Discussing Season 4

[Westeros]

Our final video for season 4 became our longest ever, needing to be split up into three parts to keep it managable. Linda and I cover the season from start to finish, reviewing both the best and worst moments, as well as speculating regarding how they’ll bring about the adaptation of the novels to season 5. There’s some spoilers along the way—some of them drawn from information about the show’s adaptation choices, specifically, and some just drawing from the novels—so beware if you’re sensitive to either!

You’ll find the videos below:

read on >>>

Visit the Site!

[boojam]

Very nice and very complete, with all the questions I have on my mind too.

One comment, and I have others, but not right now.

I think I have made this comment three or four times before, I may have missed the feedback , but again:

David Benioff and D. B. Weiss , seem, I think it's for sure, to have final say on what actor is cast in what role, contingent on that actor availability or will to choose.

(There was somewhere a list of 10 , I think they were all fine, actors who turned down roles on the show, tho now, with the success one's agent would probably jump out of their clothes to have this show on their and the actor's resume! May be some A-listers who are quite interested now.)

The observation is, I don't care if you are D&d or Martin Scorsese or Steven Spielberg if you hire a fine veteran actors , with great chops, be it Charles Dance or Conleth Hill or Lena Headey (one recalls that Lena has been in TV and Film since the early 90's) or Peter Dinklage (who has also been around since the mid 90's, nominated for an Emmy three times, won once).... others...

Particularity Dinklage as Tyrion... I lot of comment over the last four years how he is not the Tyrion of the books. Consider this, Benioff and Weiss were familiar with his work , they knew his personality and his ... well... aura ... not that fine actors don't have range, obviously Peter does, but , I think, D&D are going to write to that, I am guessing that Dinklage discussed his character in the tele-plays with them. A fine actor will shape a role.

There are very very few Peter Seller's in the world who can be chameleon like and magically seem to totally slide into a character.

So seems to me all the strong veteran actors on the show influenced the writers to play to their strengths and I am thinking feedback from the actors.

(I don't think this of the 'fist-time-out' actors.)

Seems it's a fact of life that cannot be avoided.

I had read Mario Puzo's The Godfather before the film and Marlon Brando was a different Don Vito Corleone than on the page.

I read Cormac McCarthy's powerful novel No Country for Old Men and Javier Bardem's ...Anton Chigurh is different from the page.

I am not talking huge perturbations to the story in either case .... but who would , on film, think of having written them and played them any other way.

It may be the case that some of the dramatic narrative of ASoIaF has been modified by the presence of many good actors... but that's been going on probably since the theater of Ancient Greece.

[Raja]

I am a tad unsure of what point you're trying to make with that post. The Tyrion of the show, to me, is more sympathetic, and they're making specific efforts to try and make him that way. I think it has nothing at all to do with the way Peter plays the character, if you're saying that he's been made more sympathetic to try and mold the character around the actor, then I disagree.

To me, it's an opportunity lost, the way he's written in the show, you're not really having that conflict with yourself where you're wondering how you could root for such a character. I'm not saying one is superior with the other, but what I am saying is that the show runners are not asking us that question the way Martin did in the books.

Maybe I haven't completely understood your point and am rambling on unnecessarily.

[Le Cygne]

Jon missing Ygritte was a "surprise" - even the actor asked them, why can't I show how he's feeling, and he had to come up with ways of his own, and then still wasn't sure the audience got that he was heartbroken all season. Love is not a surprise, it's there every step of the way.

Here's that interview:

The hard thing for me with this season and I wrote to the writers about it early on is that I wanted the audience to know he's been missing her. In the books he thinks about her constantly. It's there, written down, that he's thinking about Ygritte. In this he doesn't mention her once until the very beginning of this episode. The real challenge for me this season was showing the audience that he loves her without saying anything or talking about it. Which is kind of impossible, showing the audience the inner-workings of your head. So I had to find moments of that happening and I hope I did...

It is sad. He's been going through heartbreak the entire season. Whether you've seen it or not, he's been going through it.

http://www.elle.com/news/culture/kit-harington-dragon-interview

[Newstar]

I am a tad unsure of what point you're trying to make with that post. The Tyrion of the show, to me, is more sympathetic, and they're making specific efforts to try and make him that way. I think it has nothing at all to do with the way Peter plays the character, if you're saying that he's been made more sympathetic to try and mold the character around the actor, then I disagree.

