which would ruin pacing.
This is great. Really enjoyed the visual representation of middle earth, but man, the characters felt like they were just being thrown around by the plot.
Good review. I will echo the other comments here and say that you have a good balanced view. I personally do not like the show for multiple reasons, the inconsistency in how some characters behave and the dialog used for the most part. I have to disagree with you over the Galadriel assessment. She does not sound like Galadriel to me. Most of the time the writers have her sounding angry, passive aggressive and impatient with the person she is speaking to. Of course the portrayal of Galadriel in the LOTR series is hard to top. Gave season two a shot but lost interest after episode 4 i think. The few characters that were interesting in season 1 I feel have been written in odd directions for the second season. Lots of lengthy dialogs that sound forced, copied, and more like an attempt to call back to the LOTR or Hobbit films than advance the story they are telling. I really wanted to like this series because I love Tolkien's Middle Earth. Gave season 1 a chance and hoped for better with season 2. When I think of rewatching a Tolkien movie, i think of LOTR and to a lesser degree the Hobbit films. I don't really think of ROP as an option. Hopefully that will change because the more good Tolkien adaptations the better in my opinion
You are way to kind to the insufferable characters of this mediocre at best show. Your standard is low. "This free food was not amazing, little bad but but still kinda okay" He said as he dug through the trash can.
Thank you! I'm considering that, haha. Maybe when the toxicity dies down. The dialog around this show being either effusive praise or unbridled rage is exhausting and a little depressing.
Wait, WTF? You think someone on the writing staff actually understands Tolkien? That assertion right there is ridiculous. The season is nothing but a massive demonstration of the opposite.
Why is that ridiculous? Many of the characters and storylines reflected themes which were important in Tolkien's writing. Yes, the show has invented characters and changed details. The quality is uneven, but I fail to see some massive, unforgivable betrayal of the original stories so far.
@@DEBUGMODE Nobody that would tie the immortality of the Elves to mithril understands Tolkien. Nobody that would allow a line about Elves "taking our jobs!" to show tension between Men and Elves understands Tolkien. Just about every choice they made was awful. It only very superficially represented what Tolkien wrote.
@@NigelIncubatorJones The challenge with this project was always going to be filling in the gaps of what Tolkien outlined and making it into a show that works in its medium and for an audience that's not already familiar with broader Arda lore. They were never going to do that in a way that satisfied everybody or got everything right because there isn't any definitive "right" here. You highlighted two examples that I'm also not that crazy about. I could (and did) highlight counterexamples where the show does better. I would point out that mithril isn't tied to the immortality of elves exactly. In the show, they're saying that mithril has some essence of the lost Silmaril which carries the light/power of Valinor. The Eldar who come from Valinor have, in the show's construction, become dependent on that power and thus need to return to Valinor as the darkness in Middle-earth deepens. This wouldn't affect the Nandor, elves who never completed the Great Journey to Valinor in the first place and never lived in the light of the Two Trees or the Silmaril. So Arondir wouldn't be affected by this problem. Other examples of non-Eldar include most of the elves of Lorien and the elves of Mirkwood (Legolas's kin). The idea of the elves fading away is also consistent with how Tolkien described the eventual passing of the elves who are not literally immortal.
@@DEBUGMODE As someone else mentioned, this show both expects you to have some knowledge of the lore at the same time it trashes it. It's OK to call a turd a turd. It's disingenuous to try and portray it otherwise. Even if you removed the fact this is based on Tolkien's work, this show would not stand up on its own.
Thanks for the Measured Critique! That was the reason I clicked on this video, ha ha! I think I agree with you on a lot of the details, but unfortunately I still dislike the show overall. I was genuinely confused by your assertion at the end. The string of Tolkien adaptations probably are exploitative cash grabs. I just don’t see how Rings of Power is the clear exception.
Thanks for watching! I felt the same as you until I rewatched and reconsidered the show in writing this critique. I think calling Rings of Power a cash grab is incorrect for mainly two reasons. 1) This show is a massive financial gamble that seems unlikely to make Amazon a lot of money directly, nor do they need it to as they have other, incredibly lucrative revenue streams. Reportedly it's Bezos passion project otherwise it's hard to imagine them throwing so much money at it. 2) There are worthwhile, highly consequential stories to be explored by the show: the forging of the Rings, the Fall of Numenor, the Last Alliance. The same cannot be said for the two movies shoved in between The Hobbit and LotR. Very little can be gained there but WB smells money.
