"The Rings of Power" Finally Sets Sail
Go deep on the best coverage and commentary on the show thus far
So it’s finally here. I’ve written before about Amazon Prime’s massive new TV series and expensive bet on the extensibility of the J.R.R. Tolkien legendarium. Plenty others have spent oceans of ink (digital and print) on the show as hype grows around the world, reaching now its first crest point. Will it crash? Or surge? Some critics are already drawing lines and perhaps snap judgements. Without sex and gratuitous violence — the “grit” of Game of Thrones — will audiences find The Rings of Power too boring, too black and white? Is it a catastrophe or a triumph?
The smartest critics are hedging. The New York Times’ always reliable John Poniewozik is striking a middle ground for the simple reason that it’s too early to tell whether The Rings of Power is truly transformative in an individual and mass cultural sense. What is also interesting in these reviews is how some critics are revealing their familiarity with Tolkien. In Poniewozik’s case, he is a fan (he has read the books, including The Silmarillion) and therefore is far more qualified to make a judgement than most. But, he is also a seasoned television critic, so his objectivity in judging the series from a mainstream perspective brings balance.
At the very positive end of the spectrum are those who are singing high praises. There is The Guardian’s Rebecca Nicholson who calls it “astounding,” writing that it makes the Games of Thrones prequel House of the Dragon look amateurish. “It is so cinematic and grand that it makes House of the Dragon look as if it has been cobbled together on Minecraft,” she writes. There are those who give the show kudos for its mastery of the material, its visuals, and so forth. The two primary Hollywood trades, Variety and The Hollywood Reporter, both gave the first two episodes high marks. The majority of reviews out there are positive.
At the other end of the spectrum are two reviews that stick out particularly to me. There is Entertainment Weekly’s scourging review by Darren Franich wherein he mocks the show with some glee. Interestingly, he is a fan of Tolkien’s works, including The Silmarillion, but unlike Poniewozik he is a less experienced TV critic. This is evidenced in his misinterpretation of certain edits in the series’ opening, where he mistakenly contrasts the idea of orcs spreading to every “corner” of Middle-earth with the later concept of the orcs being sparse — critically, he conflated an earlier part of the prologue, the First Age, with Galadriel’s hunting down of the orcs in the Second Age.
(That is not to say some of his misgivings are misguided — and he doesn’t completely bury the show because he acknowledges there is more to come — but it is to say or point out a knee-jerk kind of reaction, to more personal tastes, or in the case of the orcs’ population growth and decline, a deficit caused by such veers in perception. While the jump in time during the show’s prologue perhaps contributed to his confusion over the timeline, one would hope for a more perceptive and patient viewing from a major critic.)
I find this is the same exact issue with another young critic, The Washington Post’s Inkoo Kang, who is smart and clearly talented, but seems to have the instincts of a social media algorithm — something is either great or its shit, a binary mentality that leaves almost zero room for subtlety when it comes to the appreciation of art and the toil involved with its creation. Her review takes less issue with the story tactics or visual effects (the two key demerits assigned by Franich), but with its inscrutability for someone with the effervescent tastes she seems to prefer. Her chief avatar of displeasure is boredom — its “banal” and too slow. She is also a literature major by training, and clearly has a taste for dialogue attuned to contemporary rhythms and bites (read bytes), so the show’s more old world rhythms and meters, and its archetypal starkness, is lost on her.
When I consider the broad range of reactions to Amazon’s major foray into blockbuster TV — a designation explored by The New York Times’ Ross Douthat — what stands out to me is the nature of time in narrative storytelling. The critics that are most attuned to TV’s quicker rhythms (it’s addiction to tit-for-tat drama) seem the least at ease and the most perturbed, and I would argue the least well equipped, to enjoy or even understand what the series is about. I have to admit that I don’t blame them for this ADD type of reaction. It is slow. It is complex. However, and this is what I wanted to share with my readers, that is in fact showrunners J.D. Payne and Patrick McKay’s intention.
Whatever the case, in an age of instant gratification and snarky ripostes, I simply hope it does take its sweet time — something The Atlantic’s David Sims gauges with a deft touch. For the greatest thing we need these days I believe is in fact more boredom. We need more time to think. More time to consider. And yes, reason. Inevitably, there will be those who complain that Tolkien’s vision of fantasy is flat or lacks the grey. But those folks have never gotten Tolkien.
