Why is the show turning Stannis into a dick?

[James Arryn]

Well, he does that because he needs men to fight for him. In the show there was really no reason for Stannis to take Jon Snow's advice...especially since he wanted to pressure Mance into bending the knee to him. But when Jon tells him that he's Ned Stark's son, he suddenly softens his position. He doesn't have to, he just does it out of a sense of debt towards Ned Stark.

Exactly, whereas in the books Stannis mostly talks about Ned in terms of how much he failed Stannis Baratheon, including mid-way through offering Cat condolences for his death.

And if the show uses one button to push for sympathetic vs. unsympathetic characters, it's the Stark/Ned button.

[Red Tiger]

I get you, but don't you feel those omissions are rather subtle/subjective compared with the flat out bad-guy stuff the show has omitted?

I think almost all characters are somewhat reduced....there's just not enough room and fans of any particular character are bound to feel theirs was not explored enough...but this idea that STANNIS has been uniquely Ill-served imo is amazing, considering the good stuff left out is pretty minor compared with the bad stuff left out.

Additionally, though not as obviously as they have done with Cersei (by giving Joff almost all of her worst acts), the show has santized STANNIS by making him more Mel's servant, whereas in the books she is his or it's vague.

That downplays him somewhat in terms of autonomy, but the biggest effect (as with Cersei) is it keeps his hands clean of blood that actually belongs there, and puts it almost all on someone else. Meanwhile his good actions have if anything been given his signature moreso than in the books. Davos' role in heading to the North is downplayed, and the petty Driftmark attack that was Plan A after the BW is omitted completely. Meanwhile we see much much more of Stannis the father in his limited screen time than we do in all his unlimited book time, he's suddenly Richard the Lionheart in battle, and while still a pedant, he's much less of a dick towards others.

Additionally, and this is more ironic to me than anything, the idea that Stannis' fans routinely feel he doesn't get what he is due is sooooo perfect, considering that's Stannis' primary topic of conversation too.

The all caps Stannis is not sarcasm/mockery. For w/e reason my completely fucked up iPad decided to,go that way until I noticed/corrected.

I don't find this a good thing at all.

Much less a dick towards others? Once again he burned those Florents for no good reason on the show. Plus after he threatens Davos with death in season 4 (my time is almost up, which means your time is almost up, Ser Davos).

I agree with everything else though

[Red Tiger]

Well, he does that because he needs men to fight for him. In the show there was really no reason for Stannis to take Jon Snow's advice...especially since he wanted to pressure Mance into bending the knee to him. But when Jon tells him that he's Ned Stark's son, he suddenly softens his position. He doesn't have to, he just does it out of a sense of debt towards Ned Stark.

Yes there was, Jon had dealt with the wildlings and knows a lot more about the Wall than anybody in his own camp, getting Jon on his side could be very helpful for his preparation in fighting the Others.

Im not saying you are wrong, but I don't agree with there being no real pragmatic reason.

[Red Tiger]

Exactly, whereas in the books Stannis mostly talks about Ned in terms of how much he failed Stannis Baratheon, including mid-way through offering Cat condolences for his death.

And if the show uses one button to push for sympathetic vs. unsympathetic characters, it's the Stark/Ned button.

No he doesn't, he is pissed that Ned got the position of Hand and that Ned didn't support him out of any sense of affection, which was a dick thing to say to a widow, but he doesn't criticize Ned for failing him.

[James Arryn]

No he doesn't, he is pissed that Ned got the position of Hand and that Ned didn't support him out of any sense of affection, which was a dick thing to say to a widow, but he doesn't criticize Ned for failing him.

Yes he does. He states he should not have been Hand. Cat clarifies that that was Robert's decision, not Ned's. To which Stannis says 'Yet he took it. That which should have been mine."

[sj4iy]

Yes there was, Jon had dealt with the wildlings and knows a lot more about the Wall than anybody in his own camp, getting Jon on his side could be very helpful for his preparation in fighting the Others.

Im not saying you are wrong, but I don't agree with there being no real pragmatic reason.

I disagree. He doesn't know anything at all about Jon at that point, he literally just met the guy. All he knows is that there is a NWman in a Wildling camp. He doesn't know what Jon has done or how helpful Jon could be to him. He only takes real note of him once Jon tells him that he's Ned Stark's son. Stannis has no compelling reason to take Jon's advice about listening to Mance, but he does because there's obviously a sense of duty to repay the debt he owes to Ned Stark.

[Red Tiger]

Yes he does. He states he should not have been Hand. Cat clarifies that that was Robert's decision, not Ned's. To which Stannis says 'Yet he took it. That which should have been mine."

Which is in no way saying Ned failed STannis.

[Red Tiger]

I disagree. He doesn't know anything at all about Jon at that point, he literally just met the guy. All he knows is that there is a NWman in a Wildling camp. He doesn't know what Jon has done or how helpful Jon could be to him. He only takes real note of him once Jon tells him that he's Ned Stark's son. Stannis has no compelling reason to take Jon's advice about listening to Mance, but he does because there's obviously a sense of duty to repay the debt he owes to Ned Stark.

