Streaming Lord of the Rings: Rings of Power

[TheGreatBarryB]

Can ‘toxic’ fans cancel a billion-dollar show?

Global streams of Amazon’s The Rings of Power, the most expensive TV show ever made, have dropped for its second season. Are its online detractors to blame?

www.theage.com.au

Amazon says global streams for the second season of flagship series The Lord of the Rings: Rings of Power are less than half the total for the Tolkien adaptation’s first season, raising eyebrows over the future of a television series often touted as the most expensive ever.
The second series of the Prime Video show reached 55 million viewers worldwide ahead of the release of its final episode at 5pm (AEST) on October 3. The first instalment of the five-season show, which The Hollywood Reporter has estimated will cost $US1 billion ($1.5 billion) in total, has now been viewed by more than 150 million people.

Charlie Vickers as Sauron in season 2 of The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power. CREDIT: BEN ROTHSTEIN / PRIME VIDEO
Last week, Jennifer Salke, head of Amazon MGM Studios, told a Prime Video presentation in London that the studio expected the same growth for season two it experienced for season one.
Data from Nielsen showed that from August 26 to September 1, the week the first three episodes of the new season became available, US viewers streamed 1 billion minutes across all eleven available episodes. That was down from 1.3 billion minutes in the week only the first three episodes of season one were available two years prior.

The show attracted 25 million viewers when it premiered in 2022, the biggest single day in the platform’s history. But it also drew the ire of “toxic” fans, some critical of the show’s dialogue and changes to source material, others its racially diverse casting, prompting the cast to release a statement condemning the racism its members had experienced. Actors from Peter Jackson’s The Lord of the Rings film trilogy also spoke out in support.
Liam Burke, an associate professor of cinema and media studies at Swinburne University, notes the impact of critical online commentary. “There is a certain subset of fandom which for one reason or another, whether it’s all-female Ghostbusters or a Lord of the Rings series that focuses on an elf that isn’t white, will do videos and social media posts and review bomb – and that’s toxic fandom.”
Burke says toxic fandoms are real, and fantasy fans, as early adopters of the internet, can “wield disproportionate power”.
“That negative word of mouth or negative word of keystroke can ripple far beyond communities, where it can begin to sour wider perceptions of a show,” he says.
Amazon briefly suspended the show’s rating on the platform in 2022 after reports of online “review bombing”, where fans get together to post negative reviews to bring down a show’s rating, leading to the audience satisfaction score on aggregator Rotten Tomatoes dropping to 37 per cent. The website’s Popcornmeter for season one now sits at 38 per cent, while season two has a score of 58 per cent, still a “stale” rating according to the site’s classifications.
Meanwhile, critical reviews for both seasons have been generally positive, with the rating on the site’s Tomatometer, which aggregates published reviews by critics, at 85 per cent for season two, up from 83 per cent for season one. In this masthead, Michael Idato has praised the second season’s lunge from an “initially intriguing story ... into something more compelling”.
The Rings of Power premiere was the first time Amazon shared streaming statistics for any of its shows. The company said it could not share the numbers for the opening day of season two, or any regional streaming figures. As of October 3, the show was the No.1 streamed show on Prime Video in Australia.
Marc C-Scott, a lecturer in screen media at Victoria University, says it was hanging on to subscribers, and not fans’ or critics’ responses, which guided the big streamers’ strategies.
“The studio would be looking to see, OK, not only is it getting them subscribers, but how long is it hanging on to those subscribers, and potentially what other content they’re looking at.”

C-Scott says a decline in viewers could impact the investment in a show, but only once a show’s subscriber-retaining powers evaporated, would they “look at different paths to either sell that acquisition off ... or they’ll just basically pull the pin on it”.
In 2017, Amazon Studios beat Netflix to pay $US250 million for the rights to adapt Tolkien’s The Lord of the Rings for the small screen, committing to five seasons.

