IGN called Rings of Power Season 2 'bogged down' and still treated it like premium mithril.
The Original Review
“Season 2 of The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power does a great job portraying Sauron’s machinations and his impact on those he manipulates, but too much time is spent on disconnected subplots delivering only mediocre intrigue and thin characters.”
The math aint mathing. IGN spends an entire review itemizing disconnected subplots, mediocre intrigue, thin characters, a useless Isildur thread, a Númenór plot that apparently needs roadside assistance, and a Dark Wizard with all the narrative force of a scented candle in a hurricane — then wraps it in enough admiration for the production budget that the criticism starts wearing elf ears and asking for craft services. This is not a review so much as a spreadsheet where every negative cell has been formatted in gold.
The central calculator crime is tonal accounting. If a show is repeatedly described as 'bogged down,' 'thin,' 'less satisfying,' and full of plots being dragged along until later, that is not a glowing epic; that is a fantasy minivan with three flat tires and a dragon decal. But IGN keeps balancing every debit with 'the monsters look incredible' or 'the sets are gorgeous,' as if visual polish is a coupon that redeems structural debt. By that logic, a collapsing bridge is fine if the rivets sparkle like Galadriel's skincare routine.
Then comes the classic prestige-TV safety maneuver: praise the one plotline that works, bury the rest in careful upholstery, and exit through the gift shop without assigning a score. Unscored reviews can be legitimate, but here it feels like putting the thermometer in witness protection. The article has enough evidence for a hard numerical verdict, then suddenly becomes a fog machine wearing a Tolkien wig. If your own prose says half the season is narrative layaway for future episodes, the conclusion should not tiptoe around like a hobbit trying not to wake the Amazon PR balrog.
This review earns a 2/10 because the writing is competent, but the judgment is softer than a ruler made of lembas bread. IGN correctly identifies the problem, photographs the problem, labels the problem, gives the problem a rich musical score, and then refuses to sentence it. That is not criticism; that is an audit performed by someone emotionally invested in the chandelier.
