TV: The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power - Amazon Prime Series

[MVP of West Hollywd]

 

[RobBrown4PM]

Tolkien did not base the Dwarves on Jews. The only thing he ever said about it was he saw Dwarves being like the Jews in regards to their relationship with the world around them; diaspora and their lost/ regained homelands. Toklien was famously against anti-Semitism. "Anti-racism" grifters trying to drag his name through the mud for clout are the sources of this ridculous claptrap.

That not at all answered the question.

 

[RandV]

Not a discussion I ever wanted to wade into, but now that I'm actually watching the series the 'diversity' is kind of... lame I guess. Like if you want a good example of prime, coming out last year The Wheel of Time did a very good job with it. But in this Lord of the Rings series it's like... an all white cast with a few token black people sprinkled in. Rather than diverse it just comes off as very American somehow.

 

[RobBrown4PM]

Not a discussion I ever wanted to wade into, but now that I'm actually watching the series the 'diversity' is kind of... lame I guess. Like if you want a good example of prime, coming out last year The Wheel of Time did a very good job with it. But in this Lord of the Rings series it's like... an all white cast with a few token black people sprinkled in. Rather than diverse it just comes off as very American somehow.

So the three (6 if you include the hobbit trilogy) movies, had essentially an all white cast. Up and down. Left and right. From the east to the west, nothing but white.

Were they lame for not even featuring a sprinkling of PoC?

The number of people here who are hating on this show because they decided to cast *shock*, black people in roles, is way too high.

 

[MVP of West Hollywd]

So the three (6 if you include the hobbit trilogy) movies, had essentially an all white cast. Up and down. Left and right. From the east to the west, nothing but white.

Were they lame for not even featuring a sprinkling of PoC?

The number of people here who are hating on this show because they decided to cast *shock*, black people in roles, is way too high.

It's because people don't respect Amazon's motivation for doing it. It's obviously a hollow attempt to suck up to Gen Z audiences who are into fad of thinking they're ending racism and homophobia by supporting minorities and LGBT being on screen more often. That's also why nearly every single Netflix show having LGBT side characters (it's rarely the lead) stands out so obviously to me, we know why they're doing it, it's basically to trick people into liking their shows more by emotionally guilting them into liking any show with gay people in it, it's signalling to them "we share your politics" in an era where millions of people are invested in us vs them attitude politically and therefore are going to like a streaming service more if it's on their side. Art is often a reflection of the times and Netflix or Amazon obviously going out of its way to impress the people who like something more cause of what race and sex its characters are is a reflection of our current vapidity. With that said, I'm still a semi Rings of Power defender, solid B imo.

 

[RandV]

So the three (6 if you include the hobbit trilogy) movies, had essentially an all white cast. Up and down. Left and right. From the east to the west, nothing but white.

Were they lame for not even featuring a sprinkling of PoC?

The number of people here who are hating on this show because they decided to cast *shock*, black people in roles, is way too high.

No I'm very much for diversity in casting, what I'm saying is Amazon's LotR is highly underwhelming. Which is surprising because they did a good job with Wheel of Time.

 

[MVP of West Hollywd]

Not a discussion I ever wanted to wade into, but now that I'm actually watching the series the 'diversity' is kind of... lame I guess. Like if you want a good example of prime, coming out last year The Wheel of Time did a very good job with it. But in this Lord of the Rings series it's like... an all white cast with a few token black people sprinkled in. Rather than diverse it just comes off as very American somehow.

There are a few Apple shows I watch in Foundation and See that think did a good job with "diverse casting". They cast some solid black actors in Foundation's leads Lou Llobell and Leah Harvey, and Nesta Cooper and Archie Madekwe as Mamoa's kids in See. They are GOOD, major roles, by actors who seem talented, and the black girl in See is also gay. I did not feel like it was forced in the same way as like a Netflix show where it's like ok we have Kiernan Shipka as Sabrina, we need some representation in this show to make the teens happy, so here's a gay black wizard that lives with her family and can be her most trusted ally. Or maybe Apple is doing the same thing and I just liked the shows more.

