# The Fandom Menace - The Dark Side of Fandom



## Halasían (Jul 19, 2022)

This was an interesting read about Fandoms in general, but sadly, there is a _lot _of the toxicity the author speaks about in the Tolkien Middle Earth fandom these days.

I'll quote one paragraph from the article...

_At the same time that Salon published the "Fandom Menace" article, a viral tweet struck a chord with many fans. Twitter user @Atriedes analyzed changes in fandom over the past decade that have contributed to the increased toxicity, using the term "evangelists" to describe fans whose interactions within a fan community are mostly to, as they put it, pontificate._

There is more good points made in the article.


----------



## Elbereth Vala Varda (Jul 19, 2022)

Halasían said:


> This was an interesting read about Fandoms in general, but sadly, there is a _lot _of the toxicity the author speaks about in the Tolkien Middle Earth fandom these days.
> 
> I'll quote one paragraph from the article...
> 
> ...


I don't frequently use fandom. The information can be inaccurate, and when I was on a fandom, all that was discussed were LOTR movies, which as you all know, are not the true story.


----------



## Squint-eyed Southerner (Jul 19, 2022)

I'm not sure what you're referring to here. What's a "fandom", and how do you "use" it? 🤔


----------



## Halasían (Jul 19, 2022)

From a medical-psychology perspective, the term 'Fandom' is a very wide ranging umbrella term of being fans of something, not any one particular 'fandom' website dedicated to whatever it is a fan of. It was clear to me this is what is meant when I read the article.

*fandom*
/ˈfandəm/
noun
The state or condition of being a fan of someone or something.
e.g. "my 47 years of Tolkien Middle Earth fandom"
The fans of a particular person, team, fictional series, etc. regarded collectively as a community or subculture.
r.g. "Tolkien fandom"


----------



## Squint-eyed Southerner (Jul 19, 2022)

I thought Elbereth might perhaps be talking about something like this:








Gandalf


"He wore a tall pointed blue hat, a long grey cloak, and a silver scarf. He had a long white beard and bushy eyebrows that stuck out beyond the brim of his hat." —The Fellowship of the Ring, "A Long-expected Party" Gandalf the Grey, later known as Gandalf the White, and originally named Olórin...




lotr.fandom.com


----------



## cart (Jul 19, 2022)

well the star wars fandom (something that i'd say im loosely part of in my own way.. though who isn't really) had/has alot to be rather disgruntled about.. the joke is Sidious nearly controlled the Star wars Universe while Disney destroyed it..
the dagger being since the basis of all the cannon was a collective effort of MANY authors and comics over a 30+ year period was basically just decided to no longer be cannon on a whim so Disney would have as much creative freedom as they desired to do what they liked with their new investment. My self personally ignore all the new content and have my own head cannon and that is the REAL canon. but at the same time i don't engage or argue with people that do enjoy the newer content.. i don't know why they do but it's certainly not to cause me any harm..

and while i have not been following the prime series for the Tolkien release (as i have 0 hope for it.. literally none) and don't even know when it is due to release and only know that it is about Galadriel and the "ancestors" of hobbits.. the harfoots (which we all know doesn't make any sense in the slightest) i am far less concerned with the outcome of it all. If it's awesome.. then great! if it sucks .. well then it met my low expectations.. but unlike the Star Wars Universe... Amazon can't step in and to their own financial benefit decide what is and is not canon.... the canon while it's minute details might be debated on sites like this.. you basically won't run into a situation where like in the star wars community the MAJORITY of what was known about the universe that was once canon... is no longer canon.. which was a fear I saw on YT.

i can't really think of any "fandoms" large enough that have been shook up in the last 5 years or so.. but i would say in general.. people are tired of being lectured to when watching the newest release of some series they are a fan of.. or a game they are a fan of.. all in all it would seem the time and place of movies and games being also a focal point of forced moral guidance at the expense of consumer is coming to an end however.. as the "go woke go broke meme" turned out not to just be a meme in the end.


----------



## Elbereth Vala Varda (Jul 19, 2022)

Squint-eyed Southerner said:


> I thought Elbereth might perhaps be talking about something like this:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Yep. That is right. Is there any other kind of Fandom?


----------



## Squint-eyed Southerner (Jul 19, 2022)

You're right there, cart -- not a meme, but a racist dog-whistle.

For the last few years, we've been experiencing the equivalent of Gamergate's "let's keep those icky gurls out of our clubhouse" campaign.

Only now, it's "_those people_" -- and we know who they mean.


----------



## Squint-eyed Southerner (Jul 19, 2022)

Elbereth Vala Varda said:


> Yep. That is right. Is there any other kind of Fandom?


Yes. See Hal's post.


----------



## Elbereth Vala Varda (Jul 19, 2022)

Halasían said:


> From a medical-psychology perspective, the term 'Fandom' is a very wide ranging umbrella term of being fans of something, not any one particular 'fandom' website dedicated to whatever it is a fan of. It was clear to me this is what is meant when I read the article.
> 
> *fandom*
> /ˈfandəm/
> ...


Oh! Interesting. I am certainly in the state or condition of being a fan of Tolkien and his works, and Middle-Earth.

This is nice to know-- I always thought it was just the website with inaccurate information on critical characters. Glad to know that it isn't all.

Thanks, @Halasían , and @Squint-eyed Southerner !


----------



## Squint-eyed Southerner (Jul 19, 2022)

I do agree the Fandom wiki is often inaccurate-- and tends to mix Tolkien with game characters, for instance, without differentiating media.


----------



## Elbereth Vala Varda (Jul 19, 2022)

Squint-eyed Southerner said:


> I do agree the Fandom wiki is often inaccurate-- and tends to mix Tolkien with game characters, for instance, without differentiating media.


Yep. I usually turn to Tolkien Gateway for more reliable info-- but even they have certain flaws, all of which I strive to correct. This site's wiki is good, however it is underdeveloped, sadly. The best way to find true facts in my own opinion, is to actually seek answers from the books.


----------



## Starbrow (Jul 19, 2022)

I want to thank all of the staff who work hard to keep this site a positive one. I appreciate that this is a place that is good for my mental health.


