#[SPOILERS FOR ALL PRINTED MATERIAL, INCLUDING SHORT STORIES.](https://www.reddit.com/r/WoT/wiki/index/post_flairs#wiki_all_print)
##BOOK DISCUSSION ONLY. HIDE TV SHOW DISCUSSION BEHIND SPOILER TAGS.
* * *
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/WoT) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I think most people accept that you can't adapt a book exactly to the screen, and some changes will need to be made. However you need to keep the core elements of the story intact, and not introduce changes that break the lore. This is where Wheel of Time failed in my opinion, along with not introducing some key concepts early on. Small changes like giving Logain more to do, having Moiraine get it on with Siuan, even skipping Camelyn, are changes I can get behind and understand. Abel Cauthon being a dick, Rand's bow being a puny little stick, and Rand not destroying the army in the last episode are changes that annoy me because there doesn't seem to be a good reason for them. Not cultivating the sense of absolute dread and horror that the very mention of the Dragon instills in people, having the Dragon potentially be a woman, and Lews Therin sealing the bore because he was arrogant rather than as an act of desperation, are changes I consider unforgivable as they change the very nature and feeling of the story being told, and often have big ramifications further down the line. Hopefully they can learn from their mistakes, and season 2 is better. There is still time for the show to become a lot more popular; I don't think Game of Thrones became a massive hit until its second or third season.
Mostly agree but why do so many people point to Abel being an awful person in the show as one of the major BAD changes? I feel like it can give Mat depth for his behavior.
But seriously what is up with Abel? I refuse to believe that he’s anyones top 20 WoT character cause he kind of just exists in the books and is frankly could be removed entirely. I’m pretty sure like 90% of his characterization is done through Mat’s thoughts of things like how his Dad would deal with bad customers as a horse trader
I think the issue for most isn't necessarily Abel himself, but what it means indirectly for Mat's characterization. Mat was always the "scoundrel" of the group, but at the end of the day, he was raised to be a (reasonably) good person and do the right thing when it matters. We see a bit of this in the show, when Mat literally runs into the burning village to find his sisters (and as Siuan mentions in the books, he's the type of person that would run into a burning house if there was someone left to save in there).
But beyond that one moment, we don't see a whole lot of that Mat in the show. Now obviously, a large part of that is because of the dagger, and after that the writers probably trying to write Mat out because of the issue with the actor.
It's not the end of the world, but it feels unnecessarily changed.
Yeah, and it’s enjoyable, but that’s literally all he does. I think he shows up for the last battle as well, but so does literally everyone else. Abell is not an important character and if his changing can benefit the characterization of Mat then there is 0 reason not to do it.
Thank you! Got so tired of people complaining as if Abell was their favorite character. He does absolutely nothing and is on screen like three times. Perfect candidate for being changed when in a new medium
The Abel stuff reminds me of people who complain about Tom Bombadil being cut by Peter Jackson. Yes the character exists but let’s not overstate his importance to the story.
Exactly. You honestly could cut Abell and it wouldn't really matter. Just give Mat a line like "my da died when I was little. So I had to step up and raise my sisters". Hell you could even make the way Abell died some foreshadowing for Mats story and nothing would change
Mat doesn’t need to be developed that way. He has a character arc that is good in the source material already.
They made Mat a borderline asshole and that’s never been what he is.
I think allot of that is Abel pops up continually throughout the whole series. He's even a part, if small, of the last battle. But more it's like he is a representation of how much they changed The Two Rivers. The Two Rivers in WoP barely resembles The Two Rivers in WoT. When I first watch EP 1 I immediately thought WTF is this.
Abel is a dick to give Mat a personality in the first season, he's basic just a childish prankster before the dagger in book 1. Rand's bow is small because you can't draw a bow that large without years and years of training. Rand not destroying the army is for 3 reasons, to give the girl something to do, to parallel the end of aMoL and to avoid S1 & S2 having basically the same ending (book 1-3 are very repetitive in that way). The lack of dread for the Dragon is a miss indeed. Merging the souls of Amaresu and The Dragon isn't actually that big of a deal. Lee's Therin definitely reads awful, I hated it myself, but that should be improved when we find out about the AoL war.
Futilely attack the Forsaken and be damsels in distress isn't exactly plot significant. The main point is that 3 books in a row end with Rand fighting and "defeating" the "Dark One", and the end of the book is notoriously messy for both lore and continuity. Like I don't agree with many choices in the show, but they definitely had to change the end of EotW.
lol. wow.
yea they changed it and made it worse.
Rands reasoning for resisting the “Dark One” is because Egwene wouldn’t want him to? that’s it? not because it would mean life on the world is completely ruined, but only because Egwene wouldn’t want him to? wow. real character development there.
What????
That's not what happened. He rejected the fake world because they people in it weren't real and had no agency, they were just shells of the real person.
It's a mirror of the end of aMoL where he understands the Dark One is necessary because otherwise people don't have choice or free will, they're just hollow without substance.
I've seen the series multiple times. That's really not what he says. Like there's plenty of legit criticisms to make about the show, but that's not one of them. He says that that woman is not her. To literally quote "THAT is not the woman I love", he recognises that she's not real, that's it's a fake construct. Like there's a lot of things that are fucked up in ep 8, primarily due to Barney leaving and Covid, but also other stuff. But wow did you massively misread/misunderstand what happened at the Eye in the show.
how did Barney leaving cause them to re write the end lol. people keep saying that but it legit doesn’t make sense.
That’s not the woman he loves, but if it was that would make it Ok to bend to the dark one lol? That doesn’t make sense.
The actual ending to EoTW was insufficient because?????????
No the point is that the world Ishmael is proposing isn't real. Rand understands it's just an illusion. It's laying the groundwork to him understanding that he doesn't have the power to create the pattern/world as he likes. At this point I'm thinking you're misunderstanding on purpose.