This video was a breath of fresh air between all the hater ones. Thank you! I rewatched this season because of the upcoming second one. I did so with pleasure. Not a dull moment, beautifull graphics and some great storylines. Unlike you I rather enjoyed the hobbits. I was not happy about the redesigning of the elves, nor about the diversity in actors. But I got over that quickly and I hardly notice it now. I'm looking forward to the next seasons.
deff dull moments imo but there is enough good stuff to give season 2 a chance. I will say the writing at times is cringe and bad. But last episode for most part is very well written which gives me hope even if i disagree with certain choices.Been hard to get over some of the vast change in lore. I expect changes and alterations to fit the sceen and condensed timeline. But some are bit too much for me. Dwarfs and elrond still for sure the best stuff in the series. Galadriel is the worst written main character. Also season one did not feel big and epic enough. Numenor was coming over to help a village...... it felt weird. Also numenor i agree with video that story was not fleshed out enough and that it starting at elves already hated does not help. The condensed time line worries me alot. Making three rings with sauron involvement is problematic and will have to work alot to have celebrimbor allowing sauron back make sense. If galadriel doesn't tell him who he is that makes no sense. If does and he still works with him makes even less sense. But i am at least optimistic that show runners seem to realise some mistakes they made in season one and from what seen and read could be good.
You are quite courageous!!!! Your exploration of this show totally anchored upon the narrative and thematic meanning of this show only and excluded any book lore. Like the show runners you are open to criticisms.
If you sat down a wrote the line 'The sea is always right' and used it repeatedly, then you shouldn't be working on the most expensive TV series ever and neither should anyone who is quality checking scripts. I couldn't get past a couple of episodes of season 1 and I loved the Lord of The Rings book and film trilogy because they were as good as the Rings of Power is bad.
So, you found Mary Sue allegations unfounded. You didn't think, "the writers made another magical Mary Sue creature that is flawless, all powerful, surrounded by either hapless men or morally corrupt evil men?" That didn't come to mind when she easily killed that ice monster? You didn't go, "OMG, she is undefeatable, she is Captain Marvel of Middle Earth, or maybe Star Wars Rey of Middle Earth?"
Yeah, everything you describe is pretty much an unfounded misreading of the show.
No, I didn't particularly like the scene of her easily killing the ice troll. But I also didn't like when Legolas singlehandedly killed a Mumakil in Return of the King. Both are silly superhero moments. But they're also tiny parts I can easily overlook.
Do you really think Galadriel was portrayed as "flawless" this season? If anything, people who think her character has been made too flawed have a better case. Her headstrong and obsessive behavior blinded her to Sauron's deception.
No. No No. EVERYTHING is wrong with this show. NOTHING is even remotely well-written. How much is Amazon paying you?
You think Amazon is paying somebody with less than a thousand subs to give a mixed review of their show?
Alternatively, I might just have a different opinion and you lack the interest or calm to engage with that directly. You make up ridiculous accusations because that's easier.
You deserve many more views! You weren't overly critical and had a pretty balanced view of the series and its issues, which was refreshing.
Thank you! That's what I was going for. The series has issues for sure and I don't blame anybody for deciding it isn't for them. But at the same time, harsh, overly dismissive criticism is too common now. This show is clearly trying and they appear to have some good ideas and instincts.
Season one was worth it just for the reveal that the ancient sword was a key to activate a mechanism that would destroy a dam, and that this was employed to detonate Mt. Doom. I was watching with wide eyes, mouth open, edge of my seat, and I belly laughed when it erupted. Absolute camp.
It's a fun show, but even without caring that much about fidelity to the lore it can be painful. Season two felt like a big step down in a lot of ways. I'm looking forward to your thoughts on it.
It's so surreal to me how the LOTR movie trilogy has grown in stature since it was released, to the extent that it's *more* well known and / or familiar than the novel itself to many people. I mean, I saw all three when they were originally released in theaters (I was in my 30s at the time) and while I thought they were extraordinarily well-made, acted, etc., I had seen *lots* of really well made movies by that point in my life, yet most of those aren't viewed as the cinematic milestones that these films are.
I saw them for the first time as a kid. I think a lot of people who are very reverent toward the films probably had that experience. But more than that, it was a special time for filmmaking and the cultural zeitgeist. We hadn't had the influx of "nerd culture" media that we have today. So they were much more special and singular back then in addition to being well done. And they've held up today in a way that a lot of genre fiction adaptations haven't.
I will have to disagree a bit about Elronds characterisation in the 1st season. I liked his character a lot, until they made him somewhat of an oathbreaker from weak story writing and scene editing.
Don't mistake my comment for a negative one. I just focused on the couple of things that I disagreed with, because I pretty much agreed with everything else that was argued in this video.
