The Elf-lord in question is Celebrimbor, who’s powered here by a sad and anxiety-inducing performance by Charles Edwards. Edwards had been an odd choice for Celebrimbor for me until now; he simply seems too approachable to play one of the most towering figures in Tolkien’s entire legendarium. 

But now I see the vision. Edwards’s job this is to take his genial approach to the character and draw the notes of self-doubt his placid disposition normally papers over. When you watch Celebrimbor look at his own shaking hands, wondering where the creation of the Seven Rings for the Dwarf-lords went wrong — he’s received word from Prince Durin that his father Durin III has undergone a complete personality change since receiving his very powerful piece of jewelry — you see the grandson of the godlike Elf craftsman Fëanor. Can he ever live up to his grandsire? And given the death and misery that resulted from Grandpa’s creations, would he even want to?

I reviewed this week’s episode of The Rings of Power for Decider.

Ents. Orcs. Elves. Barrow-wights. Wizards, good and evil. Two different kinds of proto-hobbit. A Galadriel battle sequence. A Watcher in the Water. Tom freaking Bombadil. “Pulling out all the stops” is a perfectly valid, even noble, approach for any series belonging to a genre that shows us the spectacular — fantasy, horror, and science fiction foremost among them. About the only problem I have with the cornucopia of Tolkienian pleasures that is this week’s Rings of Power episode is that co-creators and co-writers J.D. Payne and Patrick McKay didn’t try this approach sooner.

I reviewed this week’s episode of The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power for Decider.

Call this one “The Episode Starring All the Characters Whose Names You Forgot.” With no Elrond or (especially) Galadriel to anchor it, no Stranger/Harfoot antics to provide comforting Hobbit-y vibes, and a pair of very shaky storylines in their place, the third and final of the three episodes of The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power Season 2 released as a giant-sized premiere faces by far the heaviest lift. If it doesn’t get as far as its two predecessors, it manages quite a bit more than I both expected and feared.

I reviewed the third and final episode of last week’s three-ep season 2 premiere of The Rings of Power for Decider.

Is this really happening? Is The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power…good, now? Without possession of an Elven ring myself, I cannot see things that have not yet come to pass. Who knows, maybe the show falls right back off a cliff in the third and final of the three episodes Amazon released for its giant-sized Season 2 premiere. But so far, so good. Quite good, even.

I reviewed the fine second episode of The Rings of Power‘s second season for Decider.

Well. Well, well, well. Now that’s more like it!

The last thing I wrote about The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power was this: “a crushing disappointment.” I stand by that. But I also speculated that the inexperience of creators and showrunners Patrick McKay and J.D. Payne, coupled with the sheer amount of money poured into the misfire, meant there was little chance the show would improve. 

Boy, am I happy to be wrong. It’s early yet, obviously, and the show could revert to the mean. But the first episode of Rings’ second season, is, quite frankly, crackerjack live-action fantasy television. No one’s going to mistake it for the first-in-class Game of Thrones/House of the Dragon franchise anytime soon — for one thing, my 13 year old cracks wise about the special effects looking goofy when they watch this one — but can it stand with Amazon’s similarly improved sophomore season of The Wheel of Time? If it keeps it up, I don’t see why not.

I liked the season premiere of The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power, believe it or not, and I reviewed it for Decider.

Stefan Sasse and I continue our breakneck pace of reviewing big genre shows with our latest podcasts on Andor, which we love, and The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power, which we do not love. The latter is the first time I’ve done a podcast where I got so emotionally exhausted that I literally had to ask Stefan to stop the episode. How’s that for a selling point? These are both Patreon exclusive, so go subscribe and listen!

Change is value neutral. I’ve said this before, and I’ll say it again. The process of adaptation from source material to new material, from one medium to another, is tricky and complex and prone to being misunderstood by just about everyone. Books are not film, books are not television, and hell, film is not television; these are distinct media with distinct strengths and weaknesses and demands. In adapting one to another, change to the origin is necessary to suit the strengths and weaknesses and demands of the destination. The passage of time and the emergence of new social norms is another factor that deserves consideration. And of course there are the tastes and talents of the artists involved to consider. 

