Recommendations-Netflix, Amazon, MHZ

[Angela]

imo Tolkiens world is too outdated to make a modern show that is free from stereotypes, if you want to stick to the source material.

for example in the Lord of the Rings trilogy, the last humans fighting Sauron are Gondorians and Rohirim which are a mix of various european cultures. Rohan seems to be based on ancient germanics. not sure about Gondor, they seem to be a mix of western european middle ages and the roman empire. they are generally described as having fair features.

the "easterlings", who are described as having yellowish/olive sktin tone and straight black hair, were serving Sauron.

the Haradrim or "Southrons", who are as the name "Haradrim" already suggests inspired by arabic people, were also on Saurons side. their skin, hairs and eyes are dark. they come from Harad in the south of Gondor and if you go even further south the people start to look like half trolls.

the elves which were the most noble creatures in Tolkiens universe were also the fairest.

it's hard to make a modern show that is based in a world which is built like this without feeding stereotypes. so i kinda understand that the producers can't really stick to the source and try to mix things up a bit.

Well, I somewhat agree, although the creator of the original Lord of the Rings series took care of that problem by making the vast majority of the followers of Sauron, except Saruman, Orc like creatures, and you could barely see the others.

Also, I doubt the people of Rohan were supposed to be Germanic. Although there is some debate about it, Tolkien was, imo, reacting to the two World Wars he had witnessed (as well as the despoliation of the natural world by industrialization). He wouldn't have seen Germans as the "good guys".

If anything, I think the people of Rohan were based on tales of the Indo-Europeans of the steppe.

The "heroes" were the people of the West, ie. Western Europe.

I'm not, for what it's worth one of the Tolkien fanatics who want every detail of the books transferred to film. However, I am indeed very, very attached to them, and have been since I read them in high school.

We can't re-write the whole Western canon so newcomers or minorities can "see" themselves in these representations. There are plenty of films set in more modern times which can provide that opportunity.

That said, in this particular version of Tolkien's work I'm less bothered by it because of the excellence of the acting of the main elf character, especially in contrast to the terrible acting of the woman playing Galadriel.

I wonder, given all this effort to make Tolkien's world look like it's populated by people from modern day New York, how large the minority audience is for this material in the first place.

I always thought the Tolkien fanatics who would flock to series like these were white geeks who spent their adolescence reading. In other words, people like me, although I was a girl, and the vast majority of fantasy and science fiction fans were boys.

[Ailchu]

Well, I somewhat agree, although the creator of the original Lord of the Rings series took care of that problem by making the vast majority of the followers of Sauron, except Saruman, Orc like creatures, and you could barely see the others.

Also, I doubt the people of Rohan were supposed to be Germanic. Although there is some debate about it, Tolkien was, imo, reacting to the two World Wars he had witnessed (as well as the despoliation of the natural world by industrialization). He wouldn't have seen Germans as the "good guys".

Germans are just a small subgroup of modern "germanic" people though. the language of the Rohirim is based on Anglo-Saxon, they are tall, their hair is blonde, their eyes blue. perhaps there is also an east gothic influence in Rohan since the east goth armies mainly consisted of horsemen armed with lances.
and if this is what he thought about the Indo-europeans it's not really far away from what the germans of that time preached.

i'm not so sure how bad he really thought of the germans for their racial theories anyways. if i look at my previous comment he certainly had a certain affinity. as i edited afterwards, i think some form of racist thinking was common also in england and it is visible in middle earth, were there is a clear racial structure from more noble fair featured races down to more primitive darker ones.

[Jovialis]

My wife and I saw "Gilded Age" on the plane ride home from Europe. I enjoyed it primarily for the fact that I find the late 19th century in the US to be very interesting. Basically, it shows the social dynamic between a fictional (based on a real life) "Robber Baron"/Railroad Tycoon family considered new money, and how they feud with the old money families of New York City.

[Angela]

I think my instinct about the Rings of Power was correct, both in the diversity run amok and the turning of the Galadriel character into some sort of heroic, rebellious, warrior. Although the critics have lauded it, predictably enough, it gets a 37% from audience reviews. Amazon has suspended reviews of the show.

These companies have to decide whether they are businesses which have to make money to survive, or the purveyors of a certain cultural point of view.

[Ailchu]

I think my instinct about the Rings of Power was correct, both in the diversity run amok and the turning of the Galadriel character into some sort of heroic, rebellious, warrior. Although the critics have lauded it, predictably enough, it gets a 37% from audience reviews. Amazon has suspended reviews of the show.