None of this is surprising. Looking back, the same kind of yelps greeted Peter Jackson’s The Fellowship of the Ring — in fact, it was Entertainment Weekly’s Owen Gleiberman who stuck his foot in it last time and then reversed his tune two more films into the trilogy — and I predict this will be no different among some TV critics. This being Tolkien however, I would urge that we always try to give it time. Because tidal waves first tug us out to sea long before they rush.
All that said, I can’t say I have total confidence this show will be for everyone, and maybe not for people who love and devour TV. That may be where this show gets in trouble. If the showrunners try to please too many, it could simply drown. I’m not sure Tolkien’s mythology on television will unify us this time around, not in one episode or even one season. We’re too angry and cynical these days for that. It may grate for too many that it’s not killing and backstabbing aplenty. And yet, one hopes that the creative team behind it will find a way, though there’s no forcing it, no overthinking it. Frodo did not leave the Shire in a day.
But I have a feeling from everything I’m reading and observing that the show will indeed be a sleeping giant, a great wave, that may very well change a lot of things in the techno-mythopoeic age we live in today — this turning point we are living through and a part of, where politics, the nature of truth, the climate, livelihoods, humanity’s place in nature vis-a-vis artificial intelligence, will continue to upend and challenge our commitment to a peaceful and free world. Now, I say this not because I think this show alone will encapsulate all of this, but because Tolkien created a mythology that could always connect the past with the future through the medium of the present — the readers, our psyches, our lives.
There is the dimension of the streaming universe, or war if you want to see it in dualistic, Manichaean terms — the exact “black and white” polarity some critics charge Tolkien with, while they gladly refer to the TV sphere as engulfed in the “streaming wars” or “content apocalypse” and so forth. There is, unfortunately, the fight over identity, the howls by “trolls” that this Middle-earth is “woke” and inauthentic just because its vision in terms of its cast and thematics is global. There is the dimension of commerce and art wherein the specter of Amazon’s economic dominance is conflated with the creative endeavors of the writers, producers, directors and countless artists and technicians who have made this show with blood, sweat and tears.
So before you watch the first two episodes, or after you watch them and have questions, or at least before you read or listen to all of the reviews, as you process what this mythology may mean, I recommend that you give the following articles, podcasts and videos your attention. I have been reading just about everything about the show for three years, and I have been watching videos as promotion season has ramped up, and listened to podcasts (a few which are fantastic). So keep an open mind and dive into these gems to expand your Middle-earth:
The Ringer’s Ringer-Verse Podcast: Co-hosts Joanna Robinson and Mallory Rubin, both self-professed geeks and fans of fantasy, science-fiction, superheroes and so on, share their personal stories about how they found Tolkien, the effect the Jackson films had on their lives, and their hopes for the show. I have picked two episodes for you. In the first, Joanna and Mallory are also joined by Bryan Cogman, one of the writers and producers for HBO’s Game of Thrones who also worked on the early brainstorms for Rings. It’s long but funny, informative and heart-felt. Also, fair warning, Joanna and Mallory embrace colorful language, which is The Ringer’s overall editorial podcasting style (check it out).
In the second pick, we embark with Joanna and Mallory on their weekly analysis of the series as each episode rolls out. Posted just this past Friday, their first deep dive is extraordinary. It does a wonderful job of breaking down the show for fans and newbies, filled with insights on the themes, moods, characters and scenes. I learned a lot myself listening to both of their takes: one thing in particular that I missed — maybe in part because I could only watch the premiere at low volume and thus couldn’t hear certain words or lines well — is a gorgeous threading of the opening lines of the series with the first episodes’ closing (don’t miss it!).
Rotten Tomatoes TV’s Interview with the Cast: Another worthy stop in my mind to get a better sense of who the actors are that will be bringing the series to life is this engaging series of interviews on Rotten Tomatoes TV that is edited together into one video (a lot of the interview videos out there on YouTube are broken up into individual sit-downs and separate clips). I’ve been watching a lot of the various promotion pieces, and this is the best one.
Time’s Cover Feature on the Vision, Cast and Production: I’ve been reading pretty much every article out there about the show in the run-up. There are many good ones but this one from Time is probably the best. It is a fairly quick read but has enough depth and detail about the production, themes, and artistry involved. While Time’s TV critic was fairly flippant in his review of the first two episodes — again, falling on the same old tired dismissals of Tolkien’s archetypal world that is rightfully employed by the showrunners — Eliana Dockterman does a wonderful job of taking us into the human side of this creative mission.*
Empire Magazine’s Cover Feature on the Stakes: For those who want to go deeper on the production, I also recommend Empire Magazine’s feature article on Rings that came out in July. Titled “The World Is Changed,” it is a 12-page article written by Al Horner (who also run an excellent podcast on early film and TV scripts called ScriptApart). It pays especial attention to the legacy of Peter Jackson’s films and interpolates how Rings may effect the trajectory of a Tolkienian cinema universe. Horner also interviews John Howe, the lead conceptual artist for the show and a Jackson alumni.
