Cron

Is There Anything On The Show That You Think Is Better Than The Books?

1,142 posts in this topic

I think D&D did a great job especially in the 1-3s to adapt a huge source material and to portray the characters through dialogues, not POVs. There are plenty of things that I loved in the show more:

"Chaos is a ladder" dialogue

Sansa confronting Theon about killing Bran and Rickon

Arya/Tywin scenes in Harrenhall

Oberyn Martell played by Pedro Pascal was much more intense character with his own line. In the books he was more a part of Tyrion's arc.

Cersei was much more human and complicated, though I didn't like how she turned to Disney villain in s6

Bronn and his cynical wisdom

Ramsay Bolton (the show played really on the contarst of Iwan Rheon's good looking and his terrible actions)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, sweetsunray said:

:lmao: mid nineties really weren't the "dark ages". Child soldiers and child brides were a known humanistic issues. We're talking post-Ruanda. UN humanity right charters existed for decades, so does Human Rights Watch, and other humanistic organisations.

To answer OP: aging up the characters in general.

ETA: I'm quite certain that George would still write it the way he wrote it, except for aging up Dany (he said that he would age up the characters if he could). While it's statuory rape, I wouldn't call it a fantasy too quickly either. George has said that he won't write a POV character being raped (as in non-consentual, whatever the age, meaning the victim explicitly saying "no"). And I think he's wise not to do so. It would imply he would have to write the experience of it in a POV as well as the aftermath-trauma, which would at this point in the series heavily detract from the character arcs in a manner that would have heavy implications for his endgame goals. And as a male author writing such an experience for a female character (no matter how well he could write it), it would have female support groups scrutinizing all of those chapters. He wrote a trauma victim: Theon, who was tortured. He never even wrote the actual torture chapters. He only wrote the aftermath trauma which took a whole book and which imo will haunt all of Theon's future arc. If George intended to have a POV character raped, he would have done so in earlier books, to allow himself the story room for the character to integrate the trauma. The show doesn't do POV, and thought they could do it without repercussions, but they had to send actors and a crying aid-author to defend the choice and write a very nonsensical S6 as "women on top" and "rape/revenge".

Ts, I am aware that the nineties were not the dark ages. And yet the political situation has fundamentally changed. There is not only the recent threats to thousands of women by terrorist organizations, there is fortunately a bigger awareness what forced and arranged marriages mean as violence against women. I guess the show knows that and Martin does as well. I am not much younger than Mr Martin and I know myself that even some feminists back then in the nineties belittled some far away violence against women as being part of "cultural diversity", and you know, other cultures have a right to their culture........political correctness misunderstood. But "far away"  is not far away any longer and many women and girls concerned are right among us. Martin is a politically aware person, he will know that himself, and know better today like many of us.

Martin never writing a rape in a POV would by logic mean that no POV character could ever be raped. Now I do not see why Theon's torture - he is a POV -  or Shireen's burning should not be just as gruesome to read as any rape. Do you literally need to be told how fire on skin feels? Martin could for sure imply that rape has happened and write about what that does to a person. We cannot be sure that POV characters are safe from rape, torture, mutilation and horrors like that.

Edited by Woman of War

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Cron said:

Wow, that's a great list of things to think about and consider, I read it all with interest.

In fact, I'm curious whether you actually prefer the show to the books (if so, nothing wrong with that).  Or were the books ,on balance, what you ultimately preferred more?

Actually I love the show and I enjoy it very much. There are some things I like less, like the twisting of Ellaria, or Tyrion being a little less complex in the show. I miss the mystical magical aspects of his journey. Though that is richly balanced by  Dinklage's great acting (Only - how even greater could Dinklage be if Tyrion were as nuanced as in the books... ;) ).

I loved the books right from the first page and I will never stop loving them. Of course, as books, they are so much more rich, a rare experience. There are some aspects that annoy me though in the books as well, first of all the cartoonish way to deal with Cersei.

