Answering Ten of the Biggest Geeky Questions!

A spoiler warning graphic.

Spoiler Warning: Spoilers may be present for some of the franchises/properties discussed below.

There are a handful of “big questions” that define one’s place in geekdom – and today it’s my turn to answer some of them!

I thought it could be a bit of fun to consider some of the biggest questions that geeks like us have to wrangle with. Which fictional character is stronger? Which gaming platform is the best? These questions are contentious, especially here on the interweb – but I hope you’ll engage with this piece in the spirit of light-hearted fun! That’s how I’m choosing to present my answers, in any case.

As I always like to say, nothing we’re going to talk about today is in any way “objective!” These are my wholly subjective takes on questions that are intended to evoke strong reactions, so I hope you’ll keep that in mind! Although I’ve said that these are ten of the “biggest” geeky questions, I’m sure you can think of others – so this is by no means a definitive list.

A stock photo of a contemplative man surrounded by question marks.
Let’s contemplate some big questions together!

I’ve considered myself a geek – and been considered a geek by others – for basically my whole life. As a kid and a teenager, I moved in nerdy circles and friend groups where the likes of fantasy, sci-fi, horror, and video games were frequent topics of conversation. And in the ’80s and ’90s, those things were far less “mainstream” than they are nowadays! It’s actually been really cool to see the likes of The Lord of the Rings, Star Wars, and Marvel become some of the biggest entertainment properties on the planet – as well as the explosion in popularity of video games. When I was at school, and even into my young adulthood, admitting to being interested in those kinds of things could lead to mockery and even bullying!

For these questions today, I’ve set myself the rule of providing an actual answer – no cop-out, fence-sitting, “I like both equally” answers here! As I’ve already said, all of this is just one person’s opinion – and at the end of the day, this is supposed to just be for fun. So please try not to take it too seriously; none of this is worth getting into an argument over!

With the introduction out of the way, let’s answer some tough geeky questions!

Question #1:
Who’s the best Doctor?
Doctor Who

A promo image for Doctor Who showing all of the various incarnations of the titular character.
All of the Doctors – so far!

I don’t really remember watching much Doctor Who as a kid. The original incarnation of the long-running BBC sci-fi series was coming to an end when I was younger, and by the time I was getting interested in the genre, it was Star Trek: The Next Generation that really captured my imagination. As a result, I’m going to exclude all of the pre-2005 Doctors from consideration; I simply haven’t seen enough of any of them to really have a favourite.

Of the Doctors that have been part of the revived series, the Twelfth – played by Peter Capaldi – is my favourite… but with a big caveat! Capaldi gave the best individual performance as the Doctor in the role – hands down. No disrespect meant to any of the others… but I don’t think it’s even close. He’s a performer with exactly the right style, look, and gravitas – and in my view, he played the role absolutely perfectly. That’s why I didn’t hesitate when it came to naming him as my favourite!

Still frame from Doctor Who (2005) showing Pearl Mackie and Peter Capaldi.
Peter Capaldi’s Twelfth Doctor is my personal favourite.

But there’s a catch, as I said. Capaldi’s seasons as the Doctor – Seasons 8 through 10 of the post-2005 series – were almost universally terrible. There was one decent companion (Bill, played by Pearl Mackie) but her character was treated almost as an afterthought and she met a stupid and unsatisfying end. There were hardly any decent villains or antagonists, no truly standout episodes, and really very few memorable moments at all. In fact, Capaldi’s tenure as the Doctor marked a significant decline in Doctor Who’s quality… and the series doesn’t seem to have recovered.

In terms of the best seasons of the revived Doctor Who, I’d have to give the award – somewhat begrudgingly – to Seasons 2 through 4, which starred David Tennant in the title role. The quality of the stories produced at that time was so much higher, with some truly outstanding adventures in the mix. If only there was some way to go back in time and combine Capaldi’s performance with Tennant’s storylines. Where’s a Tardis when you need one, eh?