Unfortunately the article is not available online. You can still find it for fairly cheap on Ebay however. Empire released three cover versions of the issue, including an exclusive featuring concept art by Howe of the snow troll. Thankfully, you can derive most of the content and extra color from TheOneRing.net’s interview with Horner and Empire’s head editor.
TheOneRing.net’s many steady hands: Speaking of TORN (TheOneRing.net), they continue to be an invaluable resource and community for new and longtime fans. Importantly, they have no tolerance for the racist nonsense that is brewing in the darker corners of not just Lord of the Rings fandom but fandom in general. It is a frequent topic in their stories and YouTube live shows, where day after day they work hard to maintain Tolkien’s legacy with respect and love for all. Run completely by volunteers, its integrity is top.
I’ve picked three important articles here. One is an essay by a contributor who goes by DrNosy and was selected by longtime TORN editor Demosthenes. Her essay on the thematic power and meaning of Tolkien’s trees in The Rings of Power is brilliant. She analyzes the symbology of the golden and silver trees Laurelin and Telperion in Tolkien’s mythology — the Two Trees — and their various brethren, especially Nimloth and the mallorn trees. I won’t break down what these names mean. Her piece does so delightfully.
The second is Clifford “Quickbeam” Broadway’s spiritual essay about this moment in Tolkien-dom and his great pride in its ability to bring the world together. I have known Quickbeam since the Jackson films (I interviewed him a while back for Wraith Land) and was moved to tears by this honest and personal love letter to Tolkien fans of all stripes who keep the faith and the Professor’s vision aflame — he always calls Tolkien “the Professor” in his unwavering reverence of the man himself. The piece focuses on San Diego Comic-Con, including his interactions with other fans and the creatives behind Rings.
If you missed the coverage and stories coming out of SDCC 2022, then you can watch the big “Hall H” reveal and panel featuring Stephen Colbert making some good laughs as well as interview the showrunners, lead producer, and cast here on YouTube (it starts with Part 2 since Part 1 is just music). Importantly, beside all of the festivities covered elsewhere, Quickbeam’s essay focuses on the true heart of Tolkien. The moment that made me tear up is his encounter Sophia Nomvette, the Black actress playing dwarf Princess Disa (I won’t give it away). Related, TORN also hosted a great panel at SDCC with other Tolkien fan experts.
The third TORN post I wanted to share is by its co-founder Christopher “Calisuri” Pirrotta. For all of those purist Tolkien fans that may struggle with a TV adaptation of Middle-earth, he gives a spirited and easy breakdown of why Rings is great for more casual fans, which he actually classifies himself as belonging to. It’s an honest review and helped me see things from a more distanced perspective. It’s a reminder to not take ourselves too seriously. Critically, Calisuri bases it in what matters most: our common humanity.
(Also, when it comes to fan coverage and engagement with Tolkien and Rings, don’t miss Matt at Nerd of the Rings, who does a tonne of great lore videos on the legendarium and takes a very even and fair approach to the series.)
An Impassioned Call for the Soul of Middle-Earth: Quickbeam and Calisuri’s defense of a more equal and diverse Tolkien fandom brings me to The Hollywood Reporter’s feature writer, Richard Newby. An African-American journalist and hardcore fan of Tolkien’s works and mythos, he published a blazing editorial calling out the racists and cranks who are trying to hijack not only Amazon’s Rings of Power series but Tolkien’s legacy. It is essential reading for anyone standing on the sidelines. This is everyone’s world, he argues. This is world myth.
A Word of Caution Against Crass Commercialization: Coming from a different side of this world-spanning moment is Tolkien scholar Michael C. Drout. In an editorial for The New York Times, the influential co-editor of the Tolkien Studies academic journal warns against Hollywood’s current ambitions to create so-called cinematic universes. He worries the deeply moral and spiritual and even linguistic underpinnings of Tolkien’s literature will be bastardized and obliterated by Amazon. He has a point. (Catch up on this topic and my thoughts here.)
