In the Law Weekly office, controversies result in pointless disagreement between two equally unimportant editors. These are their arguments. *dum dum!*
Jonathan Peterson ‘23
Co-Executive Editor
Rings of Power
As a fan of both series, I feel that it’s important that I begin by saying that this is not an argument that Rings of Power is downright better as a series. I rarely take nuanced stances (both in life and in art), but a comparison of the two shows calls for such a stance.
Rings of Power is neither Game of Thrones nor House of the Dragon, and people seem to forget that quite often. Tolkien did not write with the intention of creating an intense political drama. Tolkien’s writings are much closer to true fantasy—he strives to depict the ebb and flow of the forces of good and evil. I believe this is a large reason why people scoff at Rings of Power; they want nuance, intrigue, and surprise, but Rings of Power is likely not going to deliver that, at least not in the way they have come to expect. Game of Thronesand House of the Dragon excel at creating characters who exist in shades of gray; this is how fan engagement is driven in the show. There is, for many characters, a reason to both love and hate them at any given time. Put simply, the series has done an incredible job of depicting humanity. This simply isn’t the case for many of Tolkien’s characters.[1] Characters are good or bad, with few falling in between. And those that do are typically humans who have been corrupted by some external force of evil—not their own moral failings.
All this to say, the two shows are different. To compare them in the same way, to ask for the same style of storytelling from either, would be to expect the showrunners of either show to completely ignore the spirit of either world. And Rings of Power certainly has been capturing the feel of Tolkien’s world, whether viewers with tastes modernized after the two decades since The Lord of the Rings enjoy it or not.
While House of the Dragon will inevitably capture the attention of more viewers due to its ruthless depiction of humanity,[2] Rings of Power will do something different. Rings of Power will depict a story which, while seemingly hopeless at times, ultimately will end in the forces of good prevailing. This somewhat dated motif is, perhaps, exactly what we need a little bit more of in the world these days. If Rings of Power can continue to pull it off (and hopefully improve on what has thus far been about a seven-out-of-ten), it may be just what viewers need.
Jack Brown ‘23
Sports Editor
House of the Dragon
I am going to be real, I have not watched a single episode of Rings of Power, and I don’t have any intention of doing so. I’m a busy guy—I have one more year of freedom before Big Law comes to collect, and I intend to make the most of what time I have left. So I only have time for one big-budget fantasy series to watch, and of the two going on right now, House of the Dragon is the clear number one show for the law student with not a lot of time on their hands.
First, we know that Game of Thrones works for television. Despite its less-than-ideal ending, George R.R. Martin’s world made for four to six-and-a-half amazing seasons of television.[3] I have no idea how Tolkien’s world will look on my laptop on a weekly basis, and I don’t intend to take the risk that my time might be wasted trying to figure it out.
Secondly, I am a jaded law student. I don’t believe in things like “impartiality” or “good and evil” or “original meaning” anymore. How can I enjoy Tolkien’s work, with its absolute evils that can be vanquished by a scrappy, idealistic group of heroes? No, as a modern media consumer, I want my nihilism reinforced by a show that tells me, “Hey, we’re all pretty bad, so it’s okay to take that Big Law paycheck, my guy.”
And finally, the biggest argument for why House of the Dragon is clearly the superior show is the fact that Matt Smith is in it. Matt Smith, a man blessed with a comically large jawline, an even bigger ego, and a level of talent that dwarfs every other characteristic that one could associate with him. A man so great that he was the youngest person to ever play Doctor Who, brought Patrick Bateman to the stage, was the villain in Morbius, and was actually pretty good in a movie otherwise devoid of redeeming qualities.
Now, we are blessed with the chance to see him play Daemon Targaryen in all of his insane, incest-y idiosyncraticness. We are only at the halfway point in the show, and I can guarantee you, you will see Daemon do things that you’ve never seen on a major show before (and will probably never see again). Getting that, on top of all the other delightfully unsympathetic but still seemingly rational characters, is all anyone could ask for.
---
jtp4bw@virginia.edu
jwb4bb@virginia.edu
[1] Many of whom are simply not even human.
[2] During a time when many people’s faith in humanity has been shattered.
[3] How many seasons of Game of Thrones were good will vary wildly, depending on when you started watching the show, if you had read the books, and how much of a contrarian you want to be, because Season Five was still great, and I will stab anyone who tries to tell me otherwise.