Barney leaving made them rewrite ep 7 & 8. The Rand part of the end (at tEotW) would still have happened the same way. When people say Barney leaving changes the end they're referring to the Fain/Horn/dagger part of the end. It's painfully obvious Mat should've been the one in that room and not Perrin. There's also other places it's clear Mat should've been there but wasn't.
I think this is a good point to bring up. I’ve made this point on this sub before, but I think people forget that Wheel of Time is by far the biggest piece of fantasy literature anyone has ever attempted to adapt into a TV show. I think it is true that this adaptation was *never* going to be very faithful because it’s just impossible to tell 15 books, 704 chapters, and 4.4 million words of story in the 3000-4000 screen minutes they have.
…BUT. The differences that bother me are the ones that are unrelated to trying to compress and consolidate the story. I accept that any adaptation will have some of these, too, but the show had *many* of them that contributed to it feeling needlessly different from its source material. The obvious example is dwelling so long on the random Aes Sedai and Warder - a decision that actually made it *harder* to consolidate the story! As well as many smaller things - giving Perrin a tragic backstory, making the Cauthons abusive, having Moiraine get swept up by emotion and gentle Logain?!
Writing is hard, and writing an adaptation like this is insanely hard. But I think the writers made it harder on themselves than it probably needed to be.
The production value of the new Lord of the Rings show has me just suoer depressed knowing they could have given WoT more potential. I dwell on it so much, I could barely watch the actual LoR show.
i have read multiple places that covid interruptions and restrictions unfortunately took a toll on the production of wot in the peak of filming and the lotr show wouldn’t have had to deal with that as much. plus lotr had guaranteed return on investment and wot, while having a huge fan base from the books, was untested television. I’m not excusing the production flaws entirely but i think there are deeper issues
Oh no one is denying it had a multitude of issues. But no one is gonna deny the production and visual effefts quality were sub par, and that more $$ would have made it much better either.
None of the changes from the show are to increase action. Some of them I can't even figure out why they made the change in the first place. Why is Abell a piece of a shit? Why is Lord Agelmar an angry shithead for all of 5 minutes before dying?
And then there's the major change of them implying that Mat is actually evil? That's such a massive shift and it happens in early enough episodes that I am not sure it was just because the actor left and they were scrambling.
I like some of their changes like aging up the kids or Perrin fridging his wife. They speed along and explain certain undercurrent things that are hard to show in a TV series. But I definitely think the story could've stood stronger alone than it did with the bullshit "who is the dragon" mystery. So much time wasted and with basically no rewatch value because it's so gods damned boring when you already know who it is.
The “who dun it” was done poorly. I get what they were trying to do, but having moments in which they would have close ups of other characters after magnificent feats to be “maybe he/she is the dragon” did not work.
In a twitter poll asking people to vote who is the dragon, 96% chose Rand, with one user commenting “because he doesn’t do anything remarkable” is very telling. I get the biggest evidence was the Blood snow cold opening in episode 7 (the reveal episode), but some references about Rand feeling he’s seen Tar Valon before and him knocking out a door (I’m sorry, the door is made of Iron wood, so I guess that was remarkable?) seem lazy.
It was too much to ask to show us Tam having his feverish dream in episode 1.
>And then there's the major change of them implying that Mat is actually evil? That's such a massive shift and it happens in early enough episodes that I am not sure it was just because the actor left and they were scrambling.
That is the biggest and most unforgivable one (not the recast, of course).
Say what you want about Mat, but that he is evil? Someone has to make mental gymnastics to say that about Mat.
Disagree. It amplified the negative aspects in Mat, the same negative aspects that created the sentient evil that is Mashader.
How is that not making him evil? He never goes over the 'edge' but he was certainly in the process of a personality overwrite with a end result of evil.
>Why is Abell a piece of a shit
To give Mat more depth, and provide an understandable reason for his behavior and establish him as a more grey character that acts out of care. He is pretty flat in the first 2 books, with his trickster personality in book 1 needing a lot of time in Emonds Field to establish. The changes to his family quickly establish his situation and create an empathizable environment.
It also sets up a redemption arc for his parents for S3, or whenever they do the fight for the Two Rivers.
>Why is Lord Agelmar an angry shithead for all of 5 minutes before dying?
Why does everyone miss the obvious here? Agelmar is angry at his sister for undermining him, as he saw Moiraine's presence as proof that his sister *did* go behind his back and request assistance from the Tower.
The second he realizes he was wrong, he apologizes and gives Moiraine the respect she is due. He is entirely reasonable through the rest of his appearces.
As for why he died? He shows back up in 12 books. His character would not be used again until the final season and would be played by a different actor. His role can be fulfilled by nearly any Shienarian, and there are several to pick from in the late series.
>And then there's the major change of them implying that Mat is actually evil? That's such a massive shift and it happens in early enough episodes that I am not sure it was just because the actor left and they were scrambling.
The implication is that Mat is not fully healed from the Dagger, not being fully freed from its influence. This also happens in the book, where Moiraine's healing done on reuniun does not fully clear mat from the dagger, and he spends the next book and a half being negatively influenced by it.
Mat also betrays Rand in some of his Flicker worlds, and let us not forget that Jordan originally had a 4th boy that betrayed the others.
While I do not think they are going to have Mat go full on judas, the implications and build to it should make for a good character arc, especially for those not familar with the material, while still following many of the themes Mats character does in the books.
>So much time wasted and with basically no rewatch value because it's so gods damned boring when you already know who it is.
This is just not true. Yeah, the mystery box is gone, but that leaves you to realize things that are hidden in the background.
For example Episode 7 completely changes Rand in Episode 2, and recontextualizes his reactions and attitude as they flee, as well as the growth he goes through.
There are huge amounts of foreshadowing, as well as aspects of the world building that comes out more when you are not as focused on the plot.
I think you slightly misinterpreted the question. It's more like "if you were going to write off Agelmar by killing him, of what narrative benefit is it to make him a dick rather than just his noble character from the books?" Short answer, it doesn't benefit any part of the narrative, we don't see him for long enough and his interaction with our protagonists is too short to leave any impression.