No, I cannot say that I love the show more than the books. I love both. At present I soooo much want the next book and I can hardly wait for season 7.

Lucky me, actually. Two events to relish.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Woman of War said:

And yet the political situation has fundamentally changed. There is not only the recent threats to thousands of women by terrorist organizations, there is fortunately a bigger awareness what forced and arranged marriages mean as violence against women. I guess the show knows that and Martin does as well. I am not much younger than Mr Martin and I know myself that even some feminists back then is the nineties belittled some far away violence against women as being part of "cultural diversity", and you know, other cultures have a right to their culture.........But "far away"  is not far away any longer and many women and girls concerned are right among us. Martin is a politically aware person, he will know that himself, and know better today like many of us.

Martin never writing a rape in a POV would by logic mean that no POV character could ever be raped. Now I do not see why Theon's torture - he is a POV -  or Shireen's burning should not be just as gruesome to read as any rape. Do you literally need to be told how fire on skin feels? Martin could for sure imply that rape has happened and write about what that does to a person. We cannot be sure that POV characters are safe from rape, torture, mutilation and horrors like that.

You are correct that the climate of the 90s and 20 years later is generally different: child brides, forced marriage and violence against women in a particular culture has become part of the political and media agenda to remind us who are the villains in our world, which are the villainous cultures, and it coincides with a general and stricter legal dealing regarding statuory rape and pedophilia. It has become part of the political agenda, majroly for political propaganda.

But to allude that George was not "so aware" of this is ludicruous, especially since he makes it part of the Westeros culture and writes plenty of young and older female POVs as a voice how awful it is for them: after all he had Sansa forced into a marriage with an older man who is her enemy, etc, etc.

Just because 90% of right wing white males in the deep South are outraged over child-brides in Afghanistan and Syria nowadays but didn't care one jot in the mid 90s does not mean that the majority of humanistic liberals weren't already outraged about it back in the 90s (let's leave the extremist defenders of this out of it).It is intellectually dishonest to use general climate and awareness as evidence to make a claim about a specific individual's awareness at a time when the general populace was not raging about it daily on facebook.

Of course torture and burning is as gruesome. You are completely strawmanning here - I never implied that one sort of phyiscal violation is more traumatic than the other, or easier to read (Vargo Hoat is total scum, and yet I'd argue he's one of the most tragic characters because what was done to him, and we only learn of it AFTER he's dead and eaten), nor is this about "plot armor" in the sense "oh, we don't wish anything awful to happen to a POV". Obviously, George did NOT write the actual torture chapters. (Shireen isn't a POV btw). What I was saying is that 1) I think that George does not write the actual atrocities done to a POV, out of respect to people who actually experienced them IRL. He can describe how disgusted, terrified and horrified an onlooker is however. And 2) that George is very much aware that as a male author women support groups would be all over him when it comes to rape experiences (during or aftermath) with a POV. And that is why George has said he'd never write a POV character being raped (non consentual one) in this series. 

Exactly the reasons (general climate regarding child-brides and rape) you use to argue that George would now write Dany-Drogo wedding night as a violent rape are imo the reasons he said he would not write a POV having been raped. And he already said what he would do differently - age up the characters. If Dany was 16 he'd still write the wedding night with Dany giving consent.

Edited by sweetsunray

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Woman of War said:

Actually I love the show and I enjoy it very much. There are some things I like less, like the twisting of Ellaria, or Tyrion being a little less complex in the show. I miss the mystical magical aspects of his journey. Though that is richly balanced by  Dinklage's great acting (Only - how even greater could Dinklage be if Tyrion were as nuanced as in the books... ;) ).

I loved the books right from the first page and I will never stop loving them. Of course, as books, they are so much more rich, a rare experience. There are some aspects that annoy me though in the books as well, first of all the cartoonish way to deal with Cersei.

No, I cannot say that I love the show more than the books. I love both. At present I soooo much want the next book and I can hardly wait for season 7.

Lucky me, actually. Two events to relish.

