Tumgik
#there was a rop content in my mentions which really couldn't have come at a worst time
remusjohnslupin · 3 months
Text
Hey, Tolkien fandom!
Do you guys ever just sit there, as peaceful as a hobbit in the Shire, lost in your own thoughts in a beautiful place, thinking about how blessed we all are to have read J.R.R Tolkien's writing, to have received the blessing of Christopher Tolkien's continuation of his father's work, and to have seen Peter Jackson's glorious adaptation of it all? Your chest expands whenever you think about the Battles of Beleriand (for good or ill), Beren and Lúthien's journey and how their love changed the course of Middle-earth, Theoden's speech when they were about to save Minas Tirith. Right?
But then...
You remember that Rings of Power exists. That it's a thing that's been made.
That's just sad. And an outright desecration.
17 notes · View notes
doberbutts · 1 year
Text
The next time I see a dumbass take from a purist fan I might actually scream.
This ranges from "why couldn't Hugo Weaving come back as Elrond" Elrond? The elf that's supposed to be effectively early-to-mid-twenties equivilant at this point in time? played by an actor that's in his 60s when y'all are shitting your pants about a Proper Adult Elf being played by a guy in his 50s and how he's "too old" for the part??? The elvish rings CANNOT look like PJ's- that is PJ's concept art and they cannot legally use it. If something looks pretty dead-on similar [like Sauron's armor] it's because that's how it's described in the BOOKS and approved illustrations. PJ's take on elves in general is very specific to PJ and is largely NOT CANONICAL to the books- this is especially true of Elrond and Thranduil and sadly it looks like no adaption can get elf kings/lords right because it's unfortunately true of Gil-Galad in ROP as well. This is in fact one of my main points of contention with the Hobbit fandom sorry, I really do not like the characterization of Thranduil either in the movies or the party-king fanon within the fandom.
All the way to "netflix witcher is bad because they didn't include [thing from games that genuinely doesn't exist in the books] which completely ruins canon". Eskel can't talk about his child surprise mauling his face because that is GAMES CANON, not book canon, therefore an original work made for a specific adaption, that the other adaptions due to copyright laws legally cannot include. Triss and Yennifer can't look like they do in the games for the same reason- they can share the traits mentioned in the books themselves but they cannot be 100% dead ringers for their game counterparts. They can't use the background music from your favorite game locations. They can't adapt Gaunter O'Dimm. They can't show Geralt with a beard [which is, again, a change to established lore made by an adaption because books!Geralt hates having facial hair]. They can't show Ciri's heist with Jaskier [Dandelion]. They can't show the huge battle with the Wild Hunt over Ciri at Kaer Morhen. These are all games things. Netflix has zero rights to the games and why would CDPR sell off rights when they're about to produce another Witcher game themselves?
I am begging and pleading please learn copyright law and understand that adaptions made by different people will have different art direction and different casting decisions and thus be inherently different from each other even if adapting the same source material, and even your beloved adaptions that predate the currently-running ones have made serious changes to established lore that you're just used to because it's existed for so long.
27 notes · View notes