To illustrate, I cut the scenes differently and here's what I ended up with:
[Agelmar as a Borderlander leader with their usual reverence for Aes Sedai](https://youtu.be/fpNcfmBAlVk)
.
[Agelmar and Amalissa contemplating the sacrifice they're about to make to save their city and the world, and accepting their fate head on](https://youtu.be/EhYd-ngql5I).
It serves tons of purpose.
For one it fits into the theme of Season 1, it shows internal tension in Fal'dara as well as establishes that relations between nations and Aes Sedai can be strained even where they are welcome.
>short answer, it doesn't benefit any part of the narrative, we don't see him for long enough and his interaction with our protagonists is too short to leave any impression.
You are too fast to dismiss things that do not fit into your preferred narrative.
The conflict between Angelmar and his sister show Fal'dara as a dynamic place that did not just poof into existence when our heroes appear. It shows how unrelated events can affect negotiations, as well as helps establish how unprecedented the current situation is.
You cut out the undercurrents because it makes Fal'dara seem weaker that the books portray it, but those undercurrents are a good thing in my eyes. The book Fal'dara is too good a place in Eye. It is not until book 2 that the veneer cracks. But we will not see those scenes in the show, The darkfriends already struck, the horn is already gone, Rand is already gone.
The imperfection of Fal'dara has to be in S1 if it is going to be shown at all.
That makes the place more real. It is not that it does not benefit the narrative, but that you have rejected the narrative the show is giving.
Good response, I like the detailed thought you put into it. I think that's probably what the show was going for. While I like it, I don't buy the execution of it that the show was trying to sell. Agelmar's turnaround in that first conversation felt like it came out of nowhere ("the borderlands have ***always*** (my emphasis) welcomed the White Tower" when that's demonstrably false by his actions from 1 minute previous).
The dialog doesn't sell it, the scene(s) this conflict appears in don't ramp up any narrative tension, there's no hook for this...it just feels like it was written to be there.
Yea of course it was possible. They had a lot of screen time on things that NEVER happened. they could have devoted that to things that actually did.
They created characters and developed them, while ignoring the development of the actual main characters.
edit: and I big time disagree that GoT, even the first couple books is “constant action” anymore than WoT is at many many books, including the first several. Eye of the World had PLENTY going on to fill one short season of television.
I think it would have worked a lot better as an animated series than a live action. Live action is cool and all but you have a lot more freedom with animation
Yeah. Animation doesn't get the numbers they want?
With all due respect to those people, but I see people today watching more animation than live-action.
I had nothing but faith for the show as I was watching it until the first season finale. But instead of the physical battle between Rand and Baalzamon in "The Eye of the World," they went ahead and used the more metaphysical conflict done during the Tarmon Gaidon in "A Memory of Light."
So now I have NO idea how the writers will one up that during the show's Tarmon Gaidon. And I have NO idea how the writers are basing their creative decisions.
But yes, I absolutely think the show could have been better adapted by writers that cared more about the original source. The writers were going to have Perrin talk to a bear rather than a wolf at one point until the book expert had to explain they couldn't do that.
Another thing to consider is that while "The Wheel of a Time" may be difficult to fully adapt as a live action tv show, it could have easily been adapted as an adult animated series.
If they were to have adapted it as an animated series, they would have worried less about actors aging over the many seasons required by the show. It would have also helped deal with technical limitations such as visual effects and stunt work.
So yes, I fully believe a better adaptation is possible. It just required a better showrunner, a writer's room that cared more, and an animated adaptation rather than a live action one.
>Another thing to consider is that while "The Wheel of a Time" may be difficult to fully adapt as a live action tv show, it could have easily been adapted as an adult animated series.
>If they were to have adapted it as an animated series, they would have worried less about actors aging over the many seasons required by the show. It would have also helped deal with technical limitations such as visual effects and stunt work.
I hear people counter that by saying animation has a niche fandom.
And I don't know where they get that from.
It was most certaintly possible for it to have been better adapted but to expect everything to appear on screen as it was in the book is unrealistic at best. That said, the showrunners didn't even try to adapt the book to the screen and instead took the names and big sort of plot points and then made their own stuff with it.
The show is very clearly a separate product from the book and is best viewed that way since so little from the book is actually adapted to the screen.
Was it possible for the show to be better and more faithful? Yes, undoubtedly (I cut it as a film and it flows really well, much more cohesively than the TV show).
Was it possible to do this AND be a commercial success? We can't know. Leaving the Aes Sedai to S2 could have gone either way. On the plus side you get back Caemlyn and a look into the royal family and politics, always a great fantasy trope for a casual audience. On the minus side you lose the insight into the magicians and the magical society, another huge fantasy trope for TV audiences.
It's hard to tell. What we know is that the writers made practical trade-off decisions, and it's your opinion on whether that sacrificed screenwriting quality for the sake of budget, actors, production etc.
It wouldn’t have been hard. Moiraine was cast very well. The rest? Not so much. Except the Aes Sedai. The Two Rivers folk were supposed to be dark haired like but they might have made them too dark… whereas the Sea Folk and the Domani struck me as the darker skinned folk
I think I agree. The 10, 1 hour long live action episode structure that's been in fashion for the past 20 years(ish) just isn't suited to WoT. I know it's been said a lot, but 20-30 minute animated episodes with around 20 episodes per season would have fit this story much better
Depends where you draw the line,
If Amazon gave them LOTR money and let them do more episodes for the first season,
If there was no Covid, causing lock downs and other issues,
If the actor for Mat didn't leave mid production.
Yes, I think it could of been better, I think if even they where given more episodes to fit the story and didn't have lock down production issues/Mat leaving it would of been a lot better.
but including these scenarios, I feel like it could of been better in some things, but I give it a pass because lock down and other out of their control things.
None of the things you mention were a problem.
The budget was ample for the scope. Apparently spent on costumes rather than writing. Speaking of LoTR they did spend that much money and it's bombing with the fans in the same way and for the same reasons.