Question #2:
Who would win in a fight: Batman or Superman?
DC Comics

Cropped poster for Batman vs Superman (2016) featuring the title characters.
Wasn’t there a mediocre film dedicated to answering this question?

Uh, this one should be obvious. It’s Superman, right? It has to be – if you gave any other answer then I don’t think you’ve been paying attention! Who would win in a fight between an overpowered demigod and a billionaire with some expensive gadgets? Yeah… the demigod is gonna win this one. He could launch Batman into the sun, punch him so hard that every bone in his body would shatter, use his heat-vision on him from half a mile away… the list of ways in which Superman could not just defeat but murder and utterly annihilate Batman is nearly endless!

Superman is, I would argue, increasingly difficult to depict in film because of how blatantly overpowered he is. If you read my review of Zack Snyder’s Justice League a couple of years ago, you might remember me saying that the film flopped around, desperately trying to find a way to include the rest of its cast of superheroes… but to no avail. There was no getting away from the simple fact that Superman could do it all single-handedly without even breaking a sweat.

Cropped cover of Action Comics #19 showing Superman.
Superman on the cover of Action Comics #19 in 1939.

At the time the character of Superman was first created, all the way back in 1938, it wasn’t a problem. In fact, creating an “all-round, all-American hero” for comic books aimed at children was exactly the point. Superman is textbook escapism – he’s the perfect hero archetype that can do it all. In context, Superman works, and when all you want is a “good guy” to save the day and stop the evil villains, he’s perfect for the part.

But any story that puts Superman in genuine danger has to come up with a reason why. The man’s basically invincible, save for the mysterious crystal known as kryptonite, and I think at least some of Superman’s big-screen and small-screen adventures suffer as a result of that. But to get back on topic: Superman would win in a fight, and he’d win incredibly quickly and incredibly easily!

Question #3:
Console or PC?

A Super Nintendo console on a red background.
A Super Nintendo – or SNES.

In the early ’90s, the first home console I ever owned was a Super Nintendo. From then on, all the way through to the middle of the last decade, console was my preference. I liked the pick-up-and-play nature of consoles, with no need to check system requirements or fiddle with settings to just get a game running. The underpowered PCs that I had in the ’90s weren’t much good for gaming, so I think that’s part of it, too. But you have to also remember that, for a long time, consoles were just better in terms of performance – and especially in terms of value – than PC.

But nowadays I’m firmly on Team PC! I built my own PC for the first time a couple of years ago, and prior to that I had a moderately-priced “gaming” PC. Since about the middle of the 2010s, PC has been my platform of choice for practically everything. I will consider picking up Nintendo’s next machine when it’s ready, but my Nintendo Switch has been gathering dust since I stopped playing Animal Crossing and Mario Kart 8… so I’m not sure how great of an investment that’ll really be!

Stock photo of a gaming PC.
A very pretty gaming PC setup.

PC offers the best of both worlds. Wanna play an in-depth strategy game or city-builder with loads of options and menus that really need a mouse and keyboard to navigate? PC can do that. Wanna plug in a modern control pad to play a third-person adventure title? PC can do that too. Wanna install a virtual machine and play games from the Windows 95 era? PC can do that! Wanna emulate every console from the Atari 2600 to the Dreamcast and play games that are out-of-print everywhere? PC can do that too!

With Game Pass bringing a lot of new titles to PC on launch day, and with Sony even porting over some of its previously-exclusive titles too, PC really feels like the place to be. It’s a lot more expensive to get started with – and that’s still a massive point in favour of consoles for players on a budget. But once that initial expense is out of the way, the abundance of sales on platforms like Steam means that a lot of titles – even newer ones – can be picked up at a discount. I’m really happy with my PC as my main gaming platform, and I doubt I’ll be picking up an Xbox or PlayStation this generation.

Question #4:
What would be the best fictional world to live in?

There are plenty of fictional worlds to choose from!

There are loads of absolutely awful answers that people give to this question! Who’d want to live in Star Wars’ fascist-corporate dystopia, for example, which seems absolutely terrible for anyone not blessed with space magic? Or any fantasy setting with a medieval level of technology? Sure, you might have a magic elf as your buddy… but if there’s no central heating, antibiotics, or flushing toilets… you’re gonna have a bad time!

