ArtsAutosBooksBusinessEducationEntertainmentFamilyFashionFoodGamesGenderHealthHolidaysHomeHubPagesPersonal FinancePetsPoliticsReligionSportsTechnologyTravel

Legend of the Seeker TV series Vs. Wizards' First Rule book series

Updated on October 31, 2012

The adventures of Richard Rahl and Kahlen Amnell were WA-AY better than this!

It's happened before; the TV or movie remake of a book is planned, implimented, carried out, and then put to air. Disasterously.

Seriously! You like "Legend of the Seeker", but the inconsistancies from the original books is enough to make a fan like me reel with disbelief!

This lens is not about how good the television series "Legends of the Seeker" is. Rather about how good it ISN'T. An adpatation from a novel series is one thing, and I can think of a few more that I would dearly LURVE to see done, but it's something that shouldn't be done lightly, and above all, needs to be done RIGHT.

Richard Cypher/Rahl was NEVER an idiot.

The original Richard Cypher (later Richard Rahl) was never the idiot the tv series has portrayed him, not even for a moment.

Richard was one of those glowing characters whose perfection as a person was flawed by naivete, impulsivness, and a generosity of spirit that was often turned against him. Wise beyond his years, skilled at herb-lore and hunting, Richard grew up in Westland with his brother Michael and adoptive father George, without any knowledge of magic or the lands beyond the Boundary. His mother was killed in a house fire when he and Michael were very young, which is later revealled as Darken Rahl's work.

Intuitive and friends with everyone, the original Richard was a "rare person".

This Richard seems plagued with stupidity, stumbling along with the Mother Confessor and First Wizard as parent figures in a story line that has strayed so far from the original storyline you wonder it's even the same characters.

Terry Goodkind's Sword of Truth Series

Get better educated on this series. Buy yourself the original books.

Darken Rahl, Richard, and Jensen are all related....

but they aren't all brothers and sister!

Darken Rahl was not brunette - he was white-blonde with startling blue eyes, who had been badly scarred on one side of his body as a child by the Wizard's Fire the First Wizard sent through to D'Hara to kill his father, Panis Rahl, before the Boundary went up.

He was also FATHER to Richard and Jensen, not brother. Darken Rahl raped Richard's mother (Zed's daughter) before the boundary went up, and Jensen's mother was one of the many Darken Rahl used and abused over his years.

Jensen Rahl was always one of the supremely ungifted, that much they got right. But that seems to be about all the got right about her, from what I've seen. She was strong, confident, and very intelligent. This one seems like a real push over.

Michael Cypher wasn't a good guy

In fact, he is the reason Darken Rahl was able to capture Richard in the first place.

Michael Cypher grew up believing that Richard was his blood brother, but other than shared parentage, the comparisons stop there. Where Richard was kind and generous of spirit, Michael was greedy and selfish, thirsting for power.

The moment in the book when Richard figures this out is quite cleverly written; he is under a spell of Darken Rahl's that makes his friends see him as their greatest enemy, and his enemies see him as himself. In order to seek Michael's urgently needed assistance, Richard recalls a game they played as children, and the "Loser's Salute" that Michael insisted Richard present when the former beat the latter. Dropping to his knees in front of his older brother, Richard smiles and performs the salute, only to have Michael frown and ask him what he's doing on his kness...

Michael DID end up dead, this much is consistant with the books. However, Michael Cypher was executed by Lord Rahl as a traitor to the People of Westland, the Midlands, and D'hara.

So, NOT a hero intent on helping the Seeker free his people.

It looks like a knock-off of Xena and Hercules

Now, I'm not actually knocking Xena and Hercules. I used to adore both shows, and am in the process of building my DVD collection to include them.

But given the leaps and bounds in film and computer technology, why does it look just the same as it did 10 odd years ago? I realise they're probably filming in the same locations (New Zealand, my hat off to you, the scenery there is hard to resist), but the costumes, the camera techniques....was there a sell-out on old props?

If this is what TV is coming to, give me a good book everytime!