You convinced me, respect.

[King Brandon Ice Eyes]

People perceive Stannis to be bad-ass and hilarious, but in the threads of "great things said by Stannis" there are only ever about 20 things. Mostly Stannis is frowning or whining or sulking or waiting. I think it is much easier to gloss over his flaws in the books.

The stuff about the pro-Lannister bias is funny too. The Lannisters were written as tremendously charismatic people. Charisma is compelling on TV. The Lannisters were also written at the center of the political story while Stannis has been on the periphery. Of course we're going to spend more time at the center where stuff happens.

Only Jaime and Tyrion are charismatic.

Tywin is cold, cruel, unapproachable, has no sense of humour and is constantly in a sour mood.

Cersei is bitter, cruel, petty, rude, aggressive, unstable, not charismatic at all. Nevertheless of all the characters in the books she is favored the most in terms of increased focus. Next to her is probably Tywin who has less than five lines in ACOK but gets long and repetitive conversations with Arya in the show at expense of the development of her own story.

And finally Joffrey is a petty, cruel, spoiled child who everybody hates.

[elfgirl43]

Just want to point out a little something about this whole topic. Much of Stannis's story in the book is told to us though Davos, who is a bit of an unreliable narrator. His adoration and respect for Stannis color his interpretation of and feelings on the events. Davos doesn't think of Stannis as a dick so therefore many readers don't think he is either. When one looks at just his actions and what all the other charaters say about him one might draw a different conslusion.

Another thing that one should keep in mind is GoT's short seasons. If the show had a 24 or 22 episode season they could take the time to delve into each character and their relationships to others. Alas that is not the case in show. It seems to me that they have looked at all the characters and picked what they believe in the grand scheme of the story is the character’s most important trait. For Ned and Jon it is honor, for Arya it is her stubbornness, Robb it's being in over his head and so on. Most of the characters decisions or conflicts lead back to that one thing. For Stantis the trait they picked is his rigidness. That can certainly come off as dickish. For Melisandre they picked her manipulativeness. TV is visual medium and as such it shows instead of tells, unlike a book does. The only way to communicate to the audience that she is manipulative is for her to manipulate those around her. Which is Stannis.

All that being said I do agree that they took a very complex character and striped him down to bare bones which is of course a disservice to the character. Anyhow just a bit of food for thought.

[The Drunkard]

However Davos, much like Cressen, doesn't ever has a positive thought about Melisandre or R'hllor, and depicts Stannis' involvement with them as if he was working with the devil, when it's Melisandre that convinces Stannis about the Others and shifts him away from winning the throne for purely mundane reasons to winning the throne as a means of saving Westeros. His bias goes both ways.

Most of the changes that get criticized with respect to Stannis have nothing to do with Davos' bias, but with events being factually, unarguably changed. Like not testing Melisandre whatsoever with the sacrifice in season 3. "Why should I spare the son of some tavern slut?" is a long ways off what happened in the books.

I'd also be more accepting of them not having enough time to go through everything the books did if they didn't waste his screen time every other episode. The first part of season 4 just retread so much ground.

This is true, he is definitely a better family man on the show, no question. He seems to care for Selyse and he clearly loves Shireen. Though in book Stannis' defense, we never see a Shireen or Stannis POV, so he may very well be as tender with her in the books as he is on the show. Also, Selyse is not quite as haughty and annoying on the show as she is in the books. If book Stannis had show Selyse as his wife, the marriage might seem a lot better (having a wife with a moustache generally doesn't do good things for your love life).

I don't think anyone gives a damn about Stannis' family life, to be honest. That's not why people like or dislike the character, and it's inclusion in the show at the expense of something telling, like the story about his parents, the vision about his death, or some more deliberations over Gendry, was pretty stupid.

[sj4iy]

Just want to point out a little something about this whole topic. Much of Stannis's story in the book is told to us though Davos, who is a bit of an unreliable narrator. His adoration and respect for Stannis color his interpretation of and feelings on the events. Davos doesn't think of Stannis as a dick so therefore many readers don't think he is either. When one looks at just his actions and what all the other charaters say about him one might draw a different conslusion.

Another thing that one should keep in mind is GoT's short seasons. If the show had a 24 or 22 episode season they could take the time to delve into each character and their relationships to others. Alas that is not the case in show. It seems to me that they have looked at all the characters and picked what they believe in the grand scheme of the story is the character’s most important trait. For Ned and Jon it is honor, for Arya it is her stubbornness, Robb it's being in over his head and so on. Most of the characters decisions or conflicts lead back to that one thing. For Stantis the trait they picked is his rigidness. That can certainly come off as dickish. For Melisandre they picked her manipulativeness. TV is visual medium and as such it shows instead of tells, unlike a book does. The only way to communicate to the audience that she is manipulative is for her to manipulate those around her. Which is Stannis.

All that being said I do agree that they took a very complex character and striped him down to bare bones which is of course a disservice to the character. Anyhow just a bit of food for thought.

