Fun fact Richard: The Two Towers is Brandon Sanderson's favorite movie of the trilogy. Also... A 10hr long podcast with Richard and Christopher Ruocchio would be the best podcast ever recorded.
Austin: What’s the name of the fish that puffs up? Richard: A Puffer Fish Austin: No No No It puffs up! Dialogue like this is worth the subscription price!
I read the book while watching the show (tried to stay ahead of the show with the book) but can say that Shogun was a VERY faithful adaptation. AND the book was very character focused, which I think is what made it so good. (Sorry if that was something you wanted to find out on your own )
I don’t know, I read the book but haven’t watched the show yet, and I hear that they changed some of the names and even had a couple of deaths that never happened in the book
@@Slobrojoe It began to stray after ep 5, so you're right it's not beat for beat after the halfway point. But still, as a whole, I felt very faithful adaptation
I’ll edit to see if they mention it, but right from seeing the title of this video: One Piece stands out as one of the best adaptations because of how much everyone involved seems to be in love with the source material.
Theory as to why Sci-fi is treated with more respect than fantasy is by hollywood: On a societal level, Fantasy is seen as "for kids" even when its not, it still is. Anime and animation has the same issue which Sanderson's talked about; Animation is either "for kids" or "for weirdos." Even the LOTR movies as perfect as they are, are still seen as family films by studios, not adult films. Game of Throne was such a hit with executives and general public bc THIS time there's boobs and blood and swears, this ain't your grandma's or your baby's lord of the rings. This helps to explain why SO many fantasy adaptations feel the need to say they're doing something different or they're 'making it like game of thrones" or they're "making it more adult" bc this aura of "Fantasy is for kids" weighs down the perception of the media when selling it to audiences and investors. The assumption is that people just like fantasy for the magic and the dragons, and don't realize the themes and characters have an ocean of depth beyond the surface level characteristics. On a character level, Fantasy, especially modern fantasy, have deeply fleshed out characters which makes it an uphill task to get it right for audiences. Even the LOTR movies as perfectly cast as they are, changed character attributes and even arcs from the books (Aragorn, Faramir, Arwen come to mind.) It binds the writers, and the producers who want to give notes for mass audience appeal, into a corner where it's a lose-lose no matter what they do. Change too much and you risk making the characters unrecognizable, keep too much the same and you risk alienating mass audiences that might not "get it" as quickly as life long readers. Which is why we see more fairytale adaptations, than fantasy, bc fairytale characters, like sci-fi characters are more malleable. Fantasy also often takes place on unique worlds that require a lot of money and effort to get right, which again can be a lose-lose: risk upsetting life long fans of the books, or risk alienating mass audiences that are weirded out by how different the world is to ours. LOTR works bc it is Earth, just way back in the mythological past. In terms of book length, a lot of fantasy books are LOOOONNNGGG, even like the shorter ones are still longer than the average book, which means making them movies involves cutting out a lot, and making them shows means having to force episodic storytelling onto something thats not episodic. Again a lose-lose. Too much can go wrong in fantasy adaptations, and often does. Sci-fi, on the contrary, is seen as for adults and intellectuals. This makes marketing it to an adult audience easier bc there's an understanding that Sci-fi will be darker, grimmer, more adult, and will make you think. (I'm not talking Science fantasy like Star Wars, I'm talking Science Fiction like War of the Worlds or The Martian.) Semi-contrary to Fantasy, Sci-fi is ALL about the themes and the world building, but the caveat being the world is 99.9% of the time just our world in the future, so it's easier to ease mass audiences into it. In terms of characters, their characters are pretty "blank slate" in that the plot/themes carries the characters, not vice versa, many sci-fi fans won't disagree that like the characters of Foundation or 3-Body Problem aren't the pull, its the ideas and the world. This simplicity of character but depth of world/ideas, lets the writers build upon the characters and lets the producers make revisions to allow for mass appeal, which only improves on elements of the books that readers agree is a weaker area anyway. Sci-fi is, also contrary to Fantasy, often short stories, novellas, or just generally sorter books, which makes for an easier adaptation -- less research reading involved before starting on the project. Remember, Execs green light things that are often already popular and they want to match the wave of success it's having, so they want projects made FAST. If a writers room can read a sci-fi novel the day before they start, that makes it easier to get moving on the scripts, while a fantasy novel could take a week or two of research reading, maybe even a month if they have to read the whole series, before they even start the adaptation process; not what you want when you're on a schedule. In short: Fantasy - unfairly seen as "just for kids and weirdos", more particular characters attributes to cling to, longer books/series, often not our world, more lose-lose scenarios = harder to adapt Sci-fi - seen as "for adults and intellectuals," more malleable characters to easily change, shorter books/short stories, set on our world, more win-win scenarios = easier to adapt I'm a fantasy fan more than a sci-fi fan and as much as it frustrates me, I understand why we see more sci-fi adaptions (and good ones), to fantasy adaptations.