 

[Garo]

It's because people don't respect Amazon's motivation for doing it. It's obviously a hollow attempt to suck up to Gen Z audiences who are into fad of thinking they're ending racism and homophobia by supporting minorities and LGBT being on screen more often. That's also why nearly every single Netflix show having LGBT side characters (it's rarely the lead) stands out so obviously to me, we know why they're doing it, it's basically to trick people into liking their shows more by emotionally guilting them into liking any show with gay people in it, it's signalling to them "we share your politics" in an era where millions of people are invested in us vs them attitude politically and therefore are going to like a streaming service more if it's on their side. Art is often a reflection of the times and Netflix or Amazon obviously going out of its way to impress the people who like something more cause of what race and sex its characters are is a reflection of our current vapidity. With that said, I'm still a semi Rings of Power defender, solid B imo.

I really don't think Netflix compares to this. Like I get what you're saying here but its moreso that if Netflix doesn't do this, the grumbling over shows that have an actual LGBT audience being cancelled left and and right for "lack of growth" will be even worse than it currently is. Hence why we of the acronym are now stuck cringing at Stranger Things and such having to do this to bait us in, because while Netflix doesn't give a damn about LGBT shows, they absolutely care about getting us suckers to pay money.

Rings of Power doesn't really do the same though, or at least its extremely difficult to get a strategy by it when racial differences are essentially ignored. Netflix tries to save its arse by having moments that can be clipped and "celebrated", there's nothing of the sort in this show for now at least.

 

[Jussi]

No I'm very much for diversity in casting, what I'm saying is Amazon's LotR is highly underwhelming. Which is surprising because they did a good job with Wheel of Time.

Not disagreeing but when it comes to diverse casting in fantasy projects, I quote John Campea: "It's fantasy, there's magic, dragons, orcs, trolls and what have you, characters can be black, yellow, red, blue, green or pink, it's not supposed to be realistic in anyway."

 

[DanielPlainview]

Not disagreeing but when it comes to diverse casting in fantasy projects, I quote John Campea: "It's fantasy, there's magic, dragons, orcs, trolls and what have you, characters can be black, yellow, red, blue, green or pink, it's not supposed to realistic in anyway."

That guy is a moron lol

 

[RobBrown4PM]

It's because people don't respect Amazon's motivation for doing it. It's obviously a hollow attempt to suck up to Gen Z audiences who are into fad of thinking they're ending racism and homophobia by supporting minorities and LGBT being on screen more often. That's also why nearly every single Netflix show having LGBT side characters (it's rarely the lead) stands out so obviously to me, we know why they're doing it, it's basically to trick people into liking their shows more by emotionally guilting them into liking any show with gay people in it, it's signalling to them "we share your politics" in an era where millions of people are invested in us vs them attitude politically and therefore are going to like a streaming service more if it's on their side. Art is often a reflection of the times and Netflix or Amazon obviously going out of its way to impress the people who like something more cause of what race and sex its characters are is a reflection of our current vapidity. With that said, I'm still a semi Rings of Power defender, solid B imo.

They're altering their castings because Hollywood's history of casting PoC is, to the say the least, both abysmal and insulting. This doesn't even touch the subject of Hollywood whitewashing history with their casting choices.

As society becomes more educated, we gain access to the insults and tragedies that befell PoC in Hollywood. It's natural that those people who are making our media now will want to include PoC in the production and casting of their works.

They aren't doing it to fulfill checkmarks in the way that you think they are.

 

[Rabid Ranger]

They're altering their castings because Hollywood's history of casting PoC is, to the say the least, both abysmal and insulting. This doesn't even touch the subject of Hollywood whitewashing history with their casting choices.

As society becomes more educated, we gain access to the insults and tragedies that befell PoC in Hollywood. It's natural that those people who are making our media now will want to include PoC in the production and casting of their works.

They aren't doing it to fulfill checkmarks in the way that you think they are.

...oh, I think in some cases they are.

 

[RandV]

Not disagreeing but when it comes to diverse casting in fantasy projects, I quote John Campea: "It's fantasy, there's magic, dragons, orcs, trolls and what have you, characters can be black, yellow, red, blue, green or pink, it's not supposed to realistic in anyway."

For me I see two good reasons to do it. First is to cast the best person for the role regardless of ethnicity. Like the black elf guy is really really good in his role, it would be hard to picture another 'Legolas' doing that. But the other is to make what's on screen more representative of our society, which is diverse. When every elf you see is white but then there's literally one black elf, it has a 'token black guy' feel to it. Same thing with the Dwarves and the Sea Humans. Only the hobbits have something close to that feel but they're pretty minor to the story so far (still have one episode left to watch).

