135 replies to this topic

[Tywin's bastard]

TreeTree, on 25 April 2011 - 04:06 PM, said:

I'm with you on the Catelyn line. I don't think it was necessary either. She told Jon to get out which shows that she hates him and even talked about it with Ned. What more do we need?
On the other hand, I don't think the scene with Cersei was a good addition. It wasn't an obvious lie to me. It seemed like they were trying to make her likable. The best thing about Cersei is that she's so UNlikable. To go to Bran's room and say she's praying for him, blah blah blah is one thing. I would believe that as a lie considering the other scenes. But to show real emotion over her own dead child seems like too much of a variation from the book and misleads people who haven't read them. I'm wondering if they are trying to change her for the show, since in one of the pre-show specials the actress said that she thinks Cersei really did love Robert at one time. All of us know that isn't true. What book did she read?

There's definitely room for interpretation but since she's so cold in wising Bran dead just a while earlier I see it as her being extraordinarily adept at trickery. As for her character I don't think she's that unlikeable in the books once we actually get to know her a bit. I feel more pity than dislike. The show will show us more of how characters "really are" since we're not just seeing Stark enemies from Stark eyes, we're seeing them for what they are (like we do with Jaime and Cersei later in the book series). As for Cersei loving Robert, I don't think that's far fetched at all. In AFFC we do learn that she thought Robert was handsome and heroic before they wed (perhaps transferring her feelings for Rhaegar to him) so it seems like she was at some point open to the possibility of that it could work well. When it didn't work she starts loathing him, blaming him for killing Rhaegar and falling back to her true comfort; Jaime.

As for what book Lena read, none. She's only read the script because she thinks that's the best way to go about this.

[Balefont]

Tywin, on 25 April 2011 - 04:24 PM, said:

As for what book Lena read, none. She's only read the script because she thinks that's the best way to go about this.

I think given her character arc, this may actually be a wise choice.

[Civfan]

Quote

This was an odd scene to me. Yes, it fleshes out Cercei's character a bit, but the notion that she ever would allow herself to birth a child of Robert's is a complete left turn from the character as she's written in the books. In the books, she was so full of hate for Robert she aborted the only child he ever impregnated her with. An odd decision, though I see why they did it."

I think I mentioned this in another thread but I was thinking she killed the baby.  Maybe they'll clear that up later, I figured it was to both mention the dark hair/light hair thing and to replace her aborting the baby.

[The_Halfhand]

Tywin, on 25 April 2011 - 03:28 PM, said:

We disagree on the importance of that then. I didn't think she was warming up to Jon in the book, but that's a side note.

She wasn't, but it seemed like it in that scene.  Read it again, you'll see what I mean.  I guess in the over-all view of the story its a small thing, but its those little details that make the books so enjoyable.

Quote

Until I see something that makes it clearly deviate from the book, I will take it as that she was lying, something that's certainly within her character. We'll see as the show goes on. She lost a child but she didn't want to have it.

That's already a clear deviation from the book.  But it seems to me that Cercei loves her children, and she wouldn't kill her own child if it had already been born.

Quote

She didn't want Jaime to kill Bran but she did want Bran to die when the deed was already done, which she also clearly confesses to her brothers. Killing someone and wishing someone already subjected to attempted murder to die are not the same things.

Sure she wanted Bran to die after the fact because she was worried about what he might say.  But she didn't send the assassin after him, and if you remember from the books, she was very upset with Jamie over what he did.  So its not out of character for her to be sad over what happened to Bran.

Quote

Yes, I see how you meant it now but we have vastly different opinions on what's important then. Bran not naming his wolf for a while is not important in my view, it's not even important that the direwolf is named Summer. Things that are important are that Bran likes to climb and gets thrown out a window, that Tyrion is a dwarf etc. Bran naming Summer is a small detail that doesn't affect the plot at all and there are lots of other similar details that have been left out, and some have been put in. They have to choose. Note that I'm talking about 'important' in a general sense as what details are important to us personally differ and are not something that's relevant to how they make the show.

Naming his wolf Summer after looking into the heart of winter is pretty important if you ask me.  There's a lot of symbolism there, and Bran's relationship with Summer is probably the most important one in the books next to Jon and Ghost.  I think that's my biggest criticism of the show is that they strip out all the nuance and symbolism that could easily be layered into the narrative.

Quote

And the wolves were howling and they don't really need to talk about what we already hear. Again it's not important to the plot exactly why so they don't have to to point that out for the new viewers. This is a clear case of where the book can be used as a companion to the series, i.e. where you get more understanding of details by having read it.

