Justin Kaiser's Blog

Dearest Readers,
In the intricate tapestry of Westerosi history, few tales scandalize and captivate as much as the infamous Dance of Dragons. Whispers in the shadowed halls and murmurs at court have long sought to pinpoint the cause of this devastating civil war. While few doubt the phallic motivations that led to the usurping of our beloved queen’s throne, none, in the writer's humble opinion, have correctly identified the true culprit of the travesty. Today, I unveil a perspective that blames none other than Ser Laenor Velaryon—a man who, despite his noble lineage and valiant heart, failed to accomplish the simplest task expected of him: siring an heir.

The marriage between Ser Laenor Velaryon and the fiery Rhaenyra Targaryen was a union steeped in political ambition. Yet, despite the strategic brilliance behind their alliance, the glaring truth remained: Laenor could not, or would not, produce a child with Rhaenyra. In a society that places the highest value on legacy and lineage, this failure of fertility was nothing short of catastrophic.

Imagine, dear readers, the immense pressure bearing down upon Ser Laenor—a pressure so overwhelming that it apparently rendered him impotent. While one could argue that he was forced to suppress his true self and conform to the rigid expectations of a patriarchal society, it must also be acknowledged that he did not allow similar pressures to deter his attempts to breed with, shall we say, less reproductively inclined orifices. So, even under this societal weight, Laenor's heart remained loyal to his true nature, rendering capabilities to fulfill the one duty that could have solidified his wife’s claim to the Iron Throne unfortunately sterile.

The legitimacy of Rhaenyra’s offspring was incessantly questioned, fueling the flames of rebellion and sowing seeds of discord that would erupt into the Dance of Dragons. Had Ser Laenor been able to sow seeds of his own, a task that all but eunuchs should be capable of, and produce an uncontested heir, perhaps the realm might have been spared this brutal conflict. Instead, the whispers of court vultures and the ambitions of power-hungry nobles found fertile ground in the barren fields of Laenor’s failure.

But let us not be too hasty in our undisputed judgment. It is not to say that the dangler-demanding usurpers would not have found other cause to deny our queen her rightful claim. Likely she would’ve been met with resistance no matter how similarly her children resembled her bent husband. The fault lies not solely with Ser Laenor but with the society that trapped him in this untenable position. The relentless pressure on men to conform to rigid roles—especially those who, like Laenor, harbored affections deemed unacceptable—created an environment ripe for tragedy. The societal norms that dictated his actions are as much to blame as the man himself.

We must acknowledge the tragic irony: a man forced to live a lie, to marry and attempt to produce an heir under duress, ultimately became a pawn in a much larger game. The Dance of Dragons was a war ignited by human failings—ambition, prejudice, and the relentless pursuit of power. Ser Laenor’s sexuality was but a single thread in this complex tapestry, yet it was one that society pulled upon mercilessly, unraveling us into untold suffering.

So, dear readers, while it may be tempting to place the blame solely on Ser Laenor Velaryon for his inability to fulfill the basic duty of fatherhood, we must also cast a critical eye on the societal pressures that forced him into this impossible position. The tragedy of the Dance of Dragons is a stark reminder of the dangers of a world that demands conformity at the expense of authenticity.

Yours truly,
JCK

Fair reader, it has been months since my first entry, as well as months since the finale of the Rings of Power first season. Why did it take me so long for this blog entry? Well, much like the blog entries themselves, the answer is not concise. Not considering the small list of excuses, involving working on my own publications, busy time in life in general, as well as temporarily forgetting my Goodreads password, there is one reason to rule them all. The fact is, it has taken me a long time to make up my mind on how I felt at the end of the season. After a ranting entry on open mindedness where applied to the adaptations of our favorite fantasy novels to the big or small screen, I wanted to make sure that I was following my own advice and not jumping to gut reaction posts. While I doubt there are few, if any, who are gnawing at the bit for my personal blog entries, I myself would have hoped to conclude this blog series in a more timely manner. But that is neither here nor there at this point.

Let us start, as we have in the past, with a short summation of my overall thoughts. Will this be a circumstance where one can simply decide if they loved it or hated it? The short answer: no. There is so much to take into consideration that to have such a black and white view I think would reflect a lack of imagination in this case. There were shortcomings, to be fair. The pace, some character arcs lacking much curvature, and some questionable takes on the source material are all things that should make an avid fan hesitate. The visual effects, the immersive references, and the small nods to both Tolkien’s writings and the Peter Jackson films still keep the spark of curiosity ignited for those of us who understand the source material (or at least feign to). The final takeaway: it's a mixed bag. Overall, it is a show worth watching no matter what level of Middle Earth fan you seek to be.
Now let us brace ourselves for the long summary.