If you guys dip into warhammer its gonna get crazy. I read probably about 15 warhammer books and barely dented it! There are some books that really stand out. Dante is a good book if you want to experience the highs and lows of an epic character, and it shows how one becomes a space marine (at least a blood angel). It gives a good portrayal of how grim dark even the good guys are. I'm more of a chaos fan, but Dante is my favorite non-primarch loyalist. I would almost compare him to Kaladin in how he is both inspirational and depressing at the same time.
Shogun is such an incredible read and experience the character writing and work is top tier and will say it’s a phenomenal show but only a good adaptation imo because the book is 100% character focused
Please talk about Lord of the Rings: The Hunt for Gollum, and how Hollywood is now focused on rebooting or doing sequels to their biggest franchises (Harry Potter, Twilight, Maze Runner, How to Train Your Dragon, Avatar the Last Airbender) instead of taking risks in new franchises
I agree you can have a bad adaptation that is a good movie. A perfect example is Jurassic Park. The plot of the movie is very different than the book. So Spielberg’s Jurassic Park isn’t a faithful adaptation, but it’s a fantastic movie.
All the show writers should just watch a 2 To Ramble video and learn what good dialogue is, issue solved 💯 This was hysterical, thanks for the entertainment 🤣
You guys bring up an interesting point with the avatar adaptations where it went from a show to show, just different forms of the visual storytelling, from cartoon to live action. I wonder if there's a possibility for s study to be done on a topic like that. I think that one of the best adaptations would be the witcher games (specifically witcher 3, but i like the first 2 also), where the books were good, but most people would argue that the third game is the best thing that the franchise has produced. Perhaps book to game is a better direction to go for the adaptation to be successful? Book to movie less successful, but clearly still a chance as LOTR proved. Book to show maybe even less successful with the witcher show and the way GOT ended? I remember a point being brought up where someone asked "Why is the best compliment for an anime/cartoon 'this should be made into a live action'?" when animation was such a good medium for that particular story. i think the same could be said for Sci-fi and fantasy where, because the setting of the story is inherently not of earth (usually) it is increasingly difficult for a strong adaptation to be made of that material because of the increased demand to make the world of those genres come to life. Would it be worth more time and effort for these genres to consider animation or video games, as opposed to going straight into the epic live actions shows?
Love the thoughts here - yea the question of going from animation to live action being the standard is so true, it would be so newt if the reverse was also true. A live action turned into an animation (do you know of any!?)
@@2ToRamble funny you mention that, yeah, Scott Pilgrim vs the World would be a solid example. Although that one is a bit weirder since I think it went from comic book to live action and then to a cartoon on Netflix. Worth giving the movie and cartoon a watch if you haven't. (I loved it, but the cartoon divided a lot of people when it first showed).
I don't know if you've read Stormlight, but if you have, could you imagine an open world RPG of that? Getting to explore Roshar, becoming a Knight Radiant, maybe meeting some characters from the books. It would be awesome! If there ever is an adaptation of SLA, I would want it to be this. And even beyond Stormlight, there are so many awesome fantasy worlds I'd love to explore in a video game setting.
I’m pretty sure SLA would be nigh impossible to do correctly since having spren pop up whenever appropriate would require a spice mine worth of visual effects artists and a duration of post production on the level of an edgar wright movie times 100. Done incorrectly, SLA could be done on a $20 SyFy channel budget but I will spontaneously combust the moment a dollar general parshendi calls another dollar general parshendi a cremling.
