Grover Bluejoy

Question for show watchers and book readers.

158 posts in this topic

Posted (edited)

ASoIaF has several different genres all in the mix.  Dany is classic sandal'n'sorcery, cavorting around in a Howardian landscape furnished in early Moorcock.  There's a twisty multidynastic political history, at least one murder plot, and a Bildungsroman with extra stabbing and cookery.  And then there's the supernatural Ragnarok thing, which appears to have collided with both the Walking Dead and the Varian Disaster. 

Edit: also, Lovecraft

Edited by SeaWitch

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, StepStark said:

Please... Not that talking with me is necessarily a good thing, but it takes more than an honest disagreement to make me not talk with someone.

I don't think we can know that for sure before he actually finishes the story. On the other hand, if he doesn't finish it for whatever reason, then by definition it'll become "bit more than he could chew" situation.

This is where I think our basic disagreement exists. ASOIAF is not a genre piece. It doesn't look like one, and it's way more complex and rewarding than one. That's my firm opinion based on years of analyzing it (including reading essays on this site and other ASOIAF sites) and comparing it to other works of fiction, be it genre pieces or more respected literature. And yes, maybe I'm overrating the books, but on the other hand, maybe you're underrating them.

this is the internet, you can never know. And just because its being not necessarily good, doesn't make it bad either. 

this brings us back to my previously mentioned belief about the last two books. 

Yes, we just approach them with different attitude and expectations. Maybe I am. I never put that kind of time and effort into the books. Though I keep discussing them here (and I even wrote an essay for a sub forum) so that's definitely way more time and effort than an average person would put into an average book. If that 1% chance prevails and GRRM releases the last two (or whatever number he wants) books, I might bring myself to reread the whole thing and see where a different approach gets me. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, RhaenysB said:

this is the internet, you can never know. And just because its being not necessarily good, doesn't make it bad either. 

this brings us back to my previously mentioned belief about the last two books. 

Yes, we just approach them with different attitude and expectations. Maybe I am. I never put that kind of time and effort into the books. Though I keep discussing them here (and I even wrote an essay for a sub forum) so that's definitely way more time and effort than an average person would put into an average book. If that 1% chance prevails and GRRM releases the last two (or whatever number he wants) books, I might bring myself to reread the whole thing and see where a different approach gets me. 

We are very different indeed. I would never spend this much time on ASOIAF if I had doubts about its quality. For example, if in TWOW anything even resembles the stupidity from the last season of the show, I'm going to quit the series for good. I'm confident that's not going to be the case though, but of course, we'll never know until TWOW actually comes out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, StepStark said:

If an actor doesn't look anything like the character in the books, and yet he's supposed to leave the same impression as the character in the books, then I'm pretty sure he/she is miscast. Mark Addy was simply miscast. He'd be equally miscast as Victarion Greyjoy for example, who is also a fearsome individual like Robert is supposed to be. Addy is a good actor, but that has nothing to do with him being miscast.

Dillane was not really good as Stannis, but that's hardly his fault. He didn't read the books and only had the scripts to work with, and D&D never had any idea what to do with Stannis. So it makes sense when Dillane admitted that he never understood the appeal of the character he was playing. But when an actor admits he didn't even understand the character he was playing, he definitely couldn't be any good in the role, not even by chance.

But Robert's fearsomeness is all in the past...when we meet him in GOT he has gone to fat.  He parties.  He reminisces.  He evades his responsibility.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, StepStark said:

We are very different indeed. I would never spend this much time on ASOIAF if I had doubts about its quality. For example, if in TWOW anything even resembles the stupidity from the last season of the show, I'm going to quit the series for good. I'm confident that's not going to be the case though, but of course, we'll never know until TWOW actually comes out.

You only ever spend time on things that are perfect? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, RhaenysB said:

You only ever spend time on things that are perfect? 

Not perfect... Things I find remarkable, inspiring and significant.

I watch other things for fun and entertainment, of course, but never spend time on analyzing and discussing them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Cas Stark said:

But Robert's fearsomeness is all in the past...when we meet him in GOT he has gone to fat.  He parties.  He reminisces.  He evades his responsibility.  

I disagree. First, Robert is still fearsome. Not as before, because he got fat and softer of course, but it's obvious people are still afraid of him. That's huge part of his character in the books. That's what makes Ned's disobedience so important, for example. Second, Addy doesn't look like he ever was fearsome. He just doesn't. And that's why D&D tried to give him some military credibility by writing those ridiculous scenes for him, where he talks and talks about his past heroics. It didn't work, of course.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, StepStark said:

Not perfect... Things I find remarkable, inspiring and significant.

I watch other things for fun and entertainment, of course, but never spend time on analyzing and discussing them.

I discuss almost everything I watch or read. Of course the length and depth of that discussion varies and depends on the impression said form of entertainment made on me. Some fandoms suck me in and some are just meh. Asoiaf was of the four fandoms that sucked me in. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, RevaM said:

same. but i think many peeps have already guessed the "principle" 

So what is it?  What will be the final shocking twist?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

23 hours ago, A Bong of Ice and Fire said:

So what is it?  What will be the final shocking twist?