For respect to some methodical thought process, let us begin by addressing some of my earlier concerns. Now that we've reached the end of the season we are able to check off which of my points was addressed and which were not.

The first point of consideration, and perhaps the largest considering its centerpiece role in the show: The character of Galadriel. This, I must admit, I was left wanting at the end. If I were to take an optimistic approach I would say that this will leave room for this character arc to continue to develop. After all, no good character arc rises and falls to completion in a single season. The parts of Galadriel that are so important to me that we're not addressed are still the elements of her significance in Middle Earth. This, for anyone familiar with Tolkien’s original works, is hardly a thing of debate. Galadriel is by all accounts one of the most formidable beings in all of Middle Earth, and she was from nearly her beginning. This is not so well represented in the show. There are no true displays of this prowess. She has impressive moments but to a level that I would expect an elf in general to be impressive. There were no displays of elven magic, in which there should be far more examples of in the Second Age than in the Third Age where we follow the Fellowship. Galadriel should be considered one of the most powerful elven magic wielders at the time the Rings of Power takes place. For her to be an answerable subject to Gil Galad is not in any regard a true representation of her role in elven society. She was considered a queen by all standards, and only through her own humility did she decide to take the title of "lady" rather than "majesty". The other aspect is the fact that there would be any sort of darkness to her character whatsoever. The Lady of Light, by name, should not encounter this as a general issue. I can see from an artistic screenwriting effect how this could play into a character arc, and so I will remain open-minded, yet skeptical. If I were to be fair, there were hints in the final two episodes where Galadriel is acknowledging that there is darkness in her that should not be there, and she starts to hint that she has become consumed by the prospect of hunting Sauron and it's changing her in a way that is not befitting of a respectable elven queen. I do hope that in the coming seasons her light shines a bit brighter both figuratively and literally, and we get some true depictions of how powerful she is.

Next, the Stranger. I admitted in earlier entries that I could not recall meteor man from the original texts and so I could not comment on his significance. Well, it has become a abundantly clear that the reason I could not recall a meteor man is because there was not one. Now we know that the stranger is in fact a wizard. Good. I could not think of another reasonable explanation for his presence that wouldn't have been an incredibly large stretch. Now remains the question of which wizard. I keep seeing the confirmation throughout the internet and amongst my own small circles that the wizard is in fact Gandalf, as he proves with his final line of “follow your nose”. If I ignore this line, and disregard it as a simple nod to wizard sagely advice in general, I must protest the decisive nature of calling the wizard Gandalf. For one, there is absolutely no reason to think that the original text would suggest Gandalf would appear in any such way, at this time, and in such a state. While that argument can be made for any of the wizards, the two exceptions would be the blue wizards. These two strange figures leave a lot of room for interpretation in the original texts, which would make them prime candidates for a show adaptation to keep some mystery about them. If the stranger does in fact turn out to be Gandalf, the showrunners are playing a very dangerous game. While I can see them trying to increase the appeal to the general Tolkien fan that is poorly versed in its true lore, Gandalf is at this point considered an untouchable fictional character, especially when one takes into consideration the depiction by Sir Ian McKellen. To add him to a small screen show now would be a very hard reputation to live up to. A blue wizard, on the other hand, would be a fascinating insight into an area that has always been a point of curiosity for Tolkien fans. And at the end of the day, there is more evidence to suggest a blue wizard than Gandalf. For one, and I think the most obvious, Gandalf flat out says he has never been to the east where we now know the stranger and Nori are headed. The next, and I would say the most important, is the fact that Gandalf arrives very-much-so aware of who he is, and receives one of the rings of power upon his entry to Middle Earth. To have his arrival in the Middle Earth take place in such a way as it did in RoP, would completely alter the foundation of Gandalf and his entire role in Middle Earth. So for now, I give the show writer the benefit of the doubt, and hope they are a step ahead of us with this character.
Now the hard one: Sauron. This is possibly where I am the most disgruntled. Let us start with the most blatant of features that confuse me: Sauron as a human. While Sauron has always been revered as a shape shifter, it is a well-established fact that he ventures through Middle Earth as an elf named Anatar, the Lord of Gifts. Perhaps the showrunners chose not to take this approach because they wanted to keep some mystery, so I'll ignore it for now. Then, I still have the questions of his motives. It seems he has been doing curious work on his own behind the scenes in an attempt to harness power that he eventually tricks and aids the elves into creating for him in the form of rings. This isn't the motive I'm talking about, however. I am more confused about his motive of wandering in a mortal form through dangerous events that seemed to not have a specific goal in mind, and eventually leads him through moments where he not only aids those who will become his most avid foes, but saves each of their lives on more than one instance. The final piece that still leaves me very baffled, is the timing of everything. Sauron was meant to be aiding Celebrimbor in the forging of the original rings, so that he might then take the art to Mount Doom, and use what he knew of the forged rings to influence them through his own ring. The only rings that he never had influence over were the three elven rings, because he did not take part in their creation. This is now the exact opposite of the events that took place in the Rings of Power. He helped forge the three elven rings, and was discovered before the other rings were created. While there are some variations for this adaptation that I'm curious to see where the path leads, this is just not one of them. To me, this will take an extraordinary amount of creative writing, something that wasn't abundant in season one, to make this twist of an adaptation work. If we're being completely honest, I found Adar a more interesting antagonist than Sauron ended up being. Perhaps Anatar will still make an appearance. After all, he needs to corrupt the Numenoreans. But this change to his character felt like a deliberate deception to throw diehard fans off the trail. The motivation for something like that I simply can't fathom, when it's the diehard fans that should be making up the foundation of support for the show. We're not watching it to be tricked into a plot that never existed, we're watching it to see an adaptation of something we already love.