----------



## cart (Jul 20, 2022)

Squint-eyed Southerner said:


> You're right there, cart -- not a meme, but a racist dog-whistle.
> 
> For the last few years, we've been experiencing the equivalent of Gamergate's "let's keep those icky gurls out of our clubhouse" campaign.
> 
> Only now, it's "_those people_" -- and we know who they mean.


tell u the truth i never understood what gamergate was all about.. like who was gating who from what.. i mean is ur simplification what it was essentially about? ppl didn't want girls playing games? from the uproar it caused.. i remember it being or including transexualism.. racism.. and well any "ism" but i don't know who or what "was it the developers or the gamers.. or the people that felt excluded or judged" that were for or against gamergate (assuming it's a concept one can be for or against)
i don't really follow these sorts of things
(in other words i don't tend to visit reddit or twitter often.. last time i was on twitter it notified me that the #SaveShenmue campaigned worked.. which was all well and good but i had owned and beaten Shenmue 3 two years since that hashtag likely last trended)

edit: i hope your reply didn't intend to mean my reply was somehow racist or supported racism or any ism... i haven't the time for any of that. i don't think it was.. or i suppose i would be banned maybe.. but again i know so little about the movements and only experience the effects as a consumer. however, that wasn't my intent..

edit2: ill rephrase my 1st post to make my underlying point more clear if my fear is indeed the case. i purchase games or movies or books or any media that is meant to entertain me in a way that it is advertised to entertain me. be it a great first person shooter, a thriller movie, or a fantasy novel. if it then has an overarching moralizing theme of the producers of said entertainment to correct my possible beliefs slipped in and generally be it a prevailing theme or a (and this is more generally the case) diminishing quality of the product then sign me out. a good example of this (though Activsion-Blizzard was quite proud of this for some bizarre reason) was how they create characters for their games now is each character is rated on several scales from their racial/gender/sexual orientations/age on scales from 1-10 so they can be sure they have a diverse group of characters for their games that represent all people.. instead of just making interesting characters. of course if the movie is about Martin Luther King.. or Ida Wells.. then i would of course go in expecting and hoping for this moralizing agent.. as that is part of the subject.. etc. and so on


----------



## Erestor Arcamen (Jul 20, 2022)

The Star Wars fandom is one I consider myself part of. I've seen all of the movies and while the sequel trilogy in my opinion was ok not great, there's fans of Star Wars who only accept the og trilogy, everything else is trash. They drove Kelly Marie Tran off social media because they didn't like her character and attacked with hateful comments and posts as if the bad writing was her fault. But the standalone movies like Solo and Rogue One, along with The Clone Wars series and Rebels series are amazing and add a ton of depth to the prequel trilogies (which also are good not great). 

I think all fandoms have these toxic people. We've seen on this forum how Rings of Power is bringing the Tolkien toxics out now. Anytime something new is added to a beloved franchise, there are people who resist that change, thinking their ignorance can make a difference in people like me who are open to new material. Maybe ROP won't be super Tolkienish but it could still be a fun fantasy series inspired by Tolkien and that's how I'm going to watch it.


----------



## cart (Jul 20, 2022)

Erestor Arcamen said:


> The Star Wars fandom is one I consider myself part of. I've seen all of the movies and while the sequel trilogy in my opinion was ok not great, there's fans of Star Wars who only accept the og trilogy, everything else is trash. They drove Kelly Marie Tran off social media because they didn't like her character and attacked with hateful comments and posts as if the bad writing was her fault. But the standalone movies like Solo and Rogue One, along with The Clone Wars series and Rebels series are amazing and add a ton of depth to the prequel trilogies (which also are good not great).
> 
> I think all fandoms have these toxic people. We've seen on this forum how Rings of Power is bringing the Tolkien toxics out now. Anytime something new is added to a beloved franchise, there are people who resist that change, thinking their ignorance can make a difference in people like me who are open to new material. Maybe ROP won't be super Tolkienish but it could still be a fun fantasy series inspired by Tolkien and that's how I'm going to watch it.



Yea the personal attacks on actors is never a good idea I'd say as a general rule. And Rogue One was (imo) the only good movie released (and I heard good things of the animated series.) But you left out the part of them turning quite nearly every book and comic made in the past 30 years no longer canon





like quite nearly everything in this picture.. it was canon one day.. then the next it was not.

It bothered me, but perhaps not others.

As for personally attacking people and general hostility to individuals who are for the most part just "doing their job" as it were, I obviously don't support and not sure what drives people like that to begin with.

But again, I'm not on twitter and not on either side of gamergates or starwars gates or Tolkien-gates assuming there are any and don't know who has the time for such things to begin with if I'm being honest.

You say there are people "resisting change" and again detached from all of this I don't know what change is being resisted other than a poorly crafted and uninspired narrative which is the only change I'm interested in (well I say interested but disinterested is closer to the truth because as I said I have no hope this is going to be a good series that would reflect and expand upon the will of it's creator) But I'm not hounding people with my opinion on these things nor attacking people for thinking differently from me.

But I will still have my opinion nonetheless and not be afraid of voicing it either.

edit: Quite frankly my outsider view of twitter and how it is generally described to me I imagine it is of echo chambers clamoring to have a clash with an opposing or some other echo chamber of a dissenting opinion arguing endlessly all day.. and when the two finally change no one's mind (as nobody had the intent to have their mind changed or engage in a manner that would change someone's mind even on such a rare occasion) they both go to bed and presumably score one point for the home team and do it all again the next day. It's all so Sisyphean in nature it is kinda bewildering people still go on with it.


----------



## Erestor Arcamen (Jul 20, 2022)

cart said:


> Yea the personal attacks on actors is never a good idea I'd say as a general rule. And Rogue One was (imo) the only good movie released (and I heard good things of the animated series.) But you left out the part of them turning quite nearly every book and comic made in the past 30 years no longer canon
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I don't think being resistant to change in a universe is bad, as long as you're (YOU as in the fans, not you cart personally) are respectful to others. The way I see it, using Star Wars as an example because it has had so many changes/new movies added, etc., Star Wars has different generations of fans (as many fandoms do). Those who grew up with the original trilogy and feel those are the only canon movies, along with the expanded universe books (And I agree with you 100% it was a garbage move getting rid of these as canon). And the newer fans like me who maybe the OT was the first that I saw but I grew up with the Prequels too and now there's the Sequels, standalones and series coming out. Healthy debate about our differences in opinion is great but there's no need to personally attack one another because of differing opinions for a fictional universe. Those are the fans that I see as the dark side of the fandom, the ones who attack others for their opinions and who insult and attack the actors and actresses in the movies. Even Rian Johnson, who directed The Last Jedi (not a great movie) doesn't deserve to be insulted. Yeah maybe he made a crap Star Wars movie, but he was just doing what he thought was a good job. Turns out it was not. But I won't tweet at him and call him a moron or to go off himself, like some fans have done to others. 