Which I liked very much. I may be a bit pickier or more critical about certain aspects, but I generally liked the way you put things and I agree with you. I would have loved nothing more than to adore this show, I just could never bring myself to overlook such mediocrity
Thank you! That's all fair. I had a more negative outlook initially but rewatching the season in preparation for the new one gave me a slightly different, more positive perspective.
I see what you're saying about Elrond. I think the way I took that was he didn't break his oath but Gil-Galad was able to ascertain what he wanted to know by Elrond's denial. In spirit, Elrond would have never gone back on his word. It's messy, but that's politics and diplomacy.
@DEBUGMODE Also, in my initial post I made another point which I now see I edited out by mistake, cause I did it through phone.
My other disagreement was the casting of Morfydd. She's a great actress, but I fear her lack of physical stature made them overcompensate in showing Galadriel s Amazonian qualities and physical prowess in other more cringy ways, that combined with the rest of the characterisation done, came off very bad and unlikeable.
@@alexkats30She is terrible because the script is terrible and direction is poor
I want this show to succeed, but I don’t even have a fools hope 😞
This show should have focused on Elrond and Sauron. Their storylines could be the jet fuel that pushes the plot forward sadly we have 5 plot lines that kill the pacing of the show and almost EVERY episode is a slog…
Not to mention the lore breaks/time line crunch. Creating the rings out of order is just mind boggling. Don’t mind changes that need to be made to drive the plot forward, but wow these mystery boxes and dull characters is so tough
AND your main character being one of the most unlikeable ever doesn’t help.
They keep saying five seasons - but I just don’t see that happening
The hobbit failed because it is a little book that was padded out to make money over 3, 2 plus hour movies and to fill that they had to... You guessed it, add original content. You mentioned the love for the original movies in your intro, but what parts of those movies were less amazing? For me it was the parts that were added by the screen writers and directors, like the fight between gandalf and Saruman, like it was street fighter. Anyway, I am getting away from my original point, the hobbit sucked because there was no source material. This rings of power has this issue tenfold. I have read all of Tolkiens works extensively, and I struggle with these massive breaks in lore. Creating the rings of power out of order and letting Sauron be involved in the making of the three rings is just to lore breaking for me to remotely take seriously. Durin's were incarnations of each other so two at once would never exist, mithril was used by Fëanor in his crafting so had nothing to do with balrogs and unnamed elf kings fighting on a mountain, there are so many lore breaking plot points. The whole show is was bad and I mean really really bad. I am out, I can't do more of that dreadful character assassination. I won't be back for season two. I enjoyed your video, well it brought back bad memories but I enjoyed your optimism.
This show is just OK if you don't think twice about what's happening. As soon as you put it under any sort of scrutiny, it collapses. I get that you're trying to be balanced, but lines like 'Give me the meat and give it to me raw' really takes you out of the immersion. The flaws inherent in this show far outweigh any positives and you're reaching here.
Yeah, it's not the greatest show. It has problems. But aside from that, I fundamentally disagree with what you're saying.
I had a more negative outlook on the show before I rewatched it and better understood what the show was trying to accomplish. I'm trying to meet the show on its own terms. I'm approaching it from the standpoint that I'd like it to succeed. That doesn't mean I'm overlooking its flaws but neither am I magnifying them.
Every audience member is going to assign different weight to the individual elements of the show. If the line you cited is a big problem for you, then okay. The dialog is clunky sometimes although I hardly think that's the best example of what you're describing and it's far from the show's worst sin.
@@DEBUGMODE I think that's the fundamental problem we have currently. Everything is subjective and shades of gray. In some cases, yes, but It's like saying Ted Bundy always treated service staff good so even though he was a serial killer, he wasn't that bad and I put more weight on how you treat service workers, so he wasn't that horrible.. Things can be objectively bad.
@@nearsite Subjectivity and nuance are very different things. I'm against moral and factual subjectivity. But I'd also argue that most everything has some nuance to it because people are complicated and the world we've establish is complicated. When you break things down far enough, you see the black and white, but in totality, it's rarely that simple. There is truth and objectivity, but it's more difficult to know it definitively than we often assume. Exploring that is interesting. It's not always clear cut and obvious. Honest, intelligent observers can disagree.
In this case, you're talking about evaluating a piece or art or entertainment. Where's the objective standard for that? This is where your example is really unhelpful and obviously hyperbolic. Murder is considered objectively wrong by every major culture, religion, and nation on earth. There's no such consensus on what makes good art. Thus the discussion.
I'm not going to change your mind on this show. I don't even care to. That's not the point. Each of us have different experiences, knowledge, and values which furnish them with wildly different takes on subjective experiences like art and entertainment. And that's okay.