I love both the show and books too, but for me, I give the edge to the books.

But this is very common for me, because, of course, a book is almost always going to be able to devote the time to character development that a t.v. show or movie is just not going to have.  (Actually, compared to a lot of other adaptations, Game of Thrones does extremely well on this, just because they have so much time to work with.  Season One was the first book, AGOT, over about 9 and a 1/2 hours, I would estimate, but what if they had made it a big screen movie instead?  Can we even imagine that entire season compressed into 2 hours??? Wow.   They would have had to leave close to 80 percent out.

Bottom line for me:  I'd say the show is possibly the best t.v. show I've ever seen, but it faces fierce competition from GRRM's books, which are among the very best books I"ve ever read, and as usual, with me, the books get the edge.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Cron said:

Good stuff.

Yeah, I hadn't consciously thought about it, but some things are better just b/c it's a different medium, and we can see visual effects, hear sound, have music, et cetera.

Regarding the music, I especially love the music they play when Dany's dragons attack.   I'm not sure if that's the Dance of Dragons track you're referring to, but I love it, especially that first part.  ALSO, my absolute favorite music of the entire series is at the very end of Season 4 when Arya is alone on the horse, then on the ship sailing to Braavos.  Do you, or does anybody here, know what that music is called?  WOW, I'm awestruck every time I hear it, right from the very first time (It's the "menu music" on the Season 4 Blu-Ray discs, and I'm really glad they chose it, I got to hear it and enjoy it every time I put one of those discs in)

that one is ny favourite track too. I think it's calles "the children".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Meera of Tarth said:

that one is ny favourite track too. I think it's calles "the children".

Oh.  Well, I guess that would make sense, since I'm pretty sure that Episode 410 is called "The Children," too.

Just tremendous. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@sweetsunray

I actually have no idea why you are fighting with me.

You try your best to present me als white racist   and  I am none of those , LOL. Stop it and don't twist my post! 

I try to give explanations why many high quality writers in a different timesetting have not been free of inconsiderate ideas that are shaped by precisely that timesetting. We all learn and these writers might have done things differently today. Art happens in a social and political context, there is no such thing as standards of "perfect art" in some timeless space, valid for eternity. Every good artist knows that and Martin will as well.

I love Martin's works but they are not beyond criticism  to me. Nothing is, actually. Should they be in your opinion? Does it mean I do not love ASIOAF enough if there are elements I do not like? The child characters are great but too young imo and Dany's story starts out in a way I do not find believable and I would not find it believable if she were five years older either, full stop.

Though I think it believable that later Dany takes charge of her situation with Drogo.

Remind me about what we disagree.  Because you  find Dany's wedding night believable and I don't? Because I think the show did better here? Heresy? So many spiteful words from your side about that one point?? I forgot, this is internet anonymity and I am old fashioned.

Edited by Woman of War

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Woman of War said:

@sweetsunray

I actually have no idea why you are fighting with me.

You try your best to present me als white racist   and  I am none of those , LOL. Stop it and don't twist my post! 

I try to give explanations why many high quality writers in a different timesetting have not been free of inconsiderate ideas that are shaped by precisely that timesetting. We all learn and these writers might have done things differently today. Art happens in a social and political context, there is no such thing as standards of "perfect art" in some timeless space, valid for eternity. Every good artist knows that and Martin will as well.

I love Martin's works but they are not beyond criticism  to me. Should they be in your opinion? Does it mean I do not love ASIOAF enough if there are elements I do not like? The child characters are great but too young imo and Dany's story starts out in a way I do not find believable and I would not find it believable if she were five years older either, full stop.

Though I think it believable that later Dany takes charge of her situation with Drogo.

Remind me about what we disagree. You find Dany's wedding night believable and I don't? So many spiteful words from your side about that one point?? I forgot, this is internet anonymity and I am old fashioned.