Yes, I heard the wolves howling, but there was no context to it for those who haven't read the books.  The didn't know Catelyn had banned the wolves from the tower.  They didn't know they had been howling since Bran's fall.  They didn't know Bran seemed to do better when he could hear them howl.  My point is it would not have been hard to explain these things and give them more meaning.  That, and the howls were awful soft so if you weren't listening for them, they could be easily overlooked.

Quote

Major bits of dialog has been left out everywhere so that's hardly a surprise. And Tyrion having Donal Noye's lines plays on the education part in a similar manner. And we disagree about their friendship. We get to see what they are thinking about in the book and none of them thinks about the other after they've parted. Hardly a sign of a great friendship.

You can disagree all you like, but its made clear in the books that they form a friendship from the time they spent together (the handshake? remember?).  This friendship is referenced a few times in the other books, and will no doubt pay off much later in the series when Tyrion, Jon, and Danny all come together.  I don't mind changing dialogue or cutting stuff, but there are signature lines from the books that can easily be includedn in the show but for some reason are left out.  It just makes me scratch my head, confused.

Quote

I'm not criticizing you about it, just saying that I think your expectations are a bit too high to be able to fully enjoy it for what it is as friendly advice. These are my favorite books as well and I'm watching this with fairly good knowledge of how adaptations are made, and how they usually turn out. That makes it so I'm rather pleasantly surprised at every detail that's left in, rather than annoyed at everything I like in the book that's left out. Pretty much every fantasy series before this has been far worse than this so I don't think what we've gotten was even realistic to expect. So if I've heard "She didn't hurt you... much" I'd have thought "cool, they got that in" (even though I don't think that particular line is one of Martin's better) rather than be annoyed when it wasn't left in.

Then you watch the show differently than I do.  The books are damn near perfect in my opinion, and they're doing a good job of adapting them, but some of their changes make no sense to me.  Hopefully there will be Commentaries on the DVDs to explain why they made the changes they did.

Quote

What's important in an adaptation is keeping true to the spirit, not making things play out exactly like the original. I want an artistic adaptation that becomes it's own entity when I watch this. If I want to make sure I get to hear my favorite lines from the book I'll read that again.

I agree, but the more faithful they can stay to the books, the better the adaptation will be.  I can see them doing stuff like this for a movie version, but they have a lot of time to play with in a TV show, and part of what make the books so enjoyable are these signature moments that Martin layers in there.  So if you think its cool they can take Tyrion's breakfast order word-for-word from the book but leave out lines that carry a powerful impact and set up things later in the series, that's a matter of your taste versus mine.

Quote

Yes, that's exactly the issue. They have to pick and choose by so many things that are in the book, together with making their own thing. At times things are explained in dialog in the book where you can just suffice with the fact that in the show you actually have visuals that speak for you. 10 hours is a short amount of time to tell what's on 700 pages of a pretty intricate story. This far they are doing clearly better than I thought they would.

From what we've heard the pace is the highest in the first two episodes (at least out of the first six) so hopefully things will get even better.

I'm sure the show will get better as time goes on, but its not the fact they're making changes that annoys me.  Its that they eliminate simple things they could EASILY include in the show to make it richer and more faithful to the books, and yet they leave them out.

Geaorge Martin said when he wrote his episode, it was easy, because he just took what was already on the page and put it into screenplay form.  Makes me wonder why the other writers couldn't do the same thing.

[Ser Luke]

Did that conversation between Jaime and Jon happen in the books? I don't have them handy and I don't remember it.

[Winterfelled]

It seems like people are expecting a shot-for-shot remake of the books. This same kind of unnecessary whining happened during the LOTR movies, so I'm not surprised, but it's still frustrating.

Even though "It's not television, it's HBO," it's still a television series, and the rules are different than in literature. They didn't simply make this show for George's readership; they are counting on some new fans who haven't (and likely never will) read the books to becoming regular viewers.

While I would have liked to see Cat say "It should have been you," I totally understand why they changed it. She's a major sympathetic character, and viewers are going to have a hard time rooting for someone who just wished that kind of harm on an innocent teenager. As horrible as it was to read in the books, it's even worse to see happen, and I understand why it was probably too big of a risk. The nature of their relationship was framed perfectly by the replacement line.

This episode, in my opinion, blew the first one away. It was head and shoulders above the first. The drama was high, the knife scene was excellent and believable, and they made the direwolf saving Bran look great, when so many animal-human action scenes, especially on TV, come off badly.