Any one of these points, much less all of them in tandem, serves to explain why alterations are, in the end, simply alterations, neither good nor bad in and of themselves. The question is not “Did this adaptation change anything?”, but rather “Were the changes the adaptation made to the source material beneficial, given the new medium involved? Did they enhance the source material’s strengths? Did they improve upon the source material generally? Were they true to the source material’s tone and themes? Did they make the adaptation stronger than a more direct and literal transposition from one medium to the other would have been?”

We have finally reached the end of The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power’s first season, helmed by J.D. Payne and Patrick McKay, And we have our answers. Were the changes The Rings of Power made to J.R.R. Tolkien’s source material beneficial, given the new medium involved? No, they were not. Did they enhance the source material’s strengths? No, they did not. Did they improve upon the source material generally? No, they did not. Were they true to the source material’s tone and themes? No, they were not. Did they make the adaptation stronger than a more direct and literal transposition from one medium to the other would have been? No, they did not.

I reviewed the season finale of The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power for Decider. As I say in the review, this show was a crushing disappointment.

Stefan Sasse and I return with our regularly scheduled weekly series, focusing on this week’s episodes Andor and The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power, both Patreon exclusives! Subscribe and listen!

I’m fond of saying that when it comes to adapting a work of art from one medium to another, “change” is value neutral. The mere fact that something is different in the TV or movie version than it was in the book is not an artistically or aesthetically meaningful thing in and of itself; what matters is whether the change improves the adaptation or weakens it. In all the cases outlined above, I cannot for the life of me figure out how altering these basic facts of the agreed-upon timeline of Tolkien’s Middle-earth improves anything. They make the story less coherent, they substitute bait-and-switch character disappearances and deaths for actual meaningful developments, they flummox hardcore Tolkien nerds like me while, I suspect, adding nothing of particular interest to newbies and casuals. 

Disa’s fire, Durin and Elrond’s friendship, the Stranger’s isolation, Elendil’s quiet dignity: This is where The Rings of Power’s power lies, not in turning Galadriel into a badass or pretending Isildur is dead or acting like we in the audience have no idea what and where Mordor is. (And btw, if you must treat the Mordor reveal as a reveal, why not have Adar proclaim the new name and then end the episode, instead of using that goofy “THE SOUTHLANDS/MORDOR” text to do it?) None of this is a dealbreaker of course; plenty of shows have rebounded from weak first seasons to achieve goodness, even greatness. It’s just hard to imagine a show with this kind of money behind it, these resources, the attention of the Eye of Bezos Himself, being granted the room to grow and breathe and change. I fear that what you see is what you get, no matter which eye you’re looking through.

I reviewed this week’s episode of The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power for Decider.

My Illustrious Co-Host Stefan Sasse and I continue our breakneck podcasting pace with new Patreon-exclusive episodes on The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power Episode 6 (disappointing!) and Andor Episode 4 (invigorating!). Go subscribe and check ’em out!

As it turns out, Adar’s whole deal is absolutely fascinating: He is a first-generation orc, one of the original Elves whom Morgoth tortured and warped to create his race of minions. (He also claims that he killed Sauron, which, okay buddy, but that’s neither here nor there.) If you’re deep into Tolkien lore — as, presumably, a decent chunk of the audience for a show set in Tolkien’s Second Age would be — this is a glimpse of something we’ve never seen before but have been wondering about since…well, in my case, since I first read The Hobbit at age four. Wouldn’t it have been so much more interesting for the show to make his origin clear immediately, thus getting the audience invested in who he is rather than who he might be, instead of erroneously presuming that mYsTeRiEs are the be-all and end-all of fantasy narratives?

Please recall that there are approximately zero “mysteries” in Tolkien’s work: Aside from the origin of Gollum and the Necromancer, which are irrelevant when they first show up in the text, everything you need to know is spelled out almost immediately, with Tolkien counting on his inventive skill to engross you all by itself. Which it does!

I reviewed this week’s episode of The Rings of Power for Decider.

My illustrious cohost Stefan Sasse and I have posted not one but two Patreon-exclusive new podcasts, one on the most recent episode of The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power and one focused on the three-part series premiere of Andor! We’ve got a very ambitious schedule going on right now so there’s no guarantee of future Andor episodes, although at the rate TRoP is going we might decide to switch, who knows. Subscribe and listen! And hey, they’re at two different tiers, so you can select one that’s right for your budget!