Also a diverse non-modern society certainly isn't fantasy. The Classical era Mediterranean would have been a very diverse place, with all sorts of different people coming together in places like Rome. It's when the Western Roman Empire fell that Europe really became insular.

 

[DanielPlainview]

For me I see two good reasons to do it. First is to cast the best person for the role regardless of ethnicity. Like the black elf guy is really really good in his role, it would be hard to picture another 'Legolas' doing that. But the other is to make what's on screen more representative of our society, which is diverse. When every elf you see is white but then there's literally one black elf, it has a 'token black guy' feel to it. Same thing with the Dwarves and the Sea Humans. Only the hobbits have something close to that feel but they're pretty minor to the story so far (still have one episode left to watch).

Also a diverse non-modern society certainly isn't fantasy. The Classical era Mediterranean would have been a very diverse place, with all sorts of different people coming together in places like Rome. It's when the Western Roman Empire fell that Europe really became insular.

Complete nonsense lol you can’t divorce a story from its context for the sake of political opinions. Don’t make a show based on Tolkien if you’re not going to respect his creation full stop

 

[Blender]

Complete nonsense lol you can’t divorce a story from its context for the sake of political opinions. Don’t make a show based on Tolkien if you’re not going to respect his creation full stop

You're going to have to provide a detailed explanation about how skin colour of specific characters is critical to Tolkien's creation and how the negative outcomes of changing any of them outweigh the positives of more open casting.

 

[RobBrown4PM]

You're going to have to provide a detailed explanation about how skin colour of specific characters is critical to Tolkien's creation and how the negative outcomes of changing any of them outweigh the positives of more open casting.

As Darren Pang once said

They aren't doing it "The white way".

 

[PeteWorrell]

You're going to have to provide a detailed explanation about how skin colour of specific characters is critical to Tolkien's creation and how the negative outcomes of changing any of them outweigh the positives of more open casting.

It's supposed to be a story of Anglo-Saxon culture just like Romance of the Three Kingdoms is supposed to be about Chinese culture. Tolkien's story is fictional but it is based on a real culture that existed once upon a time. It's not really hard to understand how trying to inject modern spins to classic stories about certain eras is simply dumb and a lack of respect towards the material.

 

[Blender]

It's supposed to be a story of Anglo-Saxon culture just like Romance of the Three Kingdoms is supposed to be about Chinese culture. Tolkien's story is fictional but it is based on a real culture that existed once upon a time. It's not really hard to understand how trying to inject modern spins to classic stories about certain eras is simply dumb and a lack of respect towards the material.

Tolkien specifically said he disliked allegory and was not trying to be allegorical with the story, so no it is not a "story about Anglo-Saxon culture". That's an interpretation by people that does not align with his intent. He used real history and his life experiences for inspiration, which is where the comparisons to historical cultures/events come from, the comparisons to WWI, etc.

Trying to inject allegory into his stories is going against his vision for the series, it wasn't his intent and he never wanted it to be interpreted that way.

 

[PeteWorrell]

Tolkien specifically said he disliked allegory and was not trying to be allegorical with the story, so no it is not a "story about Anglo-Saxon culture". That's an interpretation by people that does not align with his intent. He used real history and his life experiences for inspiration, which is where the comparisons to historical cultures/events come from, the comparisons to WWI, etc.

Trying to inject allegory into his stories is going against his vision for the series, it wasn't his intent and he never wanted it to be interpreted that way.

I find it really hard to believe you considering most of his inspiration came from Anglo-Saxon, Celtic, Nordic and other European myths plus Christianity. He used some of his real life experience true but that were things like the first world war and his life in England.

 

[Blender]

I find it really hard to believe you considering most of his inspiration came from Anglo-Saxon, Celtic, Nordic and other European myths plus Christianity. He used some of his real life experience true but that were things like the first world war and his life in England.

Let's take it from the author himself:

"I cordially dislike allegory in all its manifestations, and always have done so since I grew old and wary enough to detect its presence. I much prefer history – true or feigned– with its varied applicability to the thought and experience of readers. I think that many confuse applicability with allegory, but the one resides in the freedom of the reader, and the other in the purposed domination of the author."

"I dislike Allegory - the conscious and intentional allegory - yet any attempt to explain the purport of myth or fairytale must use allegorical language."

"The only perfectly consistent allegory is a real life; and the only fully intelligible story is an allegory. And one finds, even in imperfect human 'literature', that the better and more consistent an allegory is the more easily it can be read 'just as a story'; and the better and more closely woven a story is the more easily can those so minded find allegory in it."