My pick is simple: Star Trek’s 24th Century. There are things to worry about, sure: the Borg, the Cardassians, and the Klingons to name but a few threats! But there are so many wonderful inventions and technologies that would make life so much better. For me, as someone with disabilities, the idea of some or all of my health issues being cured is perhaps the biggest – but there are plenty of others, too.

The USS Enterprise orbiting Earth.

Star Trek does not depict, as some have tried to claim, a “communist utopia.” As we see on multiple occasions throughout the franchise, private property still exists, and people have a great deal of freedom and autonomy. Star Trek’s future could be more accurately described as a post-scarcity society – one in which technological improvements have brought unlimited power generation, food, and other resources to the people.

There are some dark spots in Star Trek’s future – but these tend to be places outside of or separate from the Federation. Assuming I could live somewhere in the Federation, and have access to replicators, warp drive, weather-controlling satellites, and Starfleet for defence… I think it would be bliss! And so much better than anywhere else I can think of.

Question #5:
Martin or Tolkien?

Who’s the superior author?

I don’t need to think too long about this one! JRR Tolkien is, for me, one of the greatest authors of all-time. George RR Martin, in contrast, can’t even finish his own story, and seems far too easily distracted by other projects – including writing TV episodes and working on video games. And c’mon… he literally copied the “RR” part of Tolkien’s name for his own pen name!

Jokes aside, I think both writers are pretty great. Tolkien could be, in places, a little too black-and-white with his protagonists and antagonists, with the goodies being pure and virtuous and the villains being corrupt and evil. Martin’s work deliberately upends many of those notions, and he places imperfect and even selfish characters at the heart of his stories. Some of George RR Martin’s characters feel more nuanced – and dare I say more human – than Tolkien’s.

The Fellowship of the Ring at Rivendell from the 2001 film adaptation.

But Tolkien was a pioneer, writing the first modern fantasy epic. Martin, and countless other writers, are simply following in his footsteps. While Martin’s work is hardly derivative, some of the choices he makes in his writing are a reaction to the way Tolkien’s worlds and characters were set up. It’s impossible to critique A Song of Ice and Fire without making multiple references to Tolkien – whereas Tolkien’s work has always stood on its own two feet.

I would love it if George RR Martin would finish his magnum opus, but as time passes I feel less and less sure that he’s even interested in doing so. Now that Game of Thrones has finished its run on television, and Martin has seen the overwhelmingly negative reaction to its ending – which will have contained at least some elements that he planned to include in the remaining books – I just don’t get the impression that his heart is in it in the same way it was a few years ago. Tolkien’s work, in contrast, is complete and has been for decades – and people are still interested in new adaptations.

Question #6:
Who’s the best Star Trek captain?

Promo banner for Star Trek Day showing multiple characters.
Multiple captains on a promo banner for “Star Trek Day.”

I’ve always struggled with this question. But I’ve gone on record several times here on the website as saying that if you put a gun to my head and forced me to choose – as this question is metaphorically doing – I’d pick Deep Space Nine’s Captain Benjamin Sisko. So that’s gonna be my answer!

There’s a lot to be said for Captain Kirk – Star Trek’s first captain. He paved the way for all of the others, and without him, Star Trek would not be the same today – if it even existed at all. And Captain Picard was my personal first captain; it was through The Next Generation that I became a Trekkie in the early ’90s. Without him and the crew he led, there’s a chance I would never have fallen in love with Star Trek in the way that I did. And all of the other captains from Janeway and Burnham to Archer and Pike all have wonderful qualities that make Star Trek into the franchise it is today.

Still frame from the documentary What We Left Behind showing Avery Brooks as Captain Sisko in a remastered clip.
Captain Benjamin Sisko.