So yes, my "resistance to change" wording was probably not correct and doesn't really clarify what I was trying to say. I don't think people who accept just the OT as canon are "dumb" or anything is wrong with that. Us LOTR purists are the same way, Rings of Power will never replace our original Tolkien books and it'll probably be better if we view it as just a random fantasy series. But we can also accept that ROP might bring in new fans. Maybe they'll see the show and want to read the books or at least learn more about the stories. And while maybe ROP isn't a great representation of Tolkien's works, if it brings more fans into the fanbase who read the books and get interested, that's good enough for me.

Back to the EU thing for a second, I wish they wouldn't have removed them as canon either. That's really a slap in the face to all those authors, in my opinion. I haven't read a TON of those books but know that things like the Yuzhan Vong materials are amazing and would make for great movies/stories. I'm glad they brought Thrawn back, he was a really good character in the Star Wars Rebels series and will apparently be back in the Ahsoka series, which should be good.

And I agree with your edit. Twitter is FULL of toxic people from all sides of the aisle arguing from behind their glass screens. I mainly stay on it to follow tech sites/posters and some sports stuff, I stay away from the politics as much as possible there and on any other social media. I rarely if at all tweet and more just use it for entering sweepstakes and reading tech news.


----------



## Elbereth Vala Varda (Jul 20, 2022)

cart said:


> Yea the personal attacks on actors is never a good idea I'd say as a general rule. And Rogue One was (imo) the only good movie released (and I heard good things of the animated series.) But you left out the part of them turning quite nearly every book and comic made in the past 30 years no longer canon
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Wow. This is quite the collection.


----------



## Olorgando (Jul 20, 2022)

Erestor Arcamen said:


> ... And I agree with your edit. Twitter is FULL of toxic people from all sides of the aisle arguing from behind their glass screens. ...


Ah yes, that pathetic naïveté of the inventors of the Internet decades ago. Assuming that it would provide people living under authoritarian rule to find a vent for their grievances. Well, those authoritarian countries (China, Russia, Turkey, the Islamic world, just to name the most obvious) very quickly found out how to stifle that.
And then the theory that everyone would get smarter by being able to discuss things with so many others?
Problem is, the business model of Twitter, FabceBook, YouTube and whatever seems to be based on something "measurable", nominally at least; other companies have gone down this "measurability" rat-hole for "incentives" ... 🤢🤮
So what do we have now? The most rabid lunatics, generating the most controversy, are the darlings of this sick industry. Nerds as CEO's ain't such a good idea ...


----------



## cart (Jul 20, 2022)

Erestor Arcamen said:


> I don't think being resistant to change in a universe is bad, as long as you're (YOU as in the fans, not you cart personally) are respectful to others. The way I see it, using Star Wars as an example because it has had so many changes/new movies added, etc., Star Wars has different generations of fans (as many fandoms do). Those who grew up with the original trilogy and feel those are the only canon movies, along with the expanded universe books (And I agree with you 100% it was a garbage move getting rid of these as canon). And the newer fans like me who maybe the OT was the first that I saw but I grew up with the Prequels too and now there's the Sequels, standalones and series coming out. Healthy debate about our differences in opinion is great but there's no need to personally attack one another because of differing opinions for a fictional universe. Those are the fans that I see as the dark side of the fandom, the ones who attack others for their opinions and who insult and attack the actors and actresses in the movies. Even Rian Johnson, who directed The Last Jedi (not a great movie) doesn't deserve to be insulted. Yeah maybe he made a crap Star Wars movie, but he was just doing what he thought was a good job. Turns out it was not. But I won't tweet at him and call him a moron or to go off himself, like some fans have done to others.
> 
> So yes, my "resistance to change" wording was probably not correct and doesn't really clarify what I was trying to say. I don't think people who accept just the OT as canon are "dumb" or anything is wrong with that. Us LOTR purists are the same way, Rings of Power will never replace our original Tolkien books and it'll probably be better if we view it as just a random fantasy series. But we can also accept that ROP might bring in new fans. Maybe they'll see the show and want to read the books or at least learn more about the stories. And while maybe ROP isn't a great representation of Tolkien's works, if it brings more fans into the fanbase who read the books and get interested, that's good enough for me.
> 
> ...


I was only so insistent at first in my posts to 1. make clear i hold no prejudices of my own will. And explained away the rest to answer why people might argue and resist certain things which on the larger points we are in agreement. And possibly disagree on some minor points, and while I might have a degree in PHIL (kinda pinned it on towards the end of graduation since I had so many credits in it) that's all well enough for me. And always figured any real debate best be verbal.

So with all that to the side, I will say that viewing the new star wars movies as simply movies in space and not star wars.. as my approach and the trilogy was still just dreadful. Just dreadful writing, narrative arc, character development.. just through and through.

So while I also hope the new amazon series drives new fans to pick up a book (in these days where people are so fast to judge and just as fast to point out their social enemies seems more ought to) I would say that unlike Star Wars where they can play with timelines and timeloops and well the expanse of their timeline is far greater than ours and far more malleable and acceptable to "interesting" ideas, to put it one way.

The Amazon series, just like the Hobbit series and even the good Jackson Trilogy can't set their own canon.. but in our books. Where it's places like here where we debate only the minute details.. not Eras.

What I fear for the series though is that after they touch the timeline.. the Second Age, something I think many of us have wanted to see depicted in some way or another. It won't be again depicted in film for another 50 years. For something as important as the Second Age.. you would really want one of those situations where it was another Jackson-esque endeavor or endearment perhaps might be the better word.

I wouldn't be satisfied in the slightest if the end goal was just bringing in some new fans to pick up the books.. not covering the epicness of the Second Age. The narrative drive and character development has to be on par or beyond what was the first 5 seasons of Game of Thrones, then you will really see the books flying off the shelves... but when you get subpar material, you'll get a subpar response.. but a response all the same and sure there will be some that might pick up the books. But you won't get the response one would hope for.. even if we would have to wait another 10 years for better care takers of the material to come forth and produce this crucial part of the Middle Earth story.

p.s. glad you guys don't think im racist or any other kind of -ist other than a classicist perhaps lol


----------



## Erestor Arcamen (Jul 20, 2022)

I'm glad we can have these discussions and stay civil. Even if I don't agree with you 100% on the new trilogy (I think it's not great but not awful) I respect that you have your own opinion, I don't think there's anything wrong with that at all, and I'm glad you shared it. To me, it has just as much value to the discussion as mine does. That's how I wish the fandom was, the way I look at it. To show respect and understand that others have their own opinions like I do and there's nothing wrong with that. I know I'm way oversimplifying it but I'm not great at putting my thoughts into words vs speaking them so I apologize.

