13 minutes ago, fra85uk said:

In the end, it's quite straightforward if you want to do a faithful adaptation:

up to book 4, a season per book adaptation with a few surgical cuts.

Right? After that, the books start taking place over the course of weeks, a massive percentage of the POV chapters get dedicated to side characters just for kicks and giggles, and there are several storylines which could be excised completely with minimal consequence to the overall narrative. 

 

All this stuff means that if you just kept the focus tight on the main characters, you could feasibly condense the final 9 books into 5 seasons without too much trouble. 

13 minutes ago, fra85uk said:

 

And by the way, I believe that WoT is difficult to adapt, but not an almost-mission-impossible thing, as some argue.

 

In the end, it's quite straightforward if you want to do a faithful adaptation:

up to book 4, a season per book adaptation with a few surgical cuts.

 

Then, there is the most difficult part in streamlining the  rest of the series.

But, there are a LOT of subplots that, while I love as a reader, I known that can be easily cut to deliver  the final battle in S8.

So I can't figure out why we are constrained to 8 seasons and 8 episodes per season. If it is a hit why wouldn't we just chug turning out show.  In regular TV where they are cranking out 24-26 episodes per season we have some shows with 260 episodes.  I don't know the streaming business model for individual shows but it seems like if the show can maintain whatever viewership justified a 3rd season then you would just keep going.  If the viewership falters you make a plan to wrap it up in the season you have left.

6 minutes ago, JeffTheWoodlandElf said:

Right? After that, the books start taking place over the course of weeks, a massive percentage of the POV chapters get dedicated to side characters just for kicks and giggles, and there are several storylines which could be excised completely with minimal consequence to the overall narrative. 

 

All this stuff means that if you just kept the focus tight on the main characters, you could feasibly condense the final 9 books into 5 seasons without too much trouble. 

As I am currently chugging through those very books I agree with this.  Perrin's hunt for Faile is a classic example.  The key is that the writing team has to have somebody expert to go through the books and sort out the relevant bits.   We need the cleansing of Sadin, for example.  Matt needs to meet Tuon.  As I have said before I think the current narrative is off RJ's story road and onto a rough wagon cart road.  it is easy to get lost.

8 episodes per 8 seasons is more than enough to faithfully adapt the core of WoT lore, world building and main characters arcs.

10x10 would be ideal to go deeper on some particularly relevant/interesting side-plots.

 

But if you waste 2/8 episodes in Stepin arc and cringey tower """""politics""""'....

You've got to pitch something, and I guess either Amazon said 8 seasons or Rafe went in with that number.  You're right though, if you have TV gold, I'm sure they would want to keep it going as long as possible.

21 minutes ago, Lethira the second said:

You've got to pitch something, and I guess either Amazon said 8 seasons or Rafe went in with that number.  You're right though, if you have TV gold, I'm sure they would want to keep it going as long as possible.

 

Oh-um.  Does that mean:

 

Series 9: A New Threat

Series 10: The Last Dragon

Series 11: The Rise of Al'thor

 

Shudder.

15 hours ago, KakitaOCU said:

I'm going to risk a comparison here.

GoT takes the approach of showing just how horrible medieval settings were for women and faces it head on while having a few women powerful or skilled enough to rip down that world.  The Show takes the same approach and so fans see what is largely a portrait for medieval times.

Wheel of Time approaches gender imbalance by instead flipping it.  The setting deliberately justifies women being the primary authority and imagines a world where men are stereotyped and often dismissed the way real women suffered for many years.  Because our main three protagonists are still men and men who become powerful enough to dominate the world around them, many people missed the gender topics being broached.

Along comes a TV show that drags them VERY much into focus and makes it abundantly clear what the setting was trying to say and they lose their mind.

I obviously don't say that as a lable for everyone who disliked the show, but if I had a dollar for every person that was confused, outraged or told me I was stupid when I pointed out things like the Aes Sedai being "The Catholic church, but real magic and all women" or other such points, I wouldn't be able to retire, but I also would have made roughly my annual salary.

I think this describes the disagreement about the TV show pretty well, the only disagreement concerns the relationship to the books and hence who is the one taking the pills.

 

The books treated men and women with respect, in a way that certainly did not reflect historical reality, but the world was not a matriarchal society broadly speaking and the books did not advocate for girl power or make some kind of comment on toxic masculinity.  
 

