To me Game of Thrones will never be the same (S4E8 discussion)

[BloatedGuppy]

Some of the things (not all) they cut and added make more sense then what the original, book was ...

The fuck?

Name ONE.

Seriously. Name ONE show creation that "made more sense" or added significantly to the narrative, and why.

Because I can name 10 that were straight up stupid off the top of my head. There were a couple in the last episode alone.

I think the showrunners have done a generally good job bringing books I considered fundamentally unfilmable to the screen in a watchable format, but almost without exception EVERY time they go significantly off-book it's a fucking calamity. Just an embarrassing mess. If I had a nickel for every time an unspoiled viewer whined about some piece of writing and how it didn't make sense/introduced a plot hole/was out of character, and it was some show creation, I'd have enough money to put on my OWN series.

It's not 'elitism'. It's recognizing good writing from bad. There were always going to be changes necessary, the books are WAY too dense and television is a visual medium. But my god, the stuff they fuck up. It's incredible, really.

Point is, while the the show isn't exactly black and white when it comes to god vs evil it's pretty easy to tell who is the good and bad guy between Obreyn and Gregor.

That's not saying much. Short of Ramsay, you'd be hard pressed to find a character more nakedly unlikable than Gregor Clegane. And the show didn't even go into detail about a fraction of his transgressions.

 

[BloatedGuppy]

Eh, I could name a couple;

Introducing Tyrion as drunkenly stumbling out to Jon, rather than doing a backflip from a rooftop (?).

Fair.

Downtoning the ridiculousness of dario's looks (with the fucking purple staches and shit, urgh)

Debatable, but likely necessary for the medium. Book Daario would've looked absolutely ludicrous.

Upping the age of most of the characters, maybe it's just because the series is a visual medium, but I would find it hard to take grown men taking order from a 15 year old seriously, also reeks too much of the "young prodigy"-schlock that's present in oh so mush fantasy.

Fair, although it does make some behaviors a bit harder to understand.

The absurd annoying "does Arya actually also die" cliffhanger at the end of the first book, which is pretty pointless.

There are two of those, but I'm not going to hold cliffhangers against the book. It's just a medium difference.

It's also a few weird mentions in the book about how Cersei liked to drink Roberts jizz or something because it was like she was eating hsi sons or something like that, urgh.

Eh. That was perfectly in keeping with Cersei's character.

Now, yes, you are correct in that quite a lot of the changes are really strange, and often for the worse, but Martins work is far from infallible as well, and there are certainly a bunch of little touches here and there that actually has improved.

Certainly he's not infallible, but the show-writers are...not good writers. When they cart dialogue and events over from the book, things are sharp and strong. When they occasionally trim flab, you're sometimes disappointed and wish the show had more depth and context, but you understand the limitations of the medium. When they start improvising content...Talissa, anyone?...you cannot help but groan with dismay and wonder what the hell they think they're doing.

I will grant, though, that there are small flourishes here and there that are fine. The show has just been driving me batty for three seasons now with a series of increasingly bone-headed deviations, which are starting to snowball into all kinds of weird ooc moments, timeline and pacing issues, and straight up stupidity. If that makes me an "elitist book reader" so be it, but the premise that the show is "improving" on the books across the board gives me hives.

 

[TerranV]

Then Ned Stark dies. No matter - the death of our hero only allows the true hero (Robb Stark) of the piece to come along, win the war, and restore peace and justice to the world...

Yeah, you know where this is going.

The funny thing is looking back, its obvious Ned and Robb were red herrings to destract us from the actual "heroes":
-Jon Snow
-Arya Stark
-Sansa Stark
-Bran Stark
-Daenerys
-Tyrion
Although I still don't expect them all to survive the series.

Or there could be no heroes, and just factions with different aims, ideologies, beliefs and histories who all are working towards various goals.

Jon Snow's as useful as a mopey teenager, suprised he isn't taking that bastard sword to his wrists, Sansa's got nothing going for her, Bran, admittedly is doing something, just completely unrelated to the politics and wars which everyone else is participating in, Arya (There seems to be a theme here, someone may still be sore than a certain couple of Paladin types lost their heads because they were a bit thick) is on a mission to stab people who she dislikes.