With all this in mind, this will still be a show that I wait with great excitement to continue watching, if not just to see how they make it all work. Being back in Middle Earth was still worth the frustrations that came with the show, and (I think) still outweighed any negative feelings that might linger. All in all, I was left more baffled than I was irritated. In the second season, I hope to see a bit more light from Galadriel, a lot more of Durin and the dwarves, a creative explanation for Sauron’s entire plot line, and more time spent on the writing than the special effects. The show is still worth a watch and certainly season renewals, but I do hope it comes with some changes.

Thank you for reading my first ever blog to completion, if you made it this far, and I will consider doing more blogs in the future. Please don't hesitate to message me, comment, or contact me in general. Until next time, fair reader.

Immersive and stunning. A long-awaited return to Middle Earth.

(spoilers ahead)

Well, the moment that many of us have been waiting for with hungry anticipation for well over a year at least, has finally happened. The Rings of Power has premiered on Amazon. Now, my first blog entry was to highlight my rules when it comes to film and TV show adaptations, but now let's talk about the show itself.

I suppose the first question that is most important to answer would be in regards to my general thoughts and reactions to it. In short, I finally feel I've returned to Middle Earth after so many years of waiting. Of all the fantasy worlds that one hopes to be immersed in, Middle Earth is by far the gold standard, as I've stated before. The fact that this show was able to embody such an intricate world at a level of detail and majesty that even avid fans such as myself felt as though we were finally returning, is nothing short of fine craftsmanship. While Peter Jackson films are truly what can be considered a masterpiece, the Rings of Power is no shortcoming. Yes, that was the short answer.

The long answer, well, buckle in.
There's going to be both a blessing and a maddening frustration to the fact that this show is depicted in the second age. I discussed this last time, that the second age is either a very good or a very poor time to be creating an adaptation for. And that's because there's simply not enough source material to be going line by line for an adaptation. However, I find this to be a good thing. Wheel of Time fans, for example, were so avid that they were expecting word-for-word recreations of their favorite scenes, characters, and moments. In reality, and for those of us that live in it, such things cannot be expected. But what of a world where the source material is generalized? Well, this is exactly where Rings of Power sought to delve. Because we know the key aspects and the key outcomes of the second age, the show has a firm planting and which directions to take their plot. This also gives them an opportunity to add original material and details that can't truly be contested because there's no source material to point at as proof of its illegitimacy. Again, this will have its pros and cons. For now, I think it is the most crucial and enjoyable aspect.

The first and most obvious compliment of the show is that it is visually stunning. This is important in a world such as Middle Earth, where there are distinct natural and developed features that are unique to this fantasy, which can be found nowhere else in all of literature or reality. The showrunners, director, and visual effects artists should be quite proud of what they created. But as you know, fair reader, it takes more than a pretty picture to intrigue an enthusiast. The brief glimpses of battle, orcs, and trolls were all so visually perfect that I felt like I was on the front lines of Helms Deep once more.