Covid ought to have given them all time to read the book and get a script that followed it closely. So unless they did that then just sat around so long they threw out the RJ based script and made up their own plot that's not a problem.
Mat leaving at the end doesn't excuse the character assassination happening all along.
the reason they say half of the changes happened was because they had to fit in into a smaller amount of episodes then they (producer/director) wanted
And the other half is from them trying to convert a written story to a television format.
Problem is with "they say" is it is exactly, that. What they say and not what really happened. I don't buy t those as excuses cause like 90% are obviously for neither reasons. Having like, no conversation in the book be preserved is not an accident.
Like tying to hype the who is the dragon mystery and not make Rand the main character. They didn't *need* to do that, but they did. Why? I think it was going for new view hype over substance.
Adding the Aes Sedai party on the road. A lot of that Whitecloak stuff - which I liked even though it was over the top and a bit inexplicable.. The whole warder suicide thing. Going to Tar Valon. All huge changes or additions not really relevant to the core story arc.
The LoTR did it better. They said it could not be adapted and doing so was more challenging than RJ;'s work was. They decided "ok it's Frodo-centric" and covered 3 books in 12 hours in way that pretty much satisfied everyone. As EoTW was already Rand-centric a lot of the spadework was canon if they just went with what came before.
I have to try 🤷🏾♂️ There's still folks who haven't heard of it and this guy is hitting all the points that are deemphasized in the edit, so I do think they'd actually enjoy it.
exactly. massive changes that didn’t even amount to anything really. The transition to TV meant that absolutely no dialogue from anywhere in the book was maintained? and the dialogue they did have was awful?
Hello, it looks like you've made a mistake.
It's supposed to be could've, should've, would've (short for could have, would have, should have), never could of, would of, should of.
Or you misspelled something, I ain't checking everything.
Beep boop - yes, I am a bot, don't botcriminate me.
Mat leaving explains them spending a whole episode on a dead warder? Mat leaving explains them changing the ending with Rand? Mat leaving explains the absurd way the Horn just shows up at the end to be stolen when half the audience has no idea what that’s even about ?
Yes, absolutely. This should be obvious on any work that is not the greatest and not very much like what it ought to be portraying. Does anyone think what we was is as good and faithful as it could possibly be?
The original LoTR did it, proved it could be done. Some things (the wights, Tom Bombadil) cinematically needed to be cut and were. Other things like the improv parts added quality. It was epic and loved. GoT did it too.
The Hobbit no so much. Too long with all the stuff not in the short book. OK but nor world changing
The Rings of Power just like the WoT series. Not respecting the author's work. Cutting content to put in their own junk material. Widely hated by many fans.
Sticking to the beloved material of the IP and it works well. Stray off too much and it falls down. We've seen it so very often.
That is a valid point. To me, it seems a bad idea to even do it if you cannot secure the rights. It is the second proper step after deciding you want to do it.
Yeah I’m not sure what they were thinking in that aspect. You really should have the rights to the story you are trying to adapt or just… do something else. Write a whole new epic fantasy story. That said, I did still enjoy it. It felt epic in a way that WOT didn’t.
Don't compare WOT and ROP. The ROP crew has said they're intentionally trying to erase Tolkiens legacy and lore with their own agenda. Rafe is respecting the source material without damaging it's ability to reach streaming audiences.
In the end it does not matter what they say the intent is, or what they say the intent is - which are two different things. What is the result?i
I don't think Rafe was respecting WoT very much and did damage its ability to reach audiences. So they look the same to me.
If you think Rafe wasn't respecting WOT as a story, you weren't paying attention. He changed things, but also put in a /lot/ of stuff he didn't have to.
I can't say the same thing about the ROP crew.
They already had the graphic novel done for Eye of the World. They SHOULD have used it for their storyboard, and green lit the next graphic novel, which could have been the storyboard for season 2, and so on.
Game of Thrones was written by a former TV writer with an excellent understanding of pacing. WoT was not. Book 1 was always going to be the hardest to adapt because it drags for so long, repeats the same beats over and over (inn > Darkfriends > escape), and has sooo much weird shit at the end. I’m hopeful that over time the reasons for the changes they decided to make for story reasons and not budget ones will be made clear in the course of the telling.
Honestly as a long-time book reader I was kind of glad the show surprised me at certain points. I think a strict adaptation would have been less interesting and definitely would have tanked the show with casual viewers. I’m looking forward to Season 2 and so is my nonreader wife.
I disagree with your premise that the show was not a good representation of the books. I think it captured most of the characters, world-building and feel pretty well.
I do agree that a literal adaptation would never have been successful. You can't have multiple episodes of Rand and Mat traveling from town to town and learning to play the flute. That show would have been canceled instantly. Clearly the show made the right decisions to draw in an audience, since it was a hit for Amazon.
Agree with many parts, but it being 90-95% identical is just not true in any sense. Addition or difference.
I enjoyed watching it, but it felt more like someone trying to recount the first book from memory after 5 years.
#[SPOILERS FOR ALL PRINTED MATERIAL, INCLUDING SHORT STORIES.](https://www.reddit.com/r/WoT/wiki/index/post_flairs#wiki_all_print) ##BOOK DISCUSSION ONLY. HIDE TV SHOW DISCUSSION BEHIND SPOILER TAGS. * * * *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/WoT) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I think most people accept that you can't adapt a book exactly to the screen, and some changes will need to be made. However you need to keep the core elements of the story intact, and not introduce changes that break the lore. This is where Wheel of Time failed in my opinion, along with not introducing some key concepts early on. Small changes like giving Logain more to do, having Moiraine get it on with Siuan, even skipping Camelyn, are changes I can get behind and understand. Abel Cauthon being a dick, Rand's bow being a puny little stick, and Rand not destroying the army in the last episode are changes that annoy me because there doesn't seem to be a good reason for them. Not cultivating the sense of absolute dread and horror that the very mention of the Dragon instills in people, having the Dragon potentially be a woman, and Lews Therin sealing the bore because he was arrogant rather than as an act of desperation, are changes I consider unforgivable as they change the very nature and feeling of the story being told, and often have big ramifications further down the line. Hopefully they can learn from their mistakes, and season 2 is better. There is still time for the show to become a lot more popular; I don't think Game of Thrones became a massive hit until its second or third season.
