Season 8 Predictions?

[Meera of Tarth]

22 hours ago, Blackwater Revenant said:

Just look at the quality of the show when they were following the source material, compared to the incoherent, clichéd, nonsensical drivel that they have produced on their own. Believe me, the show wouldn't have been a success if season one was anything like the past three; Book fans would have despised the show, it would have never been renewed for a second season, and all of the fans that now love the show, would have never heard of GRRM, or ASoIaF.

I miss those days! I was an Unsullied and I thought the show was good, and it entertained me. How disappointed I was when after Reading the books (after season 4) I watched season 5! I completely agree with you, they'd not have renewed for a second season without the source material.

I hope season 8 is better because in theory it's supposed to be inspired again by the autor of ASOIAF, and I'd really like to enjoy it. They are very bad inventing stuff.

Season 7 has been horrible as a whole, with some exceptions. At least I learnt  how to laugh at some stupidities of the plot.

[jcmontea]

14 minutes ago, Meera of Tarth said:

I miss those days! I was an Unsullied and I thought the show was good, and it entertained me. How disappointed I was when after Reading the books (after season 4) I watched season 5! I completely agree with you, they'd not have renewed for a second season without the source material.

I hope season 8 is better because in theory it's supposed to be inspired again by the autor of ASOIAF, and I'd really like to enjoy it. They are very bad inventing stuff.

Season 7 has been horrible as a whole, with some exceptions. At least I learnt  how to laugh at some stupidities of the plot.

If the last few seasons have been so bad why do the ratings just keep going up? 

i find it odd to say the show is so bad now that had it been like this it would not have been renewed yet the ratings continue to go up. 

So clearly there is a big enough group that is liking the recent seasons enough so that they continue recomending it to people.

 

[Lady Of The Crossbow Inn]

Well, as an aside regarding falling in love quickly. 

True-life story: In 1992, just before U2's  ZooTV Tour began, Phil Joanou, then the band's filmographer, met a spry lass whom he proceeded to marry *less than 48 hours later*. Yep. 2 days, from first laying eyes on each other, to the Vegas chapel, I think it was.

We know this b/c Bono couldn't stop blabbing about it onstage almost every night, and even brought the happy couple onstage a few times. I think even they were clearly in awe. 

 

Of course, they divorced only 7 months later (I'd have been very surprised if that lasted!) but in retrospect....SOMEBODY GOT THOSE TWO BOAT TICKETS. Teenage me used to wonder what their...um..."courtship" was like. Holy...moly. 

[Meera of Tarth]

Just now, jcmontea said:

If the last few seasons have been so bad why do the ratings just keep going up? 

i find it odd to say the show is so bad now that had it been like this it would not have been renewed yet the ratings continue to go up. 

So clearly there is a big enough group that is liking the recent seasons enough so that they continue recomending it to people.

 

maybe BC they want closure to the storylines or many are casual viewers who are entertained with anyhing (dont even remember the names of the characters)

I am glad my friend reccomended me the show when it used to be good and I did the same with my friends. Now we are all frustrated since we used to love it and now is super simple and cliched. I hope season eight is better.

[jcmontea]

8 minutes ago, Meera of Tarth said:

maybe BC they want closure to the storylines or many are casual viewers who are entertained with anyhing (dont even remember the names of the characters)

I am glad my friend reccomended me the show when it used to be good and I did the same with my friends. Now we are all frustrated since we used to love it and now is super simple and cliched. I hope season eight is better.

It can't be because people want closure. If that were the reason than the ratings wouldn't be going up they would be stable logically speaking. 

If its because its a bunch of casual viewers who are entertained by anything ok. Possibly. But if that is the reason than you can't say if the show was done at this quality level back in season 1 it wouldn't have been renewed for another season. after all, you just said they are entertained by anything why wouldn't it be renewed. 

And then, can people really be entertained by anything? If they were than why do shows actually get cancelled in the first place? 

[Meera of Tarth]

19 minutes ago, jcmontea said:

It can't be because people want closure. If that were the reason than the ratings wouldn't be going up they would be stable logically speaking. 

If its because its a bunch of casual viewers who are entertained by anything ok. Possibly. But if that is the reason than you can't say if the show was done at this quality level back in season 1 it wouldn't have been renewed for another season. after all, you just said they are entertained by anything why wouldn't it be renewed. 

And then, can people really be entertained by anything? If they were than why do shows actually get cancelled in the first place? 

Casual viewers watch shows that are popular and the "cool" thing. If they are not popular these people don't even try watching them. A show gets renewed when the first seasons have good quality enough so as that the viewers are invested in the story and continue watching it, and then recomment it to other Friends, making it popular. Once the show is super popular (by season 5 in thrones) the ratings increase because media start talking about them, or they start winning Emmys (even if not deserved) so more casual viewers are gonna watch it due tot he popularity and the fact that people are intrigued by it. Why is Thrones everywhere? Let's give a try.. @Blackwater Revenant explained this very well. And yeah, I also think that the core of the ratings are still the people who started watching it since the start and are invested in the story or characters. The ratings differ quite a lot depending on the episode in the same season. The casual viewers are tuning it when they want, especially in the premieres and finales or when something has been leaked, because it generates expectation. if everyone was watching all the epis then the figures would be the same, always. So basically, it's a matter of good advertising, a core of fans who startedd watching it for the quality (regardless if they still like it now or not) and the casual viewership phenomenon.

[Deadlines? What Deadlines?]