So what of the characters, the plot, and the things that actually matter? I for one, have few objections. The first character whom I was particularly worried about was Galadriel, because I worried they would nerf her either out of ignorance or to make things more daunting. After all, the lady of Lorien at the peak of her power would have changed the course of history had that always been her default. So I watched with some hesitation to see if she was depicted as an average elf, average being a very suggestive term in that case. What I can say is there has not been a clear demonstration of her strength, character, or anything else that would help me understand her full power in this adaptation. In all, we haven't seen any examples of elvin magic, but Galadriel should be a figure of power, even amongst her own people at a young age. The only elves in Middle Earth that were ever stronger than her were high kings that preceded Gil Gaald and died in the war against Morgoth in the First Age. In the Second Age, she is one of the least rivaled beings of power and answers to no one. To depict her as an average elf on a mission and trying to convince others to believe her is not doing such an epic figure justice. That being said, I have enjoyed the RoP character in all other respects, and again, we're only 2 episodes in. Perhaps this perspective will change.

There are added features that one can't help feel are a bit unnecessary. Though these features certainly don't bog down the show as a whole, it does make one a little hesitant. The forbidden romance between an elf and a human was actually done tastefully enough that there was no stumbling or awkward moments of cringing (like a certain romance between a dwarf and elf that shall remain unnamed). The features that I'm curious and hesitant about pertain to that of early hobbits. They seem to be the first addition of the show that I haven't made up my mind about yet. As lighthearted and carefree as they are, they do feel a bit more forced than the others, especially knowing that they play basically no role in the First and Second ages. Now, what I have to remind myself is that in the epic realm of Middle Earth, with all of its fanciful and fantastic creatures large and strong, it remains one of Tolkien's most important points that even the smallest of creatures can make a difference. With that in mind, I allow myself to be proud that hobbits once again are playing a role in a time where they were, quite frankly, glossed over in the history books. Middle Earth and Tolkien's worlds are, to the most avid fans of fantasy and his works, a place for all walks of life of every shape, size, and appearance.
Another aspect that I can't say I'm particularly deterred because of, but incredibly curious about, is meteor man. Now, meteor man is making an appearance very early on in the show and is also a character that has very little information provided in the original works, so I have no idea what to feel about him. Sauron has not yet made an appearance, but it has been the focus of the entire first two episodes. Meteor man, on the other hand, has been left completely to our anticipatory imaginations. I genuinely can't recall if he plays an intricate part in the outcomes of major events that take place in the Second Age, or if he was only mentioned as a passing legend. So, I must admit I cannot decide if he is a good, a bad, or an unnecessary addition to the show.

What am I most excited about? Well, if we're being honest, I am incredibly excited to see more of the dwarves. This is a realm and a people that Peter Jackson could only tease in The Hobbit trilogy. Never in Tolkien adaptations have we seen the dwarves at their prime. We come across them after their destruction in the Fellowship, and after their exile from the Lonely Mountain in the Hobbit. Now we enter a time where elves and dwarves are at the height of their influence, their power, and their prestige. We get to see a visually stunning realm of Khazad-dûm. I am incredibly excited to see not only the interactions between elves and dwarves that helped forge the rings of power themselves, but the events that led to the downfalls of so many dwarven societies, many of which forced them into their secluded and bitter nature that we encounter during the Lord of the Rings. It’s fascinating to me to now be in a time where the interactions between different races are relatively new and fresh. When we follow Frodo and the Fellowship all over Middle Earth, we're actually seeing them after multiple ages of history where these ancient races have been interacting for a time that we mere mortals cannot fathom. We know that elves and dwarves do not trust each other, and haven’t from the beginning, that much is made obvious. But what of a time when they are both young races in a world that only recently fought and won their freedom (for however short of time) from dark threats. Khazad-dûm’s prime was freshly after Morgoth was defeated, and that means the races themselves, for the first time in the existence of Middle Earth, find themselves without a common foe. They may not have had love between them before, but they did fight side by side. Now, with Morgoth’s defeat, they begin to look towards each other with hesitation about their differences. It’s only when true dark lords rise that these races stand with one another, and even then it’s a strain. We now have the opportunity to see these complex interactions in a time that is in a gray area between both war and peace. The show starts with Elrond serving as an emissary to Prince Duran, boasting of friendship between the two and yet teasing that trust between dwarves and elves should not be a thing that exists so early on. As we encounter the dwarf king in coming episodes I will be very curious to hear the reasoning why the dwarves refuse to cooperate with such important matters such as forging of the rings of power until persuaded to do so. It appears they are discussing mithril and seem worried how others will respond to its discovery. We all know the distrust is lifted for at least a short time. Calibrimbor, after all, is the elvin smith who forges, or at least helps forge, the doors of Durin, the very same that the Fellowship struggles momentarily at in the Fellowship of the Ring. We know that a collaboration between the elvin smith and the dwarven royals was something that existed and benefited both, but it didn’t last, nor did the dwarves’ prosperity. Now, a large aspect of elvish/dwarfish distrust is most likely to do with an incident that took place with the reclaiming of Silmarils between certain dwarven royals and a certain band of elves, but I'd like to think there's something a bit more complex than that. Either way I do hope the show gives us further insights. Let’s not forget our dear balrog, either. Sure, there are multiple balrogs in Middle Earth, but the appearance of Khazad-dûm and the teaser of the balrog is no coincidence in my mind. This may be the first time we’ve gotten to see dwarves at the height of their strength, but it may also be amongst the last times…