Super heroic Starks there.

Then Daenerys, who's so heroic, she crucifies people, and occupies a city which she can't hold, and of which a large portion of the population hates her. Oh, and she's got big firebreathing lizards that she can't control. And she occassionally has tantrums and calls for people's heads.

Tyrion, who hates everyone around him for the hatred he percieves they have (Not incorrectly) for him, particularly his own family. And would gladly see them all burn, and he'd like to hold the torch to Tywin and Cersei. And he's done more than a few unsavoury, not just roguish things.

There aren't any heroes, and there's no overall moral view that will be reinforced with their victory. Hell, you've missed some of the most heroic(As in noble, selfless and brave, not as in the hero of the story or "Good guy" of the story) and selfless characters. What about Brienne? What of Davos Seaworth? What of Asha/Yara? What of Ser Barristan Selmy? What of Stannis(YMMV depending on where you're up to)? What about Mance Rayder? What about the Brotherhood without Banners? What of the Blackfish and Edmure Tully(Who really are the closest thing to surviving Starks. The Stark house has fallen. Deal with it people.)? Why Bran and not Meera Reed, hell, the Reeds in general? Maybe Pod's going to save the world? Sure, depending on whether you favour book or show your view on all of these characters will vary, but without a doubt, they have as much, or indeed, more, potential than the listed fan favourites.

There's a lot of trying to work out who the "Hero" or "Heroes" are of the story. Here's my hint: If they wanted a heroic arc, or some LOTR style questing, then there would be one clear objective for our heroes to work for, and they'd have the majority of the screentime dedicated to them working towards it. It would be terrible writing otherwise. It should click for you that that is certainly not the case when we jump from character to character like syphilis in one of Littlefinger's brothels, and we see that everyone wants different things, and even the characters who are most often grouped together (Starks/Jon Snow/Daenerys/Tyrion) (Because they're favourites, not because of any real reason), are completely at odds with each other, and to accomplish their goals, would have to manipulate, conquer or subjugate their fellow "Heroes". Hell, we've already seen this when Stannis, though having a similar outlook with regards to honour as Ned Stark cursed him for a traitor, and worked against his son, even when it was Ned who informed Stannis of the goings on in King's Landing. How do you think Daenerys would react to Tyrion, a Lannister, a member of a family who supported the Usurper, considering her policy of burning and crucifying, should she have arrived in Westoros already? Or to Rob Stark, who's father helped Robert Baratheon, who tried to kill her several times, and who was responsible for the deaths of her entire family?

Like the characters you like, but don't mistake your fancying them for their being the "Main character" or "Hero". Or you'll just be set up for sucker punch after sucker punch.

I was being sarcastic with the word when I called them heroes. Thats why I used quotations. I'm sorry if that wasn't clear enough. Either way, those are the six who can be considered the true main characters (or at least the ones with any ammount of "plot armor").

 

[Vrach]

Think of it this way, if it helps. He's an interesting character partly because he comes from an insteresting country. And the show is being faithful to book structure, and in the books he was also sort of an "appetizer" for Dorne.

I've seen it hinted as much, but thanks. I was expecting something like that anyway, though it's gonna be hard to swallow the Dorne bitching about his death. He was killed in a duel he volunteered for, so, even with him being a prince, there's not much legitimate complaint there (unless they go for "did you have to blow up his head?" route, but Westeros doesn't seem to mind brutal murders and again... it's an arena to the death, anything goes).

 

[BoogieManFL]

Same here, pretty much the same as you feel. He was one of my two favorite characters and I really wanted to see more of him in the next season, now there is no doubt going to be several new characters introduced to fill the void left over. Every character that I really liked and wanted to see more of always dies. It happened so many times now that it's not that shocking any more, since it's so expected.

So of all the truckload of characters left in the show, I only particularly like Tyrion and The Hound. There is really only one "good guy" left and he just got sentenced to death. I think he'll get taken to safety, but still that just leaves one. However I suspect the new characters, probably some outraged Martells, will help increase the number of "good" guys. Hopefully at least one of them has the appeal and charisma that Oberyn had.