I'm not exactly certain what boojam is trying to say. I'm pretty sure Peter Dinklage has played characters who are somewhat less than heroic before. Even his character in The Station Agent, while not a bad sort, was prickly and taciturn. It's also kind of an insult to Peter Dinklage to suggest that D&D wrote Tyrion as more straightforwardly heroic to tailor the character to Dinklage's strengths, since it suggests that D&D lacked faith in Dinklage's acting abilities, which I'm sure is not the case. Whatever was behind their decision to write Tyrion differently from the book--and I think it's nothing more complicated than a desire to retain the audience's sympathy--I doubt it had anything to do with D&D's perception of Dinklage's acting skills.

[Frey Pies]

Well, if we're discussing the season as a whole here, I'm just going to say what I've said before on these forums- this was easily my favourite GoT season, far surpassing the achievements of Seasons 1 and 3. I think that, save for the Yara and the Sept scene, everything was brilliantly done, and there were about 7 standout episodes, whereas previous seasons had about 4. 10/10 imo.

[Raja]

Whatever was behind their decision to write Tyrion differently from the book--and I think it's nothing more complicated than a desire to retain the audience's sympathy--I doubt it had anything to do with D&D's perception of Dinklage's acting skills.

I certainly think that played a big part. Most of the people I know who haven't read the books usually say he is easily their favorite character a 'hero' they can root for in a world where there aren't enough people to root for.

Frankly, I don't think it's a complicated issue, it's a very conscious decision to ensure that people don't turn away from the show because it stops working as a form of escapism when it becomes far too bleak ( not saying this is true for everyone who is just watching the show, but it's certainly true for some). I think some of that has to do with the medium too, I return to the books not just for the characters, but for the mythology and mystery of the white walkers/ Jon/ etc. Those things are harder to establish in the show than in the books, even after four seasons.

[Newstar]

I certainly think that played a big part. Most of the people I know who haven't read the books usually say he is easily their favorite character a 'hero' they can root for in a world where there aren't enough people to root for.

Frankly, I don't think it's a complicated issue, it's a very conscious decision to ensure that people don't turn away from the show because it stops working as a form of escapism when it becomes far too bleak ( not saying this is true for everyone who is just watching the show, but it's certainly true for some).

It's not as if there's this dichotomy where Tyrion is either sympathetic and the audience has someone to root for, or he's an asshole and so the audience is turned off since they have no one to root for. In the books, there are straightforwardly sympathetic characters: Brienne, Ned, Davos, etc. It's just that Book Tyrion is not one of them.

[Raja]

Yes, but based only on the feedback I get from most of my friends who haven't seen the show, they can't really care for characters like Davos because he's not anywhere close to how central Tyrion is in the show. Same with Brienne.

I'm talking exclusively about the show here and not the books. Then again, I don't think we're disagreeing too much regarding my main point in my original post.

[boojam]

Whatever was behind their decision to write Tyrion differently from the book--and I think it's nothing more complicated than a desire to retain the audience's sympathy--I doubt it had anything to do with D&D's perception of Dinklage's acting skills.

I think this is true. For sure David Benioff had been around TV and film production and I think has a couple of fine screenplays under his belt, The Kite Runner (2007) and Brothers (2009)... I have a feeing that Wolfgang Petersen had more influence on his screenplay for Troy , which is an odd telling of the Iliad, still better than Robert Wise's rather off film Helen of Troy (1956).

Seems like Benioff's other screenplays were journeyman work. I have not read any of his novels which have had a good reception.

Daniel B Weiss has some film production experience but nothing that went into production. I don't know Benioff seems the leader, tho I guess now Weiss is on equal footing.

Neither was a veteran 'show runner' before.

So with that said, I do think that in approaching HBO , for substantial money in this case, they did tailor the production for the pitch and presentation ...

GOT does do things that are unconventional TV, but that's gotten to be HBO's reputation and their success too!

Now I am going to say something controversial.

I love George's prose , highly entertained by his story telling, but , JUST MY OPINION, his characters , well, have a modest lack of dimension to them.

It just my opinion but I like the dimensionality that the top talent has brought to the production , Charles Dance is , was, a particular gem! I thought his Tywin has GRRM's trumped, just so much deeper and richer than in the novels. I don't have any quantitative way to prove it but I am sure Dance had a 'feedback' influence on his character , even D&D speak to how easy it was to write to his character. I also think this true of Peter , Lena , Michelle , Sean ... and some other veterans too.