At the end of all of this, I have to admit my genuine excitement for the show. While many are going to criticize for the petty reasons that I've already highlighted in previous posts, there's no reason why true fans shouldn't be utterly excited to finally return to the fantasy world that we love so much. I wholeheartedly believe the Rings of Power has done Middle Earth the justice it deserves, and we can go into it with a sigh of relief knowing that our wait has not been a waste.

The purpose of this blog will be for me to voice some of my own opinions on the concept of film and movie adaptations from popular or cult favorite books. I think with the current times, we all know that everything is either sequel or remake or an adaptation, with the latter of course being the most exciting for anyone literate. The problem then becomes, what if adaptations don't meet the standard of those that have been fans of the story before it got its Netflix or Amazon or blockbuster-movie deal? In this blog I will discuss mostly a positive outlook on adaptations. I personally find there's a lot of criticism and doubt out there when it comes to these new waves of fantasy films and TV shows, and rightfully so. After all, I think the vast majority of us have still not emotionally recovered from the disappointment of Game of Thrones. It's left us with the bad taste in our mouths and fills us with resentful doubt as we look towards new possibilities. I personally felt like I was going through a bad breakup. Like the most haunting of relationship endings (or so I hear), it lacked closure. There's nothing more irksome to the thorough fantasy fan than an unresolved plotline and lack of a conclusive summary. But much like melancholy relationship strains, we must move on and hope for something better in the future.

Two of the most prominent examples currently are Amazon Prime's adaptations of the Wheel of Time by Robert Jordan and the Rings of Power based off of the works of Tolkien. As an avid fantasy nerd, and a fantasy writer inspired by both these authors, I share in everyone’s nervousness for the upcoming show but feel as though I'm entering it with far more excitement than the average fantasy blogger. I by no means consider myself an expert of all of Tolkien’s intricacies, but if Middle Earth Studies were on my OWL exams, I would like to think I would receive at least an “Exceeds Expectations”. In the following weeks I will be outlining some of my thoughts on TV show and film adaptations of classic fantasy novels with my focus being to compare people's reactions to the Wheel of Time adaptation to that of the upcoming Rings of Power. I'll highlight my expectations, my worries, and my genuine reactions and leave it to you, fair readers, to decide if my insights carry any merit.

*Clears throat*

If you will allow me a brief blasphemy to start, there are times where I actually prefer the film or TV adaptation of certain moments, characters, or even entire works, when compared to the written version. I would not say this happens very often, but the few examples serve as reminders to me that even something beloved can still be improved upon. More often than not, I do think screenwriters overestimate their abilities in this regard, but always hold out hope that they learn from their mistakes and tread carefully when adapting.

Before we jump into opinions that I would love to hear if people share or disagree with on the upcoming shows, as well as shows that have already aired, we must first highlight the key features that I've noticed when people react to highly anticipated TV or film adaptations. I have two considerations for all of you when forming your opinions on adaptations of your favorite works. Take a moment to ponder these considerations, and then we shall delve into our detailed discussions for weeks to come…