Currently reading Shogun before watching the show (apparently its on of my dads favourites) and im really curious what they cut. This book is a mammoth. Its longer than the entire LOTR trilogy according to goodreads
I have to thank the tv Seasons One of GOT, WOT & the Witcher as I immediately read all their books right afterward. So when the tv shows went down the drain after their premier season, so what? The tv show made me aware of the books prior to discovering booktube.
The movies that I liked more than the book mostly I saw the movie first (the shining, cloud atlas). I suspect that it is because I only read the book *because* the movie made such an impression. I wonder how often this happens and how much it skews statistics
Richard, how can you prefer the theatre cut of TTT to the extended version? What is TTT without the extended Scene after the battle in Osgiliath? Film-Faramir's reaction to Frodo makes absolutely no sense without knowing the dynmamic between Denethor and his sons, and I cannot comprehend the decision to cut this essential scene from the movie. Of course Book-Faramir is a better character by far, in fact one of my favorite characters in LoTR.
I recently watched the Daisy Jones & The Six adaptation on prime and did not enjoy it as I had read the book and the amount of things they changed just pissed me off more and more. (So many random things were changed for no reason which did not make it better, a lot of nuance was removed.) It is a good show, but because I had read the book I didn't enjoy it.
Two Towers is clearly the best of the three, except on days when Fellowship is best and also those rare days when I think Return is obviously the best one. But aside from those days, Two Towers is the clear winner.
Speaking of the Witcher have either of you guys read the books? As a huge fan I was very disappointed with the Netflix series. It had so much potential but surprise surprise the books are so much better. Loving the channel I can't wait for you guys to meet Brandon Sanderson one day and publish your books.
In what timeline does the Two Towers theatrical fare better than the extended? It's by far benefited the most, unlike ROTK, where the theatrical is easily the best and preferred.
I’m curious, since we’re on the topic of adaptations - how many, if any, of the Discworld movies have you watched? I find most of the ones I’ve tried so far a bit painful (though I haven’t checked all of them yet), but I actually quite enjoy the Hogfather movie. It does fall into one of your points: I saw the movie before reading the book. 😂 But on another one of your points, it preserves quite a bit of the dialogue from the book!
I don’t wanna be that guy BUT 😂 Game of thrones pretty much went downhill after season 4. season 5 and 6 are generally received very good because they had a lot of payoffs. But also there was so much bulishit happening in those seasons and the payoffs almost have no consequences. The battle of the bastards for example is just plain stupid actions and the falls apart if you even think two minutes about why and how everything happens
I think my ranking for the LotR movies would be 3, 1, 2. I love RotK the most because I think it has the best emotional highlights. However, Boromir is my favorite characters in all of them. I'm also curious as to why you like Two Towers the least. It's my least favorite too, but I still seem to like it more than you. Also, I think the difference between Catholic and Protestant churches has to do with doctrinal differences, particularly in the function of the church. I am a Southern Baptist myself, so I can only personally speak for my group, but Protestants, and Baptists in particular, believe that the church has no real authority in religion or the lives of its followers. The rules and guidance for our lives come directly from the Bible, so the Pastors do not set down rules themselves. Instead, they give sermons and talk with believers to help them understand the Word of God. The church is simply a fellowship of believers who come together to talk and worship. Protestant churches are far less structured, with a handful of people who lead certain groups like children's Sunday School or give sermons. Catholics on the other hand have heavily structured churches because they believe that because the church put the Biblical books together, it has equal to more authority than the Bible. They have many ranks in the church (Priests, Bishops, the Pope etc.) who all have differing divine authority to forgive sins, cast out demons, and set down rules for the followers. This is in stark contrast to most Protestants, who believe that such things come only from God and Christ. So, because Catholics place much more importance and authority on the church, they make a greater point to add beauty and design to it. I'm not a Catholic myself, so this is just my speculation, and I'd appreciate it if anyone could let me know if I got any of the Catholic beliefs wrong. But anyway, just a fun fact 😂
My Lord of the Rings ranking: 1 2 3 but all are 11/10. Sometimes I’m even tempted to put Two Towers at number one. The last hour is the best in the trilogy between Sam’s speech and Helm’s Deep. Plus we’re introduced to King Theodin (the goat) and Andy Serkis’ Gollum.