These companies have to decide whether they are businesses which have to make money to survive, or the purveyors of a certain cultural point of view.

i think a lot of those audience scores are from fans of the old lord of rings, who can't understand that the pure Tolkien Universe can not be implemented properly in a modern series. everything in it is clearly split into good and evil, pure and impure and it is clearly tied with the phenotype of the characters.
some old fans see more diversity in middle earth and it is automatically a bad show for them that doesn't stay true to Tolkiens world eventhough Tolkiens world has quite big flaws from a modern point of view which really do not necessarily have to be adapted.
if the show survives this initial phase it will be ok, since it certainly has it's good moments.

[Angela]

i think a lot of those audience scores are from fans of the old lord of rings, who can't understand that the pure Tolkien Universe can not be implemented properly in a modern series. everything in it is clearly split into good and evil, pure and impure and it is clearly tied with the phenotype of the characters.
some old fans see more diversity in middle earth and it is automatically a bad show for them that doesn't stay true to Tolkiens world eventhough Tolkiens world has quite big flaws from a modern point of view which really do not necessarily have to be adapted.
if the show survives this initial phase it will be ok, since it certainly has it's good moments.

The show either sells or it doesn't; it's that simple.

I was in advertising for a few years after university. To succeed you had to know your target audience. The target audience for beer was different than the target audience for fine wines. Then you had to figure out how to reach that target audience. Everything was based on test screening or "viewing" of advertising content. People either liked it or they didn't.

It was the most intense, stress inducing work I ever did; the last bastion of pure capitalism I used to think. You had to carry your resume in your briefcase at all times, because if the company lost the business you were out, no fanfare, two weeks notice, clean out your office, no matter if you were only a cog on the team, and not the deciding voice. The creative team might be trying to manipulate the emotions of the buyer, but the strategy was based on pure, cold, reason.

Media companies today are, imo, ruled by their emotional commitment to a set of far left values that are completely out of tune with the vast majority of the population. They could not have done much test screening of very early material or else they just don't care. It's like the conversations I used to hear if I stopped to shop in "Dem" territory and heard the wailing when Hillary lost. "I don't understand it; everybody I know voted for Hillary." If the people in their echo chamber like it, they figure "everyone" will like it. Well, it doesn't work that way. They forgot the cardinal rule of advertising or selling of any kind: KNOW YOUR TARGET AUDIENCE.

House of Dragons is doing much better because in the early episodes it sticks more to the universe that those interested in fantasy media like. I've seen some leaked material from after Episode 6, and they're going to run into trouble too. People need someone to root for. I don't think they're going to get it.

[Palermo Trapani]

i think a lot of those audience scores are from fans of the old lord of rings, who can't understand that the pure Tolkien Universe can not be implemented properly in a modern series. everything in it is clearly split into good and evil, pure and impure and it is clearly tied with the phenotype of the characters.
some old fans see more diversity in middle earth and it is automatically a bad show for them that doesn't stay true to Tolkiens world eventhough Tolkiens world has quite big flaws from a modern point of view which really do not necessarily have to be adapted.
if the show survives this initial phase it will be ok, since it certainly has it's good moments.

I refuse to watch it precisely do to what you are alluding to. It is a pure political statement interjecting diversity for diversity stake for representation in the fantasy space. This is the same problem happening with the Great American Comic book characters. I am an avid comic book collector. I bought my first comic book back in the day when they were sold in Drug Stores in the spin racks/bins when the cover price was 20 cents (or more likely my grandfather) 1971/1972, when they were 20 Cent cover price. I still collect silver and bronze age books (1960's to 1970's) stuff but refuse to collect any modern stuff given to what the Corporate executives have done to the canon regarding these characters (woke ideology run amok).

Netflix a few years back did 2 shows that were true to the canon and origins of 2 Marvel Comics characters, 1) Daredevil and 2) Luke Cage (one of the early African-American characters created by Marvel, debuting in 1972; The Black Panther is from mid 1960's). Both shows were in my view excellent. They both stayed true to the original canon of the characters as the creators of both characters created them.

And the reason moderns can't see the original Tolkien Universe in the way it was intended is because Tolkien was an orthodox Catholic, Yes I will come out and say it and those that have problem with that well that is their problem. So pure and impure was not tied to race and ethnicity but more in terms of grace/holiness vs sin/evil theological concepts or good vs evil. But again, the modern West has lost all sense of those realities and even a secularist who still sees the cultural norms that were passed down through the centuries in Europe (this applies to the USA/Canada/Australia as well) as having value could still see the notion of good vs. evil.