But Captain Sisko has always stuck out to me. In the first few seasons of Deep Space Nine he only held the rank of Commander, so we got to see his rise to the rank of captain as the story of that show unfolded. He was also a man with a deeply traumatic past, having to come to terms with the death of his wife while raising his son alone. He was a fantastic leader – not just of a crew, but of a community. Sisko could reach out across the cultural divide to Ferengi, Klingons, changelings, Bajorans, and more. He turned DS9 from a military outpost into a friendly place to visit and a bustling port.

Although words like “scientist” and “explorer” might not be the first ones that spring to mind when we think of Captain Sisko, he had those traditional Starfleet qualities, too. We’d see him as a pioneer of exploring the Gamma Quadrant and the wormhole, as well as interacting with the non-corporeal Prophets – the very definition of seeking out new life! Sisko could also be a soldier and a diplomat when he needed to be – and to me, he embodies the very best of Starfleet in the 24th Century.

Question #7:
Marvel or DC?

The logos of both Marvel and DC.

I don’t read comic books – and I never did, even as a kid. So my limited knowledge of both of these brands comes from their cinematic outings, not the original source material! I wanted to get that caveat out of the way before we got into the weeds with this one.

If you were to ask 100 people on the street to name a superhero, I think Superman and Batman would probably be the two names you’d hear most often. So DC, at least in my opinion, has produced the two most memorable and noteworthy superheroes. But Marvel, at least on the big screen, has a bigger and stronger ensemble – as we saw when Avengers Endgame briefly became the highest-grossing film of all time.

Still frame from Batman & Robin (1997).
Batman & Robin (1997).

Although I want to say that I’ve gotten roughly equal enjoyment from DC and Marvel over the years, I promised you no fence-sitting and no cop-outs! Based on the strength of characters like Batman, who have starred in some really great films over the years, I think I have to give the win to DC. Marvel’s output is becoming increasingly convoluted, and just keeping up with the franchise to know who’s who and what happened last time can feel like a full-time job! At least DC still produces some standalone or semi-standalone films and TV shows that I can dip in and out of.

Aside from Batman and Superman, though, DC hasn’t really been able to successfully capitalise on its other superheroes – let alone turn them into household names. Wonder Woman, Aquaman, the Flash, and Green Arrow have all had limited success in a single film or TV series, but others have struggled. Batman may drag DC over the finish line this time… but there’s still room for improvement!

Question #8:
Star Wars or Star Trek?

Still frame from Star Wars (1977) showing the Death Star.
The Death Star at Yavin IV in Star Wars.

If you’ve read the name of this website, I’m sure you can guess which way this one’s going to go! Thankfully the whole “Star Wars versus Star Trek” rivalry that was a big deal a few years ago has more or less died out, and fans no longer feel quite so tribal about which is the best. There’s been a lot more crossover in recent years, with Trekkies and Star Wars fans happy to enjoy both franchises.

I consider myself a Trekkie first and foremost – so I’ll answer this question by saying that I prefer Star Trek over Star Wars. But that doesn’t mean I hate or dislike Star Wars by any stretch. In fact, some of my favourite entertainment experiences of all-time have come courtesy of the Star Wars franchise: games like Knights of the Old Republic and films like Rogue One are genuinely fantastic.

Promo photo of the main cast of Star Trek: The Next Generation Season 2 (1988).
The cast of Star Trek: The Next Generation Season 2.

What I like about Star Trek is that many of its stories aren’t about fighting a villain or defeating an adversary – but about exploration, science, engineering, and just what it might be like to live in space in the future. Star Wars, by its very nature, is more violent, with more of a focus on conflict. That’s fine when I’m in more of an action mood – but there are times when a story about seeking out new life or learning to communicate is what I’m looking for.

It’s also worth pointing out that there’s a heck of a lot more Star Trek than Star Wars! At the time I first encountered the franchises, it wouldn’t be totally unfair to say that there were two good Star Wars films and one okay-ish one – at least in the opinion of a lot of folks! Star Trek already had more than 100 episodes of TV and five films under its belt, so there was plenty to get stuck into as a viewer in the early ’90s! Quantity over quality is never a good argument, of course… but if I’m enjoying something I’m always going to be happy to get more of it! Star Wars is slowly catching up to Star Trek now that Disney has commissioned several made-for-streaming series, but there’s still a long way to go to reach Star Trek’s 900+ episodes!