Okay, alright. I have opinions. Two Towsers is both my favorite book and my favorite movie of the trilogy; in no small part because the tree imps and Rohan are my favorite race/location respectively within the Lord of the Rings (Side note: I'm a Hayao Miyazaki and horse girly so take that as you will). However, as a writer, I can see why it could be considered the weakest for one key reason: it is my least favorite book/movie in terms of Frodo's and Sam's storyline. And as they are the linchpin to the whole plot you kind of need to be invested in them for the larger story to work. I think the movie -in that sense- is slightly better because they intersperse the three groups with one another so we're never stuck with Frodo and Sam for too long at a time. In the book I would have put their part either first or second, but not last, and definitely not right after the battle of Helm's Deep and the reunion of the boy band and the twins. It's a jump off a cliff in terms of action and while I did eventually get into the grove of that section's pacing, it took a few chapters. And that inevitably made those the worst chapters in the book for me personally. As I was re-reading before posting I did have another thought. If you absolutely need Frodo and Sam to be the last section of the book, have the boy band go first and then cut their section off before the reunion. Then have that part told through Mary and Pippin's POVs at the end of their section. And then go to Frodo and Sam. That way the change in more immediate tension is less jarring as we would go from the battle to Mary and Pippin being held captive. Plus we would then get to focus on the contrast between this larger group of friends rejoicing together before going straight to Froto and Sam being all alone. Really bringing home the fact that they are two tiny people in a massive world.
Richard is right, LOTR books are better than the movies. Also, The Two Towers is the weakest movie in the trilogy, still a good movie, but the other two are better. It's okay Austin, you can be wrong, we still love you
Ngl could be just a me thing, but its so annoying after all this time everytime some fantasy chanel makes a video. Lotr and tolkien always comes up its so boring. Like there are other stuffs too to compare things to... like every video on fantasy chanels has to have at least 6 mins of lotr talk or u cant put it on youtube.
Come watch & discuss "Shogun" with us on Fable as we view the rest of the season! (Link at top of video description)
We're pumped for this!
Fun fact Richard: The Two Towers is Brandon Sanderson's favorite movie of the trilogy.
Also... A 10hr long podcast with Richard and Christopher Ruocchio would be the best podcast ever recorded.
Austin stopping in the middle of his monologue to complain that buildings are too square was my favourite part of this
someday in a near future stormlight will be adapted and certain character will say something like "YOU CANNOT TAKE MY VIBE!!!!"
Austin: What’s the name of the fish that puffs up?
Richard: A Puffer Fish
Austin: No No No It puffs up!
Dialogue like this is worth the subscription price!
These guys needs more subscribers. Gotta make that Sanderson episode happen!
I read the book while watching the show (tried to stay ahead of the show with the book) but can say that Shogun was a VERY faithful adaptation. AND the book was very character focused, which I think is what made it so good.
(Sorry if that was something you wanted to find out on your own )
I don’t know, I read the book but haven’t watched the show yet, and I hear that they changed some of the names and even had a couple of deaths that never happened in the book
@@Slobrojoe It began to stray after ep 5, so you're right it's not beat for beat after the halfway point. But still, as a whole, I felt very faithful adaptation
Rich cracks me up, great episode boys. I personally loved Shogun all the way through, cant wait to hear your thoughts on some of the reveals!
You need to do your top 20 fantasy books
I respect Richard for making sure he pronounced Malazan correctly. 25:01
Even though the way we want to say it sounds way cooler.
Awesome convo to listen in on.
Thank you for listening!
Rich you’re gonna love Malazan I think, I also think Austin’s gonna dig it but in such a different way
What is the time stamp for when they talk about Malazan?
@@rjmoore44 it was like a sentence lol about reading Malazan or warhammer lore
We cant wait to start it!
I’ll edit to see if they mention it, but right from seeing the title of this video: One Piece stands out as one of the best adaptations because of how much everyone involved seems to be in love with the source material.
Two towers has always been my favorite
The rage about the WOT show 😂
That show has made me unsettled now whenever I hear something I love is being adapted.