Harfoots are just hobbits I think the most hilarious thing about this series is the people making it try to act like there is some distinction. Yes they live differently and I understand it’s entirely because of rights issues. They can’t use the word hobbit but it’s amusing anyway.
What? Where did you hear they can't use the word "hobbit"? I'm pretty sure it's not a rights issue. They have the rights to The Lord of the Rings and obviously hobbits are all over that book.
There were, I believe, three progenitor groups of hobbits that eventually settled in the Shire. Harfoots were one of those groups and another, the Stoors, will be featured in season two from what I understand. These groups are from Tolkien's original writing but the details are almost entirely made up for the show which is fair enough. I just question the utility of telling that story at all.
@@DEBUGMODE perhaps I heard wrong I guess but from what understood they only have rights to parts or maybe all of the appendices. The idea is that this limits the references they can make to the main series. So for example if this idea is correct and the stranger is supposed to be Gandalf they will never be able to refer to him as Gandalf. To me it’s not a huge deal I suppose but I did find it kind of funny they seemed to be treating them differently because as of LOTR the harfoots are treated as just another family of hobbits. Recall the “HARFEET” joke. To be fair now that I think about it I suppose one explanation they could try to use is that the word hobbit simply wasn’t invented by that point.
From a cursory search it looks like they have the rights to LotR and the Hobbit but nothing else. I knew they didn't have The Silmarillion or anything like that. I don't believe the Tolkien Estate has ever sold film/TV rights for any of the other work and seems like they aren't amenable to that right now.
I would be shocked if there were specific restrictions on those right like they couldn't use the word "hobbit" or the name "Gandalf". But anything's possible, I suppose.
I'm thinking you might be confusing Harfoots and Proudfoots? That's the line you're referencing from Fellowship. Bilbo says "Proudfoots" and gets corrected to "Proudfeets!" The Proudfoots are indeed just one family of hobbits, but the Harfoots are an entire ethnic group.
@@DEBUGMODE wow that’s embarrassing haha thank you for correcting me on that line you’re absolutely right
Nah, easy to mix those up. I've done it too.
Galadriel is insufferable, Elrond is a pushover despite the fact that he is thousands of years old, has been captured for years and seen a lot of battle at this point. The dialogs are bad, bad. Halbrand should not exist at all, sauron was annatar during the second age, and he influenced the elfs for centuries. Celebrimbor would be a great interesting character, compared to that, he is an imbecile in this show.
It's understandable that the show has changed some details. For example, it would be difficult to convey multiple centuries of Sauron as Annatar in a TV series without numerous time jumps, which would ruin pacing.
@@SaintFort well the story is dumb. there is more than enough material from the 2nd age. No need to invent some bs that has no place in that universe.
with a budget of 1 billion, why couldnt they get some decent actors?
This is great. Really enjoyed the visual representation of middle earth, but man, the characters felt like they were just being thrown around by the plot.
Good review. I will echo the other comments here and say that you have a good balanced view. I personally do not like the show for multiple reasons, the inconsistency in how some characters behave and the dialog used for the most part.
I have to disagree with you over the Galadriel assessment. She does not sound like Galadriel to me. Most of the time the writers have her sounding angry, passive aggressive and impatient with the person she is speaking to. Of course the portrayal of Galadriel in the LOTR series is hard to top.
Gave season two a shot but lost interest after episode 4 i think. The few characters that were interesting in season 1 I feel have been written in odd directions for the second season. Lots of lengthy dialogs that sound forced, copied, and more like an attempt to call back to the LOTR or Hobbit films than advance the story they are telling.
I really wanted to like this series because I love Tolkien's Middle Earth. Gave season 1 a chance and hoped for better with season 2. When I think of rewatching a Tolkien movie, i think of LOTR and to a lesser degree the Hobbit films. I don't really think of ROP as an option. Hopefully that will change because the more good Tolkien adaptations the better in my opinion
You are way to kind to the insufferable characters of this mediocre at best show. Your standard is low.
"This free food was not amazing, little bad but but still kinda okay"
He said as he dug through the trash can.
I'd rather be too kind than too harsh. There's enough vitriol in the world.
It's far from a perfect show, but it's certainly not garbage.
wow - this is a great review. subbed. Brisbane, Australia - keep up the good work
This is very good staff, thank you so much!
This is well done. I would love to see one for the second season.
Thank you! I'm considering that, haha. Maybe when the toxicity dies down. The dialog around this show being either effusive praise or unbridled rage is exhausting and a little depressing.
Great review, awful show.