I'm so bummed Sean Bean won't be a bigger part of the series. The scene when the Hound (another great performance, by the way) is walking his horse with the butcher's boy draped over the back, and Ned says "You ran him down?" the pain and horror in Sean's voice anchored the whole episode. You could really feel his frustration and confusion in that one sentence. Absolutely brilliant.

[Tywin's bastard]

The_Halfhand, on 25 April 2011 - 06:18 PM, said:

She wasn't, but it seemed like it in that scene.  Read it again, you'll see what I mean.  I guess in the over-all view of the story its a small thing, but its those little details that make the books so enjoyable.

I remember what you're referring to as I read the book recently. I fully agree that a lot of what makes the books truly great are in the details. Unfortunately we just won't see all of them in the show.

The_Halfhand, on 25 April 2011 - 06:18 PM, said:

That's already a clear deviation from the book.  But it seems to me that Cercei loves her children, and she wouldn't kill her own child if it had already been born.

Yes, I was referring specifically to that Cersei had been pregnant with Robert's child. I just watched the "Behind the Episode" video and they touched on this subject. They didn't say anything definitive (I guess it's up to each viewer to decide) but they felt that she was in part honest and in part deceitful in that scene.

The_Halfhand, on 25 April 2011 - 06:18 PM, said:

Sure she wanted Bran to die after the fact because she was worried about what he might say.  But she didn't send the assassin after him, and if you remember from the books, she was very upset with Jamie over what he did.  So its not out of character for her to be sad over what happened to Bran.

Yes, I never said that she was so anxious for him to die that she would do something about it, I just noted her wish. As for the scene above, I think she was mainly sad when she thought of her own child and more deceitful and scouting when it came to Bran. But as said, it's for each of us to decide until the show gives us any direct answer. That's the beauty of art, that a part is created when every individual experiences it.

The_Halfhand, on 25 April 2011 - 06:18 PM, said:

Yes, I heard the wolves howling, but there was no context to it for those who haven't read the books.  The didn't know Catelyn had banned the wolves from the tower.  They didn't know they had been howling since Bran's fall.  They didn't know Bran seemed to do better when he could hear them howl.  My point is it would not have been hard to explain these things and give them more meaning.  That, and the howls were awful soft so if you weren't listening for them, they could be easily overlooked.

Yes, the non-readers will not get everything like that. I don't really agree that they could have included all the details you mention well though as it would make the scene awfully chatty with little breathing space to let the emotions sink in. But that's just my opinion.

I don't think anyone actually missed the howling though as Cat freaked out and told Robb to shut the window so the sound would stop.

The_Halfhand, on 25 April 2011 - 06:18 PM, said:

You can disagree all you like, but its made clear in the books that they form a friendship from the time they spent together (the handshake? remember?).  This friendship is referenced a few times in the other books, and will no doubt pay off much later in the series when Tyrion, Jon, and Danny all come together.  I don't mind changing dialogue or cutting stuff, but there are signature lines from the books that can easily be includedn in the show but for some reason are left out.  It just makes me scratch my head, confused.

I can and I will. I think they found respect for each other and saw some of themselves in the other but I don't see that part being hard to tell with what I've already seen. If Jon and Tyrion meet again, I don't see them acting like they are seeing a dear friend for the first time in years. I see them having trust and keep building on their relationship. When it comes to Jon and deep friendship, I think of Sam.

The_Halfhand, on 25 April 2011 - 06:18 PM, said:

Then you watch the show differently than I do.  The books are damn near perfect in my opinion, and they're doing a good job of adapting them, but some of their changes make no sense to me.  Hopefully there will be Commentaries on the DVDs to explain why they made the changes they did.

I don't go as far as to call them near perfection, although they are still the best I've read all in all. As for explaining things as why a certain line wasn't included, I can't fuel your hopes with my expectations since I don't see them going into detail about that. If they talk about specific lines, they'll be talking about lines that are in the show. I suppose you could try to get a question about a specific line or two through if someone that's about to interview them are taking questions from fans though (like Ran recently did).

The_Halfhand, on 25 April 2011 - 06:18 PM, said:

I agree, but the more faithful they can stay to the books, the better the adaptation will be.  I can see them doing stuff like this for a movie version, but they have a lot of time to play with in a TV show, and part of what make the books so enjoyable are these signature moments that Martin layers in there.  So if you think its cool they can take Tyrion's breakfast order word-for-word from the book but leave out lines that carry a powerful impact and set up things later in the series, that's a matter of your taste versus mine.

