The show versus the books.. What differences

[boojam]

It's not about the budget. D&D have stated multiple times that GoT is too big a production to afford the time for writing episodes. Last year, the last special effects for episode 10 were finished about a week or two before the episode aired. At that time, D&D were already busy writing the new season. They go straight from writing to shooting to post production and have maybe a week or two off every year. It simply cannot be done.

It would have meant D&D allowing more line producers and , as I said, would have cost more. HBO's ROME had 3 main producers and 3 in-line producers and a 100 million dollars the first season.

I can see HBO's caution , 60 million would have been a lot to lose if GOT had of cratered that first season.

Now it's a defacto lock on the process.

If D&D were flexible and HBO ponied up 100 million more trusted line producers could be hired, actors paid more, but 12 episodes is indeed possible with more resources.

Just a gritch, that ship has sailed.

[sj4iy]

It would have meant D&D allowing more line producers and , as I said, would have cost more. HBO's ROME had 3 main producers and 3 in-line producers and a 100 million dollars the first season.

I can see HBO's caution , 60 million would have been a lot to lose if GOT had of cratered that first season.

Now it's a defacto lock on the process.

If D&D were flexible and HBO ponied up 100 million more trusted line producers could be hired, actors paid more, but 12 episodes is indeed possible with more resources.

Just a gritch, that ship has sailed.

No, it would have meant that the seasons would not come out in a timely fashion and quality would drop. It's never JUST about money, and they have stated over and over again that to stay on their yearly schedule, there is simply no time to add in shooting for an extra 2 episodes without affecting the overall quality.

Personally, I'd rather have a high quality 10-episode season every year in April than cramming in two more episodes (probably needlessly) and losing the quality and the yearly schedule.

[Ghosts Lunch]

Changes I've liked:

The Hound vs. Brienne

Stannis at the Iron Bank

Tywin stag skinning scene

Arya vs. Tywin

Tormund and Mance attacking the Wall at the same time

Arya killing Polliver

Stannis not knowing about the incest until he received Ned Stark's letter

I like Stannis better in the show and I like the ironborn better in the show (excluding that one regrettable scene in season 4)

Changes I've disliked:

Littlefinger telling Sansa how the Hound was burned

Jon and Ygritte instead of Jon and the Halfhand

Karstarks making up half of Robb's army

Yara at the Dreadfort

Jojen's death (not the fact that he died, but that I thought his death was anti-climatic)

Observations I've seen book readers make that I don't understand:

Oberyn lived in a brothel (only two scenes)

Jamie killing his cousin was out of character (at this point, he was still under Cercei's influence and didn't care about honor. He was willing to kill a child for her, I don't see why he wouldn't kill a distant relative)

Show Brienne is stupid (I just don't see it)

Craster knocking Jon unconscious was ridiculous ( I don't get how this is a disservice to Jon's character just because they didn't give him eyes in the back of his head)

Dany's Quarth storyline derailed the books (with the exception of the House of the Undying, Quarth in the books was, imo, just as boring)

Yeah there are some things the show has enhanced

For my part I'm speaking as someone who read the books halfway through a season 4, so I can see both sides of the story

Eg I've never quite got why people have a big problem with season 2, the chain thing would have been cool but the sky isn't going to fall down. For me the show has only started to become disjointed in season 4. The Sept scene was understandably controversial, I can understand what it was now, it is meant to be understood as an inverse of the Tower of the Hand scene from E10, they thematically mirror each other but they don't seem to have got that in a standalone scene it would be viewed controversially and it raises uncomfortable issues in greater society about consent

I really liked the Arya/Tywin scenes actually, it made Tywin a lot more human and one-dimensional. He isn't "evil" or cruel for his own sake ala Aerys he is just pretty much strongly Machiavellian and a lot of the reasons why can be seen through his relationship with Tytos

The issue the show has going forward is that eg are increasingly diverging in small ways (butterfly effect) but then they have to pull it back into the plot and it starts to involve increasingly large pullbacks which stretch logic a bit. Eg Tyrions rationale for going up to see Tywin is rather odd

Some of it I understand, there are practical TV show issues that come into play. I enjoy both, but will end up enjoying the. As different things.