Found yall becuase of Red Rising, now i can't stop watching ur channel❤❤❤
Thanks so freaking much
Theory as to why Sci-fi is treated with more respect than fantasy is by hollywood:
On a societal level, Fantasy is seen as "for kids" even when its not, it still is. Anime and animation has the same issue which Sanderson's talked about; Animation is either "for kids" or "for weirdos." Even the LOTR movies as perfect as they are, are still seen as family films by studios, not adult films. Game of Throne was such a hit with executives and general public bc THIS time there's boobs and blood and swears, this ain't your grandma's or your baby's lord of the rings. This helps to explain why SO many fantasy adaptations feel the need to say they're doing something different or they're 'making it like game of thrones" or they're "making it more adult" bc this aura of "Fantasy is for kids" weighs down the perception of the media when selling it to audiences and investors. The assumption is that people just like fantasy for the magic and the dragons, and don't realize the themes and characters have an ocean of depth beyond the surface level characteristics. On a character level, Fantasy, especially modern fantasy, have deeply fleshed out characters which makes it an uphill task to get it right for audiences. Even the LOTR movies as perfectly cast as they are, changed character attributes and even arcs from the books (Aragorn, Faramir, Arwen come to mind.) It binds the writers, and the producers who want to give notes for mass audience appeal, into a corner where it's a lose-lose no matter what they do. Change too much and you risk making the characters unrecognizable, keep too much the same and you risk alienating mass audiences that might not "get it" as quickly as life long readers. Which is why we see more fairytale adaptations, than fantasy, bc fairytale characters, like sci-fi characters are more malleable. Fantasy also often takes place on unique worlds that require a lot of money and effort to get right, which again can be a lose-lose: risk upsetting life long fans of the books, or risk alienating mass audiences that are weirded out by how different the world is to ours. LOTR works bc it is Earth, just way back in the mythological past. In terms of book length, a lot of fantasy books are LOOOONNNGGG, even like the shorter ones are still longer than the average book, which means making them movies involves cutting out a lot, and making them shows means having to force episodic storytelling onto something thats not episodic. Again a lose-lose. Too much can go wrong in fantasy adaptations, and often does.
Sci-fi, on the contrary, is seen as for adults and intellectuals. This makes marketing it to an adult audience easier bc there's an understanding that Sci-fi will be darker, grimmer, more adult, and will make you think. (I'm not talking Science fantasy like Star Wars, I'm talking Science Fiction like War of the Worlds or The Martian.) Semi-contrary to Fantasy, Sci-fi is ALL about the themes and the world building, but the caveat being the world is 99.9% of the time just our world in the future, so it's easier to ease mass audiences into it. In terms of characters, their characters are pretty "blank slate" in that the plot/themes carries the characters, not vice versa, many sci-fi fans won't disagree that like the characters of Foundation or 3-Body Problem aren't the pull, its the ideas and the world. This simplicity of character but depth of world/ideas, lets the writers build upon the characters and lets the producers make revisions to allow for mass appeal, which only improves on elements of the books that readers agree is a weaker area anyway. Sci-fi is, also contrary to Fantasy, often short stories, novellas, or just generally sorter books, which makes for an easier adaptation -- less research reading involved before starting on the project. Remember, Execs green light things that are often already popular and they want to match the wave of success it's having, so they want projects made FAST. If a writers room can read a sci-fi novel the day before they start, that makes it easier to get moving on the scripts, while a fantasy novel could take a week or two of research reading, maybe even a month if they have to read the whole series, before they even start the adaptation process; not what you want when you're on a schedule.
In short:
Fantasy - unfairly seen as "just for kids and weirdos", more particular characters attributes to cling to, longer books/series, often not our world, more lose-lose scenarios = harder to adapt
Sci-fi - seen as "for adults and intellectuals," more malleable characters to easily change, shorter books/short stories, set on our world, more win-win scenarios = easier to adapt
I'm a fantasy fan more than a sci-fi fan and as much as it frustrates me, I understand why we see more sci-fi adaptions (and good ones), to fantasy adaptations.
Nice thoughts, Rich and I could do a whole episode on this holy crap. Thanks for the comment! Would a full discussion like this interest you?