I agree, with the change to "the more faithful they can be to the spirit of the books...". Making an adaptation that follows a novel word for word is commonly seen as a bad way to do it (something George has said as well).

And yes, I'm fine with that scene. It's not much more than 10 seconds that shows us a bit of what they are eating in the North, it visually shows us a hall of Winterfell and is a nice lead in to the breakfast discussion. I don't think the quality of the episode had been any better if they took those 10 seconds and explained that Cat didn't allow Summer to be in Bran's room. And if I were to do such time puzzles with the episode I'd be sitting here for hours, given the amount of lines that are not in the show. It's unfortunate for you if your entertainment gets diminished by lines you know that aren't contradicted but not just said. With that mindset there's not really much you can do to mitigate it.

The_Halfhand, on 25 April 2011 - 06:18 PM, said:

I'm sure the show will get better as time goes on, but its not the fact they're making changes that annoys me.  Its that they eliminate simple things they could EASILY include in the show to make it richer and more faithful to the books, and yet they leave them out.

Geaorge Martin said when he wrote his episode, it was easy, because he just took what was already on the page and put it into screenplay form.  Makes me wonder why the other writers couldn't do the same thing.

Putting it in screenplay form doesn't mean writing the same thing on another paper, it means adapting dialog and everything else to fit to the scenes. I don't really see the point in critiquing George's episode and others in comparison to it before it's been aired. George has also said that the other screenwriters have been very faithful to his work so there's nothing saying that his will be significantly different if we just go by a few sentences he's happened to have said. We'll get the actual result in a few weeks.

It's also interesting to see that when we look at the reviews of the first six episodes the scene readers and non-readers alike have praised the most has been one that's completely new.

[sonny]

TreeTree, on 25 April 2011 - 03:47 PM, said:

Another thing I noticed about Catelyn in the show was that she acted really whiny about Ned leaving. In the book she was much stronger about it because she knew it HAD to be done. Especially after the letter she received from her sister. She NEVER threw it in his face that he had to be the king's hand. In the show, she whined about him making a choice he didn't have to make.

Incorrect ser! After Bran fell, she begged Ned not to go and was initially bitter about it. It's not written out in dialogue but her narration makes it quite clear. "He had no choice, he had told her, and then left, choosing."

I actually appreciated this version better because she didn't want him to go from the start instead of being all for it and then all against it. I thought the book version made her seem more irrational.

I also thought that whole "It should have been you" line was ridiculous in the book and didn't do her any favors. I think the actress looked angry enough at Jon's presence without having that bit of melodrama in there.

[Inglorious Pencil]

Tywin, on 25 April 2011 - 07:16 PM, said:

I think they found respect for each other and saw some of themselves in the other but I don't see that part being hard to tell with what I've already seen. If Jon and Tyrion meet again, I don't see them acting like they are seeing a dear friend for the first time in years. I see them having trust and keep building on their relationship. When it comes to Jon and deep friendship, I think of Sam.

I agree. Actually I think that it's true to life - a meaningful encounter like that between Jon and Tyrion doesn't necessarily translate into friendship. I think their relationship represents of those situations where a complete outsider, rather than the people who have been by your side your whole life, says the right thing at the right moment and makes you have an epiphany of sorts. If anything, Tyrion is more of an inspiration than a friend to Jon.

Quote

It's also interesting to see that when we look at the reviews of the first six episodes the scene readers and non-readers alike have praised the most has been one that's completely new.

To be honest, while I'm kind of bothered by some things that have been changed - i.e. Catelyn's characterization, and perhaps Cersei's, though we'll have to see how that plays out in the future - I appreciated most of the additions so far. Maybe because they bring an element of surprise even after years spent in this fandom

[mitsuk0]

probably been said but were on earth is the 3 eyed crow.... thats a pretty big thing in the books, and of course later on.... i don't think they should have missed that

also, very minor but.... why do the maesters not have the collars around their neck?

[Zelticgar]

The collar is there. It is clearly shown dangling near his waste. Most of it is covered by his robes but you can see the different size links when you look to his stomach area.

[TerraPrime]

mitsuk0, on 25 April 2011 - 07:55 PM, said:

probably been said but were on earth is the 3 eyed crow.... thats a pretty big thing in the books, and of course later on.... i don't think they should have missed that

also, very minor but.... why do the maesters not have the collars around their neck?

The current hypothesis is that the creators of the show didn't want too much magic early on, because the presence of magic tends to devalue the merit of a show/book in some people's eyes. I think this might be resolved later either through interviews or maybe DVD comment tracks. I'd be interested in finding out for sure.

