Game of Thrones

[Rath Darkblade]

Hmm. *shrug* The "guy getting eaten alive by dogs" also happens. I think Ivan the Terrible punished the Bishop of Moscow at the time by sewing him in a bearskin and letting wild dogs tear him apart. Terrifying, to be sure.

OK, so no protests until the end -- and I can see why. It feels like what Peter Jackson did with the "LOTR" films. I mean, first Faramir takes Frodo/Sam/Gollum to Osgiliath -- why? It wasn't in the book. And it chewed up a lot of screen time that could've been put to better use.

But because of that, there's no time for:

1. The Houses of Healing scene, or
2. The Tom Bombadil scenes, or
3. The Hobbits in the barrows scenes (where they find their swords), or
4. The Scouring of the Shire scenes -- where both Saruman and Grima are supposed to die.

As for what PJ did with the "Hobbit" films ... I don't know. A whole bunch of unnecessary nonsense scenes, such as:

1. The "dwarves in barrels fighting off Orcs" scene, or
2. The "dwarves Under the Mountain unveiling a golden dwarf" scene, or
3. The unnecessary Kili-and-Tauriel romance scenes, or
4. The frankly unbelievable "Legolas jumps on thin air" sequence.

But that's another rant ...

[Tawmis]

Game of Thrones was the most popular show around. There was nobody complaining.

So true. It was always the talk every break/lunch when a new episode aired.
Of course there was the "rebels" who refused to watch it because the "all the sheep did" - - but they got the last laugh in the end, still, because all of us were disappointed in how it ended.

I'm afraid like How I Met Your Mother, it's a show I will never ever ever rewatch because of how abysmally bad the ending was in comparison to the beginning of the show. Knowing that's there waiting for you at the end, you just can't enjoy it anymore. But those first four seasons were fantastic.

I can still watch it - because, if you pretty much rewatch (for me) right up to the last season - but don't watch the last season - and just make up your own ending - it's still a good show.

Yeah it had a lot of violence and sex, but the real draw was in the character arc, the political intrigue, and the fact that it was so unpredictable. Anybody, main cast member or no, could be killed off at any moment. Just men and women can die all the sudden and never see their dreams or plans fulfilled.

Very true. This is what was great and horrible - and horrible in the best way. Because you could see a character you've loved for three seasons, seems like a key player, suddenly meet their demise.
You're angry - but in a good way.
And the show did an incredible job of painting people as utter assholes, that seem like they can never be redeemed (Jamie, comes to mind) - but through progression of their character, what they go through - three seasons later, the character you hated, you're suddenly cheering for.

My wife and I were so disappointed with how it all ended up. It's not even a problem of not living up to the hype, it's that they woefully illequiped and unqualified to finish what they started (especially without any novels to adapt from George R. R. Martin anymore).

I mean, the ending isn't what I wanted. For sure. My main problem was for 7.5 seasons, we have this incredible build up. Then suddenly that 8th season - they rushed everything. Where as before we could spend eight episodes of Jon traveling from one town to another - we see it happen instantly. "I am leaving for Town_A, 500 miles away." (Next scene, Jon rides into Town_A). And the reason before, where it'd take 8 episodes, was to show progression of time; but to also skip around to all these other great characters and see what they're doing. The 8th episode - someone, who way back when is eluded to will probably go crazy - is shown for 7.5 seasons as being a symbol for people, a sign of hope - and boom - last season? She goes from sane, symbol, strength, to utterly weak, utterly insane, and utterly paranoid and ruined one of the greatest characters of the series with a snap of the finger. I'd be fine with the character fulfilling that whole insanity thing - but a build up to it would be nice. Slowly show signs of that paranoia and madness.

[Rath Darkblade]

I mean, the ending isn't what I wanted. For sure. My main problem was for 7.5 seasons, we have this incredible build up. Then suddenly that 8th season - they rushed everything. Whereas before we could spend eight episodes of Jon traveling from one town to another - we see it happen instantly. "I am leaving for Town_A, 500 miles away." (Next scene, Jon rides into Town_A).