So I refuse to watch it, same for the new Game of Thrones prequel.

[Ailchu]

I refuse to watch it precisely do to what you are alluding to. It is a pure political statement interjecting diversity for diversity stake for representation in the fantasy space. This is the same problem happening with the Great American Comic book characters. I am an avid comic book collector. I bought my first comic book back in the day when they were sold in Drug Stores in the spin racks/bins when the cover price was 20 cents (or more likely my grandfather) 1971/1972, when they were 20 Cent cover price. I still collect silver and bronze age books (1960's to 1970's) stuff but refuse to collect any modern stuff given to what the Corporate executives have done to the canon regarding these characters (woke ideology run amok).

what do you want instead? that the producers adopt Tolkiens work which was written in the 1940's one to one? that all elves are depicted as these super fair featured superhumans? that most numenorians who colonized middle earth and tought people how to be civilized are tall, blonde with blue eyes with a few having dark hair like Tolkien described them? the blonde ones descending from the "greater folk", the dark ones from the "lesser folk". btw the "northmen" like the Rohirim later descended from the greater folk.

So pure and impure was not tied to race and ethnicity but more in terms of grace/holiness vs sin/evil theological concepts or good vs evil.

of course you could say that all i wrote until now is just pure coincidence or perhaps Tolkien just liked blondes more.

[Angela]

I refuse to watch it precisely do to what you are alluding to. It is a pure political statement interjecting diversity for diversity stake for representation in the fantasy space. This is the same problem happening with the Great American Comic book characters. I am an avid comic book collector. I bought my first comic book back in the day when they were sold in Drug Stores in the spin racks/bins when the cover price was 20 cents (or more likely my grandfather) 1971/1972, when they were 20 Cent cover price. I still collect silver and bronze age books (1960's to 1970's) stuff but refuse to collect any modern stuff given to what the Corporate executives have done to the canon regarding these characters (woke ideology run amok).

Netflix a few years back did 2 shows that were true to the canon and origins of 2 Marvel Comics characters, 1) Daredevil and 2) Luke Cage (one of the early African-American characters created by Marvel, debuting in 1972; The Black Panther is from mid 1960's). Both shows were in my view excellent. They both stayed true to the original canon of the characters as the creators of both characters created them.

And the reason moderns can't see the original Tolkien Universe in the way it was intended is because Tolkien was an orthodox Catholic, Yes I will come out and say it and those that have problem with that well that is their problem. So pure and impure was not tied to race and ethnicity but more in terms of grace/holiness vs sin/evil theological concepts or good vs evil. But again, the modern West has lost all sense of those realities and even a secularist who still sees the cultural norms that were passed down through the centuries in Europe (this applies to the USA/Canada/Australia as well) as having value could still see the notion of good vs. evil.

So I refuse to watch it, same for the new Game of Thrones prequel.

You're not missing much, especially as concerns Rings of Power.

I, and a lot of others, have always loved Tolkien not just because of the beautiful language of the books, or the extremely detailed creation of a parallel universe, or the marvelous characters, although all of that is present and essential, but mainly precisely for that moral sensibility. Man and woman can love one another truly and loyally. True friendship can endure anything. There is good and evil in the world, and in a lot of instances you have to choose one or the other.

Yes, I loved the Aragorn character, and Elrond and Galadriel and the rest of the elves, and Faromir, particularly in the books, but it was the hobbits who held my heart, and especially Sam. To me he was the real hero: loving, loyal, self-less, with an unerring sense of the good and the determination and courage to follow it. To this day, after I don't know how many times I've read or seen it, when he says "I may not be able to carry it (the ring), but I can carry you.", I start crying.

George R.R.Martin and all the other fantasy writers after Tolkien stole from him unabashedly, and in the process coarsened fantasy fiction, imo, especially in the HBO GOT version. I mean how much simulated coitus do we need to see on screen, especially when it's so unfeeling or even joyous? Even in that, however, while the characters had human flaws, there were good characters and evil characters: Ned Stark, Jon, vs. Cercei Lannister and her evil father, for example.

The conflict of good vs. evil was the underpinning of the westerns. When they were deconstructed, the people who believed in the existence of that dichotomy went to fantasy fiction to some degree, imo. Now they are meddling with that.

Btw, have you seen some of the PR about the Padre Pio movie? Do you believe Shia LeBeouf is sincere in his conversion? I'm definitely going to watch the film, given its directed by a Buddhist, so who knows what kind of Padre Pio we get. I think the real Padre Pio would be a hard pill to swallow even for a lot of practicing Catholics.

