I didn't mean in terms of the plot - I've read the books. I meant in terms of what makes the story so good. The Wall stuff is just Zombies on Ice, and Danaerys is a badly imagined character who oscillates from hormonal teenager to grand dame for reasons far more related to the plot than to the character. It would have made far more sense to not even start the Essos stuff until book three or so, so that it actually moved a bit. What elevates the series is the character-driven stuff, which is almost all related to the War. If you took out the War of the Five Kings the series would be unreadable. If you removed Essos and the North it would be a sensible length, much better, and probably complete by now.
Poll: Winter Is Coming - HBO's A Game of Thrones [READ WARNING]
I didn't mean in terms of the plot - I've read the books. I meant in terms of what makes the story so good. The Wall stuff is just Zombies on Ice, and Danaerys is a badly imagined character who oscillates from hormonal teenager to grand dame for reasons far more related to the plot than to the character. It would have made far more sense to not even start the Essos stuff until book three or so, so that it actually moved a bit. What elevates the series is the character-driven stuff, which is almost all related to the War. If you took out the War of the Five Kings the series would be unreadable. If you removed Essos and the North it would be a sensible length, much better, and probably complete by now.
Yes there would.
we've gone 3 series now without the people in kings landing even having the remotest idea that a massive army is amassing north of the wall. It will probably take until series 5 before winter comes and army moves south past the wall.
This is people's issue with GOT. It spends so long hinting at what might happen, but without actually happening. Its almost a tease. That's certainly what's happening with danaerys' story.
Don't get me wrong, I enjoy it. But i totally see people's points of view here.
we've gone 3 series now without the people in kings landing even having the remotest idea that a massive army is amassing north of the wall. It will probably take until series 5 before winter comes and army moves south past the wall.
This is people's issue with GOT. It spends so long hinting at what might happen, but without actually happening. Its almost a tease. That's certainly what's happening with danaerys' story.
Don't get me wrong, I enjoy it. But i totally see people's points of view here.
Last edited:
Caporegime
- Joined
- 20 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 77,527
- Location
- Wish i was in a Ramen Shop Counter
Teasing is fine, but like any story there needs to be a beginning, middle and an end. The bigger and longer the tease, the bigger the anticipation and expectation of a big fight is going to be.
Take for example, you spend all this time building up the dragons, there better be some dragon destruction happening later.
You builds up the anticipation for the white walkers, it's castle, the huge number of them and that they are moving south, there better be a scene showing them in action.
It would be very disappointing if all you get is 1 character merely mention the death of the dragons or the battle at the wall is over.
Last edited:
Asha (well Yara as they call her in the tv show to avoid confusion with Osha) was shown in the trailer for this weeks episode
Fair point well made.
Associate
- Joined
- 1 May 2007
- Posts
- 1,150
The issue is there are so many characters and stories going on. You can go several episodes without seeing a major character. This gives the impression things are happening slowly. If you look at what has actually happened in this season i don't think that is the case, but we haven't necessarily seen much action.
That said i thought the 'battle' at Crasters was pretty poor - the outside fighting seemed poorly choreographed in particular the scene where Jon comes out of the house and his pal is finishing off the last baddie.
That said i thought the 'battle' at Crasters was pretty poor - the outside fighting seemed poorly choreographed in particular the scene where Jon comes out of the house and his pal is finishing off the last baddie.
Last edited:
Fair point about the Wall arc, but I disagree with Essos. I think George has let it get out of control somewhat, but it does tie in with the main stuff enough that it is pretty vital imo. The Westeros story has a different feel to it with the threat of the Essos characters imo. Maybe introducing it later would have been a good move though, as you said. Though with it originally planned as a trilogy, that could never have happened really.
Personally, I love the Wall stuff though.
Also, the bolded bit- Absolutely, which is one of biggest problem with the adaptation imo. Half of the best bits to read are from/about small characters that won't appear in the show. The Gravedigger chapter for example.
I take it you haven't read the 3rd then, where basically everything happens!