This is why people of my generation, who first read the books in high school, like them, they reflect their experience of equality and respect.

 

The show, on the other hand, has entirely different ideas about masculinity, equality, and respect, and those ideas have driven the changes to the story.  They aren’t bringing out something that was already there, they are advocating for different values.  I don’t think those values are something simple like women good, and men bad, they are more complex than that, but these values do include views on gender roles that are intended to be subversive, and this subversion is not supported by the books.  
 

So there is a disconnect, and because these changes were not done with any particular subtlety (a sledgehammer is more like it), the disconnect becomes overt.
 

 

Is it worth watching or is it too far from the novels I hope they miss out a lot of the political stuff that really bogs the story down for me 

45 minutes ago, Pembie said:

I hope they miss out a lot of the political stuff that really bogs the story down for me 

 

They doubled down of some of the Aes Sedai politics, but it was written in a way to just really not make much sense and extra childish (much more so than the already childish Aes Sedai bickering), and many reviewers thought it reminded them of Mean Girls. It was some of the worse episodes, and you are more than likely going to detest it.

49 minutes ago, Pembie said:

Is it worth watching or is it too far from the novels I hope they miss out a lot of the political stuff that really bogs the story down for me 

Umm..if you at least read the first book then you should already know that there's nothing political to be dealt with...in the book.

The...show itself is a different thing altogether. For those of us "bookcloaks," the show doesn't resemble the book at all.

Edited January 15, 20223 yr by Gothic Flame
Clarity

6 hours ago, Truthteller said:

The books treated men and women with respect

 

I'm truly lost.

8 hours ago, Pembie said:

Is it worth watching or is it too far from the novels I hope they miss out a lot of the political stuff that really bogs the story down for me 

Depends on tastes. They changed a lot, but kept the major plots from the book. The execution sometimes is good, sometimes is not. The acting is good.

In the end some fans liked it, some hated it. We can't say where you would fall in that. So i suggest you try watching it and decide.

 

 

 

9 hours ago, Pembie said:

Is it worth watching or is it too far from the novels I hope they miss out a lot of the political stuff that really bogs the story down for me 

 

In principle something can be worth watching AND too far from the source material (i.e. Shining).

 

But this is not the case.

6 hours ago, EmreY said:

 

I'm truly lost.

It was a comparative statement between the books and tv show. The show is an embarrassment with men as fumble-witted when compared with the books.

You already know the arguments. You just want to restart the noise.

9 hours ago, ilovezam said:

 

They doubled down of some of the Aes Sedai politics, but it was written in a way to just really not make much sense and extra childish (much more so than the already childish Aes Sedai bickering), and many reviewers thought it reminded them of Mean Girls. It was some of the worse episodes, and you are more than likely going to detest it.

Those episodes also feature an incredible phenomenon of light/matter interaction that the best scientists in the world cannot still solve: flickering flames that produce a homogenenous constant lighting.  

Edited January 15, 20223 yr by fra85uk
mispelled words

28 minutes ago, Gothic Flame said:

It was a comparative statement between the books and tv show. The show is an embarrassment with men as fumble-witted when compared with the books.

 

I'm still lost.  How can anyone say that "the books treated men and women with respect"?

 

Do you really believe that to be the case?  Because it does not compute for me, comparative or absolute.

 

28 minutes ago, Gothic Flame said:

You already know the arguments. You just want to restart the noise.

 

Oh, I'm terribly sorry.

Edited January 15, 20223 yr by EmreY

12 minutes ago, EmreY said:

I'm still lost.  How can anyone say that "the books treated men and women with respect"?

 

Do you really believe that to be the case?  Because it does not compute for me, comparative or absolute.

Compare; books vs tv show. The variable = respect for men.

Books...more

TV show...not so much.

 

3 hours ago, king of nowhere said:

Depends on tastes. They changed a lot, but kept the major plots from the book. The execution sometimes is good, sometimes is not. The acting is good.

In the end some fans liked it, some hated it. We can't say where you would fall in that. So i suggest you try watching it and decide.

 

 

 

 

11 hours ago, Pembie said:

Is it worth watching or is it too far from the novels I hope they miss out a lot of the political stuff that really bogs the story down for me 

Is it worth watching? Can’t answer that for you…

 

It is far from the novels, although many on here claim not only is it incredibly similar it improves upon the novel by a factor of ten.

 

A lot of political stuff is absent but only because of time restraints….