[mitsuk0]

Zelticgar, on 25 April 2011 - 08:03 PM, said:

The collar is there. It is clearly shown dangling near his waste. Most of it is covered by his robes but you can see the different size links when you look to his stomach area.

ahhh.. isnt the collar worn around their neck? not waste/stomach???

ooo prime that makes sense ^^

[The_Halfhand]

Tywin, on 25 April 2011 - 07:16 PM, said:

I remember what you're referring to as I read the book recently. I fully agree that a lot of what makes the books truly great are in the details. Unfortunately we just won't see all of them in the show.

I can understand them leaving some things out.  But the ones I mentioned are specifically important to character arcs or future stories in the series.  And they could so easily be added.  i think that's the point I'm trying to make.  I don't expect a word-for-word adaptation, and I don't mind them adding and subtracting stuff, but there's so much signature stuff they're leaving out that could easily be added.  That's what concerns me most.

Quote

Yes, the non-readers will not get everything like that. I don't really agree that they could have included all the details you mention well though as it would make the scene awfully chatty with little breathing space to let the emotions sink in. But that's just my opinion.

It would only require a few lines of dialogue.  If you dumped a largely unnecessary scene like Jamie and Jon by the forge, and include a scene about how the family is dealing with Bran's fall, you could easily get all of that across.  But I guess showing Jamie being a prick is more important that the Starks mourning over Bran and exploring the strange relationship they have with their wolves. *shrug*

Quote

I can and I will. I think they found respect for each other and saw some of themselves in the other but I don't see that part being hard to tell with what I've already seen. If Jon and Tyrion meet again, I don't see them acting like they are seeing a dear friend for the first time in years. I see them having trust and keep building on their relationship. When it comes to Jon and deep friendship, I think of Sam.

From page 213 of the paperback:

"Thank you, my lord of Lannister."  He pulled off his glove and offered his bare hand.  "Friend."
Tyrion found himself oddly touched. "Most of my kin are bastards," he said with a wry smile, "but you're the first I've had to friend."  He pulled a glove off with his teeth and clasped Snow by the hand, flesh against flesh.  The boy's grip was firm and strong.

Yes, Jon is better friends with Sam, and Grenn, and Pyp, etc.  But make no mistake, he IS friends with Tyrion as well, and its because the dwarf gave him such good council.  And the lessons Tyrion gave Jon help form him into the man he becomes.  That's why I'd like to see their scenes together stick closer to what they are in the book, because they will not be together again for a long, long time.

Quote

I agree, with the change to "the more faithful they can be to the spirit of the books...". Making an adaptation that follows a novel word for word is commonly seen as a bad way to do it (something George has said as well).

And I don't expect a word-for-word adaptation, but I expect them to know what fans want to see and work it into the show.  A lot of the stuff they are leaving out is stuff that would make fans of the books squeeeeeeee.  So its just odd that they're leaving so much of it out in favor of other things that aren't necessary.

Quote

And yes, I'm fine with that scene. It's not much more than 10 seconds that shows us a bit of what they are eating in the North, it visually shows us a hall of Winterfell and is a nice lead in to the breakfast discussion.

Here's the thing though - I'm fine with the scene as well because its almost VERBATUM from the book, down to the breakfast order.  So why can't they do that with other scenes when it can be done just as easily?  That's my point.  You could easily cut Tyrion ordering breakfast and slip in another quick scene about the direwolves, let's say, and still get across the same information.  But they chose to stick to the book exactly for that scene and not others.  Why?  I don't mind hearing Tyrion asking for burned bacon, but when so much other stuff is left out for no good reason, it makes me wonder where the writer's priorities lie.

Quote

I don't think the quality of the episode had been any better if they took those 10 seconds and explained that Cat didn't allow Summer to be in Bran's room. And if I were to do such time puzzles with the episode I'd be sitting here for hours, given the amount of lines that are not in the show. It's unfortunate for you if your entertainment gets diminished by lines you know that aren't contradicted but not just said. With that mindset there's not really much you can do to mitigate it.

I disagree.  I think the quality would have been much better the more information and backstory they could have put in.  I do enjoy the show, but not as much as I would if they could hit all the right beats to it.

Quote

Putting it in screenplay form doesn't mean writing the same thing on another paper, it means adapting dialog and everything else to fit to the scenes. I don't really see the point in critiquing George's episode and others in comparison to it before it's been aired. George has also said that the other screenwriters have been very faithful to his work so there's nothing saying that his will be significantly different if we just go by a few sentences he's happened to have said. We'll get the actual result in a few weeks.