Anyway, I could not help be brought up short by the idea that mithril, of all things, is required to preserve the lives of the Elves? Because of the failure of a magic tree with no basis in Tolkien’s mythology? This seems like an awful lot to add to the mythos, and for what? An added sense of urgency? A connective tissue between the disparate narrative threads? A way to move the story along during these early episodes in order to kill time between now and the end of the season? All of these seem like ways of saying “the writers didn’t really know what to do, so they said to hell with it, Elves need mithril to live, so let it be written, so let it be done.” Granted, I’m bringing a certain bias to this analysis. But even if I weren’t, it seems both too neat and too busy, an overcomplication of a pretty straightforward story about the resurgence of evil and the need for disconnected races to unite to fight it. Adding “or else one of them will go extinct” undercuts the human (for lack of a better word) drama inherent in the need to persuade different peoples to fight for a common cause.

I reviewed the fifth episode of The Rings of Power for Decider.

Stefan Sasse continue our Patreon-exclusive, subscriber-only series of full-length weekly podcasts on The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power with a look at episode 4, aka the first one we actually liked! Subscribe and listen!

Now that’s more like it!

Look, I’ll admit there are any number of reasons why I might have warmed to this episode of The Rings of Power more than its predecessors. Maybe, as a guy with the White Tree of Gondor tattooed on my arm, I just want a big-budget J.R.R. Tolkien TV series to succeed. Maybe I’m simply getting used to the show’s depictions of its characters and their world and learning to live with them rather than chafe at them. Maybe I’m feeling peer pressure!

Or — and I think this is the more likely case — maybe the show is finally doing what I’ve wanted it to do from the start: tightening the focus, abandoning the cheap “cliffhanger” mysteries that artificially forced the plot along, and allowing the story to emerge organically from interactions between characters with different personalities, goals, fears, plans, desires. Maybe it’s acting like a drama, instead of an expensive sandbox in which to play with a bunch of Tolkien and Tolkienesque toys.

In other words, maybe it got good!

I reviewed this week’s Rings of Power for Decider. It’s a vast improvement over its predecessors, though still far from perfect.

Not content with our weekly podcasts on House of the Dragon, my illustrious co-host Stefan Sasse and I are also doing a weekly series of Patreon-exclusive podcasts on The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power! Here we are on episodes one and two and on episode three. These are full-length podcasts — subscribe and give them a listen!

I’m trying, as hard as I can, not to let my lifetime of Tolkien readership to affect my judgment of the show, which is its own thing in a very different medium with different structures, strengths, and requirements. But it’s hard! It’s hard because I know how complex and tragic this material can be, and I’m seeing so little of that complexity and tragedy; in its place are a bunch of gritty tough guys and wide-eyed wonder-seekers I don’t recognize, whether their origins are canonical or not. Aside from some really cheesy seafaring sequences everything still looks solid and expensive, but it feels like some vital part of the storytelling and character-building budget was cut. Short of a magic ring, I’m not sure how the show digs itself out of that hole.

I reviewed this week’s episode of The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power for Decider.

The biggest problem with this episode is evident if you compare it to, like, any other episode of good television. For the most part, stories in prestige TV are driven by character interaction. People encounter one another, have conversations or arguments or fights, emerge on the other side either changed or redoubled in their determination not to change, and the plot proceeds from there. (This is how House of the Dragon works, to cite an obvious point of comparison for this show.)

In this episode, though, written by Breaking Bad and Better Call Saul veteran Gennifer Hutchison of all people, way too many of the scene transitions that propel the narrative are these kind of cheap cliffhangers, in which the action is cut off just before or just after something interesting happens. Arondir gets got by some goblins? Cut! Durin père and Durin fils open a treasure box with a secret MacGuffin inside? Cut! Theo’s blood gets drawn into his obviously evil Sauronic artifact? Cut! Galadriel and Halbard get rescued by the silhouette of an off-camera sailor? Cut! 

You could get away with one or even two of these pseudo-suspenseful edits, I guess. But a whole suite of them? It’s not storytelling — it’s a cheat code, the easiest possible way to drive people from one moment (or episode) of the story to the next. I’m surprised it made it out of the writers’ room this way.

I reviewed the second episode of The Rings of Power for Decider.

At this point, I want to state for the record that I am currently covering not only The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power and Game of Thrones: House of the Dragon, and in neither case do I feel it’s my job to adjudicate the differences between the books and the shows. The books are the books and the shows are the shows — two different media, two different sets of structures and demands and rewards. Ultimately, what matters is what winds up on screen, and how that comes across to the viewer.