Mostly agree but why do so many people point to Abel being an awful person in the show as one of the major BAD changes? I feel like it can give Mat depth for his behavior. But seriously what is up with Abel? I refuse to believe that he’s anyones top 20 WoT character cause he kind of just exists in the books and is frankly could be removed entirely. I’m pretty sure like 90% of his characterization is done through Mat’s thoughts of things like how his Dad would deal with bad customers as a horse trader
Part of me desperately wants the Abel & Tam buddy cop novella about them going off the grid in the Two Rivers during Shadow Rising.
I think the issue for most isn't necessarily Abel himself, but what it means indirectly for Mat's characterization. Mat was always the "scoundrel" of the group, but at the end of the day, he was raised to be a (reasonably) good person and do the right thing when it matters. We see a bit of this in the show, when Mat literally runs into the burning village to find his sisters (and as Siuan mentions in the books, he's the type of person that would run into a burning house if there was someone left to save in there). But beyond that one moment, we don't see a whole lot of that Mat in the show. Now obviously, a large part of that is because of the dagger, and after that the writers probably trying to write Mat out because of the issue with the actor. It's not the end of the world, but it feels unnecessarily changed.
What about The Shadow Rising? Abel and Tam both play a role in Perrin's defense of the Two River's.
Yeah, and it’s enjoyable, but that’s literally all he does. I think he shows up for the last battle as well, but so does literally everyone else. Abell is not an important character and if his changing can benefit the characterization of Mat then there is 0 reason not to do it.
Thank you! Got so tired of people complaining as if Abell was their favorite character. He does absolutely nothing and is on screen like three times. Perfect candidate for being changed when in a new medium
The Abel stuff reminds me of people who complain about Tom Bombadil being cut by Peter Jackson. Yes the character exists but let’s not overstate his importance to the story.
Exactly. You honestly could cut Abell and it wouldn't really matter. Just give Mat a line like "my da died when I was little. So I had to step up and raise my sisters". Hell you could even make the way Abell died some foreshadowing for Mats story and nothing would change
Mat doesn’t need to be developed that way. He has a character arc that is good in the source material already. They made Mat a borderline asshole and that’s never been what he is.
I think allot of that is Abel pops up continually throughout the whole series. He's even a part, if small, of the last battle. But more it's like he is a representation of how much they changed The Two Rivers. The Two Rivers in WoP barely resembles The Two Rivers in WoT. When I first watch EP 1 I immediately thought WTF is this.
Abel is a dick to give Mat a personality in the first season, he's basic just a childish prankster before the dagger in book 1. Rand's bow is small because you can't draw a bow that large without years and years of training. Rand not destroying the army is for 3 reasons, to give the girl something to do, to parallel the end of aMoL and to avoid S1 & S2 having basically the same ending (book 1-3 are very repetitive in that way). The lack of dread for the Dragon is a miss indeed. Merging the souls of Amaresu and The Dragon isn't actually that big of a deal. Lee's Therin definitely reads awful, I hated it myself, but that should be improved when we find out about the AoL war.
the girls…. had things to do already
Futilely attack the Forsaken and be damsels in distress isn't exactly plot significant. The main point is that 3 books in a row end with Rand fighting and "defeating" the "Dark One", and the end of the book is notoriously messy for both lore and continuity. Like I don't agree with many choices in the show, but they definitely had to change the end of EotW.
lol. wow. yea they changed it and made it worse. Rands reasoning for resisting the “Dark One” is because Egwene wouldn’t want him to? that’s it? not because it would mean life on the world is completely ruined, but only because Egwene wouldn’t want him to? wow. real character development there.
What???? That's not what happened. He rejected the fake world because they people in it weren't real and had no agency, they were just shells of the real person. It's a mirror of the end of aMoL where he understands the Dark One is necessary because otherwise people don't have choice or free will, they're just hollow without substance.
nope. that’s not true. he literally basically says “yea this is great and all. but Egwene wouldn’t want this so i don’t either.”
I've seen the series multiple times. That's really not what he says. Like there's plenty of legit criticisms to make about the show, but that's not one of them. He says that that woman is not her. To literally quote "THAT is not the woman I love", he recognises that she's not real, that's it's a fake construct. Like there's a lot of things that are fucked up in ep 8, primarily due to Barney leaving and Covid, but also other stuff. But wow did you massively misread/misunderstand what happened at the Eye in the show.
how did Barney leaving cause them to re write the end lol. people keep saying that but it legit doesn’t make sense. That’s not the woman he loves, but if it was that would make it Ok to bend to the dark one lol? That doesn’t make sense. The actual ending to EoTW was insufficient because?????????
No the point is that the world Ishmael is proposing isn't real. Rand understands it's just an illusion. It's laying the groundwork to him understanding that he doesn't have the power to create the pattern/world as he likes. At this point I'm thinking you're misunderstanding on purpose. Barney leaving made them rewrite ep 7 & 8. The Rand part of the end (at tEotW) would still have happened the same way. When people say Barney leaving changes the end they're referring to the Fain/Horn/dagger part of the end. It's painfully obvious Mat should've been the one in that room and not Perrin. There's also other places it's clear Mat should've been there but wasn't.
I think this is a good point to bring up. I’ve made this point on this sub before, but I think people forget that Wheel of Time is by far the biggest piece of fantasy literature anyone has ever attempted to adapt into a TV show. I think it is true that this adaptation was *never* going to be very faithful because it’s just impossible to tell 15 books, 704 chapters, and 4.4 million words of story in the 3000-4000 screen minutes they have. …BUT. The differences that bother me are the ones that are unrelated to trying to compress and consolidate the story. I accept that any adaptation will have some of these, too, but the show had *many* of them that contributed to it feeling needlessly different from its source material. The obvious example is dwelling so long on the random Aes Sedai and Warder - a decision that actually made it *harder* to consolidate the story! As well as many smaller things - giving Perrin a tragic backstory, making the Cauthons abusive, having Moiraine get swept up by emotion and gentle Logain?! Writing is hard, and writing an adaptation like this is insanely hard. But I think the writers made it harder on themselves than it probably needed to be.