The Meta Arc of Our Middle-Earth Universe: While I share some of Drout’s concerns, I also think it is unrealistic. Also, his argument that Tolkien himself would be displeased with the super-sizing of his mythology into other mediums, including toys and so forth, is not necessarily true. The fact is, we do not know what Tolkien would make of his world-changing mythology today. On the one hand he might very well see it as a monster grown out of control just as his son Christopher Tolkien lamented about Jackson’s films. The problem is that Jackson’s films were mostly embraced or at least tolerated by Drout; my impression is that Amazon’s behemoth power is what worries him most.
Also, as has been cited many times by the creatives behind The Rings of Power, Tolkien himself once wrote in a letter to one of his potential publishers — in the context of his dream of getting The Silmarillion published along with The Lord of the Rings — that he envisioned his mythology as being extended by “other minds and hands,” including drama.** This brings us to the other end of the intellectual spectrum in terms of Tolkien adaptations. The Tolkien Professor, Corey Olsen, comes at it from a different angle — he takes these adaptations as a given and instead engages with why, how and what this mythopoeic process means. He explores the “meta” in other words. (He even gives some of his lectures from inside of the MMORPG video game Lord of the Rings Online.)
There are two fun reads I think that look at the technological implications of The Rings of Power from a more oblique angle. This is fascinating because Tolkien was deeply worried about what he called the Machine — and our present addiction to technology would probably worry him more than anything else, except for maybe climate change. At the same time, Tolkien did acknowledge the “magic” or “Elvish” side of creativity in all things. If we are to live in a world where mythology is communicated through new mediums, then who knows?
So take Esquire’s humorous “‘Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power’ Is Pure Screensaver TV” with a little salt. It is actually one of the more brilliant reviews I read of the show — it is pure meta. It acknowledges its very slow pace compared to our present techno-frantic TV and instead of complaining of “boredom” or pace, the writer Henry Wong embraces its more ambient and relaxed flow. For Wong, its immersive pool of expansive, deliberate world-building is a virtue. Similarly, Vulture’s Kathryn VanArendonk uses the metaphor of “big” to go literally meta in the sense of scale. She argues that The Rings of Power is so expansive in every way that it practically needs its own category.
A Deep Deep Dive into the Peoples of Middle-Earth: Lastly, if you want to go deeper on the background, world and era of Rings — the Second Age in Middle-earth — then a great place to get oriented is with The Prancing Pony Podcast’s warmup guide to the peoples of Tolkien’s legendarium. Actually, for anyone wanting to deep dive on Tolkien’s books, I highly recommend PPP. But for immediate needs — getting a solid back history for the show — give their alternative show The Rings of Power Wrap-Up a listen (episodes 11-14).***
That’s my list of gems to check out if you’re getting into your Rings groove. Now that the series has premiered, I plan to share my thoughts as things evolve. I don’t necessarily plan to do reviews. That’s not the goal of Wraith Land, to comment regularly on TV content, even when it’s The Lord of the Rings. My intellectual engagement with the show will be more around the books and the mythic implications of its adaptation — as always, my take will be philosophical.
When and if the show does spark a major passion, including how the show colors responses to Tolkien’s texts, or how a dramatization with wholly new inventions transforms what we perceive as Tolkien canon, or not, I will certainly be diving deeper into such waters with you. I will say however that I am encouraged. For now I am happy to say it is no Phantom Menace. By far. Thank goodness.
For more Wraith Land posts on The Rings of Power, check out the following:
*While I am highlighting Time and Empire in terms of magazine coverage, I would be remiss to not mention Vanity Fair’s cover story from all the way back in February. It was actually written by Joanna Robinson of The Ringer. I didn’t put it on the list because it has been out for months, but it was ultimately the first major coverage of The Rings of Power and is still one of the best. Check it out if you missed it way back when.
**In a famous letter — Letter 131 in The Letters of J.R.R. Tolkien — Tolkien mapped out to a potential publisher — Milton Waldman of Collins, as in HarperCollins — his vision for his grand myth cycles of the Jewels and the Rings, in which he hoped other artists of paint, brush, and drama would extend his mythology into new forms.
***Note that somewhat awkwardly, after six years, co-host Shawn E. Marchese of The Prancing Pony Podcast announced he is discontinuing his hosting duties on the show at the beginning of Episode 12. It’s a bummer moment. The show apparently is still carrying on with co-host Alan Sisto and will soon recruit a new co-pilot for the PPP and TROPWU. I wanted to call it out so it doesn’t catch folks off guard.