Consideration #1: I plan to use the word “adaptation” repetitively, almost redundantly, yet intentionally. Why? Because I want to remind everyone that this is not a recreation, but an adaptation. The distinction is quite important when we look at some of our favorite fantasy worlds on the TV or big screen (or your big TV screen if you're so fortunate). Anytime I see people's reviews or reactions to shows that I was particularly excited about, and likewise carry the banner of a fan that knew the worlds when they were only on the page, the first thing I notice is how people highlight the subtle things that are different from the original source. Fair readers, while I see nothing wrong with highlighting such discrepancies, I personally don't feel that a change in of itself merits criticism, unless it comes with reasons of course. For example, in the Wheel of Time (WOT) by Robert Jordan, we read about a world where women all wear skirts and smooth them over their knees as they sit, and the concept of romance follows the rather tired theme of subtle courtship followed by immediate matrimony with little social forgiveness for breaking that norm. Veering away from that social etiquette would be considered indecent, just like Bridgeton but far less titillating (and lacking the wonderful outfits). Now we see the TV series adaptation that quickly became one of the most streamed shows on the platform with one of the highest percentages of episodes streamed to completion. By that standard, it was considered a streaming success. Fan reviews however, we're quite divided. One criticism that I've not only read repeatedly, but actually heard friends use in discussion as one of their reasons for disliking the show, was that there was premarital sex in the first episode. To criticisms like this, I can only laugh and roll my eyes. I didn't realize that the tired concepts of prude culture were so important to so many people and ingrained in their concept of fantasy romance, especially when coupled with the irony of hearing this criticism come from people who aren't bothered by this concept in any other context. Therefore, the only reason I can gather that it should merit criticism now, is that it was a difference between their beloved book series and the show, and so does not belong. My view on the matter, I'm personally quite glad the show chose not to indulge the continuation of cliché and archaic image of romance. However, a deeper concern arises from this observation, not just the specific topic of premarital buggery itself. It showed me that people who consider themselves avid fans are expecting a word for word recreation of the books that they were so immersed and enthralled with. I can understand this desire, really. But this is my main point of the first consideration: these are NOT recreations, these are adaptations. And to adapt is to become better suited for a current environment. With that in mind, did you really expect all the details of a world written multiple generations before streaming services started licking their lips at it, to remain steadfast? The more you think about it, do you really want them to? A as a gay man, I personally appreciate when adaptations take on a more progressive approach to concepts like this, rather than encouraging the idea of a sexually repressive culture as “classic”. As cute as it was for the books to refer to lesbians as “pillow friends” in their youth, I'd much rather the topic be approached as though it wasn't as taboo as saying Voldemort’s name. Before I start to sound like it, I'm not suggesting that every TV series adopt the same level of consistent nudity as Game of Thrones, but let's not all look away and blush as though offended just because Rand took his shirt off. Though I must say, that was when I was personally sold on the show. Just kidding, that would be when Maureen leveled an entire horde of trollocs in a stunning visual representation of the One Power. A scene, I'd like to add, that was merely glossed over in the books. To remind you avid readers, Jordan merely remarked on how the Two Rivers would be in much worse shape if Moraine and Lan hadn't intervened to the level that they had, but the event was not described in the books. It is a difference that adds excitement to an adaptation, and I’m all for it. But I digress. My point being for Consideration #1, when you point out changes like that and call them a tasteful critique of why the show did not live up to your expectations, you have to stop and ask yourself: are you being critical because there were actually flaws, or are you being critical for the sake of being critical?
With that in mind we move on to our next consideration.

Now, the Rings of Power has not yet premiered, yet I see people already creating videos titled “everything wrong with the latest teaser”. I will reserve judgement until I have context, and find the concept of criticizing fleeting images a bit on the pompous side. Again, I am very excited for this adaptation, and made this my first consideration to try and get ahead of the criticisms before I see the show. I will reserve complete judgement, as I did for WOT, until I see the season finale. Now onto the next consideration.