[eupator]

what do you want instead? that the producers adopt Tolkiens work which was written in the 1940's one to one? that all elves are depicted as these super fair featured superhumans? that most numenorians who colonized middle earth and tought people how to be civilized are tall, blonde with blue eyes with a few having dark hair like Tolkien described them? the blonde ones descending from the "greater folk", the dark ones from the "lesser folk". btw the "northmen" like the Rohirim also descended from the greater folk.

I'd like Gondor as Byzantium, and Gondorians as the "People of the South", just like Tolkien described them.

[Ailchu]

I'd like Gondor as Byzantium, and Gondorians as the "People of the South", just like Tolkien described them.

there might be no Gondor in the show because it was only founded after the fall of Numenor by fleeing Numenorians. that happend long after what is currently happening in the show. Gondor was populated at that time by "Middle Men" or "Men of Twilight". the Numenorians are the "Men of Light", the "Middle Men" are the "Men of Twilight" and the easterlings and haradrim are the "Men of Darkness".

[Angela]

what do you want instead? that the producers adopt Tolkiens work which was written in the 1940's one to one? that all elves are depicted as these super fair featured superhumans? that most numenorians who colonized middle earth and tought people how to be civilized are tall, blonde with blue eyes with a few having dark hair like Tolkien described them? the blonde ones descending from the "greater folk", the dark ones from the "lesser folk". btw the "northmen" like the Rohirim later descended from the greater folk.



of course you could say that all i wrote until now is just pure coincidence or perhaps Tolkien just liked blondes more.

Oh God, another pigmentation obsessed pop gen hobbyist. You're not inferior because you don't look like the descriptions in the books, ok. Give it a rest.

Tolkien created characters who looked like the people of the British Isles and the countries who were either allied with Britain in the great world wars of his time, or were their enemies. His writing wasn't informed by the conflict between the Arab tribes and the Ottoman Empire, or the Mongols versus the "natives" of South Asia.

Have you forgotten that Jackson did very well bringing a very faithful adaptation to the screen? Do you think things have changed so much? It's still watched on streaming services by both old fans and newbies, and reacted to by new devotees on youtube all the time.

Just because their pigmentation bothers you doesn't mean it bothers other people. For goodness' sakes, it would be like me complaining that all the series about Vikings feature Scandinavian looking people and nobody who looks like my husband. That's who they were. Putting in a black Viking also irritated the heck out of most people.

You just don't want to accept that people still love it "exactly" as it is. Most people don't approach it with your sensitivities.

Plus, you're remembering some of this incorrectly. Aragorn was supposed to be very dark haired with grey eyes. Faromir was also dark-haired. Initially I was quite disappointed with the casting for the men of Gondor. Their descriptions to me sounded like descriptions of Irishmen or Cornishmen, not blondes from East Anglia. There were also dark haired elves. You're obsessing over the Rohirim, but they weren't the heroes of the tales. The curly brown haired and brown eyed Hobbits were the heroes.

[Palermo Trapani]

what do you want instead? that the producers adopt Tolkiens work which was written in the 1940's one to one? that all elves are depicted as these super fair featured superhumans? that most numenorians who colonized middle earth and tought people how to be civilized are tall, blonde with blue eyes with a few having dark hair like Tolkien described them? the blonde ones descending from the "greater folk", the dark ones from the "lesser folk". btw the "northmen" like the Rohirim later descended from the greater folk.
of course you could say that all i wrote until now is just pure coincidence or perhaps Tolkien just liked blondes more.

I am certainly not of Northern European ancestry. However, I do have lots of respect for the history and culture of England given its impact of the USA and Western Civilization the last 500 years or so. I have no use for modern secular elites taking stories that "they did not Create!!!!" and then injecting them with their political views. I abhor that ideology. The best way to ensure diversity in the fantasy space is for Studios and publishing companies to support creators and works by authors from various ethnic/racial backgrounds. If those stories are good stories, most rational and decent people will watch the shows if they are well made. But that would take money and effort on their parts to go and find, recruit and support writers/creators from non European backgrounds and try to bring their works to the screen. If there are not lots of works from say sub-Saharan African descendant people in the fantasy space, then go out and pay for writers to write some stories and make those into films.

As I clearly stated in the rest of my post, I cited 2 Marvel Comic book characters 1) Daredevil, who first appeared in 1964 and 2) Luke Cage (one of the first African-American characters in the original Marvel Universe) which where made into Netflix series. Both shows in my view were excellent. Both stories were true to the origins of both characters and were well done.