Some members here seem to not notice that this is Benioff and Weiss's baby, they have their creative juices too and that is going to have influence.

It's a cliche now , but there are those of us who hold the books and the show in two different aesthetic places in our minds.

A point about GRRM and Tyrion.

Did anyone notice a difference in Tyrion , from the show's Tyrion, in The Pointy End , Blackwater , The Bear and the Maiden Fair and The Lion and the Rose?

You know who wrote the teleplays for those.

I know D&D could have totally rewritten those, but there is no evidence we have of that.

[Le Cygne]

This is perfect, pretty much multiply this times every episode and then multiply that times 5, and that's my review of the season:

"If you constructed a character a certain way, you would expect consistency in how you portray the character. And then suddenly to say well, let's do a completely hollow, meaningless thing."

[Juba]

For sure David Benioff had been around TV and film production...

Neither of these two EVER worked on a TV show/and or movie--unless one counts Benioff writing scripts, which in my mind isn't even in the same universe, in complexity. I mean sure--maybe he walked on the set of 25th hour, but he didn't direct it, edit it, or have any more say than any other scriptwriter.

This simple fact is what amazes me the most about GoT--they gave control of the show--not to mention millions of dollars--to people who had zero experience in the field. Of all the numerous and justified criticisms of the show, the majority have their genesis in this appalling fact.

[Newstar]

Neither of these two EVER worked on a TV show/and or movie--unless one counts Benioff writing scripts, which in my mind isn't even in the same universe, in complexity. I mean sure--maybe he walked on the set of 25th hour, but he didn't direct it, edit it, or have any more say than any other scriptwriter.

This simple fact is what amazes me the most about GoT--they gave control of the show--not to mention millions of dollars--to people who had zero experience in the field. Of all the numerous and justified criticisms of the show, the majority have their genesis in this appalling fact.

Eh, if you're going to blame anyone, blame GRRM for giving them his blessing where he'd denied others who'd approached him to adapt it. He surely would have asked about their experience at the time, and whatever answer they gave must have satisfied him.

Nor is experience in of itself any guarantee of ability. Michael Bay's been making supremely terrible movies for 20 years. Even with respect to Game of Thrones, Bryan Cogman seems to be praised up and down as the best of the TV writing crew apart from GRRM, and he has the least experience of any of them, while Vanessa Taylor's episodes were roundly criticized (with 3x02 coming in for a particularly harsh drubbing), even though unlike D&D she has a fair amount experience in writing for television predating her work on GOT.

[boojam]

Neither of these two EVER worked on a TV show/and or movie--unless one counts Benioff writing scripts, which in my mind isn't even in the same universe, in complexity. I mean sure--maybe he walked on the set of 25th hour, but he didn't direct it, edit it, or have any more say than any other scriptwriter.

This simple fact is what amazes me the most about GoT--they gave control of the show--not to mention millions of dollars--to people who had zero experience in the field. Of all the numerous and justified criticisms of the show, the majority have their genesis in this appalling fact.

Blood of the Dragon is right , George chose D&D after having bad experience with some Hollywood type giving him nightmare scenarios in talk about options for the books.

Plus George felt D&D had the right attitude , knowledge and snap ... that other producers did not have.

I think you are dead wrong about a writer not having that much involvement with production, some writers don't , but there have been writers who have been famous directors and producers.

I don't know for sure about Benioff but I get the impression that he was close to the production of some of the films he worked on.

D and D have proved to be more than adequate directors , I thought their work on episode 1 this year was out standing.

[boojam]

Another footnote.

I detect something going on globally with the show's story that seems to be echoes from the future. I know D and D had several sessions with George about 'the rest of the story'.

I am particularly thinking to of their and Bryan's meeting with GRRM in Santa Fe in early 2013.

I am thinking they were powwowing with George about what HBO's plans were, from that point in time they may have told him only four more seasons and laid out their plan for his input.

We have no idea what it was , but season 4 is really the first where we seem to see a 'backward' butterfly effect.

I just get the feeling , besides the condensations and modifications this season was showing some influence on how season's 5 and six are being written.

It does not excuse the few bloopers this season ... but seems to me explains a lot.

Sorry if that sound vague ... but that's my hunch.

[Juba]

My point is simple--not only have D+D helmed a show on par with Sons of Anarchy, when they very well could have produced a masterpiece of genre on par with the Wire--had they simply stayed true to the source material--they had no business even being chosen to adapt said material in the first place.