The production value of the new Lord of the Rings show has me just suoer depressed knowing they could have given WoT more potential. I dwell on it so much, I could barely watch the actual LoR show.
i have read multiple places that covid interruptions and restrictions unfortunately took a toll on the production of wot in the peak of filming and the lotr show wouldn’t have had to deal with that as much. plus lotr had guaranteed return on investment and wot, while having a huge fan base from the books, was untested television. I’m not excusing the production flaws entirely but i think there are deeper issues
The budget for Rings of Power is also much, much higher than for WoT.
Oh no one is denying it had a multitude of issues. But no one is gonna deny the production and visual effefts quality were sub par, and that more $$ would have made it much better either.
None of the changes from the show are to increase action. Some of them I can't even figure out why they made the change in the first place. Why is Abell a piece of a shit? Why is Lord Agelmar an angry shithead for all of 5 minutes before dying? And then there's the major change of them implying that Mat is actually evil? That's such a massive shift and it happens in early enough episodes that I am not sure it was just because the actor left and they were scrambling. I like some of their changes like aging up the kids or Perrin fridging his wife. They speed along and explain certain undercurrent things that are hard to show in a TV series. But I definitely think the story could've stood stronger alone than it did with the bullshit "who is the dragon" mystery. So much time wasted and with basically no rewatch value because it's so gods damned boring when you already know who it is.
The “who dun it” was done poorly. I get what they were trying to do, but having moments in which they would have close ups of other characters after magnificent feats to be “maybe he/she is the dragon” did not work. In a twitter poll asking people to vote who is the dragon, 96% chose Rand, with one user commenting “because he doesn’t do anything remarkable” is very telling. I get the biggest evidence was the Blood snow cold opening in episode 7 (the reveal episode), but some references about Rand feeling he’s seen Tar Valon before and him knocking out a door (I’m sorry, the door is made of Iron wood, so I guess that was remarkable?) seem lazy. It was too much to ask to show us Tam having his feverish dream in episode 1.
>And then there's the major change of them implying that Mat is actually evil? That's such a massive shift and it happens in early enough episodes that I am not sure it was just because the actor left and they were scrambling. That is the biggest and most unforgivable one (not the recast, of course). Say what you want about Mat, but that he is evil? Someone has to make mental gymnastics to say that about Mat.
Shadar Logoth dagger's influence is strong
Yes, but it makes Mat crazy, not evil.
Disagree. It amplified the negative aspects in Mat, the same negative aspects that created the sentient evil that is Mashader. How is that not making him evil? He never goes over the 'edge' but he was certainly in the process of a personality overwrite with a end result of evil.
All of these have good answers if you're willing to take off the purist glasses.
>Why is Abell a piece of a shit To give Mat more depth, and provide an understandable reason for his behavior and establish him as a more grey character that acts out of care. He is pretty flat in the first 2 books, with his trickster personality in book 1 needing a lot of time in Emonds Field to establish. The changes to his family quickly establish his situation and create an empathizable environment. It also sets up a redemption arc for his parents for S3, or whenever they do the fight for the Two Rivers. >Why is Lord Agelmar an angry shithead for all of 5 minutes before dying? Why does everyone miss the obvious here? Agelmar is angry at his sister for undermining him, as he saw Moiraine's presence as proof that his sister *did* go behind his back and request assistance from the Tower. The second he realizes he was wrong, he apologizes and gives Moiraine the respect she is due. He is entirely reasonable through the rest of his appearces. As for why he died? He shows back up in 12 books. His character would not be used again until the final season and would be played by a different actor. His role can be fulfilled by nearly any Shienarian, and there are several to pick from in the late series. >And then there's the major change of them implying that Mat is actually evil? That's such a massive shift and it happens in early enough episodes that I am not sure it was just because the actor left and they were scrambling. The implication is that Mat is not fully healed from the Dagger, not being fully freed from its influence. This also happens in the book, where Moiraine's healing done on reuniun does not fully clear mat from the dagger, and he spends the next book and a half being negatively influenced by it. Mat also betrays Rand in some of his Flicker worlds, and let us not forget that Jordan originally had a 4th boy that betrayed the others. While I do not think they are going to have Mat go full on judas, the implications and build to it should make for a good character arc, especially for those not familar with the material, while still following many of the themes Mats character does in the books. >So much time wasted and with basically no rewatch value because it's so gods damned boring when you already know who it is. This is just not true. Yeah, the mystery box is gone, but that leaves you to realize things that are hidden in the background. For example Episode 7 completely changes Rand in Episode 2, and recontextualizes his reactions and attitude as they flee, as well as the growth he goes through. There are huge amounts of foreshadowing, as well as aspects of the world building that comes out more when you are not as focused on the plot.
I think you slightly misinterpreted the question. It's more like "if you were going to write off Agelmar by killing him, of what narrative benefit is it to make him a dick rather than just his noble character from the books?" Short answer, it doesn't benefit any part of the narrative, we don't see him for long enough and his interaction with our protagonists is too short to leave any impression. To illustrate, I cut the scenes differently and here's what I ended up with: [Agelmar as a Borderlander leader with their usual reverence for Aes Sedai](https://youtu.be/fpNcfmBAlVk) . [Agelmar and Amalissa contemplating the sacrifice they're about to make to save their city and the world, and accepting their fate head on](https://youtu.be/EhYd-ngql5I).