Last edited:
Its taken them long enough however ! we've not seen them for weeks.
Soldato
- Joined
- 31 May 2009
- Posts
- 21,468
No we haven't but Bolton, sent his ******* Ramsey Snow to the Moat Cailin place to take it from the Ironborn, so that will come when he arrives.
When Yara was saying to her father about her plan, the tension and build up was immense. Then it died a deadly death when nothing happened for what seems like a whole series now.
First scene next episode-
Ramsey- "remember that big battle at Moat Cailin we just had?...that was cool wasn't it. But at least we won and captured come people and everything is back to normal now. Why don't we have a chat whilst two naked women have sex in the background"
Soldato
- Joined
- 22 Jul 2012
- Posts
- 16,159
- Location
- London
At least it's not as ridiculous as Spartacus was with the soft pron 
Then again, at least you got to see the battles too...
More Pron and fighting it is!
Then again, at least you got to see the battles too... More Pron and fighting it is!
At least it's not as ridiculous as Spartacus was with the soft pron
That goes without saying!
I actually like the fact that they don't show the battles. I find the way GoT handles things a lot more engaging than (as an example) Vikings. More often than not, seeing a battle just underwhelms me - too often they boil down to 'scream and charge at your enemy in the most stupid fashion possible, then cut to scenes of the hero (or heroes) cutting down swathes of enemies on their own without being challenged, then cut to a showdown with the' bad guy' where (rather miraculously) they are allowed to fight each other (in the middle of a battlefield) without anyone interfering'.
However, I can't see how they can get away from showing some battles that I presume will play out at some point. Mance's assault on The Wall and any showdown with the Wight Walkers really need to be put on screen. It would be really underwhelming to miss such large scale battles (it would be a bit like skipping the Battle of the Blackwater).
However, I can't see how they can get away from showing some battles that I presume will play out at some point. Mance's assault on The Wall and any showdown with the Wight Walkers really need to be put on screen. It would be really underwhelming to miss such large scale battles (it would be a bit like skipping the Battle of the Blackwater).
It should have both, you need the battles and skirmishes.
And it doesn't mean they have to follow those other series.
Could actually do a bit of research decide which faction collates to which real world army and actually make it a decent, whilst still fitting the story out come, just do it In a sensible well thought out way.
And it doesn't mean they have to follow those other series.
Could actually do a bit of research decide which faction collates to which real world army and actually make it a decent, whilst still fitting the story out come, just do it In a sensible well thought out way.
Last edited:
Definitely. It has already been established over the years. On ASOIAF forums people have been studying it for ages. It is very interesting actually, as basically everything in the books has some kind of root somewhere in history. George is heavily influenced by the War of The Roses for a start with Stark/York, Lannister/Lancaster or something like that. It has been a while since I really went through it, but it is worth looking in to.
Last edited:
True, and well known. But a one-for-one mapping attempt is a really silly idea. Martin took on board the Middle Ages ethos, the family strife, the chains of obligations etc; but he did NOT just do a thinly described version history. Tyrion is not Richard III. Tywin Lannister is not Richard Neville, although it's easy to see the connection. By all means read the history (the fact that so many important people died during the Wars of the Roses tells you where Martin got the "Kill 'em All" attitude), but expect only loose reflections, not shadowing.
Oh definitely. You can find a lot of similarities in the conception of characters/houses etc, but they certainly go their own way and often one or two characters or myths are mixed together/expanded on. Some people try and look at real world history to try and predict where the series will go, but it isn't as simple as that...saying X will end up as king because he is based on someone from history for example is quite common in places, but it is ultimately baseless. I originally got in to the series(just before Storm) as a recommendation from my 6th form history tutor, as we were doing the hundred years war at the time and she thought the series was good in it's depiction of Feudalism.
There is a very interesting interview(well discussion really) with GRRM and Bernard Cornwell where they discuss their influences and how they see fantasy and historical fiction as 'twins' iirc...that reminds me, I have a few Sharpe books around somewhere, and I have been meaning to read them for years!