He was going for a story which hits broad human themes like the struggle between good and evil, domination and corruption of power, destruction of nature by industry, the cost and horrors of war, etc. that anyone could pick up and read and recognize. He wasn't going for any specific interpretation or meaning, it was just inspired by the history he knew and loved, predominantly English history of course. He had an adventure story he wanted to tell and themes he wanted to hit with the work, and used the history he was interested in and his life experiences as the foundation for that. To say that it is specifically an Anglo-Saxon tale misses the much broader themes present throughout the work, he was not writing an historical story.

Your Three Kingdoms example is not a valid comparison. That is an historical story that blends history and fiction that is set in a specific time period during China's Three Kingdom's period. Stories about King Arthur are a better comparison to Three Kingdoms, which is a fictional story set in a real time period with inspirations from real events, though even that might be a bit unfair to Three Kingdoms.

You haven't actually addressed my original question though either, so this is a side track.

 

[PeteWorrell]

Let's take it from the author himself:

He was going for a story which hits broad human themes like the struggle between good and evil, domination and corruption of power, destruction of nature by industry, the cost and horrors of war, etc. that anyone could pick up and read and recognize. He wasn't going for any specific interpretation or meaning, it was just inspired by the history he knew and loved, predominantly English history of course. He had an adventure story he wanted to tell and themes he wanted to hit with the work, and used the history he was interested in and his life experiences as the foundation for that. To say that it is specifically an Anglo-Saxon tale misses the much broader themes present throughout the work, he was not writing an historical story.

Your Three Kingdoms example is not a valid comparison. That is an historical story that blends history and fiction that is set in a specific time period during China's Three Kingdom's period. Stories about King Arthur are a better comparison to Three Kingdoms, which is a fictional story set in a real time period with inspirations from real events, though even that might be a bit unfair to Three Kingdoms.

You haven't actually addressed my original question though either, so this is a side track.

I already gave an answer to your original question, you just disagree and that's that.

 

[Blender]

I already gave an answer to your original question, you just disagree and that's that.

You did not; "how the negative outcomes of changing any of them outweigh the positives of more open casting." was not addressed at all.

 

[Jack Straw]

It's supposed to be a story of Anglo-Saxon culture just like Romance of the Three Kingdoms is supposed to be about Chinese culture. Tolkien's story is fictional but it is based on a real culture that existed once upon a time. It's not really hard to understand how trying to inject modern spins to classic stories about certain eras is simply dumb and a lack of respect towards the material.

Not really. Tolkien stated that the events of LoTR take place around 4000 BC. 2nd age would be a few thousand years before that. Tolkien's "people" bear no relation to Stone Age inhabitants of the British Isles that I've ever heard of. His creation is entirely made up, although the languages (and names) are based on languages that he studied to some extent or other.

In any case, it's acting. I posted this earlier in this thread but I'll repeat it, if James Earl Jones can star as a fictional ancient British king named Lear (who certainly would not have been a black dude) and if Linda Hunt can win an Oscar for playing a male character in The Year of Living Dangerously, then people who get wound up about non-white characters in a TV show that bears little to no resemblence to anything Tolkien actually wrote need to just get used to it. This what people who make TV shows, movies, and plays do. It's not going away.

 

[Siamese Dream]

Honestly, when I watched it I barely (if at all) noticed the whole racial aspect. What was very apparent however was the gender side of it. They turned Galadriel into an insufferable, arrogant moody teenager type because they were overtly trying to write a strong female character but clearly had no idea how to actually pull it off.

Like there are times in the series where some setback will befall her and you think, oh great she's about to be taught a lesson and be humbled, and actually go through a character arc but nope, she remains as stubborn as ever.

 

[TCTC]

Honestly, when I watched it I barely (if at all) noticed the whole racial aspect. What was very apparent however was the gender side of it. They turned Galadriel into an insufferable, arrogant moody teenager type because they were overtly trying to write a strong female character but clearly had no idea how to actually pull it off.

Like there are times in the series where some setback will befall her and you think, oh great she's about to be taught a lesson and be humbled, and actually go through a character arc but nope, she remains as stubborn as ever.

We live in a world where people believe Captain Marvel is a strong female character because she has super powers.

James Cameron showed us in the 80's how to write strong female characters. But Ripley and Sarah Connor weren't invincible, so I guess they weren't strong enough by todays standards.