Thank you for being a member here and for continuing to discuss your feelings on the Amazon series and everything else. I as a staff member truly value your and everyone else's contributions to our forums.


----------



## Olorgando (Jul 20, 2022)

cart said:


> ... So while I also hope the new amazon series drives new fans to pick up a book ...


PJ's films - "Fellowship" premiered over 20 years ago - certainly haven't hurt sales. In Tom Shippey's 2000 book "Author of the Century", he states statistics (which seem to be difficult to compile even for the publishers) of LoTR having reached 50 million in sales (and TH not far behind with 40 mio). Current statistics give the sales at between 100 and 150 mio for LoTR - see what I mean about statistics being difficult to compile?

Well, people bought the book; not all, I would guess, finished it (my wife and at least one other - of the very few - people I've spoken to about LoTR didn't). I'd guess that most if not all who got through a lot, or all the way through, the books must have noticed "erm ... this isn't exactly what was in the films."
And how they reacted to the differences - no one will ever know.

But that's just LoTR, and I have quite a few more books by / about JRRT in my library by now ...
I bought LoTR in the original in about 1985 (having read the German translation in 1983).
TH, The Sil, UT and BoLT volumes 1 and 2 must have followed by the end of the 80's at the latest - leaving 10 books of Christopher's HoMe to go.
In the same category the index to HoMe, Rateliff's brick HoTH, Hostetter's NoMe ...
... three lexicons (two English, one German), two of them in two editions, and three (or four) books by Hammond & Scull in a similar vein, Anderson's "Annotated Hobbit" ...
... books about JRRT and his writings by the authors Humphrey Carpenter (3), Tom Shippey (3), Verlyn Flieger (3), Crabbe, Curry, Fisher, Pearce, Garth ...
... books by Christopher tangential to M-e (Beowulf, The Fall of Arthur, The Legend of Sigurd and Gudrun) ...

... so, now, 37 years after my first reading of LoTR in the original, I try to imagine I'd just done that recently (instead of my fourth reading of the German translation and something past 15 total readings), being as enthusiastic about it as I was back in 1985 ... and then someone taps me on the shoulder and tells me "well, if you *really* want to understand JRRT's writings, you're gonna hafta read all of that!"



Most of it, you'd have to be able to read English (only BoLT 1 and 2 ever got translated into German, for example). And I have no idea what kind of sales any of the books I mentioned above had or have - but I'd guess below six figures each, a whole different ballpark from LoTR. And some may be out of print by now ...


----------



## cart (Jul 20, 2022)

Erestor Arcamen said:


> I'm glad we can have these discussions and stay civil. Even if I don't agree with you 100% on the new trilogy (I think it's not great but not awful) I respect that you have your own opinion, I don't think there's anything wrong with that at all, and I'm glad you shared it. To me, it has just as much value to the discussion as mine does. That's how I wish the fandom was, the way I look at it. To show respect and understand that others have their own opinions like I do and there's nothing wrong with that. I know I'm way oversimplifying it but I'm not great at putting my thoughts into words vs speaking them so I apologize.
> 
> Thank you for being a member here and for continuing to discuss your feelings on the Amazon series and everything else. I as a staff member truly value your and everyone else's contributions to our forums.


well this is how people used to talk.. and i mean verbally dissent with one another. they would talk out their differences and sometimes their opinions would be altered in some ways unexpected.. but with the influx of standard internet discourse where there are "in" groups and "out" groups (though they are "in" groups to their own accord and the others "out") it's all or nothing and if you're not for all of it not only are you 100% in the wrong, but can be accused of all kinds of nasty things (of which i obviously was afraid i was falling into) and the reason you dissent from one opinion or another is not your stated reason, but often a veiled and sinister one such as some -ism..

so that leads not only to incredibly useless and toxic "discussion" but also silences those that are simply afraid to be painted as a racist or misogynism when their reasoning is nothing of the sort. you see this accusation used often by creators that inherit a beloved work of fiction and when the fans of 20,30,40+ years voice their dissent of the mishandling of something they cherish and see the vision of their favourite author or visionary of some other sort handled with no care and transformed from entertainment to virtue signaling or worse.. they are often automatically and unequivocally all labeled as some kind of -ism.

everything is political now in one way or another.

and im like you that i'm glad i can have these discussions, but sad that i also feel an inherent and reflexive need to shield myself from insults of the worst kind.


----------



## Uminya (Jul 20, 2022)

Fandoms are a curious phenomenon, and it's worth considering that 'fan' was intended as shorthand for 'fanatic'. They (fandoms) are cultural groups built around the consumption of specific brands, typically built around some form of media (be it books, comics, films, television shows, video games, or some combination of these). It is important to remember that all art is political, whether it is intentional or not; all media has biases that come not just from the writer(s), but also from the producers, publishers, and other people that control how and when the media gets released (via investment, funding, etc).

With more and more intellectual properties flowing into the ownership of massive corporations, These corporations have more and more power to shape media into a force that drives further consumption of that media. Gandoms are, in essence, social groups based around product consumption. Nobody wants the thing they consume to be "bad", so people begin to take them personally; authors and writers become the objects of parasocial relationships, which is especially troubling when the author is long dead and can no longer defend (or damn) themselves.

Speaking on Star Wars in particular, i think people have a very naive view about what sort of person George Lucas is. Creative, certainly. The man runs a business, though, and there have been thousands of products created from the Star Wars IP; that development did not begin with the latest sequel, or even the prequels. Each of the products that came out was attempting to lure consumers into purchasing them; they were never art created for the sake of art, but to keep people invested in "star wars" enough to buy its products. People that pretend star wars only sold out when it "got woke" are, quite honestly, foolish.

i think this emphasis on the commodification of art is what has lent itself to fandoms becoming deeply entrenched into internal identities. Tolkien-enjoyers are really no better, even if there are fewer products aimed at us; a lot of people want to be comforted and to feel recognized, When someone presents a viewpoint that is critical of our object of interest, we have a tendency to get irrationally defensive about it. So in a lot of ways, fandom forms a sort of social sorting system as well, based on in-groups and out-groups and competing theories about the media itself.


----------



## Elbereth Vala Varda (Jul 20, 2022)

cart said:


> So while I also hope the new amazon series drives new fans to pick up a book


This summarizes my one hope for The Rings of Power series. It is a very controversial subject, but just as I do for the movies when people watch them first, I hope that the fans of the movies and now series, will read and fall in love with Tolkien's works as I have.