I've adapted books and stories for screenplays before, so I'm aware of what goes into it.  Keep in mind, I don't mind changes and new additions.  But I do mind editing out awesome stuff from the book that could easily be in the show.  See my point?  Its not enough to ruin the show, but it is enough to annoy a fan of the books.  Just saying.

Quote

It's also interesting to see that when we look at the reviews of the first six episodes the scene readers and non-readers alike have praised the most has been one that's completely new.

Not sure what scene you're referring to, but its easy to praise a new scene because there's nothing to be disappointed by from it.  The direwolf scene was horribly handled, and they're making Jon far to sullen.  Tyrion's scenes are changed too much for my liking, especially when he's with Jon.  But whatever, the show is still good.  I just would like to see them stick a little closer to the book in the details.  If a show like LOST can layer in all kinds of easter eggs and subtlety I'm sure this show can do that because it's far better than LOST.

Also, keep in mind the purpose of this thread is to highlight what was different from the books to the episode, not a true critique of the episode.  So you can argue with me about the quality of the show, but you can't argue over what they decided to leave in and leave out.  :-)

[TerraPrime]

The_Halfhand, on 25 April 2011 - 10:57 PM, said:

Not sure what scene you're referring to, but its easy to praise a new scene because there's nothing to be disappointed by from it.  The direwolf scene was horribly handled, and they're making Jon far to sullen.  

Did we read the same book? Jon was sullen and cantankerous until he got some sense beaten into him at the NW. It was at the NW that he got over his bastard status to see that yes, he was a bastard, but he's still a noble for all that and had a good life compared to most others that he now calls brothers. The only exception is when he interacts with Arya and Bran, and to some extent Robb. When I read the book I thought of him as "oh, the emo-goth of the family - each family's gotta have one. Look, even his wolf is all white and pale and tragic."

[Relic]

I hated the exclusion of the Three Eyed Crow and the naming of Summer. No good reason to leave either of those out, other than to dumb things down.

[The_Halfhand]

TerraPrime, on 25 April 2011 - 11:08 PM, said:

Did we read the same book? Jon was sullen and cantankerous until he got some sense beaten into him at the NW. It was at the NW that he got over his bastard status to see that yes, he was a bastard, but he's still a noble for all that and had a good life compared to most others that he now calls brothers. The only exception is when he interacts with Arya and Bran, and to some extent Robb. When I read the book I thought of him as "oh, the emo-goth of the family - each family's gotta have one. Look, even his wolf is all white and pale and tragic."

I'm pretty sure we did.  In the book Jon is far less mopey than he is in the show.  He has a brooding nature, but we have some chapters of him at Winterfell having fun, smiling, interacting with his siblings, playing with ghost, etc.  It seems all he does in the show is act angry, practice his swordplay, and act all mopey.  I'd like more than a 1-note Jon Snow.

[Asha—Not Yara!]

Relic, on 26 April 2011 - 12:53 AM, said:

I hated the exclusion of the Three Eyed Crow and the naming of Summer. No good reason to leave either of those out, other than to dumb things down.

I can understand being disappointed that they have been excluded so far, but I doubt it's to "dumb down" the show. I don't think "His name is Summer" line would have worked as well without the dream set up and having Bran dramatically wake up as Lady died and ending the episode there was an awesome way to do it from a TV perspective. It communicates to the viewers that there's some special connection between the kids and wolves, and it makes them want to turn in next week to see what happens when Bran tells what he saw. Of course we know he doesn't remember, but non-readers won't unless they've spoilered themselves.

One of the promotional posters had the Three Eyed Crow in it, so we're going to see it eventually or else they wouldn't have made the artwork for it. Patience.

I'm really shocked that some people think that scene with Ceresi and Catelyn was added to make Ceresi likable. If that was the producers' intention, it failed miserably because the show clearly established that Ceresi wants Bran to die and has good reason to want him to die. Therefore her story to Catelyn (while it probably has a grain of truth to it) is nothing but a manipulative ploy.

Edited by Mellisandra, 26 April 2011 - 01:17 AM.

[KyleLitke]

I'd wait til the beginning of next episode before I'd totally discount Bran's dream anyway. They could pick up from a few minutes before he wakes up. They may also skip the dream and just describe it, which for now would be fine.

