Jump to content

Taking the Adaptation to Task: A TV Critic’s Perspective


Westeros

Recommended Posts

We’ve only had one or two outside of contributions this year to our features section, so it was with great pleasure when Miodrag Zarković—a television critic for Serbia’s popular weekly magazine Pečat—contacted us and offered a lengthy consideration on the series to date, in English for an English-speaking audience. Bringing his knowledge of television and literature to bear, as well as his appreciation of the source material, Mr. Zarković shares his views with the readers of Westeros.org in an article titled, “An Adaptation Without Honor, or Adaptation Morghulis - This One’s Dead Already”. As you can guess, he wasn’t a fan.His trenchant commentary is not going to appeal to everyone, and there are points we ourselves would happily argue with him about, but his observations come from the heart, are built on a grounding in literary and television history that not everyone has, and some of the points raised seem very hard to argue with. In any case, it is an opinion we felt worth sharing with readers, to provide one unique, thought-provoking perspective from which to consider the adaptation.(It goes without saying that should a fellow critic or television writer offer up a response or rebuttal, we would be pleased to link to it, or even to publish it on our site!)

Visit the Site!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I tend to agree with the statement that showrunners tend to overlook the ancestry themes.

I feel ASOIAF is at its heart a beautifully convoluted tale of legacy: legacy of blood, of (dis)honour, of tales and tradition. In some case legacy of long lost passions. Fated choices. The long shadow of the past is what gives the story solid form, depth, chiaroscuro. Light and shades. Past is honour and responsability. A sour sweet burden.

The first two seasons of the show have missed the centrality of this theme contributing to a sense of general confusion when it is comes to an 'unsullied' audience. Friends of mine, non book readers, keep on coming for clarifications and explainations. Well, 90% of the time their doubts are born of a total lack of perspective of past events. True, it's not easy task to adapt when the source material is so rich, complex, multilayered. I still think though a few well placed references would have hugely helped to prevent such controversial reactions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am sorry, maybe there is a language problem here, but this review is way to much 'purist' to the point of angels dancing on the head of pin.

I dont see the structural problems of the adaptation such a large piece of prose into a very confining space of a season with 10 episodes addressed.

Even some of the logic faults are not even D and D's.

For instance I could never follow George's construct of Qhorin Halfhand's infiltration ploy with Jon Snow.

I was totally unconvinced by Mance Rayder's gullibility at what the Wilding captors and Jon told him, in the book, that I had too turn up my willing suspension of disbelief knob a couple of clicks.

I am sorry Mr. Zarković , to get 4 million viewers you have to have a quasi 'rock show' , a symphony would have seen GOt go the way of ROME and DEADWOOD.

Look! The only solution to this discussion is for someone serious, with an understanding of modern TV adaptation to interview David Benioff and D. B. Weiss just why season 2 construct came out as it did.

Mr. Zarković's essay is a mile wide and an inch deep.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

His thesis about failure of logic and inconsistencies within the TV show while at the same time demanding not to be taken as a fluff story like True Blood is absolutely true.

If you look at the series as a separate entity than books, it is becoming more and more a fluff piece based on violence, magic and tits.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It has been noted that contrary to popular belief that The Wire survived on increasingly low ratings purely because of critic adoration and a low budget, the show cost more than $50 million a year in its last three years ($55 million is today's dollars).

Rome went the way it did because it cost $100 million. Deadwood went the way it did because of RomeThat doesn't have to be the case with A Game of Thrones, though. A deeper and more well-structured season could theoretically push some viewers away, but I'd guess it would impress more critically and develop even more devotion among its fans.

So... no, the show isn't anywhere near the point that HBO will can it. They'll hopefully take the luxury of basically having two seasons ahead of them (failing natural disaster wiping out Belfast or other acts of God, I consider S4 a done deal) to be smarter about their choices.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Even some of the logic faults are not even D and D's.

For instance I could never follow George's construct of Qhorin Halfhand's infiltration ploy with Jon Snow.

I was totally unconvinced by Mance Rayder's gullibility at what the Wilding captors and Jon told him, in the book, that I had too turn up my willing suspension of disbelief knob a couple of clicks.

If you had a problem with Mance trusting Jon in the book, what did you think of the show version? That was far worse in my opinion; made absolutely no sense why Rattleshirt would just free Jon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you had a problem with Mance trusting Jon in the book, what did you think of the show version? That was far worse in my opinion; made absolutely no sense why Rattleshirt would just free Jon.

I had to turn my 'willing suspension of belief' up one more notch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I completely agree with him on all the logical leaps in show. What's worse is that apparently they don't even seem to care. Not that it would matter if they did; the explanations would only be even more clumsy, so it's probably best not to draw more attention to it. Considering how ridiculous some of it is, I wouldn't at all be surprised if the theory that Dagmar is Ramsay ends up being true.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He makes some good points, but he really seems way too much of a fan of the books to be even remotely objective. It's hard for me to take the article seriously after this tidbit:

"Sandor’s feelings for Sansa constitute one of the most memorable love stories of all times."

Most of the article keeps going on and on how awesome the books are and how dare the writers change anything from that perfection. He makes a few good points along the way, but they are drown in all that fannish indignation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

His comments about the characters being maltreated are very nearly spot on. I think HE brought up a little while ago that there is a problem if you summarise a character in 1-2 sentences and the book summary and the show summary end up so different you can't recognise the character. I think Season 2 did miss the characterisation by that much, personally. That's not a "purist" view either I think as it really goes to the heart about what the characters are like.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think he means speeding up the film so their movements don't look slow (e.g. they might act it out at a slower pace to get the motions right and then just speed it up later).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can someone explain to me what "fast-motioning" swords means, and why it's apparently a cardinal sin to use in television?