 

[Daystar Clarion]

Ukemi? Seriously?

This isn't Viewtiful Joe XD

Ukemi is a real thing, look it up before mocking it and making yourself look like an idiot.

Also spoiler large files, please.

I'm aware that it's a real thing, when did I say it wasn't?

Way to jump the gun with the ad hominem though, classy ;3

 

[maxben]

There are characters in GoT with grey morality, but Obreyn and Gregor were clearly as representation of good vs evil, and anyone can see that.

Since when is looking for revenge automatically making you a whitecloak? Under that Daenerys's brother was a whitecloak. What Oberyn was was charismatic, which is what people are trying to tell you. He was a violent, arrogant man who fights dirty and fathers bastards throughout the world. Essentially, he was a suave version of King Robert (who was grey as hell). Anyhow, you will later see more about his family that may or may not change your mind about them.

As for Gregor, Gregor is a blackcloak obviously but that's because he is an attack dog. Every leader has one. Technically Roose Bolton or possibly the Umbers were the Starks' attack dog before they betrayed them. That's what Daario is for Daenerys. These are men you send out to do the worst things because they are necessary. Again though, Daario is more suave so we forget that he is a heartless mercenary who would murder whatever.

By the way, I read the books and even then when I saw that scene in the show it was like a punch to the guts, so I do understand where you're coming from. But dont worry, there is always a win on the horizon. By the way, I though Blackwater wasn't the bad guys winning but the other bad guy (Stannis) losing for what he did to Renly (which I think would have been the best King, better than the Starks by far). I feel that if you really break it down there is a lot of give and take in this series and that every awful act by an actor gets a response in one way or another.

 

[Silvanus]

By the way, I though Blackwater wasn't the bad guys winning but the other bad guy (Stannis) losing for what he did to Renly (which I think would have been the best King, better than the Starks by far).

Renly? When did Renly exhibit mettle, or any other kind of leadership qualities?

As Donal Noye said, Renly is copper (to Robert's steel and Stannis' iron). Quick with a joke, amicable, but shallow and dismissive. Even if we disregard the order of ascension, and look solely to the characters' records, Renly is weak: a toddler during the rebellion but gifted Storm's End anyway, completely unearned.

There is really only one "good guy" left and he just got sentenced to death. I think he'll get taken to safety, but still that just leaves one.

What did Jon Snow and Sam Tarly do to lose their good guy cards?

 

[maxben]

By the way, I though Blackwater wasn't the bad guys winning but the other bad guy (Stannis) losing for what he did to Renly (which I think would have been the best King, better than the Starks by far).

Renly? When did Renly exhibit mettle, or any other kind of leadership qualities?

As Donal Noye said, Renly is copper (to Robert's steel and Stannis' iron). Quick with a joke, amicable, but shallow and dismissive. Even if we disregard the order of ascension, and look solely to the characters' records, Renly is weak: a toddler during the rebellion but gifted Storm's End anyway, completely unearned.

I saw him in a completely different light. Renly was an urban man, a politician. He wasn't a warrior like Stannis or Robert but that's precisely what the 7 Kingdoms needed. Renly was the only way for the Starks to return North, the Lannisters to return to the West, and for Stannis to remain on Dragonstone with as little pain as possible. That's why, I think, the Tyrells picked him to rally around (note that they had no reason to fight for any side), they were always the pragmatic ones who just wanted to grow and prosper and knew that a politician is far more important than a King.

And you can see that he was loved! Just reread or re-watch the scenes at his camp. That's what every other leader lacked.

I think a Renly Kingship, backed by the richness and shrewdness of the Tyrells, would have been peaceful and ultimately saved the realm from utter bankruptcy. But both Ned and Stannis rejected him not because of his lack of skill but because of laws of inheritance (and the reason that Ned was so conflicted about picking Stannis is because he knew that Renly was the better choice). The only reason he lost was evil magic.