And at no point do I let GRRM off the hook. When the show was first green-lit and I saw D+D's bona-fides, I thought he'd made a huge blunder and told anyone who cared to listen. And as others have pointed out ad-naseum on the ever popular 'nitpicks' threads, my position has only been strengthened with each passing season.

As far as equating experience with quality--it's not an either or thing. It's not like they had a choice between Micheal Bay or DnD, and that's it. They could have done something as radical as hire someone who actually, had TV/film experience and talent in equal measure. I know that's a rather far-fetched scenario, and Hollywood doesn't generally like to do things that make sense, but hey, it's within the realm of possibility, right?

What I can't wait for is when we see these guys fly solo--without even GRRM's plot cliff-notes to guide them. I have a feeling it will make Sons of Anarchy look like Shakespeare.

I get the impression that he was close to the production of some of the films he worked on

Just because you get a feeling in your gut doesn't make it a fact. I mean really, even the most casual knowledge of the way the film industry works shows this to be false.

[Newstar]

Another footnote.

I detect something going on globally with the show's story that seems to be echoes from the future. I know D and D had several sessions with George about 'the rest of the story'.

I am particularly thinking to of their and Bryan's meeting with GRRM in Santa Fe in early 2013.

I am thinking they were powwowing with George about what HBO's plans were, from that point in time they may have told him only four more seasons and laid out their plan for his input.

We have no idea what it was , but season 4 is really the first where we seem to see a 'backward' butterfly effect.

I just get the feeling , besides the condensations and modifications this season was showing some influence on how season's 5 and six are being written.

It does not excuse the few bloopers this season ... but seems to me explains a lot.

Sorry if that sound vague ... but that's my hunch.

No, I agree. Season 4 was the first season that was written in whole or in part--I'm not clear exactly when that meeting was--after that powwow with GRRM where he spilled all the characters' endgames. So it makes sense to watch Season 4 with an eye to storyline hints at post-ADWD developments, and to wonder about the ramifications of any significant omissions or changes. It's hard to tell without having the post-ADWD books in hand, however.

they had no business even being chosen to adapt said material in the first place.

Well, they chose themselves, essentially, when they approached GRRM and got him to give them his blessing.

As far as equating experience with quality--it's not an either or thing.

You claimed that the fact that they had zero experience means that they had no business adapting GOT. However, experience is no guarantee of competence (Michael Bay being the first example that came to mind), and in the context of GOT the most praised writer has no pre-GOT experience to speak of and the one writer who did have extensive TV experience either left or was ditched after Season 3, and deservedly so to hear the fans tell it. Using your logic, the inexperienced Bryan Cogman never should have been allowed near writing duties, and Vanessa Taylor should have stuck around by virtue of her superior experience. However, neither of these things happened, and we're better off for it.

I do find it funny that you state that all of your complaints with the show have their origins in D&D being chosen despite their lack of experience, since that suggests that you think that a more experienced producer would have taken a more reverent approach to the text. Given that GRRM found wanting such proposals from more experienced producers--some of whom apparently suggested a film treatment--clearly he did not share your opinion. I tend to think more experienced TV showrunners would have been far less deferential to the text, not more so. D&D's status as inexperienced fanboys probably bolstered the level of faithfulness to the text, not lowered it. And really, a lot of--maybe most of--the changes fans complain about are ones that any showrunner would have made (battles not being shown, gratuitous sex scenes, turning Jeyne from a shy, sweet girl into a flirty, self-possessed type, toned-down SanSan, making Cersei less of a cartoon, making Tyrion more straightforwardly heroic, filler plots, "Your sister," minimal direwolves to save on CGI costs, etc.), so the assumption that things would have been more to your liking with a different showrunner strikes me as especially rich.

[Juba]

D&D's status as inexperienced fanboys

That's just not true. They read A Song of Fire and Ice with the expressed intention of adapting it, not because they just happened across it or were fans of genre--that's simply wishful thinking. Weiss even tried to adapt Ender's Game, and various video game franchises into movies... that's how they stumbled onto ASoIaF, not because they were 'fans.'

And as far as Cogman goes--I've seen no evidence that he's any more talented than Benioff and Weiss. Just because someone calls themselves 'the master of lore' doesn't give them any real understanding of George's world, characters, or themes. In fact, their collective output has proved just the opposite. And their lack of basic historical knowledge and genre conventions shows. Shit, they can't even be consistent in their inconsistencies.