Amazon beat other streaming giants to pay $US250 million for the rights to JRR Tolkien’s The Lord of the Rings in 2017. CREDIT: PRIME VIDEO
While a third season has not been officially confirmed, show runners Patrick McKay and J.D. Payne signed a new three-year deal in February and have already previewed their hopes for the direction of the story, which portrays the events preceding Jackson’s films and The Hobbit adaptations.
Amazon has said the show’s launch had driven more global Prime sign-ups than any of its previous content. C-Scott says the appeal of buying the rights to a franchise like The Lord of the Rings or Star Wars was not just the pre-existing fan base.

RELATED ARTICLE​

Streaming​

Mud, blood, orcs … and the secret history of the Rings of Power​

“They’ve already got a starting point, but the other end of it is that it allows a new fan base to potentially take on hold.”
Burke, a Tolkien fan, says he was halfway through season two of The Rings of Power, which he thought had produced “some good stuff, and some not good stuff”. He says it was unfair to compare it against Jackson’s movies, a “unicorn” in terms of their success which even Jackson had been unable to replicate with The Hobbit trilogy.
Burke says he understood fans being protective of “beloved source material”, but the views of a minority of toxic fans should not be overrepresented.

 

[FlowersByIrene]

Can ‘toxic’ fans cancel a billion-dollar show?

Global streams of Amazon’s The Rings of Power, the most expensive TV show ever made, have dropped for its second season. Are its online detractors to blame?

www.theage.com.au

85% approval rating by critics is insane. To describe this show as "compelling" is actual lunacy, but I guess the feeling of being completely alienated by the opinions and taste of the general public is becoming more and more common recently.

The media gaslighting regarding "toxic fans" is laughable, a 50% drop off in viewers is not because of "toxic fans" it's because the show is fundamentally poor. It simultaneously rushes and convolutes critical aspects of the narrative (Saurons deception, political developments in Numenor) while being glacially paced in other aspects (Gandalf / Harfoots, Isildur & Co etc). The dialogue when not blatantly lifting lines from Lord of the Rings is banal and faux poetic. The action scenes are poorly thought out (siege progression was confusing and scattered) terribly choreographed (Galadriel looked like a child swinging a stick in her Sauron duel) and lacking any emotional pay off (characters that have 'epic' deaths are meaningless and characters that do mean anything are treated with invulnerability (Galadriel falling 250m, Arondir being gutted and being fine). The attempted 'Game of Thrones' political scenes with Galadriel-Gil Galad and Numenor are completely lacking substance, flip flop between episodes with no causation and lack any inter-personal tension. - and again this is all limited to the things that any fan, regardless of their knowledge of Tolkein should pick up, and doesn't speak to the lore issues which draw the ire of many.

 

[TheGreatBarryB]

85% approval rating by critics is insane. To describe this show as "compelling" is actual lunacy, but I guess the feeling of being completely alienated by the opinions and taste of the general public is becoming more and more common recently.

The media gaslighting regarding "toxic fans" is laughable, a 50% drop off in viewers is not because of "toxic fans" it's because the show is fundamentally poor. It simultaneously rushes and convolutes critical aspects of the narrative (Saurons deception, political developments in Numenor) while being glacially paced in other aspects (Gandalf / Harfoots, Isildur & Co etc). The dialogue when not blatantly lifting lines from Lord of the Rings is banal and faux poetic. The action scenes are poorly thought out (siege progression was confusing and scattered) terribly choreographed (Galadriel looked like a child swinging a stick in her Sauron duel) and lacking any emotional pay off (characters that have 'epic' deaths are meaningless and characters that do mean anything are treated with invulnerability (Galadriel falling 250m, Arondir being gutted and being fine). The attempted 'Game of Thrones' political scenes with Galadriel-Gil Galad and Numenor are completely lacking substance, flip flop between episodes with no causation and lack any inter-personal tension. - and again this is all limited to the things that any fan, regardless of their knowledge of Tolkein should pick up, and doesn't speak to the lore issues which draw the ire of many.

Critics clearly disagree with you. And as the article states toxic fans can have a big impact on other sites.