They simply can't put all of the Manderly/Dustin stuff plus the Vale intricacies in despite the fact I am loving it all in the books, I do think there should be room for a condensed Young Griff (just him and Jon Connington) and Ironborn (Euron and Victarion, no Damphair or Seal weddings etc). They could have had Arianne and Two Sand Snakes, and no Quentyn

[Ghosts Lunch]

I haven't seen Season 4, yet. I wouldn't say that Cersei has been whitewashed. She's committed her fair share of crimes. But, she has been made more sympathetic than in the books.

This is a very rare case of the Show doing a better job at characterisation than the books, IMHO.

Yeah they make her more humane, I've got no problem with that or the season 1 convo with Robert for example,

And as said earlier I like the Roose/Ramsay "winning his fathers approval" plus the Arya/Tywin Harrenhall arc

My issue is there comes a point though where they are becoming something of an apologist and making it seem "like her hand has been forced" (eg this idea the mines have run dry when in the books they haven't and) when it wasn't, Maggy the Frog explains a lot but in the end a lot of it is her hubris which is her undoing

Fortunately the whole "you're not as smart as you think you are" has been established by Tywin, so hopefully that is what comes into play, she tries to be clever and smart but is often missing a further layer of insight in her arrogance and makes mis-steps

Obviously they've set up issues with Tycho to not be her fault, we'll see what happens with high sparrow, Pryce is a good actor so hopefully they are setting his character up to duly outwit her

[boojam]

No, it would have meant that the seasons would not come out in a timely fashion and quality would drop. It's never JUST about money, and they have stated over and over again that to stay on their yearly schedule, there is simply no time to add in shooting for an extra 2 episodes without affecting the overall quality.

Personally, I'd rather have a high quality 10-episode season every year in April than cramming in two more episodes (probably needlessly) and losing the quality and the yearly schedule.

No so. It would mean adding another film crew , using Bryan Cogman and Dave Hill with that third crew , D&D trust them now. Same filming schedule, just more places simultaneously.

More resources on post production , more help there. It could be done with sacrificing quality.

It would just cost more money ... which is the crux of the thing.

[James Arryn]

I agree show Cersei is a lot more sympathetic/human than book Cersei. The cost has been to lump it all on Joff, but I guess that's pretty academic.

[FreeParking]

I wouldn't be surprised if it turns out that Cersei sent the assassin after Bran in the show. Joffrey doing it in the books always felt weak to me. This season Tyrion mentions Cersei using honest feelings toward dishonest ends or something like that. It made me think of when Cersei went to Bran's room (possibly to scope the room out) and told Cat that story about her first son who died, which was confirmed as true when she and Robert had their conversation later in the season.

[James Arryn]

I wouldn't be surprised if it turns out that Cersei sent the assassin after Bran in the show. Joffrey doing it in the books always felt weak to me. This season Tyrion mentions Cersei using honest feelings toward dishonest ends or something like that. It made me think of when Cersei went to Bran's room (possibly to scope the room out) and told Cat that story about her first son who died, which was confirmed as true when she and Robert had their conversation later in the season.

Unless I'm wrong, the Bran assassin is actually Joff's doing. The stuff he got lumped with was all Robert's bastards being butchered and similar.

Edit: Nevermind, I misread your post.

[Trogdor Targaryen]

When I realized that Jon had just told Mance that Grenn had died holding the gate, my stomach twisted in a knot so tight that I couldn't even hear the next minute or two of dialogue.

[WinterRaven]

A few that come to mind which I didn't like.

1. No Manderly

2. No Tyrion learns about Tysha scene

3. No Patchface

With that being said, I really like the show. I understand that they have to cut/change stuff to fit the whole story in there.

[Alex Storm]

I wish the show would have made Jaime into the much greater fighter like he was in the books. If Jaime and Ned had the fight outside the brothel in the books, Jaime would have made quick work of him. Also Brienne beats Jaime pretty easily in the show, when in the books it was a much more even fight and I think Brienne even recalls being scared for her life during the fight.

[NightGathers998]

-Hate that they changed Jeyne Westerling to Talisa.

-It drives me crazy that Coldhands and Strong Belwas aren't in the show

-Casting for the Mountain is inconsistent. Season 2 Gregor sucked

-Asha was changed to Yara instead of OSHA being changed

-Random nonsense like Grey Worm/Missandei romance garbage

-Locke......terrible

[The Dragons Hand]

Daenerys' reasoning for banishing Jorah in the show "Fucker sent some letters."