That ... makes no sense. None. (It only makes a kind of sense in a game like "The Elder Scrolls". Insta-travel!)

All right, granted, i'm writing a story now where my MC (Main Character) struggles the whole time through to leave ancient Italy and sail for Egypt. *nod* By the time he has the power to do this, the story is nearly over - but he still has a task to carry out in Egypt.

Is it OK, then, to condense the Italy-to-Egypt voyage into a couple of sentences (e.g. "they get on the boat" and "they arrive"?) The Italy-to-Egypt voyage is about 14 days long, but my story is very long as it is. So I'm afraid that, if I tack this on as well, it could bore the readers. What do you think?

The 8th episode - someone, who way back when is eluded to will probably go crazy - is shown for 7.5 seasons as being a symbol for people, a sign of hope - and boom - last season? She goes from sane, symbol, strength, to utterly weak, utterly insane, and utterly paranoid and ruined one of the greatest characters of the series with a snap of the finger. I'd be fine with the character fulfilling that whole insanity thing - but a build up to it would be nice. Slowly show signs of that paranoia and madness.

Ah. *nods* Yes, I'd never seen GoT or read the books, but I understand what you mean. His character is built up over 7.5 seasons to represent strength and sanity, and then it suddenly represents weakness and insanity - the exact opposite - just like that? That's not how characters work! No, no, no!! *shakes head*

There has to be a reason why. Let's see ... maybe we could have seen a gradual deterioration in the character's mind as the constant bickering and political manuevering takes its toll. Or -- and I'm just throwing out ideas here, since I'd never seen the show -- maybe he sends his friend on a quest and the friend dies, and the character thinks it's his fault. MAYBE. Or, maybe, a trusted friend turns against him. Or maybe all together! Or ... thing is, there are endless possibilities. But any one of them is better than no explanation at all. And for the best results, it has to be a gradual process, one incident piling on top of another, until -- like dominoes -- the defenses of his mind come tumbling down.

I'm not sure if any of these things happen in GoT (e.g. betrayal, loss of a friend etc.) -- but any of them, or all of them, would mean the character arc makes more sense. *nod*

[DeadPoolX]

GoT is loosely based on medieval European history, but like everyone's already said, it's a completely different world. There is some magic (although it's a very low-magic world for fantasy) and of course, a few dragons. Those dragons are unusual, however, since it was thought that all the dragons died out.

The first and maybe second season did have some over-the-top T&A. HBO tends to do that early on in its shows as a way of signaling, "Look! We're not a censored network show or for kids!" Well, either that or they're being juvenile about it, but I prefer to believe the former over the latter.

One of GoT's big draws was that "anyone could die." I put that in quotes because let's face it, we knew some of the most popular and story-relevant characters weren't going to die. Maybe get injured or even disfigured, but not die. Regardless, it was still jarring to see characters who were seemingly important to the story's narrative get murdered because that so rarely happens in TV shows.

The TV show changed a number of things from the books, such as Robb Stark's marriage and the Red Wedding. That won't mean anything to you and if you're ever planning on watching the show, don't look it up. But the fact remains that the character, Robb Stark, had the foresight to anticipate betrayal and didn't put his pregnant wife in harm's way in the books, but not in the show.

Probably the biggest problem GoT faced was that the source material wasn't finished. The author of the books hadn't completed his series. This meant that the show was great so long as it at least based its content on the novels, but when those ran out, the story's entire narrative began to decline and characters started acting different.

By the time Season 8 arrived, we had maybe six episodes that rushed not only the whole White Walker storyline (which had been built up for years!) but one of the main characters just went nuts and began to act like someone else entirely. It was so mind-boggingly stupid that it ruined GoT for a lot of people and created a ton of memes that mocked (and continue to mock) GoT to this day.

