"Fair Game: The critical universe around Game of Thrones".

[Darkstream]

13 minutes ago, Good Guy Garlan said:

And that is...?

Ok, hear my interpretation of the scene:

The lead actor/writer is D&D. He's an asshole, we're meant to hate him, we're meant to criticize his attitude towards the lead actress, and most importantly, we're meant to think his writing is shit. That seems pretty damn self-aware to me. If D&D were truly the arrogant monsters you say they are, wouldn't they depict themselves in a better light, as a gifted writer, perhaps, or something like that? 

Now, I don't know who the actress is meant to represent or if she's even supposed to represent anyone, but one thing is clear and that's that we, the audience, are meant to sympathize with her. In fact, if I had to guess, I'd say the actress is supposed to represent GRRM. D&D are basically telling him that without him and his books all they would write would be farts and slapstick. I thought that would actually please you ranters, but apparently I was wrong. 

The message is a big fuck you to anyone who would criticize them, IMO they feel like they are above criticism, and feel they are above anyone who would dare to question them. 

Again, the actor doesn't have to be an actual representation of themselves. they are just using this particular character's dialog to purvay their message. 

With all the existing examples depicting their arrogance and disrespect that people try to defend, and bury their head in the sand to, I would expect nothing less than those same people to do so with this case.

[Darkstream]

21 minutes ago, Good Guy Garlan said:

And that is...?

Ok, hear my interpretation of the scene:

The lead actor/writer is D&D. He's an asshole, we're meant to hate him, we're meant to criticize his attitude towards the lead actress, and most importantly, we're meant to think his writing is shit. That seems pretty damn self-aware to me. If D&D were truly the arrogant monsters you say they are, wouldn't they depict themselves in a better light, as a gifted writer, perhaps, or something like that? 

Now, I don't know who the actress is meant to represent or if she's even supposed to represent anyone, but one thing is clear and that's that we, the audience, are meant to sympathize with her. In fact, if I had to guess, I'd say the actress is supposed to represent GRRM. D&D are basically telling him that without him and his books all they would write would be farts and slapstick. I thought that would actually please you ranters, but apparently I was wrong. 

My interpenetration of the first part of the dialogue, referring to the source material is in response to the constant praise that the actors on the show receive, which is often accompanied with a comment pertaining to how awful the material they are working with is.

[Good Guy Garlan]

3 minutes ago, Darkstream said:

The message is a big fuck you to anyone who would criticize them, IMO they feel like they are above criticism, and feel they are above anyone who would dare to question them. 

Again, the actor doesn't have to be an actual representation of themselves. they are just using this particular character's dialog to purvay their message. 

With all the existing examples depicting their arrogance and disrespect that people try to defend, and bury their head in the sand to, I would expect nothing less than those same people to do so with this case.

You do know context is a thing that exists, right? That message wasn't just sent from the void. It was said by a character who's immediately depicted as an asshole, who's depicted as a shitty writer, who the audience is supposed to hate, to a character who we're supposed to like. Like, I don't think how this can be any clearer. We're not supposed to agree with the lead actor/writer, we're not supposed to take what he's saying at face value. 

 

[Darkstream]

9 minutes ago, Good Guy Garlan said:

You do know context is a thing that exists, right? That message wasn't just sent from the void. It was said by a character who's immediately depicted as an asshole, who's depicted as a shitty writer, who the audience is supposed to hate, to a character who we're supposed to like. Like, I don't think how this can be any clearer. We're not supposed to agree with the lead actor/writer, we're not supposed to take what he's saying at face value. 

 

Well, your free to make of it what you will, that is how the scene comes off to me, and d&d have shown that they are not beneath this sort of thing before with the whole Orson/beetle scene, and countless comments and actions in the past.

My case in point:

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2015/09/21/15/2C9A365200000578-3242859-image-a-8_1442844128870.jpg

[Good Guy Garlan]

1 minute ago, Darkstream said:

Well, your free to make of it what you will, that is how the scene comes off to me, and d&d have shown that they are not beneath this sort of thing before with the whole Orson/beetle scene, and countless comments and actions in the past.

You're obviously entitled to your own opinion, but I imagine this gives you an idea of why people say you're projecting. Like, this is textbook projecting, right here. 

[Darkstream]

3 minutes ago, Good Guy Garlan said:

You're obviously entitled to your own opinion, but I imagine this gives you an idea of why people say you're projecting. Like, this is textbook projecting, right here. 

So am I projecting that he is saying fuck you to the critics here?

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2015/09/21/15/2C9A365200000578-3242859-image-a-8_1442844128870.jpg

[SerMixalot]

Ellaria Sand, Bastard Companion of the Brother of the Prince of Dorne and the Sand Snakes of Dorne killed the Daughter of Cersie Lannister and Jaime Lannister and Sister to King Tommen Baratheon-nee Lannister-Myrcella Lannister as well as killing the Prince of Dorne (Doran Martell) and the heir to the Dornish Throne.-Trystanne Martell

The Lannister Army will march on Riverrun.

Yeah quality writing there.