I suppose if you approach watching a show in a negative frame of mind you’re going to find ‘issues’ regardless

 

[FlowersByIrene]

Critics clearly disagree with you. And as the article states toxic fans can have a big impact on other sites.

I suppose if you approach watching a show in a negative frame of mind you’re going to find ‘issues’ regardless

I didn't start watching the show with a negative frame of mind. It created it.

 

[eth-dog]

85% approval rating by critics is insane. To describe this show as "compelling" is actual lunacy, but I guess the feeling of being completely alienated by the opinions and taste of the general public is becoming more and more common recently.

The media gaslighting regarding "toxic fans" is laughable, a 50% drop off in viewers is not because of "toxic fans" it's because the show is fundamentally poor. It simultaneously rushes and convolutes critical aspects of the narrative (Saurons deception, political developments in Numenor) while being glacially paced in other aspects (Gandalf / Harfoots, Isildur & Co etc). The dialogue when not blatantly lifting lines from Lord of the Rings is banal and faux poetic. The action scenes are poorly thought out (siege progression was confusing and scattered) terribly choreographed (Galadriel looked like a child swinging a stick in her Sauron duel) and lacking any emotional pay off (characters that have 'epic' deaths are meaningless and characters that do mean anything are treated with invulnerability (Galadriel falling 250m, Arondir being gutted and being fine). The attempted 'Game of Thrones' political scenes with Galadriel-Gil Galad and Numenor are completely lacking substance, flip flop between episodes with no causation and lack any inter-personal tension. - and again this is all limited to the things that any fan, regardless of their knowledge of Tolkein should pick up, and doesn't speak to the lore issues which draw the ire of many.

We get it. You don't like the show. Now kindly **** off so that people who do like it can discuss it without you ranting every five minutes about how we're wrong and stupid for liking it.

 

[FlowersByIrene]

We get it. You don't like the show. Now kindly **** off so that people who do like it can discuss it without you ranting every five minutes about how we're wrong and stupid for liking it.

I'm yet to see anyone actually discuss the show with any genuine positivity. Most posts are people complaining about people criticising the show or generic comments like "watched todays episode - thought it was better".

I would LOVE to see some commentary on why you enjoy it so much.

So no, I wont "**** off".

 

[FlowersByIrene]

Love your contributions to this thread eth-dog

It's a good show.

Life's too short to watch a tv show you don't like

I'm enjoying it. It's still in a world building phase though

The thing I don't get is that whenever one of us who enjoys the show says so, those that don't come in here and whinge about the fact we like it and tell us why we shouldn't like it

Enjoyed season 2. They've advanced the plot a lot more than I expected. Have honestly felt that the arrogance of Numenor is overwhelmingly the weakest part of the show.

Sauron has more depth to his character than pretty much anybody else.

Some really compelling stuff that makes this thread so interesting!

 

[eth-dog]

I'm yet to see anyone actually discuss the show with any genuine positivity. Most posts are people complaining about people criticising the show or generic comments like "watched todays episode - thought it was better".

I would LOVE to see some commentary on why you enjoy it so much.

So no, I wont "**** off".

Love your contributions to this thread eth-dog











Some really compelling stuff that makes this thread so interesting!

Yes, because any time someone actually wants to discuss it you come in and tell us to shut up, how the critics are wrong and why we shouldn't enjoy it.

I'm not saying it's perfect. But why are you so persistent in telling us why you don't like it? There are show's I've started and didn't like. I stopped watching. I didn't go find their thread on BigFooty, rag on the show, and get offended when other people didn't want to discuss the content.

You're being a gate keeper. The only discussion you put forward is ragging on it, and stifle any conversation from people who like it. I don't particularly want to discuss why I enjoy the show when all you're going to do is tell me why I'm wrong.

 

[Milanista28]

I'm yet to see anyone actually discuss the show with any genuine positivity. Most posts are people complaining about people criticising the show or generic comments like "watched todays episode - thought it was better".