@@2ToRamble I can't speak for them, but it would certainly interest me! Just this post alone is getting the brain wheels turning.
i also go back to hyperion when i get anxious
Re:WoT. Cant pull dialogue when none of the scenes in the book are in the adaptation
Four degrees of separation. Seven samurai, magnificent seven, battle beyond the stars… a bugs life.
If you guys dip into warhammer its gonna get crazy. I read probably about 15 warhammer books and barely dented it! There are some books that really stand out. Dante is a good book if you want to experience the highs and lows of an epic character, and it shows how one becomes a space marine (at least a blood angel). It gives a good portrayal of how grim dark even the good guys are. I'm more of a chaos fan, but Dante is my favorite non-primarch loyalist. I would almost compare him to Kaladin in how he is both inspirational and depressing at the same time.
The 2 towers is by far the best lotr movie
I think Shogun the book is character focused. It's third person omniscient so you get everyone's inner dialogue.
The irony off pulling Hyperion while making your argument since it’s effectively a retelling of Geoffrey Chaucer’s The Canterbury Tales
Oh yeah, sci fy Canterbury tales. Nothing better
“Our lord God”
I’ve now found Jesus haha
Can’t wait to hear you guys talking about The Search for Gollum
The books featured superb writing, and the movies exhibit outstanding filmmaking.
this episode was chaotic😂 I want to here yalls take on the Halo adaptation
We havent seen it so currently no take on it !
Shogun is such an incredible read and experience the character writing and work is top tier and will say it’s a phenomenal show but only a good adaptation imo because the book is 100% character focused
Very excited for you to get round to Malazan! I hope you enjoy it and stick with it :)
Im 850 pages into shogun, the adaptation has been very faithful to the book, also the book is genial.
Please talk about Lord of the Rings: The Hunt for Gollum, and how Hollywood is now focused on rebooting or doing sequels to their biggest franchises (Harry Potter, Twilight, Maze Runner, How to Train Your Dragon, Avatar the Last Airbender) instead of taking risks in new franchises
I agree you can have a bad adaptation that is a good movie. A perfect example is Jurassic Park. The plot of the movie is very different than the book. So Spielberg’s Jurassic Park isn’t a faithful adaptation, but it’s a fantastic movie.
Great example!
Love your passion 😂❤
🥂
All the show writers should just watch a 2 To Ramble video and learn what good dialogue is, issue solved 💯
This was hysterical, thanks for the entertainment 🤣
😂 now youre getting it
You guys bring up an interesting point with the avatar adaptations where it went from a show to show, just different forms of the visual storytelling, from cartoon to live action. I wonder if there's a possibility for s study to be done on a topic like that. I think that one of the best adaptations would be the witcher games (specifically witcher 3, but i like the first 2 also), where the books were good, but most people would argue that the third game is the best thing that the franchise has produced. Perhaps book to game is a better direction to go for the adaptation to be successful? Book to movie less successful, but clearly still a chance as LOTR proved. Book to show maybe even less successful with the witcher show and the way GOT ended? I remember a point being brought up where someone asked "Why is the best compliment for an anime/cartoon 'this should be made into a live action'?" when animation was such a good medium for that particular story. i think the same could be said for Sci-fi and fantasy where, because the setting of the story is inherently not of earth (usually) it is increasingly difficult for a strong adaptation to be made of that material because of the increased demand to make the world of those genres come to life. Would it be worth more time and effort for these genres to consider animation or video games, as opposed to going straight into the epic live actions shows?
Love the thoughts here - yea the question of going from animation to live action being the standard is so true, it would be so newt if the reverse was also true. A live action turned into an animation (do you know of any!?)
@@2ToRamble funny you mention that, yeah, Scott Pilgrim vs the World would be a solid example. Although that one is a bit weirder since I think it went from comic book to live action and then to a cartoon on Netflix. Worth giving the movie and cartoon a watch if you haven't. (I loved it, but the cartoon divided a lot of people when it first showed).
I don't know if you've read Stormlight, but if you have, could you imagine an open world RPG of that? Getting to explore Roshar, becoming a Knight Radiant, maybe meeting some characters from the books. It would be awesome! If there ever is an adaptation of SLA, I would want it to be this. And even beyond Stormlight, there are so many awesome fantasy worlds I'd love to explore in a video game setting.