Question #9:
Sci-Fi or Fantasy?

The NeverEnding Story (1984) was one of my favourite films as a kid.

This may come as a surprise, but fantasy was my first love long before I got interested in sci-fi, space, and the “final frontier!” Among my earliest memories is reading The Hobbit – a book that was originally intended for children, lest we forget. I can even remember pointing out to my parents that there was a typo on one page; the word “wolves” had been misprinted as “wolevs.” Aside from Tolkien’s legendary novel, I read other children’s stories including Enid Blyton’s The Faraway Tree, and watched films like The Neverending Story.

But it’s not unfair to say that sci-fi became a much bigger deal for me by the time I was reaching adolescence. Inspired by Star Trek: The Next Generation I immersed myself in science fiction, reading as many books about space and the future as I could get my hands on, and watching films like Alien and the Star Wars trilogy. TV shows like Quantum Leap, Space Precinct, and Buck Rogers in the 25th Century graced my screens in the ’90s, as did more kid-friendly offerings like Captain Scarlet.

Star Trek: The Next Generation turned me into a sci-fi fan!

So while I can happily say that I enjoy both genres for what they offer, sci-fi has been my preference going back more than thirty years at this point! Star Trek opened my eyes to science fiction and remains one of my biggest fandoms to this day! But there are many other sci-fi films, shows, books, and video games that I’ve enjoyed – everything from Mass Effect and Foundation to Battlestar Galactica and Halo. Sci-fi is great escapism, and I love the feeling of being whisked away to another world or another moment in time.

Though I haven’t forgotten my roots as a fan of fantasy, and still enjoy many fantasy titles across all forms of media, if I had to choose I’d definitely say that I’m a fan of sci-fi first and foremost. Sci-fi feels broader and more varied in some respects – there are radically different presentations of humanity’s future, the kinds of aliens we might engage with, and so on. Modern fantasy tends to stick to a medieval level of technology and use the same kinds of magical spells and the same handful of races – Elves, Dwarves, Orcs, and so on – in different combinations depending on the story.

Question #10:
What’s your favourite anime/cartoon series?

Still frame from Shenmue: The Animation showing Ryo and Fangmei.
There’s an anime adaptation of Shenmue.

I have to confess something at this point: I’ve never seen any anime. I don’t know why exactly – I’ve never really been in friendship groups where anime was a topic of conversation, and when I was a kid, there wasn’t any anime on TV or in the cinema that I can recall. I’ve yet to encounter an anime series that felt like a must-watch – with the only exception being the adaptation of Shenmue that I really ought to get around to watching one of these days! But until I do… no anime for me.

I had to think about this question for a while, though. There are some great adult animation programmes: Lower Decks, Futurama, Rick and Morty, South Park, and The Simpsons all come to mind. The Simpsons in particular was a pioneer of adult animation, and a series I remember with fondness from its ’90s heyday here in the UK! The fact that my parents – and many others of their generation – absolutely loathed The Simpsons was a huge mark in its favour for a renegade adolescent!

Still frame from the Phineas and Ferb Season 3 episode What A Croc showing the kids on jet skis.
Phineas and Ferb.

But on this occasion, I’m giving the award to Phineas and Ferb. Regular readers might remember me talking about this series as one of my “comfort shows;” a programme I often return to when I need a pick-me-up. I recall watching a promo for the series circa 2007-08, and although kids’ cartoons on the Disney Channel should’ve held no appeal… something about Phineas and Ferb called out to me. I tuned in and I was hooked from almost the first moment.

Phineas and Ferb’s two-and-a-half story structure – with the kids making an invention, their sister trying to bust them for it, and special agent Perry the Platypus on a mission to fight evil – felt incredibly fun and innovative, and more often than not the storylines would intersect in creative and unexpected ways. There are also some fantastic moments of characterisation in Phineas and Ferb, particularly with the breakout character of Dr Doofenshmirtz. I was thrilled to learn that the series will be returning for two new seasons and a whopping forty new episodes, and I really hope it will be as good as it was the first time around.