Consideration #2: As I just concluded a long rant about accepting changes to our favorite work, allow me to alter perspective for a moment. As fans, how flexible with these subtle changes should we be? Well, that is a question each fan will have to answer for themselves, but I personally think there are a few ground rules when taking this into consideration. As I stated above, there are certain concepts to which I find irrelevant in my hopes for an adaptation, but I've come to expect as people’s minds become more progressive. There are some changes, however, that I am quite protective of. While the list could be quite considerable, I will spare you my endless ranting and limit it to two key features: plot importance and character development. There are elements of both that can be both positive and negative. Harry Potter in my opinion shaved the plot to the bare essentials for the film adaptations, I suspect mainly to save time. Though I would have enjoyed seeing peeves on the big screen, one has to stop and admit that he did not play own overly critical role in the overall plot, and so was a fair removal. Analyzing Tom Riddle through his life and studying his personality characteristics in Dumbledore’s pensive, on the other hand, I considered an incredibly important aspect to the plot and character both. Was I hoping for something a little more mythical for a live action Ogier? Yes. Will it make a difference in the end? No. Does stabbing him with a cursed blade in the season finale make a difference? I would assume so, and here I find myself joining the skeptics, though perhaps not as aggressively. Though I have no idea where they plan to take that (perhaps he didn't even die), this can serve as an example of remembering important plot concepts. The dagger for example, has the ability to spread a sort of evil plague if used. That, combined with Maureen losing the One Power, left to me significantly confused, which I should not be as someone who has read the books. While I had no qualms with the show giving Matt an abusive back story and Perrin a dead wife, I do have qualms about changing the foundational plot. The release of two Forsaken and Rand gaining the power to level an entire army were concepts that I considered key aspects to the plot moving forward. It makes me hesitant, to say the least, to think I will have any idea what each subsequent season will look like. To tie problems like this to people’s apprehension of Rings of Power, I think we can rest a bit easier. When it comes to the second age of Middle Earth, we are not so intimately familiar with the personalities and intricate details of each key character and the steps they take throughout the overall plot. Remember, this age took place over thousands of years, so we know generally what happened, and the results. All the rest can be left to the imagination. I personally find that a safeguard, because it means much of what we will see was left to interpretation from the source itself. There are likely no characters from Middle Earth that we would be in fiery defense of their personalities, as was the case with beloved characters like Ginny Weasley. Adding a forbidden love between Eugene and Perrin was a plot twist I was not expecting, but must admit that it adds a bit more interesting dynamics to their group. I think the main character that I do consider a worry for personality representation in the upcoming Rings of Power show, would be Galadriel, who will serve as the main character if interpretation of the trailers can be believed. Now while I've seen nothing of her personality so far that makes me particularly concerned, there are aspects to her character itself that I do not want ignored. For example, of all the various legendary individuals that roam Middle Earth, Galadriel was not one to ever need armor in my mind. Not because I don't picture her involved in combat or warfare, but because she should be powerful enough that armor is unnecessary. While there are many critiques of The Hobbit movies that I could outline, one thing that I did thoroughly enjoy was watching Galadriel blast an orc out of existence with a wave of her hand. It was a wonderful visual that showed us the literal concept of “overkill”. It's this unshakeable presence that I've come to associate with the lady of the wood. Now, we are meeting Galadriel in her youth, so perhaps her power has not yet fully developed. Elves, after all, were all young at one point, so I will assume many of their features develop gradually, and that might include one of the most powerful beings in Middle Earth. It will certainly be one of the aspects I will be waiting nervously to be addressed. At last, we arrive at my point for Consideration #2: Will the foundational aspects of the characters and plot be respected in the upcoming adaptation, or will it, like WOT, veer of course to suit a schedule of episodes and visual effects budget? Only time will tell, but I will of course be watching with hungry anticipation, as well as keen observance of the source material.

With these two considerations in mind, let us move forward into breaking down the film and TV adaptation of Tolkien’s gold-standard world. With regards to Consideration #1, I've already seen people complaining that Elrond's hair is short. To which I honestly must roll my eyes. Again, while I do enjoy the classic look of a long-haired elf, it will not be something I will factor in when making up my mind on whether or not the show rose to the challenge of bringing me back to one of the most beloved fantasy realms of my life, or if they bit off more than they can chew by placing Middle Earth on the small screen.
Now that I've given you some generalities and tone to decide whether or not you want to keep reading, let us delve into some of my thoughts in regards to the Rings of Power. I'll reference multiple fantasy pop culture comparisons, but we'll mainly focus on the WOT as a comparison, as both represent a new age of high budget fantasy world TV shows. Sorry Witcher, as much as I enjoy you and Henry Cavil, I consider WOT and LOTR a level above, with LOTR being the untouchable top tier. No offense intended, and I still can’t wait for season 3.

“So it begins.”

The Rings of Power first full trailer:
I didn't really feel the need to comment on the teasers, or even give them much thought beyond that of my unbridled excitement, because their purpose is to do exactly what their label says they do: tease. As I said before, taking things out of context really does not provide insight that is worth acknowledging. Now, however, we've been given a full trailer, and this gives us plenty to dwell on. If you want complete breakdowns scene by scene, shot by shot, with in-depth Middle Earth history background, I highly suggest the YouTube channel Nerd of the Rings (link below). It's one that I frequent and absolutely love for its succinct and entertaining summaries of various Middle Earth characters and concepts. One of those concepts, of course, is now analyzing the Rings of Power in detail. If you have or choose to follow the channel, you'll find that we have a great deal of overlap in our observations, but not necessarily the same thoughts and reactions.
I think we can all be in agreement that the trailer gives us the feel of Galadriel dwelling on the very bloody past that took place in the First Age, and the main plot is to focus on the free peoples of Middle Earth's attempt to move beyond their enormous losses as they enter the Second Age. Though I'm glad to see some flashbacks to the events of the First Age, it becomes difficult to tell how much of the trailer is showing memories or flashbacks, and what number of those scenes will somehow be incorporated into the Second Age events. I personally think this would give Galadriel incredible character development by depicting the horrors her people had endured in the First Age by the hands of Morgoth. As she moves forward to confront Sauron, it sets the stage for a powerful and inspiring character that is growing into her own power, much like Sauron himself will be doing in the Second Age, when the show is to take place.