----------



## cart (Jul 20, 2022)

Elbereth Vala Varda said:


> This summarizes my one hope for The Rings of Power series. It is a very controversial subject, but just as I do for the movies when people watch them first, I hope that the fans of the movies and now series, will read and fall in love with Tolkien's works as I have.


i know i tend to type alot but if ur read further on in my post, but that is also my fear. simply because it's new and brings into the minds of the people Tolkien's universe which is known to most as it is.. i fear that since this second age likely will not be displayed in film for another 20-50 years unless they clearly retcon it.. it won't have the effect that one might hope for and a bring about a new renaissance of sorts for this world we all hold dear if it was directed by hands that cared perhaps more deeply and carefully to build upon and further expand the great vision that Tolkien has laid forth.
it seems often these days that producers and directors that are allowed to work with beloved works of fiction seem to have ideas of their own they deem to be somehow superior and try to subvert and supplant the original vision.. thus spoiling it in their wake.

but time will tell, though i have very little hope but i do hope for the best all the same.


----------



## Elbereth Vala Varda (Jul 20, 2022)

cart said:


> i know i tend to type alot but if ur read further on in my post, but that is also my fear. simply because it's new and brings into the minds of the people Tolkien's universe which is known to most as it is.. i fear that since this second age likely will not be displayed in film for another 20-50 years unless they clearly retcon it.. it won't have the effect that one might hope for and a bring about a new renaissance of sorts for this world we all hold dear if it was directed by hands that cared perhaps more deeply and carefully to build upon and further expand the great vision that Tolkien has laid forth.
> it seems often these days that producers and directors that are allowed to work with beloved works of fiction seem to have ideas of their own they deem to be somehow superior and try to subvert and supplant the original vision.. thus spoiling it in their wake.
> 
> but time will tell, though i have very little hope but i do hope for the best all the same.


You are right. It is a danger when changing and rewriting the history of Middle-Earth, and I sincerely hope it doesn't come to that. It is clear that very few of the people (if any) involved with The Rings of Power series, actually care about Tolkien's vision. I am also a bit nervous that people might find the amazon series rather disappointing and trashy, and think that Tolkien's works would be the same.

Nauva i nauva. What should be, shall ever be.


----------



## cart (Jul 20, 2022)

Elbereth Vala Varda said:


> Nauva i nauva. What should be, shall ever be.



Apalúme, sina yú autauva. (wonder if i got this right..?)


----------



## Elbereth Vala Varda (Jul 20, 2022)

cart said:


> Apalúme, sina yú autauva. (wonder if i got this right..?)


I believe you did! Hannon-le lithra edhellen!


----------



## Halasían (Jul 20, 2022)

cart said:


> or something as important as the Second Age.. you would really want one of those situations where it was another Jackson-esque endeavor or endearment perhaps might be the better word.


Gawd... Peter Jacksonists... Yeeesh. He gutted the core story of Lord of the Rings. That pretty much opened the floodgates for tweaks, changes, and additions to the legendarium in any future Tolkien visual media adaptations. (I won't even mention what PJ did to the Hobbit...)

Personally, I'm glad someone else is doing the Rings of Power.


----------



## Elbereth Vala Varda (Jul 20, 2022)

Halasían said:


> Gawd... Peter Jacksonists... Yeeesh. He gutted the core story of Lord of the Rings. That pretty much opened the floodgates for tweaks, changes, and additions to the legendarium in any future Tolkien visual media adaptations. (I won't even mention what PJ did to the Hobbit...)
> 
> Personally, I'm glad someone else is doing the Rings of Power.


I guess I agree, however it seemed that the people who created The Lord of the Rings movies cared at least somewhat for Tolkien's vision and works. I don't see that with the new Rings of Power. To me, it feels like they are just demolishing anything with tradition. As I am sure many have noted, it calls to mind the thought of Tolkien's quote about Evil being unable to create. The whole thing with Galadriel wearing the Star of Feanor in battle is basically just spitting on Tolkien's whole vision for Middle-Earth. I'm greatly disappointed so far-- but I suppose I will have to see what comes next.


----------



## cart (Jul 20, 2022)

cart said:


> Apalúme, sina yú autauva. (wonder if i got this right..?)





Halasían said:


> Gawd... Peter Jacksonists... Yeeesh. He gutted the core story of Lord of the Rings. That pretty much opened the floodgates for tweaks, changes, and additions to the legendarium in any future Tolkien visual media adaptations. (I won't even mention what PJ did to the Hobbit...)
> 
> Personally, I'm glad someone else is doing the Rings of Power.



Personally, and this is now subjective to each of us. I feel his directorial decisions were made to maintain the spirit of the books if it was at the cost of the actual story.. which for me.. someone who has seen ALOT of my favourite works grasped by "showrunners." I find it quite easy to find fault in ALL their work as the source material will always stand far and beyond the reach of most adaptations. I do think there is one instance I actually found an adaptation superior to the earlier work.. but I forget what it was.. and will conclude that neither works are timeless in any way. But always appreciate and tend to enjoy the works that do their best to maintain the spirit of the original work, even if they have to make certain editorial/directorial decisions along the way. And while he was the director you have to remember, he hardly has the final say on anything.... the producers/publishers/actors all have their parts to play.

That is why (assuming im in the same thread) used the term endearment to the source material over whatever other term I used.

And yea I know the hobbit went awry.. though I suspect these were decisions made above him. LoTR has 5x as many words and perhaps 20x as much content if you really think about it.. and thus the Hobbit should of been a single movie.. or as I have said over the years a mini series.... But I think anyone would have a hard time turning down the offer he got for that Trilogy.. 20$ million per movie and then 20% off the back and with that name recognition and install base.. and with it being a trilogy and needing that mass appeal he tried to make it a LoTR.. but with Hobbits and yea just missed the mark by a mile. I'm sure when the masses showed up to the theatre they were expecting another epic journey and it was marketed as such.