 

How would I describe the show? Well, imagine the notorious Gillette advert being the primary basis for the show rather than the books and you will have a clue…

Edited January 15, 20223 yr by Raal Gurniss

2 hours ago, Gothic Flame said:

Compare; books vs tv show. The variable = respect for men.

Books...more

TV show...not so much.

 

in several aspects, the tv show treats men a lot better than the books. for example, men are not dim-witted about women in the tv show. And they also don't have all the stupid bravado and toxic masculinity that the book tries to depict as innate for men. warders in the tv show are depicted as true companions; in the books, their interactions basically amounted to out-staring each other.

 

however, the tv show has made men a lot less capable. tam losing to a single trolloc. the women of emond field killing a trolloc. lan entering shadar logoth without a plan for dealing with mashadar, without even telling anyone of mashadar. nynaeve getting lan at dagger point. stepin accidentally giving logain the chance to break free. lan failing to prevent stepin's suicide. egwene doing all the job when escaping eamon valda, perrin not even throwing a punch when freed. Lord Agelmar turned into an incompetent leader, getting killed with all his men, and five women destroying the whole trolloc army.

None of those episodes is problematic by itself; each and every one of them can be justified.

But, when weighted all together, they all point in the same direction. It's not as bad as men only being damsels in distress - Lan was really badass protecting moiraine in emond field fight, thom merrilin was totally cool in everything he did (we didn't get enough of him), rand and mat handled themselves competently when isolated. Still, most awesome moments were given to women, and most blunders were made by men.

 

So, the show is treating men better than the books in some regards, worse in some others.

It is, however, treating women a lot better than the books. I haven't noticed a single sniffing or hair-pulling in the whole show

Edited January 15, 20223 yr by king of nowhere

The arguments are as circular as the Wheel itself, and it's only January

31 minutes ago, king of nowhere said:

in several aspects, the tv show treats men a lot better than the books. for example, men are not dim-witted about women in the tv show. And they also don't have all the stupid bravado and toxic masculinity that the book tries to depict as innate for men. warders in the tv show are depicted as true companions; in the books, their interactions basically amounted to out-staring each other.

 

however, the tv show has made men a lot less capable. tam losing to a single trolloc. the women of emond field killing a trolloc. lan entering shadar logoth without a plan for dealing with mashadar, without even telling anyone of mashadar. nynaeve getting lan at dagger point. stepin accidentally giving logain the chance to break free. lan failing to prevent stepin's suicide. egwene doing all the job when escaping eamon valda, perrin not even throwing a punch when freed. Lord Agelmar turned into an incompetent leader, getting killed with all his men, and five women destroying the whole trolloc army.

None of those episodes is problematic by itself; each and every one of them can be justified.

But, when weighted all together, they all point in the same direction. It's not as bad as men only being damsels in distress - Lan was really badass protecting moiraine in emond field fight, thom merrilin was totally cool in everything he did (we didn't get enough of him), rand and mat handled themselves competently when isolated. Still, most awesome moments were given to women, and most blunders were made by men.

 

So, the show is treating men better than the books in some regards, worse in some others.

It is, however, treating women a lot better than the books. I haven't noticed a single sniffing or hair-pulling in the whole show

This is quite fair, and I agree with the second and third paragraphs.

On women in the books, I do think the portrayal is often flat, with the younger women in particular.  I think the book does a better job with older women.  Moiraine in particular I thought had a lot of depth, Verin, Sorilea, all great characters.  Nyneave, Egwene, and Elayne on the other hand struck me somewhat as caricatures.  However, people seemed to like those characters . . . Anyway, I completely agree that if there is an area where the show could have improved on the books it is by making those three characters in particular more dimensional.

 

And this is yet another failure which tells us something about the show creators and what they care about. Instead of making Nyneave and Egwene more interesting they made them more important, as if the two were synonymous.  The characters remain flat, they just take up more space, and in the meantime they made one of the more interesting women, Moiraine, both less effectual and with less depth.

 

Where I really disagree is with the Warders. I found them less effective, and because they were less effective, more subordinate, than in the books.  A mood that was compounded by the fellowship of the campfires, etc.  I don’t think the portrayal of the Warders can be easily separated from the other portrayals of men you rightly identify in the second paragraph.