It is speeding up the sword fight because actor or stunt doubles could not execute the choreographed movements fast enough. The problem with doing this is if you look at movements of the parts of body and other things that should move slower you might notice them being abnormally fast.

I didn't notice it myself when watching. :dunno:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree completely with all his criticisms, however, I don't agree with his overall assessment.

He correctly pointed all the mistakes that the showrunners made, and there were many,but I think he completely neglected to mention the parts they did well in. It would be as if I took a one hundred question test, got 80 of them right, and the person well through all the 20 I got wrong and talk as if I scored a big fat zero.

D&D made some serious mistakes this season, and I hope they can learn from it and do a better job next year. Critiques like this one though, that completely discounts any thing positive will probably turn them off and make them less likely to acknowledge the truths that are contained.

Nevertheless, I hope the showrunners take some of these criticism to heart and do a better job for next season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The complaint about speeding up the sword swings is, by some considerable margin, the most pedantic, pathetic complaint I have read about the show in the last two years, either here or on WiC. Seriously? That's how you open your serious critical assessment of the show?

Some of this other points approach legitimacy, but that silly opening section seriously damaged his credibility.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes. His view is basically that if you're doing that, you're doing something wrong: if the viewer notices, you're breaking the "reality" that you're trying to convey, and you should instead find a way to not need it (either have the actors/stunt men rehearse it more, or find some other way to handle the scene). It's a technical point that I think is a very subjective, YMMV thing, but none the less it's true that they did feel at times that they needed to throw in a bit of speeding up into scenes that in other places don't have it.

Scabbard,

Critiques like this one though, that completely discounts any thing positive will probably turn them off and make them less likely to acknowledge the truths that are contained.

They don't read published or online criticism, they've said, and I've had that said to me separately. So it's all rather academic.

I think they're also big boys and can take the useful criticism without needing sugar put on top of it to make it more palatable. I myself always try to discuss positives, but there's more than one way to skin a cat, critically speaking.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, I think he needs to accept that not everyone in the world just starts seeing nothing but red before their eyes at the sight of fast-motioning swords. I have read reviews of S1E5 that commented on them. They didn't really care all that much.

Arya is not the inside scope of the average peasant. She's a highborn noble girl born with a silverspoon in her mouth, put through the ringer when she's a stuck on the streets without a dime.

Also, what the absolute endgame political machinations would have been, anyone would have sicced Jaqen on Tywin, she's older in the TV show (which I will insist is neccesary, 9-year old A-list actors don't fall from the sky), she needs an immeadiate reason why not.

Reek and Ramsays intricate relationship would have required quite the monologue on Ser Rodriks part to explain, Theon meanwhile needs castmember to discuss his plans with besides the guy that he just released from prison, us not being privy to thoughts like in books). We needed a Dagmar like character anyway.

Other then that, I mostly agree.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think he's spot on with a lot of his criticisms, but at points seems to be nitpicking or way overly emotional. Calling San-San one of the greatest love stories of all time and calling the Catelyn/Jamie cell conversation like one of the greatest scenes ever is a little ridiculous.

But yeah, I have to say, the more I think about it the more angry I am about certain scenes and problems. As great as Tywin/Arya were together, the scenes were ultimately pointless and seriously deprived the show of the opportunity to better characterize The Mountain, the Tickler, Gendry, Hot Pie, Rorge, Biter, Amory Lorch. The Qarth scenes were awful and lacked any sort of logic, as was Jon Snow's "turn" to the Wildling side.

Another thing that really pissed me off was Sansa with regards to the Hound and Littlefinger. People should not be questioning why she refused to leave with the Hound. That bedroom scene in the books was explosive, I was holding my breath wondering if Sansa was going to get raped or murdered. The show- Meh, boring.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

His complaint about the swordfighting is a total distraction from the more substantial arguments in his review. I can't figure out why he front-loaded the article with the insignificance of how the production choreographed the swordfights, with sped-up footage (according to him), the opposite of slo-mo apparently.

I'm more interested in how he takes on the excuses people have made about "budget" all the time. I tend to agree with him about choices involving Dagmer vs. Reek (no real financial considerations, there, honestly) and keeping the news about Bran & Rickon from Robb and Catelyn. There is no need for it financially, there is no need for it plot-wise (indeed, in my opinion--and as others have complained--the ignorance of Robb and Catelyn on this point detracts from plot and character development.

Jaime Lannister's escape was laughable, whether you're a book purist or non-reader. If they want to mess with his characterization and have him kill a distant cousin to escape, fine. But, I mean, seriously, a see-through pen and the Karstark fellow just walks right in with the door open, his keys on his belt, and turns his back on Jaime who just beat the snot out of the other guy while manacled? One guard for their most prized hostage?

And Jon defeats the Halfhand in a manner of minutes (really, less), and they untie Jon because.....why, exactly?

Ros---at this rate, she's gonna' have to be the one to betray Tyrion and/or wind up in bed with Tywin, no?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think he makes a number of valuable points, but the ranting was not very professional. Especially the part about fast-motion sword work. Talk about beating a dead horse. I do expect a critical analysis to actually discuss the medium and structure of the episodes (which the critic attempts), but this is more like harping on one thing over and over again. We get it. Is the point worth the space expended saying the same thing a thousand times? Move on. Needs an editor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...