So that’s it!

The famous "that's all folks" card shown at the end of Looney Tunes cartoons.
That’s all for now!

I hope this has been a bit of fun – and maybe bolstered my geeky credentials just a little. As I said at the beginning, I don’t think any of these subjects are worth fighting about or losing friends over, but I’ve had fun sharing my thoughts and nailing my colours to a few different masts!

The great thing about sci-fi, fantasy, gaming, and the wide world of geekdom is just how much of it there is nowadays. There are so many high-budget productions on the big screen, the small screen, and in the gaming realm that we’re really spoilt for choice. As much fun as it is to play favourites and pick one series or franchise over another… more than anything else I’m just glad to be living through a moment where geekdom is having its turn in the spotlight! That may not last forever – a return to action movies, westerns, or whatever else might be on the cards one day. So we should all make the most of it and enjoy it while it lasts!

It’s been interesting to consider some of these questions, and I hope reading my answers has been entertaining for you, too!


All properties discussed above are the copyright of their respective owner, company, distributor, broadcaster, publisher, etc. Some stock photos courtesy of Unsplash. This article contains the thoughts and opinions of one person only and is not intended to cause any offence.

Previewing Amazon’s Lord of the Rings series

Spoiler Warning: Beware of minor spoilers for The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings.

Though disrupted by the pandemic, filming for Amazon’s upcoming Lord of the Rings prequel series resumed earlier this year, and the series currently has a tentative 2021 release date. That could easily slip back into 2022 depending on production-side factors, but I don’t think it’s too early to begin considering what the series could be – and what I’d like to see from it.

The Lord of the Rings was part of my childhood. Not the films – those came years later – but the books. I remember my father reading The Hobbit to me when I must’ve been only six or seven years old, and I later read The Lord of the Rings while still quite young, so it’s not unfair to say they spurred a lifelong interest in fantasy that I still enjoy today. I came to enjoy Tolkien’s works years before I watched Star Trek, so you could even call it one of my earliest fandoms!

The films, which were released from 2001-03, are many folks’ first and only encounter with The Lord of the Rings, and many elements from the films – like the music – which didn’t come from the original books are now considered inseparable from the realm of Middle-earth. The new series has a line to walk between respecting that and trying to do its own thing.

The Lord of the Rings films are held in very high regard.

Expectations will be sky-high for this series. Not only because of its association with the most famous works of the fantasy genre, but because of the frankly insane budget afforded to the show. Simply purchasing the rights to use Tolkien’s world set Amazon back an eye-watering $250 million, and that was before any work had been done on the show at all; no actors had been cast, no scripts written, etc. The budget for the series, which has been given a preliminary five-season order from Amazon, may top out at over $1 billion. This makes it by far the most expensive television series of all time, surpassing the likes of Game of Thrones, and that alone generates a lot of attention and scrutiny. And speaking of Game of Thrones, despite that show’s controversial and disappointing final season, comparisons will be inescapable. The stakes could hardly be higher.

Our last visit to the realm of Middle-earth didn’t go so well. The first two parts of The Hobbit were decent, even good films, but The Battle of the Five Armies wasn’t spectacular, something caused at least in part by the entire film being adapted from a handful of pages of text instead of a whole book! In a way, the disappointment some fans felt at The Hobbit’s adaptation means that Amazon’s series has even more work to do. It has to convince sceptical fans that they want to come back to Middle-earth, and that there are stories worth telling beyond the first three films.

The Hobbit was a less-enjoyable experience overall.

The series will be set during Middle-earth’s Second Age, which makes it a prequel to the events of Lord of the Rings. Taking a setting several thousand years in the distant past could open up myriad possibilities within the story. And we’ve seen some prequels that go down this kind of route achieve success – Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic, for example. But the stories of Middle-earth in the Second Age are all background, building up slowly toward the events of the “main” books. The initial rise of Sauron – who is still alive in this era – may prove fascinating to see. Or it may feel underwhelming considering we’ve already seen his ultimate defeat at the hands of Frodo.

