I really enjoyed them too, which I guess I could have made clearer. I felt like my enjoyment was heightened by my knowledge and nostalgia for the books, but interesting yto hear another positive perspective without that aspect. I suppose what I’m trying to say is not that they aren’t or can’t be good, but that they aren’t and can’t be a faithful and complete adaptation.

The world building aspect is why I tend to think TV series are generally the better screen medium for scifi than feature film, having more space to explore the causes and consequences of a fantasy premise. But yeah, I love a spectacle. The setting and soundscape of the new movies are top. Like I can’t rember feelings like that in the cinema since Lord of the rings.

It’s impossible to adapt, see all previous adaptations. I think you’ve pretty accurately summed up the shortcomings of the medium for that story. Watch the movie to marvel at the setting brought to life with a nice soundscape, ideally see it on a big screen. If you read the book you’ll have some attachment to the characters and universe anyway so pacing and skipped detail shouldn’t be too much of a problem for you. Just don’t expect it to be perfect. IMO the second part is a bit stronger, maybe because the scope is tighter.

Seeing a bit of blowback about the “happy ending” undermining the message about stoicism and missing the opportunity to portray challenges like moving as an opportunity for new adventures and growth. Seems fair in my view.

I will love it they do a moving away episode with another character to show both sides. Rusty maybe, military family…

“off to be the wizard” takes the universe is a simulation trope and REALLY runs with it. I don’t know if I’d call it good scifi though…

I remember being pretty impressed with “permutation city” for it’s depiction of the consequences of being able to upload consciousness into machines.