I agree with you. I think ASOIAF characters' age is a pure artistic convention, like 200 y.o. heroes in ballads and legends. I don't want to repeat about Dany and Drogo, but 14-15 y.o. boy leading an army and winning every battle against seasoned commanders makes no sense for me either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, Woman of War said:

@sweetsunray

I actually have no idea why you are fighting with me.

You try your best to present me als white racist   and  I am none of those , LOL. Stop it and don't twist my post! 

I try to give explanations why many high quality writers in a different timesetting have not been free of inconsiderate ideas that are shaped by precisely that timesetting. We all learn and these writers might have done things differently today. Art happens in a social and political context, there is no such thing as standards of "perfect art" in some timeless space, valid for eternity. Every good artist knows that and Martin will as well.

I love Martin's works but they are not beyond criticism  to me. Nothing is, actually. Should they be in your opinion? Does it mean I do not love ASIOAF enough if there are elements I do not like? The child characters are great but too young imo and Dany's story starts out in a way I do not find believable and I would not find it believable if she were five years older either, full stop.

Though I think it believable that later Dany takes charge of her situation with Drogo.

Remind me about what we disagree.  Because you  find Dany's wedding night believable and I don't? Because I think the show did better here? Heresy? So many spiteful words from your side about that one point?? I forgot, this is internet anonymity and I am old fashioned.

Fighting? I'm debating your claim about George's intentions and knowledge and awareness in the 90s for which you have absolutely ZERO evidence. You're just spouting projectios and opinions about the author with no proof at all.

Where the hell did I present you as a white racist? Can you give evidence of me saying that about you at all? You can't. It's horseshit!

The rest is just more and more complete strawmanning. Nowhere do I say that Martin's work cannot be criticised. Did I in any way argue against your opinion of child brides? Did I in any way argue against the questionability of presenting the wedding night of a 13 year old as a consentual in the same way a 16 year old or older would? No, I did not do any of these. In fact I said that what the show did better was "aging up" the children, and it is in fact an error that George has admitted to.

What do we disagree about? We disagree about your assertions that George would have written Dany-Drogo as a rape the way the show did. We disagree about your assertion and completely unfounded claim that George was not aware about child-bride issues. We disagree that George will write a rape story for Sansa in tWoW and aDwD. And I think you know very well what I'm disagreeing with you about. But instead of admitting that you have no evidence to back up your claim about George's awareness, and that in fact SSMs contradict your assertions about George writing a rape for a POV character, you're just muddying the water. Sometimes, the strongest debate move is to admit when you made an intellectual error, rather than trashing like a devil in holy water.

 

Edited by sweetsunray

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Aging up the characters. 

Tywin & Arya

Bronn

So pretty much agreeing with the majority of the posts here. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@sweetsunray

And why is it sooooo unthinkable to you, such a horrible desecration of the Holy Book that Martin might do something differently if he did it again? Hasn't he himself said that Tyrion's tumbling in AGOT wasn't the best idea, that show Osha and show Shae were great?

It can in no way be offensive against an artist if I imagine he might do things differently under different circumstances. It's not diminishing Martin's work as a whole, everyone can be criticized. I do not really know what Martin thinks and you do not really know but rethinking one's artistic work  is a healthy process. 

But what I know for sure is that he is in no need of protection against any of my infamous suggestions. Be his white knight if you like but he does not need you against me. I love his books.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Woman of War said:

@sweetsunray

And why is it sooooo unthinkable to you, such a horrible desecration of the Holy Book that Martin might do something differently if he did it again? Hasn't he himself said that Tyrion's tumbling in AGOT wasn't the best idea, that show Osha and show Shae were great?

It can in no way be offensive against an artist if I imagine he might do things differently under different circumstances. It's not diminishing Martin's work as a whole, everyone can be criticized. I do not really know what Martin thinks and you do not really know but rethinking one's artistic work  is a healthy process. 

But what I know for sure is that he is in no need of protection against any of my infamous suggestions. Be his white knight if you like but he does not need you against me. I love his books.