I’m pretty sure SLA would be nigh impossible to do correctly since having spren pop up whenever appropriate would require a spice mine worth of visual effects artists and a duration of post production on the level of an edgar wright movie times 100.
Done incorrectly, SLA could be done on a $20 SyFy channel budget but I will spontaneously combust the moment a dollar general parshendi calls another dollar general parshendi a cremling.
Currently reading Shogun before watching the show (apparently its on of my dads favourites) and im really curious what they cut. This book is a mammoth. Its longer than the entire LOTR trilogy according to goodreads
Oh wow! Glad theyre doing a show then to get more details in
I might be alone in this but my LotR order is 3,2,1. I love the Rohirrim and Fellowship has zero riders of Rohan
All rankings are valid when discussing the GOAT film series 🤝
Such a great video. Had a blast. Shogun the book is not worse than the show, btw
I have to thank the tv Seasons One of GOT, WOT & the Witcher as I immediately read all their books right afterward. So when the tv shows went down the drain after their premier season, so what? The tv show made me aware of the books prior to discovering booktube.
The movies that I liked more than the book mostly I saw the movie first (the shining, cloud atlas). I suspect that it is because I only read the book *because* the movie made such an impression. I wonder how often this happens and how much it skews statistics
I made it here first. Finally!!!
Richard, how can you prefer the theatre cut of TTT to the extended version? What is TTT without the extended Scene after the battle in Osgiliath? Film-Faramir's reaction to Frodo makes absolutely no sense without knowing the dynmamic between Denethor and his sons, and I cannot comprehend the decision to cut this essential scene from the movie. Of course Book-Faramir is a better character by far, in fact one of my favorite characters in LoTR.
That is my (austin) favorite extended scene in TTT
I recently watched the Daisy Jones & The Six adaptation on prime and did not enjoy it as I had read the book and the amount of things they changed just pissed me off more and more. (So many random things were changed for no reason which did not make it better, a lot of nuance was removed.) It is a good show, but because I had read the book I didn't enjoy it.
So... Is The Wiz another adaptation of the book? Or is it an adaptation of the movie that was an adaptation of the book?
No child left behind is the death of cinema
Two Towers is clearly the best of the three, except on days when Fellowship is best and also those rare days when I think Return is obviously the best one. But aside from those days, Two Towers is the clear winner.
Have you guys heard about Andy Serkis going to direct a new Gollum movie? I'm not optimistic.
We have. We arent either 😭
The Two Towers is my favourite lord of the rings movie
Speaking of the Witcher have either of you guys read the books?
As a huge fan I was very disappointed with the Netflix series. It had so much potential but surprise surprise the books are so much better.
Loving the channel I can't wait for you guys to meet Brandon Sanderson one day and publish your books.
We havent read them yet but know its been disappointing - and wow, thanks so much!!
In what timeline does the Two Towers theatrical fare better than the extended? It's by far benefited the most, unlike ROTK, where the theatrical is easily the best and preferred.
this isn’t an unique opinion (I don’t think), but I genuinely prefer the movie of Neil Gaiman’s stardust
Oo nice
I’m curious, since we’re on the topic of adaptations - how many, if any, of the Discworld movies have you watched?
I find most of the ones I’ve tried so far a bit painful (though I haven’t checked all of them yet), but I actually quite enjoy the Hogfather movie. It does fall into one of your points: I saw the movie before reading the book. 😂 But on another one of your points, it preserves quite a bit of the dialogue from the book!
We havent seen them yet!
I don’t wanna be that guy BUT 😂
Game of thrones pretty much went downhill after season 4. season 5 and 6 are generally received very good because they had a lot of payoffs. But also there was so much bulishit happening in those seasons and the payoffs almost have no consequences. The battle of the bastards for example is just plain stupid actions and the falls apart if you even think two minutes about why and how everything happens
I think my ranking for the LotR movies would be 3, 1, 2. I love RotK the most because I think it has the best emotional highlights. However, Boromir is my favorite characters in all of them. I'm also curious as to why you like Two Towers the least. It's my least favorite too, but I still seem to like it more than you.