But whatever, we have differing opinions here--I think D+D are talentless hacks, and you don't. No biggie, the world goes on.

[Gallivant]

No, I agree. Season 4 was the first season that was written in whole or in part--I'm not clear exactly when that meeting was--after that powwow with GRRM where he spilled all the characters' endgames. So it makes sense to watch Season 4 with an eye to storyline hints at post-ADWD developments, and to wonder about the ramifications of any significant omissions or changes. It's hard to tell without having the post-ADWD books in hand, however.

I agree with this. The meeting was in Feb or March 2013 I think (not totally sure... happy to stand corrected!), but I couldn't help but think during s4 that D&D already knew where much of the action was ultimately headed. With that in mind, some of the handling of the TV characters is likely already being influenced by GRRM's endgame.

Take Tyrion's increasingly sympathetic (and, arguably, simplistic) portrayal in the show as an example, which is perplexing and annoying to so many book-readers. Is it purely because he is so popular? And because the show needs a hero audiences can root for? And/or, because the endgame D&D most certainly know about 'requires' Tyrion to become a bona fide hero whose actions and outcome will have more dramatic impact if the audience already thinks of him as eternally wronged and essentially 'right?' So, theoretically... if he eventually becomes a leader/king who rules or defines the future of Westeros in some capacity, the showrunners might well want the audience to feel buoyed by this - in a 'Yes, he was always the best man for the job!' sort of way. Or - if he is destined to die heroically, this would then engender a sense of tragic loss with all its melodramatic ramifications... Book-readers love Tyrion too, of course - almost BECAUSE of his dark complexity! Perhaps a multi-plotted, action-packed TV show like GoT is less good at portraying subtle ambiguities and prefers black/white characterisations over richly-drawn texture. (This does not mean, of course, that all baddies are hated by audiences - there are villains who an audience is encouraged to 'love to hate' too - Tywin!). Perhaps TV producers assume (perhaps wrongly) that audiences ultimately want clearcut good v evil and definitive closure, though there are obvious exceptions to this rule, of course - such as Matthew Weiner.

Contrary to this thinking on Tyrion of course is the case of Cersei... (I'm contradicting my own argument here!), as IMO Show-Cersei is more sympathetic than her book-counterpart, and I don't foresee - or at least I really hope NOT to see - a good ending for her!

Interesting that Linda pointed out that Brienne has been less uglyfied this season. That made me wonder if there really is a potential romance between her and Jamie!! - something I'd never really thought too much of as a real possibility (beyond her obviously being in love with the guy). If her face isn't mutilated next season then I'll begin to think this even more! There's no way a TV show would match her up with Jamie if she was seen as off-the-scale unattractive.

Dark, politicking Sansa was another obvious nod to the future of the series too...

It was interesting that Elio and Linda commented on the vanishing Tyrells ... makes me think that they aren't going to be that important in the scheme of things.

Well, they chose themselves, essentially, when they approached GRRM and got him to give them his blessing.

You claimed that the fact that they had zero experience means that they had no business adapting GOT. However, experience is no guarantee of competence (Michael Bay being the first example that came to mind), and in the context of GOT the most praised writer has no pre-GOT experience to speak of and the one writer who did have extensive TV experience either left or was ditched after Season 3, and deservedly so to hear the fans tell it. Using your logic, the inexperienced Bryan Cogman never should have been allowed near writing duties, and Vanessa Taylor should have stuck around by virtue of her superior experience. However, neither of these things happened, and we're better off for it.

I do find it funny that you state that all of your complaints with the show have their origins in D&D being chosen despite their lack of experience, since that suggests that you think that a more experienced producer would have taken a more reverent approach to the text. Given that GRRM found wanting such proposals from more experienced producers--some of whom apparently suggested a film treatment--clearly he did not share your opinion. I tend to think more experienced TV showrunners would have been far less deferential to the text, not more so. D&D's status as inexperienced fanboys probably bolstered the level of faithfulness to the text, not lowered it. And really, a lot of--maybe most of--the changes fans complain about are ones that any showrunner would have made (battles not being shown, gratuitous sex scenes, turning Jeyne from a shy, sweet girl into a flirty, self-possessed type, toned-down SanSan, making Cersei less of a cartoon, making Tyrion more straightforwardly heroic, filler plots, "Your sister," minimal direwolves to save on CGI costs, etc.), so the assumption that things would have been more to your liking with a different showrunner strikes me as especially rich.