Read my post again. This answer of yours is a repeat of strawmanning and more horseshit. But I'll accept your bolded as a euphemistic admittance that you cannot make any assertions about George not being aware in the 90s that child-brides is a problem, especially given the fact that the series is full of examples what an abusive institution it is. And with that admittance snuck in between your projections and muddying the water our discussion is closed.

Edited by sweetsunray

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We should stop this now. 

If you desire to have the last word you can do another spiteful post after me, enjoy.

If Martin had written Dany's wedding night the way he did today I would call him insensitive at best or even misogynist. But he did not.

I think it is great that the show presented Dany's wedding night as what is was: abuse and rape. If they had done it with the same accent Martin used there would have been a shitstorm in the Web, and rightfully so. But they did not.

I am done with that topic and nothing you write can change my opinion. But this exchange is not about convincing me or anyone or defending poor Mr Martin, is it? I do not care about what it is, go on without me.

This thread is too interesting to get locked, we will all behave.

 

Edited by Woman of War

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That I can remember now: Bronn, no Penny, no high fantasy "The North Remembers", almost no super children (the exception here is super-arya which I still hope didn´t really happen), Tywin at harenhall, Robert Baratheon describing him charging and his horse being hit by an arrow while discussing his first kill with Barristan and Jaime.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm, I suppose, in the minority here, but I found show Bronn an annoyance. Every second of screen time for Bronn, or MissWorm romance, or Tyrion making dick jokes, or Pod-in-a-whorehouse (actually most scenes in brothels) was fan service and a distraction from telling the story in ~73 hours. Which is why we have casual fans wondering where in Westeros Trystane was when he got Tryskebobbed.

Folks keep insisting the show and books are two different animals (and nobody has argued that they are not), but good storytelling in either medium requires some ability to avoid unnecessary tangents. Sure, Jerome Flynn is adorable and funny, but he's not driving the story to its conclusion. He exists in-show to be adorable and funny (in a foul-mouthed kind of way). That makes him another Boxey, Cousin Oliver, or Scrappy-Doo. 

Edited by TepidHands

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, TepidHands said:

good storytelling in either medium requires some ability to avoid unnecessary tangents.

This is exactly why I think Bronn is such a genius character. I disagree with this here:

 

17 minutes ago, TepidHands said:

he's not driving the story to its conclusion.

He is a comic relief without being unnecessary, because he is also very often the bridge between nobility and commons, he is the voice telling Tyrion and Jaime what normal people think and which both of them treasure because they understand they need that. He is a different kind of Ser Davos in that he shows how merit has always been an element of our societies.

Bronn is more important to the script of GoT than, say, Gimli is for the script of LotR, which is considered a good adaptation.

Story telling is much more than getting from A to B.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, TepidHands said:

I'm, I suppose, in the minority here, but I found show Bronn an annoyance. Every second of screen time for Bronn, or MissWorm romance, or Tyrion making dick jokes, or Pod-in-a-whorehouse (actually most scenes in brothels) was fan service and a distraction from telling the story in ~73 hours. Which is why we have casual fans wondering where in Westeros Trystane was when he got Tryskebobbed.

Folks keep insisting the show and books are two different animals (and nobody has argued that they are not), but good storytelling in either medium requires some ability to avoid unnecessary tangents. Sure, Jerome Flynn is adorable and funny, but he's not driving the story to its conclusion. He exists in-show to be adorable and funny (in a foul-mouthed kind of way). That makes him another Boxey, Cousin Oliver, or Scrappy-Doo. 

while I agree with you on that there are unnecessary distractions (a Lot of fan service instead of other important monments that should be adapted) this season Bronn served to remind viewers of Jaime and Brienne's secret feelings.:P

Edited by Meera of Tarth

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, TepidHands said:

 

I'm, I suppose, in the minority here, but I found show Bronn an annoyance

 

Count me with you, for me (personal opinion) Bronn is the clown of the show, he never got my interest, he's a character without a story

Edited by Future Null Infinity

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now