Back to Tolkien, he wrote what he wrote. It is quite clear his work drew on Northern European/Anglo-Saxon/Norse mythology which Tolkien also wove into those Myths symbolism of orthodox Catholic theology (which I am not going to take time to explain to you as there is little chance in hell you would understand), as opposed to his contemporary CS Lewis (who was an Anglican) who made explicit references to traditional Christian theology.

Modern secular globalist liberals can't create, so they destroy what they didn't create themselves and interject their politics into those stories that "they did not create"

[Ailchu]

Oh God, another pigmentation obsessed pop gen hobbyist. You're not inferior because you don't look like the descriptions in the books, ok. Give it a rest.

Tolkien created characters who looked like the people of the British Isles and the countries who were either allied with Britain in the great world wars of his time, or were their enemies. His writing wasn't informed by the conflict between the Arab tribes and the Ottoman Empire, or the Mongols versus the "natives" of South Asia.

Have you forgotten that Jackson did very well bringing a very faithful adaptation to the screen? Do you think things have changed so much? It's still watched on streaming services by both old fans and newbies, and reacted to by new devotees on youtube all the time.

Just because their pigmentation bothers you doesn't mean it bothers other people. For goodness' sakes, it would be like me complaining that all the series about Vikings feature Scandinavian looking people and nobody who looks like my husband. That's who they were. Putting in a black Viking also irritated the heck out of most people.

You just don't want to accept that people still love it "exactly" as it is. Most people don't approach it with your sensitivities.

Plus, you're remembering some of this incorrectly. Aragorn was supposed to be very dark haired with grey eyes. Faromir was also dark-haired. Initially I was quite disappointed with the casting for the men of Gondor. Their descriptions to me sounded like descriptions of Irishmen or Cornishmen, not blondes from East Anglia. There were also dark haired elves. You're obsessing over the Rohirim, but they weren't the heroes of the tales. The curly brown haired and brown eyed Hobbits were the heroes.

Tolkien gave most of the Numenorians blonde hair and blue eyes. they are from the "house of hador". aragorn is partially descended from the "house of boer", which made up a minority of numenorians. perhaps this is why Tolkien named the latter "lesser", it's just numbers.

you're right about the elves it seems. Tolkien gave most of them dark hair. they had pale skin with mostly blue/grey eyes. only the first elves had blonde hair. the high king of the elves belongs to them. they all left middle earth by the time of this series. Galadriel is a descendant of them, thus her blonde hair.

anyways, i'm not the one obsessing about skin color difference between this modern adaption and the original descriptions. i mean if we really sticked to the source, orcs would look like disfigured mongolians with "sallow" skin with a few black ones while the elves would only be made up of top models with pale skin. elrond, celeborn, that other elf from Helms Deep they all never really fit except maybe Legolas. they even made the actor wear contacst to adjust the eye color. most of the orcs never really fit either.

[Jovialis]

I saw Death Wish (2018) with Bruce Willis, and Prey (2022), the new Predator movie. Both excellent films. My father came over today, so we dominated the TV.

[Jovialis]

My child loves the show "Masha and the Bear" on Netflix, and we have it on often. We first discovered it on RAI Yoyo.

[dyterw]

New Amsterdam is great! very intersting

[Brown300]

Narcos!! Pablo Escobar :)

[LarrCarter1231]

Narcos! Pablo Escobar! You could watch this all day long!

[Jovialis]

I saw the John Wayne Gacy Tapes, as well as the Jeffery Dahmer one on Netflix. I also saw the Jeffery Dahmer mini-series, and the Watcher.

Sick people indeed.

[Angela]

Barbarians-Season 2 on Netflix.

I've rarely seen such an a-historical fictionalized version of history pretending to be historical, if that makes sense. :) It's one thing to make up characters and place them in a historical setting; it's even ok to use real historical people and invent dialogue or private relationships; it's another to have actual historical facts and completely ignore or change virtually everything that we know happened.

The fact that all the historical advisors quit tells you a lot about its reliability.

I was going to do my own point by point review, but I couldn't watch it after the second episode, and anyway, Metatron knows more than I do about the Roman military and the specific battles, so here it is:

[Jovialis]

I found the first episode of the second season to be completely unwatchable. The opening battle particularly, so corny! I stopped after that.

[ScottPreot]

Russian Doll - the plot is fantastic! Underrated show.

[ScottPreot]

I really liked Wednesday. It's the show I've been waiting for. My expectations were met and I was very impressed with the show. I recommend it.