Wait, WTF? You think someone on the writing staff actually understands Tolkien? That assertion right there is ridiculous. The season is nothing but a massive demonstration of the opposite.
Why is that ridiculous? Many of the characters and storylines reflected themes which were important in Tolkien's writing. Yes, the show has invented characters and changed details. The quality is uneven, but I fail to see some massive, unforgivable betrayal of the original stories so far.
@@DEBUGMODE Nobody that would tie the immortality of the Elves to mithril understands Tolkien. Nobody that would allow a line about Elves "taking our jobs!" to show tension between Men and Elves understands Tolkien. Just about every choice they made was awful. It only very superficially represented what Tolkien wrote.
@@NigelIncubatorJones The challenge with this project was always going to be filling in the gaps of what Tolkien outlined and making it into a show that works in its medium and for an audience that's not already familiar with broader Arda lore. They were never going to do that in a way that satisfied everybody or got everything right because there isn't any definitive "right" here.
You highlighted two examples that I'm also not that crazy about. I could (and did) highlight counterexamples where the show does better.
I would point out that mithril isn't tied to the immortality of elves exactly. In the show, they're saying that mithril has some essence of the lost Silmaril which carries the light/power of Valinor. The Eldar who come from Valinor have, in the show's construction, become dependent on that power and thus need to return to Valinor as the darkness in Middle-earth deepens. This wouldn't affect the Nandor, elves who never completed the Great Journey to Valinor in the first place and never lived in the light of the Two Trees or the Silmaril. So Arondir wouldn't be affected by this problem. Other examples of non-Eldar include most of the elves of Lorien and the elves of Mirkwood (Legolas's kin).
The idea of the elves fading away is also consistent with how Tolkien described the eventual passing of the elves who are not literally immortal.
@@DEBUGMODE What you just described does not make it any better.
@@DEBUGMODE As someone else mentioned, this show both expects you to have some knowledge of the lore at the same time it trashes it. It's OK to call a turd a turd. It's disingenuous to try and portray it otherwise. Even if you removed the fact this is based on Tolkien's work, this show would not stand up on its own.
Thanks for the Measured Critique! That was the reason I clicked on this video, ha ha! I think I agree with you on a lot of the details, but unfortunately I still dislike the show overall.
I was genuinely confused by your assertion at the end. The string of Tolkien adaptations probably are exploitative cash grabs. I just don’t see how Rings of Power is the clear exception.
Thanks for watching! I felt the same as you until I rewatched and reconsidered the show in writing this critique.
I think calling Rings of Power a cash grab is incorrect for mainly two reasons.
1) This show is a massive financial gamble that seems unlikely to make Amazon a lot of money directly, nor do they need it to as they have other, incredibly lucrative revenue streams. Reportedly it's Bezos passion project otherwise it's hard to imagine them throwing so much money at it.
2) There are worthwhile, highly consequential stories to be explored by the show: the forging of the Rings, the Fall of Numenor, the Last Alliance. The same cannot be said for the two movies shoved in between The Hobbit and LotR. Very little can be gained there but WB smells money.
Thank god there is still someone out there who can watch and critisice this without being an anal fanboy.
This video was a breath of fresh air between all the hater ones. Thank you! I rewatched this season because of the upcoming second one. I did so with pleasure. Not a dull moment, beautifull graphics and some great storylines. Unlike you I rather enjoyed the hobbits. I was not happy about the redesigning of the elves, nor about the diversity in actors. But I got over that quickly and I hardly notice it now. I'm looking forward to the next seasons.
deff dull moments imo but there is enough good stuff to give season 2 a chance. I will say the writing at times is cringe and bad. But last episode for most part is very well written which gives me hope even if i disagree with certain choices.Been hard to get over some of the vast change in lore. I expect changes and alterations to fit the sceen and condensed timeline. But some are bit too much for me. Dwarfs and elrond still for sure the best stuff in the series. Galadriel is the worst written main character. Also season one did not feel big and epic enough. Numenor was coming over to help a village...... it felt weird. Also numenor i agree with video that story was not fleshed out enough and that it starting at elves already hated does not help. The condensed time line worries me alot. Making three rings with sauron involvement is problematic and will have to work alot to have celebrimbor allowing sauron back make sense. If galadriel doesn't tell him who he is that makes no sense. If does and he still works with him makes even less sense. But i am at least optimistic that show runners seem to realise some mistakes they made in season one and from what seen and read could be good.
You are quite courageous!!!!
Your exploration of this show totally anchored upon the narrative and thematic meanning of this show only and excluded any book lore. Like the show runners you are open to criticisms.