In reference to what I italicised in your text - I agree with much of what you say here, but I do wonder if D&D's relative inexperience in handling mega-TV productions over so many years may now be taking its toll - most particularly as they will soon be having to move into uncharted (well, UNWRITTEN) territory. What they have achieved, whilst dissatisfying and even concerning to me on many levels, is also pretty stupendous. Showrunning these books must be enormously difficult! The logistics and budget management alone, not to mention handling such a mammoth cast... But there are huge potential pitfalls coming their way - big, scary choices about how to proceed narratologically in a coherent and satisfying manner which pleases all sectors of their audience, how to 'pitch' upcoming events and handle character development - the tonality of their work to date is very uneven, at best - and how to maintain and consistently live up to inordinate media hype, hopefully without constant resort to their preferred 'twist and shock' tactics (as Elio & Linda point out), &c.

Responses in bold!

[Newstar]

I agree with this. The meeting was in Feb or March 2013 I think (not totally sure... happy to stand corrected!), but I couldn't help but think during s4 that D&D already knew where much of the action was ultimately headed. With that in mind, some of the handling of the TV characters is likely already being influenced by GRRM's endgame.

I agree, although it's important to be careful with this line of thinking: Robb was given a more prominent role in the TV show, and that certainly didn't have anything to do with his endgame in the books (although to be fair, that happened before Season 4, the first season written after D&D's big meeting with GRRm).

Take Tyrion's increasingly sympathetic (and, arguably, simplistic) portrayal in the show as an example, which is perplexing and annoying to so many book-readers. Is it purely because he is so popular? And because the show needs a hero audiences can root for? And/or, because the endgame D&D most certainly know about 'requires' Tyrion to become a bona fide hero whose actions and outcome will have more dramatic impact if the audience already thinks of him as eternally wronged and essentially 'right?'

It could be either, honestly, but I will say that Tyrion was being written as more straightforwardly heroic long before Season 4, and I noticed no great shift in his characterization in Season 4. After 4x06 and his spiteful, venomous tirade at the end of that episode, a lot of fans thought "FINALLY! Book Tyrion is in the house!". The show backtracked on that in 4x10, though, with a warm parting with Jaime and with a "murder" of Shae that looked a lot like self-defence. So I dunno.

Contrary to this thinking on Tyrion of course is the case of Cersei... (I'm contradicting my own argument here!), as IMO Show-Cersei is more sympathetic than her book-counterpart, and I don't foresee - or at least I really hope NOT to see - a good ending for her!

Again, though, TV Cersei was written as more nuanced and more sympathetic virtually from the get-go, as one of her biggest scenes in the show was a non-book scene: her rueful conversation with Robert on the state of their marriage in Season 1. Nor did I detect any noticeable change in her characterization in Season 4, unlike, say, Sansa going from zero to Machiavel in 4x08.

Interesting that Linda pointed out that Brienne has been less uglyfied this season.

Really? She looks a bit less ragged, I suppose, with her spiffy new armour and neater hair, but no more pretty. TV Brienne has always been very pretty, and she never looked more pretty than in the bath scene in 3x05.

Dark, politicking Sansa was another obvious nod to the future of the series too...

That's my assumption. There's also more of a focus on revenge when it comes to TV Sansa. "What do we do to those who hurt the ones we love?" and so on.

But there are huge potential pitfalls coming their way - big, scary choices about how to proceed narratologically in a coherent and satisfying manner which pleases all sectors of their audience, how to 'pitch' upcoming events and handle character development - the tonality of their work to date is very uneven, at best - and how to maintain and consistently live up to inordinate media hype, hopefully without constant resort to their preferred 'twist and shock' tactics (as Elio & Linda point out)

I don't think the shift from books to 100% Cliffs' Notes rough outline is going to be all that dramatic. There have been large chunks of the series which have gone entirely off-book, or where D&D have taken the bones of a plot in the books and filled it in with their own material. If they were 100% faithful to the books in every scene, then there would absolutely be a huge shock when they go completely off-book and have nothing but a rough outline to work with. As it is, there's been so much non-book material to date that I imagine the transition will be a fairly smooth one.

As for "pleasing all sectors of their audience," I think they've got that covered, although it will be amusing to see the book fans go from teasing non-book readers with their knowledge of future plots to desperately trying to remain unspoiled when the TV show ventures into post-ADWD territory. The worm definitely will have turned.