Jump to content
We have a Patreon! Support this website and get exclusive content

Cauthonfan4

Member

  • Joined

  • Last visited

View Profile Find content

Posts posted by Cauthonfan4

    6 minutes ago, Deviations said:

    Brandon has bonifides.  He completed the series as closely as he could to Jordan's style and notes.  I really only had issue with one scene he wrote where I thought he missed represented a character - and truth be told, Jordan's notes could have led him down that path.  The fanbase trusts him.  His interviews make it clear that there are things he disagrees with.

     

    Even though her knowledge of the books is unquestioned, I'm not sure she maintained the trust.

    Could not have said it better myself. BS has come out and said "hey i didn't like this or this and while i don't like this i can see why they did it, etc"

    ·

    Edited by Cauthonfan4

    5 minutes ago, Vartija said:

    I don't doubt for a moment that she's fulfilled her role as a book expert just fine. People probably overestimated her influence and thought she had some kind of veto power over changes when she obviously didn't. 

    My problem is more this.

    why spend so much time propping someone up as a book expert and be so public about it if you're not going to bloody use the book for anything more then  names, a very general plotline, and that's about it?

     

    Because the implication i got during production was they were bringing these people (her, Sanderson, etc) in order to keep it true to the source. 

     

    the various threats are dumb and need to stop but if i was heralded as the book expert i wouldn't be thrilled at all with what they put on screen.

     

    ·

    Edited by Cauthonfan4

    2 minutes ago, Terry05 said:

    7/10 as a failure? Don’t think so. 

    70% as the best? yeah that's not good. considering that most people rarely rate a show below a 5?

     

    think about it this way. if we adjust for how most people rate, 5->9 then you got the equivalent of 3 stars out of 5. hardly something stellar.

    3 minutes ago, Terry05 said:

    More people I know are talking about WoT compared to GoT

    what? not even close. back when GoT came out i couldn't go anywhere without hearing about it. my job at the time literally had a rule where you couldn't spoil anything until the next episode had aired.

    3 minutes ago, Terry05 said:

    season 1 but that’s an unfair comparison given how much more accessible WoT is compared to GoT season 1. I’m from Australia so no HBO over here.

    ahh okay. i guess that makes more sense.

    1 minute ago, Terry05 said:

    Cheers. Confirmed what I expected that removing the top and bottom ratings wouldn’t really affect the overall IMDb rating. Close to my rating of the season as a 7.5 as well.

    it didn't but it also didn't make them go up either. and still a failure in the eyes of most grading systems.

    22 hours ago, Terry05 said:

    47.6% 7-9

    18.2% 2-6

    simple math

    10944*9 = 98496

    14882*8 = 119056

    10154*7 = 71078

    5104*6 = 30624

    3104*5 = 15520

    1891*4 = 7564

    1912*3 = 3824

    1804*2 = 3608

    49795 total voters. 349770 total score.

    349770/49795 = an average of 7.02.

    that means the average is around 70%, which would be around a C minus in school or a 1.7 GPA. hardly something to celebrate.

     

     

    ·

    Edited by Cauthonfan4

    14 hours ago, Humbugged2 said:

    Sam Elloit is 77 and by the time this finishes would be 84 , Weisz is too old at 51 seeing as she is the Trakand kids aunt , Mat Bomer is 44 so Tigraine was -20 when she had him ,Nathalie Emmanuel would be good but she signed up for another 2 FF movies

    While i agree with what you're saying, I basically started my fan casting like a decade ago when these people would have been well suited for the roles. I also think Weisz carries that ageless look far better then Pike does.

    ·

    Edited by Cauthonfan4

    36 minutes ago, ashi said:

    Do you think this is literally true? I don't, while I agree that the show spent too much time on Stepin, and failed to develop especially Perrin and Rand sufficiently. Still, hyperbole doesn't usually do much except increase polarization and establish trenches.

    Yes i believe it is true. even @Lethira the second said in another thread that a friend of hers said "rand was the dude wandering around the bow" and Perrin was "The bloke who fridge his wife". meanwhile we got real meaningful time with stepin, especially in episode 5.

    we literally couldn't even be bothered to give them a training regime with Lan to show them actually learning to use their weapons.

     

    36 minutes ago, ashi said:

    For what it's worth, I think the show mishandled Moiraine's character more than Rand's.

    they definitely did, but at least she got time to develop and do things. Amd the handling of her was botched on purpose to keep Pike around.

    10 minutes ago, EmreY said:

    Very fair comments but we have a lot of story to cover yet, so the opportunities will be there.  Whether they use them is another matter.

    but as Lethira said, it is going to be a huge tone shift if all of a sudden they take the women in season 2 and sideline them as badly as they did the men in season 1. that, as is pointed out, can easily cause backlash against sidelining the female characters.

    whereas if they just developed both equally there is no backlash about the situation to begin with.

    2 minutes ago, Ralph said:

    Which of the three boys developed more in book 1?

    the boys in book 1.

     

    got weapons training with lan, among other lessons

    mat and rand got training from a gleeman.

    perrin learned about his being a wolfbrother first hand.

    rand had his interactions with people in caemlyn, teaching him more about the world.