 

I do agree, however, that Rafe thinks he is portraying men better, but in my opinion it is a vision of masculinity that is pretty political and alienating, and which undermines the virtues surrounding obligation upon which the books are based.

52 minutes ago, king of nowhere said:

in several aspects, the tv show treats men a lot better than the books. for men are not dim-witted about women in the tv show.

Where is this "dim-witted" in the book? Or is this a reference to three teenagers?

 

56 minutes ago, king of nowhere said:

And they also don't have all the stupid bravado and toxic masculinity that the book tries to depict as innate for men.

Where is any of this in the book? Or is this a reference to war veterans behaving exactly as knowing they are still at war. Or professional bodyguards knowing they can't relax their guard in the field for obvious reasons...

"Toxic..." sounds personal.

  

6 hours ago, EmreY said:

I'm still lost.  How can anyone say that "the books treated men and women with respect"?

I think the idea is in the books, while in-universe many of the female characters, especially Aes Sedai, hold prejudiced views against men, male characters are still given moments to shine and to show goodness and character against that sexist backdrop. Robert Jordan reminds you that this sexist backdrop is wrong, and not justified.

 

In the show, on the other hand, we seem to get confirmation that this sexist backdrop is in fact justified and accurate (so far).

• Show Moiraine says the Breaking of the World comes from male arrogance. Rosamund Pike confirms that Moiraine is correct to hold that view, because she claims Robert Jordan intended to highlight "men abusing their power" with the Breaking. Episode 8's cold open backs this view once more - LTT arrogantly wants to do something unprecedented and unnecessary in peacetime because he thinks he's invincible, against the wishes of his leader Latra Posae.
• Show Liandrin says men hold political power undeservingly and suppresses women who in fact know better than them. Agelmar is completely transformed from being a virtuous, kindly, and competent man from the books into cliched alpha-male twat just to back this view, where he does... exactly that. (Against his own sister, no less. Like goddamn, man!) 

 

Where Robert Jordan condemns this in-universe sexism, Rafe seems to... back it up. Of course, this may change in Season 2, and I suspect it might, unless of course Rafe completely and utterly misunderstands the books. 

 

I would also argue that men did not get any moments to shine. Tam, blademaster, gets bodied by one Trolloc, Lan demonstrates zero martial prowess above that of an average Warder, and is ineffective even regards to tracking his own Aes Sedai. Perrin is completely ineffective, Mat is completely ineffective, Rand's moment given to Amalisa, and so on. (To be fair, Mat was pretty ineffective in the early books too, but for everyone else I don't think it's unfair to say they got nerfed, hard) 

 

I would also argue that women were treated better in the books though, in that, they get character development and growth. Nynaeve and Egwene seem to be end-game Nynaeve and Egwene already in terms of feats and traits. Egwene's agency in choosing to journey alongside the team is removed because she has to be made a candidate of the Dragon Reborn in the name of gender equality. Nynaeve's insufferable stubbornness and her block is no longer present.

 

I would agree that men and women both are more mature with regards to how they don't have super childish opinions about the opposite sex anymore, but that's about it. But then we also get an extremely inappropriate love triangle, so...

Edited January 15, 20223 yr by ilovezam

2 minutes ago, ilovezam said:

 

Where Robert Jordan condemns this in-universe sexism, Rafe seems to... back it up. Of course, this may change in Season 2, and I suspect it will, unless Rafe completely and utterly misunderstands the books.

 

 

 

Season 1 of WoT  is a lecture in how to subvert the message of a source material towards an opposite ideology.  

It is the equivalent of taking Dante's  Divine Comedy and swap people in Hell with those in Paradise.

27 minutes ago, fra85uk said:

 

Season 1 of WoT  is a lecture in how to subvert the message of a source material towards an opposite ideology.  

It is the equivalent of taking Dante's  Divine Comedy and swap people in Hell with those in Paradise.

To be fair to Rafe (it takes me tremendous effort to squeeze out this amount of charity for him), he does mention the importance of "balance" in the books, and says that that'll be in the show.

 

Since no semblance of "balance" whatsoever was featured in Season 1. Here's my *huffs copium* hope:

 

If he used Season 1 to generate evidence to support up this extremely infantile "men are bad and arrogant!" view, only to use Season 2 to collapse it all down by finally showing how extremely unfair and inaccurate that view actually was, he could redeem the show yet...

 

...I wouldn't bet on it happening though.

Edited January 15, 20223 yr by ilovezam