One character I am particularly excited for, is Annatar. While some are still skeptical that the fair figure in light gray robes and hood his Annatar, I personally have little doubt. Much like Galadriel recovering from a devastating war, in which she lost her entire family, Sauron is now in a transition from lieutenant to Dark Lord. Annatar was one of the key aspects to his rise in power. He not only uses this form to learn how to forge and influence rings of power, but corrupt the kings of Numenor and ultimately lead to their destruction. Events that are self-explanatory enough in terms of significance. Now at the end of Nerd of the Rings breakdown of this trailer, they joke about if Annatar is too much like Voldemort. While I'm not sure if this was a jab at his appearance or not, I personally find it the perfect analogy. Not for his creepy demeanor, but how similar of profile these two villains have with one another. One area that I must disagree with their considerably insightful and knowledgeable breakdown, is when the claim is made that the character “doesn't seem all that fair” as Annatar is what is commonly referred to as Sauron's “fair form”. Fair, in my mind, especially in the reference to Tolkien’s writing, means light of skin and hair, as well as subjectively attractive features. By this definition, I would say Annatar is quite fair. The context the channel is using is that he looks “shady” rather than “fair” which makes me think the term is being used to describe a demeanor rather than appearance. This is why I think the comparison to Voldemort could not be anymore perfect. Not slits for nostrils and red-eye Voldemort that is as bald as a full moon, but the person who became Voldemort: Tom Riddle. I will not insult anyone's intelligence by explaining who Tom Riddle is, assuming that by reading a blog by a fantasy author, this merits no explanation to you. The reason why I think Tom Riddle and Annatar are such comparable antagonists, is the fact that they are both charming, very handsome, very intelligent, and the pinnacle of evil during their time. While Annatar may have a clearly shady image in this trailer, this is not showing him near any of those he ended up influencing during the Second Age. I would be willing to bet that this shady brooding robed figure has a much smoother and charming demeanor when he is in the presence of, say… Celebrimbor. While he roams by himself working on his plans, I would not expect him to have this demeanor because it is not actually his true nature. Opinion summary: I am very much so looking forward to Annatar and Sauron’s depiction in the new show.

The next aspect of the trailer that I am in full agreement with many other reviews about, is the use of practical effects rather than entirely CGI. This, I have to admit, was one aspect that strongly differentiated the Lord of the Rings films from The Hobbit films to me. While I enjoyed both, the Lord of the Rings I found far more immersive. One reason for that was the very authentic orcs and evil creatures. Now they give us a very clear image of practical effect orcs yet again, and I couldn't be happier. One reason for this is not necessarily because of the aesthetics, but when we start to enter combat and battle sequences. Action shots always have some element of disbelief when one of the opponents is CGI. Not always, I suppose, but commonly. Now that we're entering a new age of different (and epic) conflicts, I'm very glad practical effects will be part of these sequences. From what the trailer depicts already, these orcs will be haunting, and what would be the point otherwise? Rhetorical question. CGI is an area where I should probably not be overly critical or act as though I'm particularly informed. By no means do I have any concept of how CGI actually works, I simply see it and know of it. I go back and forth on my opinions of its roll, but there are times that I think it is overused. I was hoping for more of a CGI Ogier in WOT but less of it in the goblins of the first Hobbit film. So far from what I can tell from the trailer, Middle Earth has found its perfect balance of CGI and prosthetics once more. On that note, and which merits very little reaction explanation, would be our beloved Balrog. Is this the very same that slumbers in the Mines of Moria, or is it one of the several others used by Morgoth in the First Age? At this point, I’m too excited for its presence to care much. Time will tell.

With that, I conclude my first blog entry but highly encourage your feedback. Leave comments or send me messages. I would love to hear your thoughts.

For those that want a truly thorough walk through Middle Earth, I highly recommend the Nerd of the Rings breakdown: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FmDMm...