$200 million is alot of money and while I wouldn't say he was set up to fail.. there is only so much one can do to contort the hobbit into the like of the trilogy.. and then on top of that make it a trilogy as well, so I give him a personal pass on that one and totally understand those who don't for the Hobbit or the LoTR trilogy.. but the latter could of been far far far far worse (as we saw in the hobbit.. and likely later this year!

edit: i was wrong in my first paragraph where i thought the adaptation surpassed the original material. and since i couldn't recall it's not some timless work.... i am thinking of Akira. while the manga/comic is superb... the resulting film was something else altogether and it's impact is still felt to this day


----------



## Halasían (Jul 21, 2022)

Elbereth Vala Varda said:


> I guess I agree, however it seemed that the people who created The Lord of the Rings movies cared at least somewhat for Tolkien's vision and works. I don't see that with the new Rings of Power. To me, it feels like they are just demolishing anything with tradition. As I am sure many have noted, it calls to mind the thought of Tolkien's quote about Evil being unable to create. The whole thing with Galadriel wearing the Star of Feanor in battle is basically just spitting on Tolkien's whole vision for Middle-Earth. I'm greatly disappointed so far-- but I suppose I will have to see what comes next.


Like Peter Jackson's movies, RoP is pure fanfic. Neither one is nothing more, and nothing less. Gutting Aragorn's whole ancestral story, throwing elves into Helms Deep, emasculating Denethor and Faramir, etc. Peter had a whole book story to follow. This series doesn't. Can't excuse one while railing on the other. 

Anyway, dont want to turn this into another PJ movies & Rop series is crap thread. There is enough of that up-forum. I was mostly interested in the toxic fandom aspect of this article. It's quite prevalent in our fandom here (Tolkien/Middle Earth fandom, not Tolkien Forums specifically) as well as what was done with the Ms Marvel TV show, etc.


----------



## cart (Jul 21, 2022)

Halasían said:


> Like Peter Jackson's movies, RoP is pure fanfic. Neither one is nothing more, and nothing less. Gutting Aragorn's whole ancestral story, throwing elves into Helms Deep, emasculating Denethor and Faramir, etc. Peter had a whole book story to follow. This series doesn't. Can't excuse one while railing on the other.
> 
> Anyway, dont want to turn this into another PJ movies & Rop series is crap thread. There is enough of that up-forum. I was mostly interested in the toxic fandom aspect of this article. It's quite prevalent in our fandom here (Tolkien/Middle Earth fandom, not Tolkien Forums specifically) as well as what was done with the Ms Marvel TV show, etc.


I tend to agree with how PJ did the people of Gondor wrong.. from Boromir being.. basically evil Faramir being a crying ***** and Denethor being.. well I dunno, just kinda pathetic I guess. But I always took that as (at least for Denethor and Boromir) that this was his way of demonstrating the failing and weakness of man in the third age.

As for the elves in Rohan.. I mean it makes sense and most of the directorial decisions at least you can understand the reasoning behind it.. even if you may disagree with it. Lothlorien was also at war... everyone was.. the Beornings.. the Woodland Realm and with there already being a great number of characters to track (I know it's easy for us.. but for the casual movie goer... there is quite list of people in those movies alone) that to have them fight in one battle at Helm's Deep to represent that they are all fighting.. seems fair enough to me.

If this was a 5 part movie then you may have gotten (well any true fan) may have gotten something much closer to what they read (or wound up reading) but for a preapproved we're shooting 3 movies at once (unheard of then and still kinda unheard of now) I do think you are being a but harsh on that trilogy in particular. I don't know how else he conveys all these events/people/places in a trilogy and then on top of that you have to remember these movies were really really long for when they came out.. we were used to movies being 1.5 hours and longer ones about 2.... but then 3 hours and expecting people to remain in their seats for that long was not entirely a new concept but a risky one nonetheless.

He had alot of square pegs and had alot of round holes.. I think he did quite well. Not perfect, not by a long shot.. but captured the important places/people/events and made hundreds of millions of people go and read some long books.. Not many movies can say that.. I mean hardly any really. Dune.. umm this is a 1-2 hand number of movies that would lead you to say man i should go read the source material (obviously none have drove SO MANY to do so.. but that's besides the point.)

I know some say game of thrones did but i know alot of people who watched that series and the only people I knew that even owned the books.. already owned them.. and only 1 of the 3 actually read an entire book (though tbf those are some long books.)

EDIT: I DO AGREE IT IS ALL FANFIC THOUGH!


----------



## Erestor Arcamen (Jul 21, 2022)

There is no dark side of the fandom, really. Matter of fact, it's all dark.

Sorry, had to


----------



## Elbereth Vala Varda (Jul 21, 2022)

Erestor Arcamen said:


> There is no dark side of the fandom, really. Matter of fact, it's all dark.
> 
> Sorry, had to


'Tis true, unfortunately..


----------



## Squint-eyed Southerner (Jul 21, 2022)




----------



## Elbereth Vala Varda (Jul 21, 2022)

Squint-eyed Southerner said:


> View attachment 14577


I suppose it does fit the topic, good one, Squint!


----------



## Olorgando (Jul 21, 2022)

cart said:


> ... but for a preapproved we're shooting 3 movies at once (unheard of then and still kinda unheard of now) ...


That reminded me of a fact that's probably not all that well known (anymore?):
PJ's proposal to the studios in the late 1990's was for a two-film production with Miramax. Some utter nutcases thought it could be squeezed into a single film, but PJ managed to get New Line to do a trilogy. Just to give some background to the production history and nincompoops in the film industry with no idea of the source material.


----------



## Elbereth Vala Varda (Jul 21, 2022)

Olorgando said:


> Some utter nutcases thought it could be squeezed into a single film,


I am glad it wasn't all put into one film-- how disappointing would that be.


----------



## Erestor Arcamen (Jul 21, 2022)

Elbereth Vala Varda said:


> I am glad it wasn't all put into one film-- how disappointing would that be.


Yup, instead we were disappointed by 3 movies...twice!


----------



## Elbereth Vala Varda (Jul 21, 2022)

Erestor Arcamen said:


> Yup, instead we were disappointed by 3 movies...twice!


Ah, true. I feel as though it would not have covered near anything however. I consider the films of The Lord of the Rings fine movies, save for accuracy to the books. I like them very much, but of course, nothing could properly represent Tolkien, and those that try fail rather miserably.


----------



## cart (Jul 21, 2022)

Olorgando said:


> That reminded me of a fact that's probably not all that well known (anymore?):
> PJ's proposal to the studios in the late 1990's was for a two-film production with Miramax. Some utter nutcases thought it could be squeezed into a single film, but PJ managed to get New Line to do a trilogy. Just to give some background to the production history and nincompoops in the film industry with no idea of the source material.



I'm starting to wonder if you really are wizard some times...
hmm


----------



## Elbereth Vala Varda (Jul 21, 2022)

cart said:


> I'm starting to wonder if you really are wizard some times...
> hmm


One must wonder....