     

    and that's just some broad strokes.

     

    besides - the girls are already well developed beyond where they were in book 1. why couldn't you develop the boys the same way you developed the girls?

     

     

    1 minute ago, VooDooNut said:

    Answers are answers, insufficient or otherwise. It is no one's obligation to convince you of why show choices were made. Also, these are opinions anyway.

     

    well the argument was that all the big changes were done "#BecauseCovid, #OnlyHad8Hours, or #BarneyJumpedShip" and yet you have been given a list of changes that weren't impacted by covid.

     

    so the argument that this is the reason all the big changes were done because reasons above is complete crap.

    2 minutes ago, VooDooNut said:

    I found all characters (minus Perrin) to be adequately developed for the first season of this show.

    really? what did we get for development from Rand by the end that didn't read like a ham fisted teenage drama?

    because literally stepin got more development then any of the boys.

    ·

    Edited by Cauthonfan4

    8 minutes ago, EmreY said:

    This has been discussed ad nauseam.

    with insufficient answers. they had time to develop the male characters. they CHOSE NOT TO.

    Who was the second most developed male Character after Lan? Stepin. a side character. who died in episode 5. who wasn't even in the books. The fact that they could literally invest two episodes into him and kill him off literally shows that they had time to sink into the 3 boys. and they chose not to. Even Naeblis points out how one sided the character development is.

    the fact that you can literally SIT HERE and tell us they did the male characters fair makes me laugh.

     

    the women in the series had plenty of time to shine. there was no reason to do the men dirty like they did.

     

    You can't sit there and say that "all the big changes are #BecauseCovid, #OnlyHad8Hours, or #BarneyJumpedShip." when we have literal proof of changes that were done that weren't done because of covid.

     

    6 minutes ago, Skipp said:

    Depending on what you consider "Big Changes" we won't know exactly without seeing first/mid draft scripts.  But here are some that we can argue about.

     

    but none of those explain...

    why the male characters got next to no development.

    why they had to take a character widely loved like mat and turn him into something that wasn't enjoyable.

    why they chose to shift rand wiping out the army to the women.

     

    those are all big changes and none of those would have been impacted by covid.

    ·

    Edited by Cauthonfan4

    3 minutes ago, VooDooNut said:

    No. That is not the purpose of this thread. Thank you for following the thread outline and keeping off-topic posts out of this thread.

    so pointing out the flaws in an argument isn't allowed? guess I'll leave the chorus fest alone then.  have fun tooting each others horns with everyone yessing each other.

    ·

    Edited by Cauthonfan4

    4 minutes ago, VooDooNut said:

    Just a friendly reminder that this thread is not the place for rants against the show. Plenty of other threads around for posting content like that. Please take conversations like this elsewhere.

    I am merely pointing out that his argument is flawed. you all sit there and pretend its a great theory but their is zero evidence to support his theory. quite to the contrary.

     

    his claim is based on following the source material.

    show me literally anything in season 1 that doesn't include names that supports we are following the source material so closely you actually believe they will stop developing the female characters before they stop developing the male characters?

    7 minutes ago, Jaysen Gore said:

    With all that, it's why I can see them putting so much more emphasis on the girls at the start - to make their mid-series climaxes (ugh - no double entendre intended) as impactful as possible. I'm not saying I trust this production team to pull it off, but if they are looking at telling the series as a single story, this could be a big  reason why.

    See here is the problem - you're operating from the assumption of the books.

    but we're already wildly deviated from that. Nothing I have seen shows me that this story is even going to follow the source material at all. 

    If we were following the books I could absolutely agree with what you are saying and support it.

    But we have already deviated from that.

    ·

    Edited by Cauthonfan4

    2 minutes ago, orbops said:

    I think average score numbers become secondary. Look at GoT. S1 got a 96% on rotten tomatoes from viewers, while S8 got a 30% from viewers. Based on that horrible rating, why would HBO want to have a prequel series, and yet here comes House of the Dragon later this year.

    because they want to capitalize on what actually went right, with the earlier seasons? Because its still a great IP with lots of potential? Much like say STAR WARS. you know, that little known IP that is still being used to this day?

    1 minute ago, orbops said:

    Every show sees ratings drop as follow on seasons come out. Just look at the books' ratings: bk 1 had 14,736 ratings, bk 4 had 5,295 ratings, bk 8 had 3,645 ratings. I would consider probably at least 5-8 of the middle books to be somewhat bland and boring also - yet I stuck it out to the end.

    I'm talking overall rating. not how many ratings they had. so for example. Let's say the average score from viewers of season 1 is 7. Season 2 could easily see that drop substantially when they realize that yes, the Dragon is Rand. 

    ·

    Edited by Cauthonfan4

    39 minutes ago, Weird_Old_Lady said:

    And I think TG fight will be a major trauma for both her  and Egwene. 

    Yeah considering i don't recall any trauma from her after getting dragged around by a trolloc, Or from watching Lan almost die in front of her, and the way the rest of her season 1 story arc has gone I highly doubt we see anything of the sort. She has been built up since the beginning of the series as a Mary Sue of epic proportions. Nothing has slowed her down.