Prequels can be difficult to get right. The Hobbit trilogy attempted to bring in characters who weren’t present in the original book in order to “foreshadow” the events of The Lord of the Rings, and it was hit-and-miss. Some elements worked, and some fell flat. Telling a story that serves as a fully-direct prequel to The Lord of the Rings, with characters like Gandalf, Sauron, and the ancestors of people like Aragorn and Legolas could be tricky to get right – there will always be a sense that we’ve seen the main event, and this is just unnecessary fluff.

That’s what happened – in my subjective opinion, of course – with the Star Wars prequels. They took on the less-interesting part of the story, a story that was ultimately wholly unnecessary. We didn’t need a three-film saga depicting the rise and fall of Anakin Skywalker to know that Darth Vader was an evil, yet ultimately redeemable, character. Everything we needed to know about Vader was already present in the original films, and the prequels – which had numerous other problems, don’t get me wrong – didn’t feel like they had a purpose or told a particularly compelling story. They did, at least, tell one single story, which is something the Star Wars sequel trilogy failed to do! But that comparison is not a redeeming feature, despite what some like to think.

Legolas in The Desolation of Smaug. The character was not part of The Hobbit novel but was included in the film version.

But we’re off-topic! Prequels can be troublesome and difficult to get right, so one way around that is to tell a story that’s tangentially related to the main event but is otherwise a wholly standalone affair. As strange as it may sound for a show with the working title Lord of the Rings on Prime, the fewer direct references to The Lord of the Rings the better. There’s plenty of scope to see familiar places and races, and if the show keeps to an aesthetic that fits with the films then all of that will be to the good. But where The Hobbit was less interesting was when it ham-fistedly tried to “foreshadow” the events of The Lord of the Rings, so if the new series could find a way to stick to new characters and a storyline that doesn’t stray too much into setting up the events of the earlier films, I think all of that will be to its overall benefit.

Middle-earth, much like the Star Trek or Star Wars galaxies, is a sandbox. It’s a beautifully-created world with a rich lore built up over decades, but the main works set in Middle-earth focus on a relatively narrow slice of that world across a relatively short span of time. Taking us back to the Second Age opens up a lot of possibilities – as would moving forward to a potential Fourth Age! Star Trek demonstrated as early as the 1980s that it’s possible for a franchise to expand beyond its original incarnation and do completely different things. Star Wars has yet to really attempt this, as I noted once, but this is a chance for Middle-earth to do what Star Trek did more than thirty years ago. It has the opportunity to expand beyond Sauron, Bilbo, Frodo, and the Rings of Power.

The kings of Middle-earth receive their rings of power, as seen in The Fellowship of the Ring.

The history of the Second Age is documented, in part, in Tolkien’s The Silmarillion. But unlike The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings, which each look in detail at a few characters across a relatively short timeframe, The Silmarillion is broad, encompassing thousands of years of history and legend within a single work. There are so many opportunities within these legends and this fictional history to either expand upon events it touches on or to create something completely new. There’s certainly the prospect of doing both.

One of the few things we know about the upcoming series is that it will look, at least in part, at the land of Númenor – an Atlantis-type land that would later vanish beneath the sea. Some Númenoreans would settle in Middle-earth, and these long-lived men would be the ancestors of Aragorn and a few other familiar characters.

The destruction of Númenor is documented in The Silmarillion, and if it’s the case that the show will look at that event (or the lead-up to it) there’s still a lot of scope to expand on the familiar and branch out into something entirely new. In fact, because The Silmarillion is a single book, and doesn’t contain anywhere near enough material for a straight adaptation, the producers of the new series will have to get creative!

The Silmarillion may be the basis for the new series.