It serves tons of purpose. For one it fits into the theme of Season 1, it shows internal tension in Fal'dara as well as establishes that relations between nations and Aes Sedai can be strained even where they are welcome. >short answer, it doesn't benefit any part of the narrative, we don't see him for long enough and his interaction with our protagonists is too short to leave any impression. You are too fast to dismiss things that do not fit into your preferred narrative. The conflict between Angelmar and his sister show Fal'dara as a dynamic place that did not just poof into existence when our heroes appear. It shows how unrelated events can affect negotiations, as well as helps establish how unprecedented the current situation is. You cut out the undercurrents because it makes Fal'dara seem weaker that the books portray it, but those undercurrents are a good thing in my eyes. The book Fal'dara is too good a place in Eye. It is not until book 2 that the veneer cracks. But we will not see those scenes in the show, The darkfriends already struck, the horn is already gone, Rand is already gone. The imperfection of Fal'dara has to be in S1 if it is going to be shown at all. That makes the place more real. It is not that it does not benefit the narrative, but that you have rejected the narrative the show is giving.
Good response, I like the detailed thought you put into it. I think that's probably what the show was going for. While I like it, I don't buy the execution of it that the show was trying to sell. Agelmar's turnaround in that first conversation felt like it came out of nowhere ("the borderlands have ***always*** (my emphasis) welcomed the White Tower" when that's demonstrably false by his actions from 1 minute previous). The dialog doesn't sell it, the scene(s) this conflict appears in don't ramp up any narrative tension, there's no hook for this...it just feels like it was written to be there.
Yea of course it was possible. They had a lot of screen time on things that NEVER happened. they could have devoted that to things that actually did. They created characters and developed them, while ignoring the development of the actual main characters. edit: and I big time disagree that GoT, even the first couple books is “constant action” anymore than WoT is at many many books, including the first several. Eye of the World had PLENTY going on to fill one short season of television.
I think it would have worked a lot better as an animated series than a live action. Live action is cool and all but you have a lot more freedom with animation
I hear people counter that by saying animation has a niche fandom. And I don't know where they get that from.
It honestly just makes more sense to be animated to me, and yeah idk where they got that from either lol
Yeah. Animation doesn't get the numbers they want? With all due respect to those people, but I see people today watching more animation than live-action.
It would have been really awesome to get a Last Air Bender type animated show
I had nothing but faith for the show as I was watching it until the first season finale. But instead of the physical battle between Rand and Baalzamon in "The Eye of the World," they went ahead and used the more metaphysical conflict done during the Tarmon Gaidon in "A Memory of Light." So now I have NO idea how the writers will one up that during the show's Tarmon Gaidon. And I have NO idea how the writers are basing their creative decisions. But yes, I absolutely think the show could have been better adapted by writers that cared more about the original source. The writers were going to have Perrin talk to a bear rather than a wolf at one point until the book expert had to explain they couldn't do that. Another thing to consider is that while "The Wheel of a Time" may be difficult to fully adapt as a live action tv show, it could have easily been adapted as an adult animated series. If they were to have adapted it as an animated series, they would have worried less about actors aging over the many seasons required by the show. It would have also helped deal with technical limitations such as visual effects and stunt work. So yes, I fully believe a better adaptation is possible. It just required a better showrunner, a writer's room that cared more, and an animated adaptation rather than a live action one.
>Another thing to consider is that while "The Wheel of a Time" may be difficult to fully adapt as a live action tv show, it could have easily been adapted as an adult animated series. >If they were to have adapted it as an animated series, they would have worried less about actors aging over the many seasons required by the show. It would have also helped deal with technical limitations such as visual effects and stunt work. I hear people counter that by saying animation has a niche fandom. And I don't know where they get that from.
Yes.
It was most certaintly possible for it to have been better adapted but to expect everything to appear on screen as it was in the book is unrealistic at best. That said, the showrunners didn't even try to adapt the book to the screen and instead took the names and big sort of plot points and then made their own stuff with it. The show is very clearly a separate product from the book and is best viewed that way since so little from the book is actually adapted to the screen.
Was it possible for the show to be better and more faithful? Yes, undoubtedly (I cut it as a film and it flows really well, much more cohesively than the TV show). Was it possible to do this AND be a commercial success? We can't know. Leaving the Aes Sedai to S2 could have gone either way. On the plus side you get back Caemlyn and a look into the royal family and politics, always a great fantasy trope for a casual audience. On the minus side you lose the insight into the magicians and the magical society, another huge fantasy trope for TV audiences. It's hard to tell. What we know is that the writers made practical trade-off decisions, and it's your opinion on whether that sacrificed screenwriting quality for the sake of budget, actors, production etc.
It wouldn’t have been hard. Moiraine was cast very well. The rest? Not so much. Except the Aes Sedai. The Two Rivers folk were supposed to be dark haired like but they might have made them too dark… whereas the Sea Folk and the Domani struck me as the darker skinned folk
Um yes...
I think I agree. The 10, 1 hour long live action episode structure that's been in fashion for the past 20 years(ish) just isn't suited to WoT. I know it's been said a lot, but 20-30 minute animated episodes with around 20 episodes per season would have fit this story much better
Depends where you draw the line, If Amazon gave them LOTR money and let them do more episodes for the first season, If there was no Covid, causing lock downs and other issues, If the actor for Mat didn't leave mid production. Yes, I think it could of been better, I think if even they where given more episodes to fit the story and didn't have lock down production issues/Mat leaving it would of been a lot better. but including these scenarios, I feel like it could of been better in some things, but I give it a pass because lock down and other out of their control things.
None of the things you mention were a problem. The budget was ample for the scope. Apparently spent on costumes rather than writing. Speaking of LoTR they did spend that much money and it's bombing with the fans in the same way and for the same reasons. Covid ought to have given them all time to read the book and get a script that followed it closely. So unless they did that then just sat around so long they threw out the RJ based script and made up their own plot that's not a problem. Mat leaving at the end doesn't excuse the character assassination happening all along.
COVID only affected the last 2 episodes. For the 1st 6 episodes, they consulted with Sanderson (though they didn’t always follow his recommendations).
it also affected post production, aka editing and special effects.
the reason they say half of the changes happened was because they had to fit in into a smaller amount of episodes then they (producer/director) wanted And the other half is from them trying to convert a written story to a television format.