----------



## Olorgando (Jul 21, 2022)

cart said:


> I'm starting to wonder if you really are wizard some times...
> hmm


If deciding to buy the EE DVDs of the LoTR film trilogy as soon as they hit the stores is wizardry, then I'm a wizard - so I guess not. It was discussed in the "Appendices" - "from book to film", "making of" etc, for this part most likely in the Fellowship" EE.


----------



## Elbereth Vala Varda (Jul 21, 2022)

Olorgando said:


> If deciding to buy the EE DVDs of the LoTR film trilogy as soon as they hit the stores is wizardry, then I'm a wizard - so I guess not. It was discussed in the "Appendices" - "from book to film", "making of" etc, for this part most likely in the Fellowship" EE.


I have seen these videos also. They provide a bit of insight into why certain choices were made, which is helpful of course, whether I agree with the choices or I do not.


----------



## Olorgando (Jul 22, 2022)

Erestor Arcamen said:


> Elbereth Vala Varda said:
> 
> 
> > I am glad it wasn't all put into one film-- how disappointing would that be.
> ...


Well, just think of all the place even PJ had the Fellowship, or parts of it, showing up at:
Hobbiton, Bree, Weathertop, Fords of Bruinen, Rivendell, Caradhras, Moria, Lórien, Falls of Rauros (9);
Frodo & Sam alone:
Emyn Muil, Dead Marshes, Black Gate, Henneth Annûn, The Stairs, Shelob's Lair, the Tower of Cirith Ungol ... errr ... Mount Doom, Ithilien, back to the Shire (+8? = 17);
Merry & Pippin:
from the Falls of Rauros dragged to the eaves of Fangorn, Treebeard's home, Isengard (+3 = 20);
Aragorn, Legolas and Gimli:
from the Falls of Rauros chasing the Orcs, meeting with the Rohirrim, eaves of Fangorn, meeting GtW, Edoras, Helm's Deep (with an excessive battle); (+3 = 23)
Gandalf and Pippin:
ride to Minas Tirith, some fan-fic there (+1 = 24);
Aragorn, Legolas and Gimli:
the Paths of the Dead, Pelargir, on to the Battle of the Pelennor Fields *with* the Army of the Dead ... (+3 = 27)
Merry with the Rohirrim:
Dunharrow (?), ride to Minas Tirith, charge of the Rohirrim, destroying the Witch-king on the battlefield together with (helping) Éowyn (+3 = 30);
All survivors of the Fellowship:
Ithilien, Minas Tirith for the marriage and crowning of Aragorn;
The four Hobbits:
back to the Shire, the Grey Havens (+1 = 31).

I've tried to leave out places visited by different members of the Fellowship at different times.
For a 90-minute film (normal for H'Wood at the time) that would have meant 3 minutes per location; even for a 120-minute film, that only raises it to 4 minutes. Even for the RoTK Extended Edition 240-minute monster it's max 8 minutes.

I'm wondering if *any* Middle-earth Internet sites would ever have sprung up (or survived for more that a few weeks after its premiere) for a one-film mutilation of the book. Even Ralph Bakshi, with all of his compression, needed just over 2 hours just to get to the Battle of Helm's Deep ...


----------



## Elbereth Vala Varda (Jul 22, 2022)

Olorgando said:


> Well, just think of all the place even PJ had the Fellowship, or parts of it, showing up at:
> Hobbiton, Bree, Weathertop, Fords of Bruinen, Rivendell, Caradhras, Moria, Lórien, Falls of Rauros (9);
> Frodo & Sam alone:
> Emyn Muil, Dead Marshes, Black Gate, Henneth Annûn, The Stairs, Shelob's Lair, the Tower of Cirith Ungol ... errr ... Mount Doom, Ithilien, back to the Shire (+8? = 17);
> ...


This is a good point. They didn't have much time to film in any of the locations, and for that very reason it would be far from simple to film.


----------



## frodolives7601 (Aug 3, 2022)

The linked article that started this thread off was very interesting. I appreciated what it said about the notion of fandom's purpose being to join people together to celebrate something (as opposed to joining them together to attack something or someone). To be honest, one of the things that keeps me from visiting TTF as often as I might is the frequent slamming of the films. I don't expect everyone to love them as I do, but I'm sometimes thrown off by the vehemence of the outrage communicated when they are praised in any way. It's totally fine to say, "Wow, I don't see it as you do at all; the films just don't work for me," but the reactions tend to be more along the lines of "My God, how can you possibly think that?" 

I sometimes get the feeling that disparaging the films is one way people bond here.

Now, the forum isn't entirely negative regarding the movies--the thread "PJ: What He Did Well" is one good example--but in general, as a fan of _both_ the books and the films, I do have a sense of being an outsider. I like coming back to the notion of celebrating what we love. I may love aspects of the films--and the books--that you don't, but I would hope that we can recognize that even when we disagree, when we participate on this forum, we are each celebrating works of art in which we personally find excellence and relevance. 

It ain't easy, being a lover of the creative realm. We live in a world that tends to value and honor materialism far more than creativity. As outsiders in the dominant culture, let's keep our commonalities in mind and recognize that no matter our differing views on specific aspects of the books or the films, what holds us all together is our shared fascination with Middle-earth. And that _is_ something worth celebrating.


----------



## Squint-eyed Southerner (Aug 3, 2022)

The arguments about the films were going on almost since the beginnings of this forum-- hence "FAD vs NPW" -- which I believe originated here. Look through the ancient threads, and you'll find plenty of FADS.


----------



## frodolives7601 (Aug 3, 2022)

Squint-eyed Southerner said:


> The arguments about the films were going on almost since the beginnings of this forum-- hence "FAD vs NPW" -- which I believe originated here. Look through the ancient threads, and you'll find plenty of FADS.


Just curious--what do "FAD" and "NPW" stand for?


----------



## Olorgando (Aug 3, 2022)

frodolives7601 said:


> We live in a world that tends to value and honor materialism far more than creativity.