There's no real way to do the dream in that episode and have it work, not without totally changing the episodes ending. They went with a dramatic juxtaposition of Lady dying as Bran wakes up. If you show the dream, how do you do that? You can't cut away from the whole thing with Lady to suddenly show this random crow dream, then cut back to it then Bran waking up...doesn't work. You could have, I suppose, done the buildup, then cut to the dream, then Brans eyes opening (but NOT with him naming Summer, that's an episode ending line, not a "pre Lady death" line), then gone to Ned killing Lady, but eh. I thought the way they handled it worked, and if you're doing it that way, the dream doesn't fit and would have entirely taken viewers out of the moment.

Kind of the same thing with "His name is Summer". It would have been really weird to do it the way it happened in the book. Bran doesn't just suddenly wake up and blurt out to absolutely nobody "His name is Summer!". He wakes up, then someone notices he's awake, then they run out of the room, then they go get Robb, then Robb comes in, and then Bran tells HIM that he named the direwolf Summer. How would you suggest they do it? Bran randomly wakes up yelling Summer to himself? Or they do the dramatic death of Lady then cut away to a minute or two long scene where they go run and get Robb? Neither one works. I was looking for it too but it just doesn't work with the way they wanted to do the episode, and frankly, if the next episode starts with Robb coming in and Bran telling him, it's actually perfectly in line with what happened in the books, they just cut the episode off as his eyes open, rather than as Robb runs in.

[Tywin's bastard]

The_Halfhand, on 25 April 2011 - 10:57 PM, said:

I can understand them leaving some things out.  But the ones I mentioned are specifically important to character arcs or future stories in the series.  And they could so easily be added.  i think that's the point I'm trying to make.  I don't expect a word-for-word adaptation, and I don't mind them adding and subtracting stuff, but there's so much signature stuff they're leaving out that could easily be added.  That's what concerns me most.

The problems become clearer when you notice that many of the people wishing that things had been added are wishing for different things.

The_Halfhand, on 25 April 2011 - 10:57 PM, said:

It would only require a few lines of dialogue.  If you dumped a largely unnecessary scene like Jamie and Jon by the forge, and include a scene about how the family is dealing with Bran's fall, you could easily get all of that across.  But I guess showing Jamie being a prick is more important that the Starks mourning over Bran and exploring the strange relationship they have with their wolves. *shrug*

Jaime will be a more important character in the show than he is in the first book. Also a meeting between him and Jon, that could have taken place in the book but was never shown, is intriguing to me. It gives me something new, instead of just the same thing I've already read. As for the family dealing with Bran's death, I think that comes across well for many of them without them having to state it too clearly. You can't tell everything too clearly or the show will look like it doesn't think the viewers are very bright. The connection with the wolves is most important for Bran and that can very well be explained more further on. There's nothing forcing them to explain things in the exact same order that the book does.

The_Halfhand, on 25 April 2011 - 10:57 PM, said:

From page 213 of the paperback:

"Thank you, my lord of Lannister."  He pulled off his glove and offered his bare hand.  "Friend."
Tyrion found himself oddly touched. "Most of my kin are bastards," he said with a wry smile, "but you're the first I've had to friend."  He pulled a glove off with his teeth and clasped Snow by the hand, flesh against flesh.  The boy's grip was firm and strong.

Yes, Jon is better friends with Sam, and Grenn, and Pyp, etc.  But make no mistake, he IS friends with Tyrion as well, and its because the dwarf gave him such good council.  And the lessons Tyrion gave Jon help form him into the man he becomes.  That's why I'd like to see their scenes together stick closer to what they are in the book, because they will not be together again for a long, long time.

I think there's a lot of difference in calling someone friend like that (which is basically a sign of respect and understanding) and "deep friendship" as you described it. As for Tyrion's council, we have heard Jon say that no one told him the truth but him (we don't see Tyrion but it's obvious that he's talking to him) and that Tyrion gives more advice than he does in the book so the relationship that forms between them will most likely be very clear to the audience. I don't think the relationship hangs on any one line of dialog, it's better written than that.

The_Halfhand, on 25 April 2011 - 10:57 PM, said:

And I don't expect a word-for-word adaptation, but I expect them to know what fans want to see and work it into the show.  A lot of the stuff they are leaving out is stuff that would make fans of the books squeeeeeeee.  So its just odd that they're leaving so much of it out in favor of other things that aren't necessary.

What fans want differs a lot. If they can get George happy that's a bigger sign of that they have succeeded than that any individual fan (including me) likes or dislikes it. Not least since George knows more than most fans about adapting things to TV. And again, what's not necessary to you can be that to others. We've obviously not seen eye to eye on the exact importance of various lines from the book. Why people differ in that is not easy to understand, we can only accept that it's so. Some people want the show to be like a photography of the original, others want it to be like a stylized painting.