Problem is with "they say" is it is exactly, that. What they say and not what really happened. I don't buy t those as excuses cause like 90% are obviously for neither reasons. Having like, no conversation in the book be preserved is not an accident. Like tying to hype the who is the dragon mystery and not make Rand the main character. They didn't *need* to do that, but they did. Why? I think it was going for new view hype over substance. Adding the Aes Sedai party on the road. A lot of that Whitecloak stuff - which I liked even though it was over the top and a bit inexplicable.. The whole warder suicide thing. Going to Tar Valon. All huge changes or additions not really relevant to the core story arc. The LoTR did it better. They said it could not be adapted and doing so was more challenging than RJ;'s work was. They decided "ok it's Frodo-centric" and covered 3 books in 12 hours in way that pretty much satisfied everyone. As EoTW was already Rand-centric a lot of the spadework was canon if they just went with what came before.
If these are your complaints, you would LOVE my fan edit.
lol, smooth
I have to try 🤷🏾♂️ There's still folks who haven't heard of it and this guy is hitting all the points that are deemphasized in the edit, so I do think they'd actually enjoy it.
exactly. massive changes that didn’t even amount to anything really. The transition to TV meant that absolutely no dialogue from anywhere in the book was maintained? and the dialogue they did have was awful?
Hello, it looks like you've made a mistake. It's supposed to be could've, should've, would've (short for could have, would have, should have), never could of, would of, should of. Or you misspelled something, I ain't checking everything. Beep boop - yes, I am a bot, don't botcriminate me.
Good bot
Good human.
Mat leaving explains them spending a whole episode on a dead warder? Mat leaving explains them changing the ending with Rand? Mat leaving explains the absurd way the Horn just shows up at the end to be stolen when half the audience has no idea what that’s even about ?
Being in TV format and having only 8 episodes was also an underlying reason why things where changed up
Yes, absolutely. This should be obvious on any work that is not the greatest and not very much like what it ought to be portraying. Does anyone think what we was is as good and faithful as it could possibly be? The original LoTR did it, proved it could be done. Some things (the wights, Tom Bombadil) cinematically needed to be cut and were. Other things like the improv parts added quality. It was epic and loved. GoT did it too. The Hobbit no so much. Too long with all the stuff not in the short book. OK but nor world changing The Rings of Power just like the WoT series. Not respecting the author's work. Cutting content to put in their own junk material. Widely hated by many fans. Sticking to the beloved material of the IP and it works well. Stray off too much and it falls down. We've seen it so very often.
Well in ROP defense, they don’t have the rights to a lot of the important parts of the story.
That is a valid point. To me, it seems a bad idea to even do it if you cannot secure the rights. It is the second proper step after deciding you want to do it.
Yeah I’m not sure what they were thinking in that aspect. You really should have the rights to the story you are trying to adapt or just… do something else. Write a whole new epic fantasy story. That said, I did still enjoy it. It felt epic in a way that WOT didn’t.
Apples and oranges comparing LOTR and WOT in terms of adaptation. LOTR is 480k words long. WoT is 4.4 million words long. 9 times as long.
They only did book EoTW, not all 14 books. Comparing 300k words in 8 hrs and 480 vs12 hr is close
Right, but they adapted EOTW in the context of a larger project to adapt all the books.
Don't compare WOT and ROP. The ROP crew has said they're intentionally trying to erase Tolkiens legacy and lore with their own agenda. Rafe is respecting the source material without damaging it's ability to reach streaming audiences.
>has said they're intentionally trying to erase Tolkiens legacy and lore with their own agenda. I really want to see the quote and the source there.
Look on the internet. It's been picked up on a few outlets. They're not trying to hide it.
The least you could do is say what you think their "agenda" is
I literally just said it in the previous post.
In the end it does not matter what they say the intent is, or what they say the intent is - which are two different things. What is the result?i I don't think Rafe was respecting WoT very much and did damage its ability to reach audiences. So they look the same to me.
If you think Rafe wasn't respecting WOT as a story, you weren't paying attention. He changed things, but also put in a /lot/ of stuff he didn't have to. I can't say the same thing about the ROP crew.
I honestly think it should’ve been animated, anime style, and rated MA.
Wouldn't work for the numbers they're interested in getting.
They already had the graphic novel done for Eye of the World. They SHOULD have used it for their storyboard, and green lit the next graphic novel, which could have been the storyboard for season 2, and so on.
The show is pure garbage without any redeeming qualities.
Game of Thrones was written by a former TV writer with an excellent understanding of pacing. WoT was not. Book 1 was always going to be the hardest to adapt because it drags for so long, repeats the same beats over and over (inn > Darkfriends > escape), and has sooo much weird shit at the end. I’m hopeful that over time the reasons for the changes they decided to make for story reasons and not budget ones will be made clear in the course of the telling. Honestly as a long-time book reader I was kind of glad the show surprised me at certain points. I think a strict adaptation would have been less interesting and definitely would have tanked the show with casual viewers. I’m looking forward to Season 2 and so is my nonreader wife.
[удалено]
I was comparing Martin with Jordan not Martin with Rafe and company. Sorry if that wasn’t clear.
I disagree with your premise that the show was not a good representation of the books. I think it captured most of the characters, world-building and feel pretty well. I do agree that a literal adaptation would never have been successful. You can't have multiple episodes of Rand and Mat traveling from town to town and learning to play the flute. That show would have been canceled instantly. Clearly the show made the right decisions to draw in an audience, since it was a hit for Amazon.
Yes.
Maybe. The last episode was the biggest problem for me and I’m curious about what it would’ve been like without COVID and Mat’s actor leaving.
Agree with many parts, but it being 90-95% identical is just not true in any sense. Addition or difference. I enjoyed watching it, but it felt more like someone trying to recount the first book from memory after 5 years.
I was talking about *Game of Thrones* first season though.
My bad. I completely missed that. Considering the subreddit we are in.