I also don't really mind cutting elements of story out. You can't adapt an entire universe of narratives. Cuts WILL be made in any adaptation to serve the story the adaptor is telling. It won't be a one-for-one adaptation otherwise...why do it? Adaptation isn't about just recreating a medium in another medium. It's about adapting. You can not enjoy the adaptations, totally get that. And we can disagree with whether we liked things or not. But the idea that they cut stuff being an issue doesn't quite gel for me. You can argue that what they cut is integral and therefore overall utterly misses the point of the world that it takes place in (don't get me started on the Artemis Fowl movie). But again, that's a personal preference. Some adaptations are wild WILD departures from their source material but function as great art in their own right. But that is also subjective preference. I think Ilana is stating, and I would agree, that the idea of them cutting stuff isn't an evil in itself and we don't yet know what has been subtracted or its overall purpose. So by that metric we only have the first season to go on. So we CAN hope for more in season 2. But equally, as we only have season one to go on people are ENTIRELY vindicated in not liking it BECAUSE stuff they felt was integral is missing. The issue of subtracting or including storylines isn't an inherit flaw in itself, it's just whether it was enjoyable. And that is the crux of the debate which we won't agree on.