[alcasinoroyale]

The only things I've disliked are:

1. Leaving out Tysha - It would have made Tyrion's motivation for killing Tywin more compelling and understandable.

2. Littlefinger's Character - He is more mysterious and clever in the books

3. Yara at the Dreadfort - The most pointless scene in the show's history

4. Dany banishing Jorah - Should have stayed the same as it was in the books

5. Jon and Qhorin - Jon's storyline in Season 2 left out a lot from the books

6. Jaime raping Cersei - That was uncalled for, but it was mistake by the director

7. Sam and Gilly, Grey Worm and Missandei - It doesn't contribute to the main plot at all

Otherwise, I think the show has done a reasonably good job adapting the books. Yes, there have been more divergences as the seasons go on, but most of them I can kind of understand where D&D are coming from.

[Mad Madam Mim]

I understand that casts need to be trimmed but i do wish they had kept Coldhands. Visually I think he would have looked great and would have added a sense of mystery to Bran's otherwise dull storyline, I think show watchers would have enjoyed him just as much as book readers.

I also have lots of nitpicks but I am trying to think of the show and the books as separate things so that I keep my rage to a minimum.

[Iron Maiden Islands]

Getting a little annoyed at people complaining how the show is "butchering" their favorite characters!!! The screen writers for Game of Thrones read the ASOIAF books the same as any other fan. Plenty of fans have read the books and came away with different vastly interpretations of the characters and the story, as is to be expected. When people get bent out of shape that the screen writers for the show interpret the story in a different matter than themselves personally, I think it's pretty dumb!

[alcasinoroyale]

Getting a little annoyed at people complaining how the show is "butchering" their favorite characters!!! The screen writers for Game of Thrones read the ASOIAF books the same as any other fan. Plenty of fans have read the books and came away with different vastly interpretations of the characters and the story, as is to be expected. When people get bent out of shape that the screen writers for the show interpret the story in a different matter than themselves personally, I think it's pretty dumb!

It's really the same with anything that is adapted from a book. The book readers will always criticize the movie or television show, even if it does the book justice.

[sj4iy]

It's really the same with anything that is adapted from a book. The book readers will always criticize the movie or television show, even if it does the book justice.

This. I've been around enough fandoms to know that there will always be people who complain about even the most faithful adaptations for one reason or another. Some people just can't see them as separate entities.

[Waho]

This. I've been around enough fandoms to know that there will always be people who complain about even the most faithful adaptations for one reason or another. Some people just can't see them as separate entities.

So you don't think some of the criticisms coming from this thread are justified? I get that it's an adaptation and we have to see it that way, but even then I think there's some really good and reasonnable points being made here.

[sj4iy]

So you don't think some of the criticisms coming from this thread are justified? I get that it's an adaptation and we have to see it that way, but even then I think there's some really good and reasonnable points being made here.

I don't think any criticism that says "the show was bad because it was different in the book" is justified. Why? Because it shouldn't be compared to the books- it should be judged on its own merits. There's nothing wrong with criticizing the show, but it aloud be criticized in terms of its storyline and not what people expected the storyline to be or wanted it to be.

I've criticized the show. I've criticized the books. But I've never criticized either because I wanted it to be like the other. I look at it and say, "okay, how does it make sense in the context of what has happened so far?"

Now, you can say "I like the way the book did it better", but there should be a valid reason behind it. Not just because you expected it to be that way and it wasn't. It should be based on how each medium handled a certain situation.

I've seen some people validly criticize the show around here- but much more criticize solely on the fact that it wasn't the same. And that's not valid- that's unrealistic expectations. A TV show with a budget and a time restraint cannot realistically replicate an entire book series like ASOIAF. Even one without those constraints STILL could not replicate it, because it would make for terrible television with so many characters to follow. The show already pushes the envelope with the amount of characters they have (most non-book readers get easily confused with the names, in my experience), and that's only a fraction of the characters in the actual series.

The show is a critical and popular success. Many book purists don't want to admit that, but they are. But it's a bit ridiculous when you talk to someone who insists that the writers of the show are "no talent hacks" when it's so obviously not true.

So, yes- there are valid complaints one can make against the show. But a real complaint shouldn't require one to reference the books to make it.