 

[Silvanus]

And you can see that he was loved! Just reread or re-watch the scenes at his camp. That's what every other leader lacked.

I think a Renly Kingship, backed by the richness and shrewdness of the Tyrells, would have been peaceful and ultimately saved the realm from utter bankruptcy. But both Ned and Stannis rejected him not because of his lack of skill but because of laws of inheritance (and the reason that Ned was so conflicted about picking Stannis is because he knew that Renly was the better choice). The only reason he lost was evil magic.

I don't believe that was the reason Ned was conflicted; Renly had never exhibited any particular skill for politics either. He had not earned a thing in his life, but exhibited a sense of complete entitlement. As far as I can see, Ned was conflicted because he was in a delicate and dangerous situation, he knew it, and the idea of relying on Littlefinger was hardly reassuring.

What is it, exactly, that gives evidence of him being a good politician?

 

[Slycne]

What is it, exactly, that gives evidence of him being a good politician?

Disregarding the books, wasn't there that scene in Renly's camp where he knows the name and problems that one of his rank and file soldiers is going though. I suspect that was how the creators were working in that Renly actually would have been a good king, from a diplomatic/personal politics/rallying the common folk sense.

 

[Vrach]

Hard to reply without spoiling but I'll try to allude to past plot points which have already been set in place or hinted at in the show thus far: Oberyn is not the ruler of House Martell. He's in fact the hot headed younger child who, like many noble younger children, can afford to live their lives as adventurers, sell swords and womanizers, manizers (that even a word), or both. Charismatic, but a minor player nonetheless.

The actual ruler of Dorn is Prince Doran, and though physically weak (Gout is alluded at least twice this season) he's been spoken off screen as a shrewd ruler cunning and powerful enough to maintain neutrality in the Civil war of the 5 kings. Time and again the contenders (mainly the Lannisters) expressed some degree of concern over whether Dorne would take part in the conflict and which side would they take. He's also brother to Elia, who was raped and murdered by Clegane under the command of Tywin... and he's also currently the ward of Myrcella Lannister.

Even with Oberyn's death being ultimately on his own (now pulverised) head, and without resorting to spoilers ( I hope) there's still a lot of elements still dangling.

Yep, I'm aware of most of that, however, as I said, I'm interested to see if and how his death will affect anything, since it was his own doing. If Oberyn was an introduction to the Dorne, it has to be connected to him somehow and I'm not seeing the link just yet.

And thank you for not spoiling anything, I can imagine it being hard to discuss when you've read the books

 

[Silvanus]

Disregarding the books, wasn't there that scene in Renly's camp where he knows the name and problems that one of his rank and file soldiers is going though. I suspect that was how the creators were working in that Renly actually would have been a good king, from a diplomatic/personal politics/rallying the common folk sense.

I don't recall the scene, but it sounds likely.

I'd say that's evidence he was a personable, relatable man. I don't see anything qualifying him for kingship, though, and he lacks any record of note. Ned Stark was close with a number if his men, too, and most are in agreement that he wasn't too good at the politics game.

Edit: Out of interest, Slycne, is that a Stone Summit dwarf in your avatar?

 

[Slycne]

I don't recall the scene, but it sounds likely.

I'd say that's evidence he was a personable, relatable man. I don't see anything qualifying him for kingship, though, and he lacks any record of note. Ned Stark was close with a number if his men, too, and most are in agreement that he wasn't too good at the politics game.

Edit: Out of interest, Slycne, is that a Stone Summit dwarf in your avatar?

I think the books do a better job of it, though I can't recall any exact scenes off the top of my head. I feel like the idea that it was going for was that Renly would be a good king for the current climate, sans the wars. He's likable and agreeable enough by everyone that in a way he gets to sidestep "the game".

Edit: Out of interest, Slycne, is that a Stone Summit dwarf in your avatar?

No, it's actually Pantheon from League of Legends. Though I can see the resemblance since they both draw influence from Corinthian helmets.

 

[SacremPyrobolum]

THe mountain had armor and a huge fucking sword. The outcome should have been obvious.

That statement is just as wrong as OP´s .

It was a joke, calm down.