Absolutely agree. But what drove the film-making, from film to film in the LoTR trilogy, then far more crassly in the entire TH film trilogy, and *possibly* (the trailers and other stuff do not bode well) withe Amazon series, further down into the cesspit, is exactly that shallow, superficial, greed-is-good materialism. PJ really didn't have much wiggle room with LoTR, there's just too much detail; so that he had to leave things out - no issue with that. But did he have to stand characters, and scenes, on their head, and waste time with stuff he and Boyens and Walsh invented? 99% of which was exactly the opposite of an improvement?
In TH there was a good deal more lee-way, at least as far as the published book is concerned. JRRT himself provided some of that in his writings - all published posthumously by his son Christopher. But to bloat TH into a trilogy, PJ and Co. had to pour in a lot of blubber.
Amazon's "Second Age" series? Will it cover even as much as a generation (of men - who *could* get quite old in Númenor, it's true)? Here they basically have only a skeleton of a story, so they can run riot with their own inventions. Which, is my impression of H'Wood generally, is simply a re-hash of stories already told endless times in other films, of whatever genre. They just seem to be unable to get out of the Grand-Canyon-sized rut they've dug themselves into.


----------



## Squint-eyed Southerner (Aug 3, 2022)

> Just curious--what do "FAD" and "NPW" stand for?



*F*ilm *A*daptation *D*efenders
*N*it *P*icking *W*eenies


----------



## Elbereth Vala Varda (Aug 3, 2022)

Squint-eyed Southerner said:


> *F*ilm *A*daptation *D*efenders
> *N*it *P*icking *W*eenies


Is this actually what the acronyms are for?


----------



## Squint-eyed Southerner (Aug 3, 2022)

It is indeed. Look through the old movie threads.


----------



## frodolives7601 (Aug 3, 2022)

Squint-eyed Southerner said:


> *F*ilm *A*daptation *D*efenders
> *N*it *P*icking *W*eenies


Ah, I see! Thanks for the clarification!


----------



## frodolives7601 (Aug 3, 2022)

Olorgando said:


> Absolutely agree. But what drove the film-making, from film to film in the LoTR trilogy, then far more crassly in the entire TH film trilogy, and *possibly* (the trailers and other stuff do not bode well) withe Amazon series, further down into the cesspit, is exactly that shallow, superficial, greed-is-good materialism. PJ really didn't have much wiggle room with LoTR, there's just too much detail; so that he had to leave things out - no issue with that. But did he have to stand characters, and scenes, on their head, and waste time with stuff he and Boyens and Walsh invented? 99% of which was exactly the opposite of an improvement?
> In TH there was a good deal more lee-way, at least as far as the published book is concerned. JRRT himself provided some of that in his writings - all published posthumously by his son Christopher. But to bloat TH into a trilogy, PJ and Co. had to pour in a lot of blubber.
> Amazon's "Second Age" series? Will it cover even as much as a generation (of men - who *could* get quite old in Númenor, it's true)? Here they basically have only a skeleton of a story, so they can run riot with their own inventions. Which, is my impression of H'Wood generally, is simply a re-hash of stories already told endless times in other films, of whatever genre. They just seem to be unable to get out of the Grand-Canyon-sized rut they've dug themselves into.


My point was the larger issue of whether we are connecting by celebrating something or by tearing something down, an issue that came up in the original article. I clearly don't see the films as examples of "shallow, superficial, greed-is-good materialism," and you do, and that is fine. As we found in our discussion of _FOTR_ about a year ago, we have very different views on the merits of different aspects of that film. Again, absolutely fine. One person's masterpiece is another's donation to the library sale. I'd just like to see how we can all look for our commonalities more than our differences. Does my blood pressure rise a little when I read "99% of which was exactly the opposite of an improvement"? For a moment, yes. But then I step back and think about what we have in common and find myself realizing that I respect your passion for the books because I feel the same way about certain things. The article that prompted this thread has reminded me to look for those connections.


----------



## Olorgando (Aug 3, 2022)

frodolives7601 said:


> The article that prompted this thread has reminded me to look for those connections.


I hadn't read the article that Halasían had linked in his original post, the one on "Psychology Today", so far.
Now I have, and also the article in "Salon" that was linked at the beginning of the "Psychology Today" article.
Disagreeing on details of the books and films is one thing; we're still arguing about the books and films, their contents.

The toxicity mentioned in both articles indicates that the poison peddlers basically don't care squat about the contents of anything, they're just out to blare their filthy, poisonous agenda(s), using plenty of double-speak as they do. And the direction this is all coming from does not surprise me a bit.

We've had some from those dungeons crawling around TTF occasionally, but they don't feel too comfortable in a moderated environment.


----------



## Squint-eyed Southerner (Aug 3, 2022)

Well there's an image. 😅


----------



## Elbereth Vala Varda (Aug 3, 2022)

Olorgando said:


> We've had some from those dungeons crawling around TTF occasionally, but they don't feel too comfortable in a moderated environment.


I truly cannot thank our mods enough! You guys are the like the soldiers of Gondor that hold the gates of our city closed! 

Hannon-le, @Erestor Arcamen & @Squint-eyed Southerner !

You make this place so wonderful-- and keep it that way!


----------



## Halasían (Aug 3, 2022)

Squint-eyed Southerner said:


> *F*ilm *A*daptation *D*efenders
> *N*it *P*icking *W*eenies


I was a proud soldier in the NPW Army back in the day. It's why I have no fs... um.. 'spoons' to give on the Amazon project. I agree (*!*) with the Gandolorian way up there on what he says about the PJ projects.



Olorgando said:


> I hadn't read the article that Halasían had linked in his original post, the one on "Psychology Today", so far.
> Now I have, and also the article in "Salon" that was linked at the beginning of the "Psychology Today" article.
> Disagreeing on details of the books and films is one thing; we're still arguing about the books and films, their contents.
> 
> ...


Yes... it has reached heights comparable to Thangorodrim's peaks in some places, and also as the show nears its air date, have made then evermore irrelevent. Been enjoying a 'discussion on the discussions' discussion on Hall of Fire lately. Been interesting.


----------



## Elbereth Vala Varda (Aug 4, 2022)

Squint-eyed Southerner said:


> *F*ilm *A*daptation *D*efenders
> *N*it *P*icking *W*eenies


Goodness! I must admit-- this is not the response I expected.


----------



## Squint-eyed Southerner (Aug 4, 2022)

Why -- what did you think they meant? 😄


----------



## 🍀Yavanna Kementári🍀 (Aug 4, 2022)

Elbereth Vala Varda said:


> nothing could properly represent Tolkien, and those that try fail rather miserably.


It saddens my heart and my _féa_ to hear of this, yet, mayhap only Time may tell of what may lie ahead...


----------



## Elbereth Vala Varda (Aug 4, 2022)

Vilisse said:


> It saddens my heart and my _féa_ to hear of this, yet, mayhap only Time may tell of what may lie ahead...


Mayhaps such is so, and yet hope remains e'er, e'en in the depths of despair.


----------