I would LOVE to see some commentary on why you enjoy it so much.

So no, I wont "**** off".

Tbf, you sound like a guy complaining about food at a restaurant he doesn't like for a 3rd and 4th time, stop going to that restaurant man.

 

[MC Bad Genius]

85% approval rating by critics is insane. To describe this show as "compelling" is actual lunacy, but I guess the feeling of being completely alienated by the opinions and taste of the general public is becoming more and more common recently.

This is the biggest flaw with RT as a whole. If you have a film where all the critic reviews are "Good but not great" it will get a 100% Fresh score, even though if you averaged out the review scores from those reviews might be much lower.

Metacritic is a much better website and for Season 2 of Rings Of Power, it has a metascore of 67, which sits a lot closer to where I'd rank it.

While on the topic of ratings, I find it interesting that on imdb, ratings for TV shows are much higher than movies on the whole. I don't know what that means, but I just needed to share it with someone.

 

[FlowersByIrene]

Tbf, you sound like a guy complaining about food at a restaurant he doesn't like for a 3rd and 4th time, stop going to that restaurant man.

It's a good analogy, let's unpack that thought a bit further.

eth-dog questioned why i'm in here if I don't like the show. The answer to that is because i'm a Lord of the Rings fan. I don't just go around criticizing stuff that means nothing to me, like i'm not in the reality TV show thread saying "this is trite". I only critcise because this is something I care about.

In your restaurant analogy. Imagine you had a favourite restaurant, you used to go there when it was run by its original management and you loved everything about it, the food, the atmosphere, the service. Maybe you used to have dinner there for your Birthday every year, or maybe it was the type of place you'd go for sunset when Christmas season starts and you get time off work? Maybe it's the place where you and a particular friend would always meet for dinner once or twice a year?

Then it gets taken over by new management. They say they want to improve the restaurant while keeping its charms. You go and check it out but they've replaced the house made aioli with store bought discount garbage, they've painted the walls a terrible IKEA-Hamptons grey, and the've replaced the service staff with a bunch of rude losers. They say they still have a couple of the classics and some new things on the menu but everything is dripping in seed oils and microwaved crap.

You go there a couple of times because it's still a part of your routine, it's still that place that you and your friend have caught up at for half a decade... but it's not the same and you miss what it used to be.

The worst part is, it gets a good write up in your local paper by some yuppy who thinks Nandos tastes good and you think to yourself, what is wrong with people.

 

[FlowersByIrene]

This is the biggest flaw with RT as a whole. If you have a film where all the critic reviews are "Good but not great" it will get a 100% Fresh score, even though if you averaged out the review scores from those reviews might be much lower.

Metacritic is a much better website and for Season 2 of Rings Of Power, it has a metascore of 67, which sits a lot closer to where I'd rank it.

While on the topic of ratings, I find it interesting that on imdb, ratings for TV shows are much higher than movies on the whole. I don't know what that means, but I just needed to share it with someone.

Yes it's really odd. Universally TV shows are rated very high with the likes of True Detective, the Wire, Breaking Bad, GoT regularly having 9+ ratings scores, whereas your top movies are in the low 8's as far as I recall.

It's an odd phenomenon but I think it's a combination of:

• less people using IMDB to rate TV vs movies;
• TV having a more dedicated ongoing fan base;
• the repetitive nature of TV meaning 'fans' are the only ones likely to interact with a weekly rating mechanism
• people following the trend, i.e the smaller IMDB using TV fan base regularly rate TVs 10 so other people follow to stay 'closer to the average', whereas films are rated on a wider spectrum

Online rating mechanisms are so hard. A few friends of mine have a film club where we watch films and discuss them with each other and rate them - we have long debates about the value of a rating - should an 'average' film be a 5/10 or should it be like a 3 and a 'good' film is a 5, should there be 50 10/10 films in existence or is it more like 500? And if there are 500 or even 50 10/10's what differentiates your favorite handful of films from the remaining 10/10, how do you account for that film you think is perfect above all else?