Now, this isn't what you'd call a marshalled offensive against the very broad poetic license that has been taken in turning Terry Goodkind's Sword of Truth series into what some people only know - and love - as Legends of the Seeker. In fact, it's not.

The books themselves started brilliantly, but I gave up trying to follow the plot about halfway through "Naked Empire". What started as a good fantasy adventure series turned into a vehicle for Goodkind to explore his ideas on theology. (Which isn't necessarily a bad thing, but when that takes over the story, you've lost the plot in a number of ways).

By the way, I happen to ENJOY discussion theology. I think there's alot of valid belief systems out there.

But I don't like my fantasy adventure novels to turn into someone's personal gospel on how to live.

Post Scriptum

I have to confess. I've been watching the second season, and I think you could nearly call me a fan now.

That said, I do still feel that there was a great deal in the TV series that could have (should have?) been improved, and alas, with it's cancellation, there's now not going to be a 3rd season during which we could hope for this.

For those who saw the series first and loved it - you will enjoy the books.

For those who read the books first - you'll have to make up your own minds.

Share your thoughts

    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    • KeemaWolf profile image

      Fiona Findlay 7 years ago from Queensland, Australia

      @MentorPalokaj: That was pretty disappointing. They also had Nicci die there, and she didn't. She's aroudn for a great deal longer in the books! No mention of Warren, or any of the other issues/secrets from the Palace of the Prophets - no Nathan!

      I think that they should have done a book per series. That way they stood less of a chance of offending the original fans of the books, and the plot would have been more solid.

      Also easier to finish at the end of a season.

    • profile image

      MentorPalokaj 7 years ago

      I Really REALLY hate the fact they took away Richards magic in the series. He is a war wizard, I mean come on everything the guy does is magic. Why don't they ever make a movie/series fully (as much as possible) sticking to the book plot? It's not like we can't handle the special effects or anything...

    • KeemaWolf profile image

      Fiona Findlay 7 years ago from Queensland, Australia

      @Arizona-Snow: Too be 100% honest, I couldn't stand to watch the whole series! I caught a few episodes, and cringed so hard I had to change the channel or switch the TV off entirely!

      But so true! The Mud People are a very important part of the continuity of the whole series. Such a shame to miss something so vital to the over all plot!

      Yes, that's true. Poetic license carried to the outer edges, I think.

      Thanks for visiting!

    • Arizona-Snow profile image

      Arizona-Snow 7 years ago

      I'm forever telling ppl the differences between the books and the series. My biggest critisism though is ... where are the Mud People????

      The only good thing about the show is that it can keep you guessing as it don't follow the books at all, it is only BASED on the books and they use that term very loosely too.

    • profile image

      anonymous 7 years ago

      @WindyWintersHubs: they are definitelly different

    • profile image

      anonymous 7 years ago

      @KeemaWolf: Yeah, I am glad for every day I have the luxury to live in a world like this:o)

      best wishes^^

    • KeemaWolf profile image

      Fiona Findlay 7 years ago from Queensland, Australia

      @anonymous: Hey Waylander, thanks for visiting my lens.

      You don't have to agree with me - that's the beauty of us living in a free world!

    • profile image

      anonymous 7 years ago

      I woulnd't dare to judge anything just because it did things in a different way they were done once. Re-animating a book, taking it as a inspiration for creating pretty much of a good show is no violation on any of Wizard's rules for me.

      Will add an example - have seen the old Battlestar Galactica? And the new one? The new one is wayyy better, and I won't blame it for being different than the original either.

      Just stop disdain thins only because they are different.

    • profile image

      anonymous 7 years ago

      i gave up on watching the shows after the first few were on. THEY HAVE SLAUGHTERED TERRY GOODKINDS WORK!!!

    • KeemaWolf profile image

      Fiona Findlay 7 years ago from Queensland, Australia

      @WindyWintersHubs: Thanks, Windy :-) I aim to.

    • WindyWintersHubs profile image

      WindyWintersHubs 7 years ago from Vancouver Island, BC

      It seems the book version is much better than the TV version for most shows. Keep up the good work. ~Squid Greeter