[Tawmis]

Probably the biggest problem GoT faced was that the source material wasn't finished. The author of the books hadn't completed his series. This meant that the show was great so long as it at least based its content on the novels, but when those ran out, the story's entire narrative began to decline and characters started acting different.
By the time Season 8 arrived, we had maybe six episodes that rushed not only the whole White Walker storyline (which had been built up for years!) but one of the main characters just went nuts and began to act like someone else entirely. It was so mind-boggingly stupid that it ruined GoT for a lot of people and created a ton of memes that mocked (and continue to mock) GoT to this day.

And I am pretty sure it's still not done (the book series) and I wonder how much the end of GoT (show) is going to impact book sales.

Side note - merged a previously existing GoT thread with this one.

[DeadPoolX]

... I wonder how much the end of GoT (show) is going to impact book sales.

I don't think it really will. The books differ in a lot of ways than the show. I imagine the fans who bought the books while experiencing "GoT withdrawal" between seasons probably had a difficult time reading about a story and characters that simultaneously seemed similar yet very different.

Usually our first exposure to an intellectual property is the one we consider "correct" (even if it's not the original incarnation) and that can make accepting other versions hard to stomach. Not everyone, of course, but the books GoT is based on aren't light reading to begin with, so that's a hurdle for many people right away.

[Rath Darkblade]

The TV show changed a number of things from the books, such as Robb Stark's marriage and the Red Wedding. That won't mean anything to you and if you're ever planning on watching the show, don't look it up. But the fact remains that the character, Robb Stark, had the foresight to anticipate betrayal and didn't put his pregnant wife in harm's way in the books, but not in the show.

Hmm. Even without having watched GoT or read the books, I've heard of the Red Wedding and I know that some people die there, and it is (apparently) shocking. I'm afraid that's all I know. *shrug*

Usually our first exposure to an intellectual property is the one we consider "correct" (even if it's not the original incarnation) and that can make accepting other versions hard to stomach. Not everyone, of course, but the books GoT is based on aren't light reading to begin with, so that's a hurdle for many people right away.

*shrug* Not sure. My first exposure to LOTR was through the first movie (LOTR: Fellowship), although I had read "The Hobbit" before seeing the film, of course.

After I saw the first film, I got the books and read through all three, cover to cover. (I had to skip one or two pages within the Tom Bombadil scenes, especially his songs. But meh). *shrug* LOTR isn't light reading either!

So, of course, I was disappointed that the LOTR films didn't have some scenes (e.g. the House of Healing, the Scouring of the Shire). Having said that, I know that authors have a luxury that film directors often don't have -- i.e. authors can make their book as long as they want (especially in the fantasy genre).

[MusicallyInspired]

The Red Wedding is probably the biggest example of cutting characters' (plural) storylines short in such a shocking way that I've ever seen. Because normally in events like that in other movies/shows, there may be an attempt to take them out but they always triumph in the end. This one was just....insane. I doubt anything like it will ever top it.

[Tawmis]

The Red Wedding is probably the biggest example of cutting characters' (plural) storylines short in such a shocking way that I've ever seen. Because normally in events like that in other movies/shows, there may be an attempt to take them out but they always triumph in the end. This one was just....insane. I doubt anything like it will ever top it.

I've never read the books to know anyone's storyline - but I'd agree. It's pretty shocking.

[MusicallyInspired]

It's pretty much the same thing from what I understand. Just some reactions were different. One character, instead of screaming in agony and loss before they themselves die, just starts laughing manically in insanity before they're put out of their misery.

[Rath Darkblade]

Just wondering: the iconic throne seems pretty ... spiky. If someone sat on it without taking care, would it be a game of thorns?

[DeadPoolX]

Just wondering: the iconic throne seems pretty ... spiky. If someone sat on it without taking care, would it be a game of thorns?

I can't say for sure, but that might be the point.

[Rath Darkblade]

Uh-oh. Now it's Game of Puns, eh?