And don't forget that D&D are big fans of the books themselves, even impressing George with their knowledge about the series. They probably know the story just as well as you or I, if not better.

The_Halfhand, on 25 April 2011 - 10:57 PM, said:

Here's the thing though - I'm fine with the scene as well because its almost VERBATUM from the book, down to the breakfast order.  So why can't they do that with other scenes when it can be done just as easily?  That's my point.  You could easily cut Tyrion ordering breakfast and slip in another quick scene about the direwolves, let's say, and still get across the same information.  But they chose to stick to the book exactly for that scene and not others.  Why?  I don't mind hearing Tyrion asking for burned bacon, but when so much other stuff is left out for no good reason, it makes me wonder where the writer's priorities lie.

There are lots of things to take into consideration when making a script (no doubt a good deal that I don't even know about) but for your exact example, cutting 10-15 seconds of Tyrion walking to his family and instead inserting a talking scene with detailed information is the kind of thing that would make the show seemed more rushed than it already is. And an entire scene that just lasts 10 seconds will make it look jerky.

The_Halfhand, on 25 April 2011 - 10:57 PM, said:

I disagree.  I think the quality would have been much better the more information and backstory they could have put in.  I do enjoy the show, but not as much as I would if they could hit all the right beats to it.

But now you are just talking about giving information and that's what I stated by saying keeping to the spirit of the original. What I said is not something that's good to do is to rip all scenes exactly from the book with the same dialog because books and TV does not play by the same rules and some scenes, or information, is best told in different ways in the two mediums.

The_Halfhand, on 25 April 2011 - 10:57 PM, said:

I've adapted books and stories for screenplays before, so I'm aware of what goes into it.  Keep in mind, I don't mind changes and new additions.  But I do mind editing out awesome stuff from the book that could easily be in the show.  See my point?  Its not enough to ruin the show, but it is enough to annoy a fan of the books.  Just saying.

I know what you mean but as someone that hasn't adapted any books for screenplays I still think you've given several examples that would press an already rushed episode over the limit where it becomes clumsy storytelling. Some things are also done from that you are set in that information must be told in the same order as in the book, instead of waiting to see if they chose to spread it out differently in the show.

The_Halfhand, on 25 April 2011 - 10:57 PM, said:

Not sure what scene you're referring to, but its easy to praise a new scene because there's nothing to be disappointed by from it.  The direwolf scene was horribly handled, and they're making Jon far to sullen.  Tyrion's scenes are changed too much for my liking, especially when he's with Jon.  But whatever, the show is still good.  I just would like to see them stick a little closer to the book in the details.  If a show like LOST can layer in all kinds of easter eggs and subtlety I'm sure this show can do that because it's far better than LOST.

Also, keep in mind the purpose of this thread is to highlight what was different from the books to the episode, not a true critique of the episode.  So you can argue with me about the quality of the show, but you can't argue over what they decided to leave in and leave out.  :-)

They didn't say what scene it was, although my guess is that it's Robert and Cersei talking alone. As for Tyrion, I think he was just as he is in the book with Jon in the forest. Part mocking, part educating but thoroughly honest.

And LOST is a bad comparison because that was written directly for TV and the details could be created exactly for that medium. GoT does not have less intricate details (I'd say the contrary given how much they hint to the books without being obvious about it) and Lost definitely is far more shallow than the ASOIAF book series (despite having an average of 20 episodes per season). I've of course only seen two episodes of GoT but this far I think it's better than Lost was when it started.

Other than that I disagree with things that Tyrion isn't saying enough to Jon (as I think he seems to say more in the show than in the book given the previews) I haven't disagreed on that things are left out. I've just said that I don't think all those things are as crucial to the plot as you think, plus that I have explained a different way to look at it in order to more easily enjoy it. It's not easy to change your views but it's still worth discussing in my opinion.

And from another post:

The_Halfhand, on 26 April 2011 - 12:59 AM, said:

I'm pretty sure we did.  In the book Jon is far less mopey than he is in the show.  He has a brooding nature, but we have some chapters of him at Winterfell having fun, smiling, interacting with his siblings, playing with ghost, etc.  It seems all he does in the show is act angry, practice his swordplay, and act all mopey.  I'd like more than a 1-note Jon Snow.

In the show we see him laughing with Robb when they teach Bran how to shoot a bow, he's talking to Arya, Bran, Robb and Benjen (and he's not angry at any of them) and so on. I agree with the other poster that they are portraying him well and your description of all he does in the show is obviously wrong.