There will be a big battle between AA vs The great Other. That is the main principle of the books. there are theories floating that dany is the PTWP/AA while Jon is the Other's champion. there are also other theories that jon is the AA/PTWP, and that Dany and Jon will face the the others together. but i find the latter one really unbelievable. Generally speaking, Martin has said that SOME people guessed right (the ones who has read the boards) so yeah.

Edited by RevaM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

16 hours ago, snow is the man said:

I can't remember the context exactly but in the show her and tywin talk and we find out one of aegon's sisters was her hero .I still say it is just that she doesn't want the role most women have in that world but not gonna argue

all I'm saying is that the line "all girls are idiots" was just damn unnecessary. if they wanted to show that arya is a badass™ and "not like other girls" then they did an awful job at that. Just because she is a tomboy, doesn't mean she isn't like other girls. arya acknowledged that she is a girl like any other and she's proud of that too. she didn't want to be a special snowflake nor did she look down on other girls; she simply didn't like the sexism that existed in her time. long story short, she is a feminist of Westeros who believes that women were as capable as men AND SHE DEFINITELY DOESN'T THINK THAT "ALL GIRL ARE IDIOTS"! that just goes against of what she believes in.

That line just made me hate my most favourite character's show counterpart tbh. i was very disappointed with D&D for that and to this day i still am. 

Edited by RevaM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On Invalid Date at 3:17 PM, StepStark said:

If an actor doesn't look anything like the character in the books, and yet he's supposed to leave the same impression as the character in the books, then I'm pretty sure he/she is miscast. Mark Addy was simply miscast. He'd be equally miscast as Victarion Greyjoy for example, who is also a fearsome individual like Robert is supposed to be. Addy is a good actor, but that has nothing to do with him being miscast.

Dillane was not really good as Stannis, but that's hardly his fault. He didn't read the books and only had the scripts to work with, and D&D never had any idea what to do with Stannis. So it makes sense when Dillane admitted that he never understood the appeal of the character he was playing. But when an actor admits he didn't even understand the character he was playing, he definitely couldn't be any good in the role, not even by chance.

I agree with this. Stephen Dillane is one of the better actors out there. If you've seen him in other roles you would know the immense talent he has as an actor. The fact that he couldn't nail the Stannis role lies at the feet of D&D for not fleshing out the character and not knowing where to go with it. In the end, Dillane and Stannis just kind of wallowed until he was mercifully killed off. Even great acting can't always overcome shit awful writing and directing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6. 4. 2017 at 11:40 PM, dsug said:

Cersei is better. Less comic-book supervillain and more actual human being. 

Bronn, Margaery, Qyburn. 

True that.

Most of secondary characters are better. 

I really like Tywin, Bronn, Oberyn, Hound, Cersei, Jorah, Lyanna Mormont, Robert, Thorne, Shireen and Roose just top of my head.

On 11. 4. 2017 at 2:32 AM, Good Guy Garlan said:

Jon

Catelyn

Roose

Tywin

Oberyn

Robert

Jaqen

Shireen

Osha

Thoros

Thorne 

Jorah

Ygritte

Jojen

Pre-season 5 Varys 

No way in hell are Jon or Cat better on the show. Especially Jon Snow, makes me wanna punch the screen from time to time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Adore Aidan Gillen as Littlefinger, but also have an odd picture in my head of Jonathon Young doing a decent version.  It's that slightly built, smirking smartarse thing.  The mental image when I'm reading is an unholy hybrid.

Share this post


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

Adore Aidan Gillen as Littlefinger, but also have an odd picture in my head of Jonathon Young doing a decent version.  It's that slightly built, smirking smartarse thing.  The mental image when I'm reading is an unholy hybrid.

the guy who plays little finger in the show blows that role away. Does a great job.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, snow is the man said:

the guy who plays little finger in the show blows that role away. Does a great job.

Oh,  I quite agree. He's the reason I fell into the show, and thus the books.  I have a type. Or a problem. Or both.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/11/2017 at 0:48 PM, Lord Friendzone said:

True that.

Most of secondary characters are better. 

I really like Tywin, Bronn, Oberyn, Hound, Cersei, Jorah, Lyanna Mormont, Robert, Thorne, Shireen and Roose just top of my head.

No way in hell are Jon or Cat better on the show. Especially Jon Snow, makes me wanna punch the screen from time to time.

See, for me it's the other way around. I think Jon in the books 1-3 is a whiny brat/generic fantasy hero and in Dance he's just a bore. Mediocre acting aside, I think the older Jon in the show is more believable and tolerable. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 14. 5. 2017 at 3:00 AM, Good Guy Garlan said:

See, for me it's the other way around. I think Jon in the books 1-3 is a whiny brat/generic fantasy hero and in Dance he's just a bore. Mediocre acting aside, I think the older Jon in the show is more believable and tolerable. 

Is Jon Leeroy Jenkins in the books? I doubt that .. what¨s intersting about him in the show besides swinging the sword? He's there to stand around with his moody look on his face, looking all pretty and everybody does things he's supposed to do.

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