Picture Credit: Stojanoski Slave, CC BY-SA 3.0 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/, via Wikimedia Commons

Speaking of the creative team, there are some very interesting folks amongst the producers and writers. Showrunners JD Payne and Patrick McKay both worked on Star Trek Beyond, and amongst the writing team are folks with credits on such diverse works as Breaking Bad, Hannibal, and Toy Story 4. The director of the first two episodes has also been announced: JA Bayona, the Spanish director of Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom. Some fans were critical when Amazon debuted the creative team, but let’s try to give them a chance. Though most of their names would not be familiar to the average viewer, between them they’ve worked on some huge and very successful projects. There’s an expression that the whole is greater than the sum of its parts – perhaps that’s true here. Having spend this much money, Amazon would surely not waste that on a creative team it wasn’t 100% happy with. Unlike some recent projects, there haven’t been any high-profile firings or departures, which I take as indicative of a project progressing nicely.

On the cast front, none of the main players from The Hobbit or The Lord of the Rings seem to be returning, at least not at this stage. I do consider cameos at least a possibility, but so far no announcements have been made. The cast that we do know of is led by Robert Aramayo, who is probably best-known for his flashback scenes as young Ned Stark in Game of Thrones. Nazanin Boniadi, who has had co-starring roles in shows like Homeland, also joins the cast along with Tom Budge, Owain Arthur, Morfydd Clark, Ismael Cruz Córdova, who played the Twi’lek Qin on The Mandalorian, Ema Horvath, Joseph Mawle, who played Benjen Stark in Game of Thrones, Markella Kavenagh, Tyroe Muhafidin, Sophia Nomvete, Megan Richards, Dylan Smith, Charlie Vickers, Daniel Weyman, and Maxim Baldry. What do most of these folks have in common? You’ve never heard of them. And why is that significant (aside from perhaps saving Amazon some money)? It follows a trail blazed by Game of Thrones. Set up a series with a mostly-unknown cast, give them a chance to grow into their new roles and become household names for those roles. It was a successful formula in 2011, and for the most part, people weren’t watching that show thinking “hey, I know that actor!” That was a deliberate choice, and I assume the same is true here too.

Robert Aramayo (seen here as young Ned Stark in Game of Thrones) leads a mostly-unknown cast.

Amazon is positioning this new series as a successor to Game of Thrones. The way the casting has been handled, the amount of money being thrown at it, and the general way they’re working on the series all smacks of being an attempt to recreate the magic of one of the last decade’s most important television series. Game of Thrones built on what The Lord of the Rings films had done, and at this stage, folks who would have balked at the idea of watching anything in the fantasy genre a few years ago will surely be interested to check out what this new series has to offer. The genre has become a major part of our cultural landscape, and The Lord of the Rings films set the stage for that in a huge way.

Other than a single map of Middle-earth in the Second Age, Amazon is keeping a tight lid on this project. There haven’t been any leaks or significant rumours about the series, which is a good thing. It’s always nice to go into a new show unspoiled!

The map depicting parts of Middle-earth in the Second Age.

Despite some positive moves from Amazon, and the huge amount of money involved in this production, there are no guarantees of success. The show needs to be well-written, with interesting characters and a story arc – or multiple storylines – that are interesting and worth getting invested in. Game of Thrones, at least in its earlier seasons, came with that built-in because it was based on an already-successful series of novels. The Silmarillion is indeed a successful book, but as mentioned can hardly be adapted verbatim in the same way as A Song of Ice and Fire was for Game of Thrones’ earlier seasons. In that sense, this show represents more of a risk.

I’m hopeful for some truly awe-inspiring fantasy. Returning to the land of Middle-earth is always a treat, and by filming the show in New Zealand – where the films were all produced – it might just feel like a homecoming. Game of Thrones’ final season was a disappointment to many, but this new series has the potential to help us all forget about that and get stuck into another fantasy story all over again – one inspired by the works of the grandfather of the modern fantasy genre. I can hardly wait!

Lord of the Rings on Prime (working title) is the copyright of Amazon Studios. The Silmarillion, The Hobbit, and The Lord of the Rings books are the copyright of the Tolkien Estate. Film versions of The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings are the copyright of New Line Cinema and Wingnut Films. This article contains the thoughts and opinions of one person only and is not intended to cause any offence.