‘The Rings of Power’ Is Quickly Heading Toward the Same Path as ‘The Acolyte’ By Repeating One Critical Mistake

by

As a lifelong fan of both Tolkien’s Middle-earth and Star Wars universes, I must confess that my initial excitement for these recent adaptations has been somewhat dampened by their attempts to redefine established lore. It feels like they’re trying to serve us a new dish while keeping the old one on the table, and the result is a bit of an uncomfortable blend.

‘The Rings of Power’, a new series, has just started airing its first three episodes. The initial season faced much debate because it altered certain events from the original story and some viewers felt uncomfortable with the character changes. However, many people feel that Season 2 is better, particularly in terms of technical improvements. Yet, critics argue that the writers are still modifying the narrative, which some fans think contradicts Tolkien’s original writing style.

In contrast to their portrayal in season 2, Orcs are presented in a more compassionate light. It seems that this brutal race has familial bonds, as one orc is shown caring for a child, and they do not appear to be eager to fight alongside Sauron. In essence, the Orcs in ‘The Rings of Power’ are merely misjudged beings.

Representing orcs as misunderstood beings rather than the typical embodiment of pure evil and brutality found in most fiction is an audacious move, even if it seems somewhat reckless.

Critics swiftly ridiculed the concept harshly, seeing it as overlooking the past few decades of storytelling that portrayed orcs as pure chaos. It seems that all the killing, looting, violence, and other heinous acts were simply due to a lack of understanding. Perhaps orcs even look down upon their own kind because they too are misunderstood.

In a parallel scenario, ‘Star Wars: The Acolyte,’ the latest and arguably contentious installment of Star Wars, has been criticized for its portrayal of Jedi characters in an unfavorable light. Meanwhile, traditionally antagonistic figures are given justifications for their villainous actions, painting them as misjudged rather than purely evil.

“The quintessential example of this was a newcomer named Qimir, who identified himself as a Sith. He yearned for independence and desired to wield the Force according to his own will. Interestingly, he once had ties with the Jedi order but chose to reject that past in favor of embracing pure chaos.

Qimir yearns for solitude intensely, so much so that he chooses to unveil himself to the Jedi on Khofar, a group who are completely oblivious of the Sith at this particular juncture in time. He elects to engage them in combat and ruthlessly slay a score of them, as he yearns for freedom and solitude. His desire for retribution is portrayed as “just” as he exhibits scars that were supposedly inflicted by his former Jedi Master.

The Sith ideology appears to be misconstrued yet again; perhaps their emphasis on violence, anger, and disorder stems from a desire for autonomy. It could be that the Sith harbor self-hatred and disdain because they aspire to free themselves internally as well.

It makes no sense as you can see, you can try to shoehorn as much rationalization as you want in both ideologies, but decades of established lore cannot be rewritten and reprogrammed with a few scenes. I get what they were trying to do, they were trying to go beyond good and evil, all sides are flawed, etc, etc. But quite frankly, just like ‘House of the Dragon’ attempt to make some kind of a deep allegory about sexism, the show failed badly in their attempt, and it feels like the decisions were made last minute and with no thought about the source material.

Read More

2024-09-08 12:43