Also, I think the difference between Catholic and Protestant churches has to do with doctrinal differences, particularly in the function of the church. I am a Southern Baptist myself, so I can only personally speak for my group, but Protestants, and Baptists in particular, believe that the church has no real authority in religion or the lives of its followers. The rules and guidance for our lives come directly from the Bible, so the Pastors do not set down rules themselves. Instead, they give sermons and talk with believers to help them understand the Word of God. The church is simply a fellowship of believers who come together to talk and worship. Protestant churches are far less structured, with a handful of people who lead certain groups like children's Sunday School or give sermons. Catholics on the other hand have heavily structured churches because they believe that because the church put the Biblical books together, it has equal to more authority than the Bible. They have many ranks in the church (Priests, Bishops, the Pope etc.) who all have differing divine authority to forgive sins, cast out demons, and set down rules for the followers. This is in stark contrast to most Protestants, who believe that such things come only from God and Christ. So, because Catholics place much more importance and authority on the church, they make a greater point to add beauty and design to it. I'm not a Catholic myself, so this is just my speculation, and I'd appreciate it if anyone could let me know if I got any of the Catholic beliefs wrong.
But anyway, just a fun fact 😂
Boromir is my favorite too! (Austin here) - and thanks for the details on churches, super interesting
Some adapations are better than the book. Examples: Jumper, The Witcher, and Jurassic Park.
My Lord of the Rings ranking:
1
2
3
but all are 11/10. Sometimes I’m even tempted to put Two Towers at number one. The last hour is the best in the trilogy between Sam’s speech and Helm’s Deep. Plus we’re introduced to King Theodin (the goat) and Andy Serkis’ Gollum.
11/10 is the correct rating
You would have to read the source material to be able to steal from it.
The two towers is the best of the three
❤
Thanks, so much!
Okay, alright. I have opinions.
Two Towsers is both my favorite book and my favorite movie of the trilogy; in no small part because the tree imps and Rohan are my favorite race/location respectively within the Lord of the Rings (Side note: I'm a Hayao Miyazaki and horse girly so take that as you will). However, as a writer, I can see why it could be considered the weakest for one key reason: it is my least favorite book/movie in terms of Frodo's and Sam's storyline. And as they are the linchpin to the whole plot you kind of need to be invested in them for the larger story to work.
I think the movie -in that sense- is slightly better because they intersperse the three groups with one another so we're never stuck with Frodo and Sam for too long at a time. In the book I would have put their part either first or second, but not last, and definitely not right after the battle of Helm's Deep and the reunion of the boy band and the twins. It's a jump off a cliff in terms of action and while I did eventually get into the grove of that section's pacing, it took a few chapters. And that inevitably made those the worst chapters in the book for me personally.
As I was re-reading before posting I did have another thought. If you absolutely need Frodo and Sam to be the last section of the book, have the boy band go first and then cut their section off before the reunion. Then have that part told through Mary and Pippin's POVs at the end of their section. And then go to Frodo and Sam. That way the change in more immediate tension is less jarring as we would go from the battle to Mary and Pippin being held captive. Plus we would then get to focus on the contrast between this larger group of friends rejoicing together before going straight to Froto and Sam being all alone. Really bringing home the fact that they are two tiny people in a massive world.
Did you guys see they are adapting a new gollum movie? :)
We did we did
Richard is right, LOTR books are better than the movies. Also, The Two Towers is the weakest movie in the trilogy, still a good movie, but the other two are better. It's okay Austin, you can be wrong, we still love you
❤️
The Return of The King is my least favorite, and it all comes down to the ghost, I wasn’t a huge fan of it back then and it’s aged like milk for me.
Correct. Lord of the Rings movie is better than the books.
That take on Two Towers man...big L...but doesnt surprise me coming from Rich...
otherwise..great episode.. :3
Ngl could be just a me thing, but its so annoying after all this time everytime some fantasy chanel makes a video. Lotr and tolkien always comes up its so boring. Like there are other stuffs too to compare things to... like every video on fantasy chanels has to have at least 6 mins of lotr talk or u cant put it on youtube.
As a Catholic, Rich, I appreciate your praise of our Church as much as I appreciate your diss of the protestant "churches".