Eh, I don't agree that the show has stripped everyone down to a 'main' theme. If you really look at the books, you could say that they are all that way anyway. Jon's 'theme' has always been about honor, books and show. Stannis' theme has always been about his rigidity, books and show. Davos' has always been about the perils of serving without question...on and on and on. There's not really enough time even in the books for the character to explore different themes.

[stannisismyking]

I don't think anyone gives a damn about Stannis' family life, to be honest. That's not why people like or dislike the character, and it's inclusion in the show at the expense of something telling, like the story about his parents, the vision about his death, or some more deliberations over Gendry, was pretty stupid.

I care very much actually! And I know of others who do as well. Seeing him actually interact with Shireen has been one of my favourite Stannis moments.

I do agree I'd like more of the background like his parents death (or even PrOuDwING).

[Becket]

My MAIN beef with the show is that they're catching up to the book anyway. SLOW IT DOWN, TAKE TIME WITH CHARACTER DEVELOPMENT. That's what makes a good drama, and Martin isn't exactly known for his timely writing fashion either. They're already been forced into a corner with Bran's PoV, They should've done 2 seasons for each book, and maybe 3 seasons for book 3 onward. I guess it's too late for that now, but hopefully they'll take things a bit slower from here on out.

Mainly I think they don't do Stannis justice, but there are other characters they've shit on too as others have pointed out.

[Ferocious Veldt Roarer]

My MAIN beef with the show is that they're catching up to the book anyway. SLOW IT DOWN, TAKE TIME WITH CHARACTER DEVELOPMENT. That's what makes a good drama, and Martin isn't exactly known for his timely writing fashion either. They're already been forced into a corner with Bran's PoV, They should've done 2 seasons for each book, and maybe 3 seasons for book 3 onward. I guess it's too late for that now, but hopefully they'll take things a bit slower from here on out.

You do know that people age, actors not excluded, and aging is even more visibly in young people? Two season per book, that's fourteen seasons, give you Arya and Sansa in their late twenties, Daenerys and Jon in their late thirties, Cersei and Jaime entering their fifties. And a five-and-fifty years old Tyrion. Grabbing the TV audience's attention and holding on to it for fourteen years might be problematic.

I imagine that the producers did think about what can be realistically done and be profitable, and the idea of a decade-and-a-half long show simply wasn't viable.

[Red Tiger]

My MAIN beef with the show is that they're catching up to the book anyway. SLOW IT DOWN, TAKE TIME WITH CHARACTER DEVELOPMENT. That's what makes a good drama, and Martin isn't exactly known for his timely writing fashion either. They're already been forced into a corner with Bran's PoV, They should've done 2 seasons for each book, and maybe 3 seasons for book 3 onward. I guess it's too late for that now, but hopefully they'll take things a bit slower from here on out.

Mainly I think they don't do Stannis justice, but there are other characters they've shit on too as others have pointed out.

They already slowed it down with last season, there was a ton of filler. Plus like Roarer said age and MONEY play a huge factor in this. The audience might not be interested in a show that is too slow and just goes on much longer than necessary.

[sj4iy]

My MAIN beef with the show is that they're catching up to the book anyway. SLOW IT DOWN, TAKE TIME WITH CHARACTER DEVELOPMENT. That's what makes a good drama, and Martin isn't exactly known for his timely writing fashion either. They're already been forced into a corner with Bran's PoV, They should've done 2 seasons for each book, and maybe 3 seasons for book 3 onward. I guess it's too late for that now, but hopefully they'll take things a bit slower from here on out.

Mainly I think they don't do Stannis justice, but there are other characters they've shit on too as others have pointed out.

So there should have been a 20-season tv show instead?

You realize how ludicrous that sounds, right?

[Guard of the Rainking]

My MAIN beef with the show is that they're catching up to the book anyway. SLOW IT DOWN, TAKE TIME WITH CHARACTER DEVELOPMENT. That's what makes a good drama, and Martin isn't exactly known for his timely writing fashion either. They're already been forced into a corner with Bran's PoV, They should've done 2 seasons for each book, and maybe 3 seasons for book 3 onward. I guess it's too late for that now, but hopefully they'll take things a bit slower from here on out.

Mainly I think they don't do Stannis justice, but there are other characters they've shit on too as others have pointed out.

IMO the number of the seasons isn't the problem (yet), it's the length of the seasons. I call BS on them saying that there's not enough time or money. They have probably the biggest budget of any show on HBO ever, and they spend it on rather pointless aerial shots of Meereen and a stupid skeleton fight, when they could just cut those and shoot scenes between characters who need development.

[Red Tiger]

IMO the number of the seasons isn't the problem (yet), it's the length of the seasons. I call BS on them saying that there's not enough time or money. They have probably the biggest budget of any show on HBO ever, and they spend it on rather pointless aerial shots of Meereen and a stupid skeleton fight, when they could just cut those and shoot scenes between characters who need development.

These scenes wouldn't cost as much as say, showing big epic pitched battles like the ones Robb fights in the books.

[Guard of the Rainking]

These scenes wouldn't cost as much as say, showing big epic pitched battles like the ones Robb fights in the books.

You're right, but they cost more than just having regular dialogue scenes between characters in sets that they have already used.