That being said, I must admit that it’s extraordinarily difficult for a person like me — a guy who first read The Hobbit at age 5, who’s seen the LotR movies more times than I can count, who’s read Tolkien’s books to his children multiple times, who has the goddamned White Tree of Gondor tattooed on his arm — to formulate an equal appreciation for the canonical characters and the invented ones. Galadriel and Elrond, and even Finrod and Gil-galad — these are old friends of mine, dating back decades. Arondir and Bronwyn and Theo and Nori? To paraphrase Mariah Carey, I don’t know them.

I reviewed tonight’s series premiere of The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power, which was okay, for Decider.

Ketchum is a forgettable goon. That’s just facts. I know who he is because I’ve watched Road House a million times, and you know who he is because you’re reading this series of daily essays about Road House. But it took me a long, long time, and many, many viewings, to put Ketchum together, as it were: that he drives the monster truck any time it shows up; that he’s the guy who tries to kick Dalton in the head with the knife in his boot and gets his ass kicked instead; that he’s the man who kills Wade Garrett, as evidenced by his retrieval of the knife used to kill him and insertion of that knife into a custom sheath on his hip; that he’s the last goon to tangle with Dalton hand to hand; that his name is Ketchum.

Alone among the goons present for the climax of the film, no one even says his name in the movie, a privilege afforded to Pat McGurn, Morgan, O’Connor, Tinker, and Jimmy. I’ve made a fuss about this over the past few months, alleging that it’s one of the reasons he’s so forgettable. But I’ve been thinking about that assertion lately, because I don’t think it has to be that way.

Consider the orcs.

Remember these handsome fellas? Sure you do. That’s Lurtz, Grishnakh, and Gothmog, from Peter Jackson’s Lord of the Rings trilogy. No one says their names in the movies. No one says any orc’s name in the movies. For that matter, Lurtz is a made-up name for a brand-new character the filmmakers introduced, and Gothmog is simply their best guess as to what a Mordor commander from the books whose species isn’t even specified by Tolkien might be like.

But if you’ve watched those movies recently, or if you find them memorable at all, you probably recall them as the uruk-hai leader with the Ariana Grande hairstyle whose head gets chopped off by Aragorn after a big fight, the raspy-voiced weasel who tries to hunt and kill Merry and Pippin before Treebeard squishes him, and the leader of the orc assault on Minas Tirith with the big puffy pink face. You remember how they look, how they sound, and what they do, because Jackson and company made a big point of giving them memorable introductions, isolating them with distinct camerawork (closeups, angles, whatever the case), and having them do their most memorable stuff right there for all to see. Lurtz was created to give the uruk-hai chasing the Fellowship a distinctive leadership figure so the film’s climax would work as such. It’s a far cry from the aggressively nondescript Ketchum first showing up as a non-speaking background character wearing face-masking sunglasses during the Bleeder scene and eventually killing Road House‘s secondary protagonist off-screen.

For that matter, it’s a far cry from these fellows.

Karpis and Mountain are also never named. They’re only shown in close-up in couple of scenes apiece; in Mountain’s case, one of those scenes is a pool party (in which Karpis appears in the background). Neither of them make it to the film’s final reel but it’s not because they get killed—they simply stop showing up, because that’s how Road House rolls.

But you remember them, right? They each have a distinctive look, with Karpis’s clothes from the Bun E. Carlos collection and Mountain’s sheer size. They each do something interesting: Karpis stares down Dalton, and Mountain dances like an idiot and later Sam Elliott tells him “I sure ain’t gonna show you my dick” before taking him down. The camera makes a point of both of them: Karpis stares right into it in closeup, while Mountain becomes the focal point as it follows Wesley and Denise into the pool party.

When it comes to differentiating your goons, bothering to say their name during the film helps, especially if you name half a dozen comparable characters during the film and run the risk of drowning the unnamed one out. (That doesn’t apply to LotR.) But you need the look, you need a distinctive action, and you need a memorable trick with the camera to make the look and the action click in the viewer’s mind. It’s a bit unfair to compare Rowdy Herrington’s work with Ketchum to Peter Jackson’s work in The Lord of the Rings, which is better at this than any other film I’ve ever seen. My point is simply, what’s in a name?