Any critic of the show that does not point out that massive plot hole is not worth the title-critic

 

[Neds Secret]

2 hours ago, Darkstream said:

Boy, I love when something like this just falls right into your lap. A lot of you were jumping on me, accusing me of projecting, and then this little nugget comes along.

Directly from episode 6:

In an interview with Cogman: 

The theater troupe scenes have been really fun too. It’s like you’re meta commentating on the way the show itself gets depicted.
I come from theater and being able to comment on the show and the reactions to the show through the players were so much fun. The show is often accused of being gratuitous in all kinds of way – the violence and the bigness of the characters. It’s a huge operatic story. We’re able to lovingly spoof ourselves but also play with ideas about how audiences view the show, good and bad, and how a perspective of a story changes. Plus there’s the dramatic deliciousness of Arya watching her own life play out on stage.

http://www.ew.com/article/2016/05/29/game-thrones-coldhands-benjen-stark

Is Cogman all there? I means is he firing on all cylinders? Is he playing with a full deck of cards? Is a couple of cans short of a six pack? Is he a couple of slices shy of a loaf? I only ask this because it sure looks like that to me. 

[Darkstream]

1 hour ago, Good Guy Garlan said:

You're obviously entitled to your own opinion, but I imagine this gives you an idea of why people say you're projecting. Like, this is textbook projecting, right here. 

Bye the way, I'll take your non reply to my question on page 7 as an admission that you were just making a baseless statement in order to back your agenda, unless of course you would like to defend your statement now.

[Good Guy Garlan]

1 hour ago, Darkstream said:

So am I projecting that he is saying fuck you to the critics here?

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2015/09/21/15/2C9A365200000578-3242859-image-a-8_1442844128870.jpg

See, remember that thing I said about context? You're gonna have to give me a little bit of that here. Like, you give me a link to a picture of Benioff giving the middle finger to the camera, what am I supposed to do with that? 

As to your post in page 7, if that's the one you mean, it's quite simple: there have been countless Rant and Rave threads, sometimes opened by the administrators themselves, and those are the only threads in the whole site where different opinions are literally forbidden. I'm not gonna try it, but I'm guessing I wouldn't receive the same treatment if I were to open a Rant and Rave thread about the books. Miodrag, the guy of the documentary, had a platform on this site to post his hate-filled "reviews" of the show a couple of seasons ago. But more to the point, every time I or anyone attempts to criticize the books, people immediately jump and go into the attack, as it happened more than once in this very thread, while that never happens in the Rant and Rave threads. 

So yeah, there's a clear opposition to criticism of the books compared to criticism of the show, namely because those who partake in the latter have an exclusive, airtight sealed space to do so while the former don't. 

[Darkstream]

47 minutes ago, Good Guy Garlan said:

See, remember that thing I said about context? You're gonna have to give me a little bit of that here. Like, you give me a link to a picture of Benioff giving the middle finger to the camera, what am I supposed to do with that? 

Fine, I will give you this as there is no way for me to prove the context of the picture. As for the lines in episode 6, together with Cogman's comments, as well as the president set by them doing this sort of thing in the past, and previous remarks by Benioff that have rubbed me the wrong way, It seems quite obvious to me what their intent was. And yes, your right, I am no longer willing to give them the benefit of the doubt as I once did. I'm aware that none of this is going to change your view on the matter, but your feelings are irrelevant to the fact that I, as a fan of the books, and a critic of the show feel disrespected by a multitude of comments made by the d's. I don't expect you, as someone that often criticizes GRRM and defends d&d to agree with my interpretation.

47 minutes ago, Good Guy Garlan said:

 As to your post in page 7, if that's the one you mean, it's quite simple: there have been countless Rant and Rave threads, sometimes opened by the administrators themselves, and those are the only threads in the whole site where different opinions are literally forbidden. I'm not gonna try it, but I'm guessing I wouldn't receive the same treatment if I were to open a Rant and Rave thread about the books. Miodrag, the guy of the documentary, had a platform on this site to post his hate-filled "reviews" of the show a couple of seasons ago. But more to the point, every time I or anyone attempts to criticize the books, people immediately jump and go into the attack, as it happened more than once in this very thread, while that never happens in the Rant and Rave threads. 

So yeah, there's a clear opposition to criticism of the books compared to criticism of the show, namely because those who partake in the latter have an exclusive, airtight sealed space to do so while the former don't. 

As to the bold, that is a false statement. I will say the same thing to you as I did to the previous poster who made this claim. 

Quote

I would direct your attention to The positive (gasp!) GoT discussion thread (Spoilers)

I tell you what, why don't you go on over to that thread and start ranting about how bad the show is, and start challenging other posters opinions and we'll see how that goes for you. 

This thread is constantly bashing the books, and any opposition to their statements are against the rules.  I can attest to the fact that these rules are enforced, as I myself was disciplined for posting in there.The existence of the r&r thread is not to oppose criticism of the books, the purpose of this thread is to shield people with legitimate complaints about the show who have constantly been attacked and called trolls for not mindlessly praising the show and conforming to the mass opinion.

I'm not sure where your posting that you get attacked for legitimate criticism of the books, as I am constantly subjected to opinions that the last two books are bad, and rarely respond anymore as I know it is a futile argument and I'm always in the minority. Maybe your problem is that your criticism, all though valid, is a subjective opinion that has to do with your preference, not the quality of GRRM's writing. You have the right to dislike the books, but to infer that the writing, although not perfect and does have some flaws, is in anyway close to being as incompetent as that of d&d's is outright ludicrous.

[Good Guy Garlan]

1 minute ago, Darkstream said:

Fine, I will give you this as there is no way for me to prove the context of the picture. As for the lines in episode 6, together with Cogman's comments, as well as the president set by them doing this sort of thing in the past, and previous remarks by Benioff that have rubbed me the wrong way, It seems quite obvious to me what their intent was. And yes, your right, I am no longer willing to give them the benefit of the doubt as I once did. I'm aware that none of this is going to change your view on the matter, but your feelings are irrelevant to the fact that I, as a fan of the books, and a critic of the show feel disrespected by a multitude of comments made by the d's. I don't expect you, as someone that often criticizes GRRM and defends d&d to agree with my interpretation.

As to the bold, that is a false statement. I will say the same thing to you as I did to the previous poster who made this claim. 

This thread is constantly bashing the books, and any opposition to their statements are against the rules.  I can attest to the fact that these rules are enforced, as I myself was disciplined for posting in there.The existence of the r&r thread is not to oppose criticism of the books, the purpose of this thread is to shield people with legitimate complaints about the show who have constantly been attacked and called trolls for not mindlessly praising the show and conforming to the mass opinion.

I'm not sure where your posting that you get attacked for legitimate criticism of the books, as I am constantly subjected to opinions that the last two books are bad, and rarely respond anymore as I know it is a futile argument and I'm always in the minority. Maybe your problem is that your criticism, all though valid, is a subjective opinion that has to do with your preference, not the quality of GRRM's writing. You have the right to dislike the books, but to infer that the writing, although not perfect and does have some flaws, is in anyway close to being as incompetent as that of d&d's is outright ludicrous.

See, I'm glad you brought up that last point, because that's a response I often get when I say something bad about the books, that I can't say they're objectively bad, that it's impossible for anyone to say that, etc, while people bashing the show do so like their opinions are facts. And that's just one example. 

But clarify something for me please, before we end this discussion. I'm still confused about that picture. It's...I mean, did you come across a random picture of Benioff giving the middle finger to the camera and you assumed he was...directing it at you? That's what I thought you were implying, but surely I'm wrong, right?

[Darkstream]

27 minutes ago, Good Guy Garlan said:

See, I'm glad you brought up that last point, because that's a response I often get when I say something bad about the books, that I can't say they're objectively bad, that it's impossible for anyone to say that, etc, while people bashing the show do so like their opinions are facts. And that's just one example. 

The issue with the show, while people's opinion are subjective, is that the objective criticism is a fact based on any literary standards. To say these issues with the show are only opinion is false. There are established rules and standards that can be used to judge a piece of literature objectively, d&d's writing fails miserably when judged by these.  

27 minutes ago, Good Guy Garlan said:

But clarify something for me please, before we end this discussion. I'm still confused about that picture. It's...I mean, did you come across a random picture of Benioff giving the middle finger to the camera and you assumed he was...directing it at you? That's what I thought you were implying, but surely I'm wrong, right?

No, my understanding is that this was his response to critics after he won the Emmy. I do not have evidence to put this in context and I will admit that the information of which I've based my opinion was only hearsay, thus my willingness to concede on this point.

[Neds Secret]

1 hour ago, Darkstream said:

Fine, I will give you this as there is no way for me to prove the context of the picture. As for the lines in episode 6, together with Cogman's comments, as well as the president set by them doing this sort of thing in the past, and previous remarks by Benioff that have rubbed me the wrong way, It seems quite obvious to me what their intent was. And yes, your right, I am no longer willing to give them the benefit of the doubt as I once did. I'm aware that none of this is going to change your view on the matter, but your feelings are irrelevant to the fact that I, as a fan of the books, and a critic of the show feel disrespected by a multitude of comments made by the d's. I don't expect you, as someone that often criticizes GRRM and defends d&d to agree with my interpretation.

As to the bold, that is a false statement. I will say the same thing to you as I did to the previous poster who made this claim. 

This thread is constantly bashing the books, and any opposition to their statements are against the rules.  I can attest to the fact that these rules are enforced, as I myself was disciplined for posting in there.The existence of the r&r thread is not to oppose criticism of the books, the purpose of this thread is to shield people with legitimate complaints about the show who have constantly been attacked and called trolls for not mindlessly praising the show and conforming to the mass opinion.

I'm not sure where your posting that you get attacked for legitimate criticism of the books, as I am constantly subjected to opinions that the last two books are bad, and rarely respond anymore as I know it is a futile argument and I'm always in the minority. Maybe your problem is that your criticism, all though valid, is a subjective opinion that has to do with your preference, not the quality of GRRM's writing. You have the right to dislike the books, but to infer that the writing, although not perfect and does have some flaws, is in anyway close to being as incompetent as that of d&d's is outright ludicrous.