20 minutes ago, jcmontea said:

It can't be because people want closure. If that were the reason than the ratings wouldn't be going up they would be stable logically speaking. 

If its because its a bunch of casual viewers who are entertained by anything ok. Possibly. But if that is the reason than you can't say if the show was done at this quality level back in season 1 it wouldn't have been renewed for another season. after all, you just said they are entertained by anything why wouldn't it be renewed. 

And then, can people really be entertained by anything? If they were than why do shows actually get cancelled in the first place? 

I've been watching since season 1.  I read all the books starting around season 2. I still think season 5 & 6 are the best ones.

[jcmontea]

19 minutes ago, Meera of Tarth said:

Casual viewers watch shows that are popular and the "cool" thing. If they are not popular these people don't even try watching them.

Yes. But why does it become popular? Why does it stay popular? Most shows peak in terms of popularity and then begin declining. This show has not. It has only continued getting more and more popular. Something is driving that. 

A show gets renewed when the first seasons have good quality enough so as that the viewers are invested in the story and continue watching it, and then recomment it to other Friends, making it popular.

Once the show is super popular (by season 5 in thrones) the ratings increase because media start talking about them, or they start winning Emmys (even if not deserved) so more casual viewers are gonna watch it due tot he popularity and the fact that people are intrigued by it. Why is Thrones everywhere? Let's give a try.. @Blackwater Revenant explained this very well. And yeah, I also think that the core of the ratings are still the people who started watching it since the start and are invested in the story or characters. The ratings differ quite a lot depending on the episode in the same season. The casual viewers are tuning it when they want, especially in the premieres and finales or when something has been leaked, because it generates expectation. if everyone was watching all the epis then the figures would be the same, always. So basically, it's a matter of good advertising, a core of fans who startedd watching it for the quality (regardless if they still like it now or not) and the casual viewership phenomenon.

What you write here could apply to every show. But not every show has the continued growth in popularity that GoT has. Most shows that suffer actual declines in quality also start suffering declining ratings and lose popularity as people abandon the show. 

The fact that that has not happened with GoT and in fact the opposite has happened, suggests to me that any perceived decline in quality is either not a universal opinion or whatever decline in quality is simply not that material. 

[jcmontea]

23 minutes ago, Deadlines? What Deadlines? said:

I've been watching since season 1.  I read all the books starting around season 2. I still think season 5 & 6 are the best ones.

Season 6 is my favorite. 

[Lady Of The Crossbow Inn]

MinscS2, sorry I missed yr reply to my LOTR post. Yes, that's interesting too, I never thought of the parallels between Jon and Aragorn, as well as Jon and Frodo. However, there's Tolkien's Aragorn and PJ's Aragorn.  PJ took the somewhat more traditional heroic-fantasy archetype of Aragorn from the books and turned him into a post-modern creation...or as much as possible in this High Fantasy saga.

In the books, whatever inner conflict Aragorn may or may not have suffered  about fulfilling  his destiny as the Heir of Elendil, it mostly happens off-stage, prior to the story I think. He's always twitching aside his cloak in key moments in the story and talking about his sword and its history and who he is (numerous examples abound) talking as if he knew and embraced this all along. Whereas in the films he is nowhere near at peace with himself even well into TTT, and wrestles with his inner demons/doubts over what he sees as his perceived inability to withstand the Ring's temptation, he thinks he is cursed by the weakness of his ancestors. He clearly does not see himself as ready for the tests the Quest will present to him, thinks he will fail, and it ultimately takes only Arwen's belief in him--which she has to coax him into accepting--to get him to set out at all. 

 

PJ also altered the character of Faramir,  Tolkien's heroic and noble Scholar-warrior who many think was Tolkien's alter-ego in the story, the one who not pick up the Ring "if he found it lying by the side of the road," and changed him into a son who was more obsessed in proving himself to his harsh father than in the book, and was willing to deliver the Ring to him as a weapon, even though he knew how dangerous it could potentially be. In both cases much darker characters. 

 

One of the most interesting scenes in PJ's Trilogy is in the last 15 minutes of FOTR when Frodo offers Aragorn the Ring: "Would YOU destroy it?" And Aragorn almost gives in. And based on his being correct about this perceived inherent weakness, this is what makes him want to acede to Frodo's decision to set off for Mordor alone. "I would have gone with you to the end..into the very fires of Mordor." Frodo: "I know. Look after the others...esp Sam, he would not understand"etc.  Even more interesting is that this comes after Frodo also offered the Ring to Galadriel in Lorien, in a similar vein. And after "passing the Test," she says: "You begin to see with a very keen eye."

 

Notably, the Galadriel scene is from the book; but Frodo offering Aragorn the Ring is not. It's a scene that Peter, Fran and  Philippa invented.  It is as if Frodo is beginning to be corrupted by the Ring in his perverse desire to tempt others and see if they are as impervious as he is to the lure of Power. If he is beginning to enjoy this testing of people--if he begins to think himself superior-- then just that belief, that lack of proper Humility,  itself is corruption too. At this point in the FOTR film we already know that Frodo is already becoming very possessive of the Ring and will not give it up, so when he asks Aragorn this question he is clearly NOT asking this legedary character to  take over the Quest from himself, a helpless hobbit. He now sees himself as Aragorn's equal and is testing Aragorn's  mettle in that regard. 

 

Anyway, this is a much darker Aragorn than in the books (oh, and add to this his ambivalence about his relationship with Arwen in the films; he wants her to leave b/c he does not want her to sacrifice her mortality,  even for him; in the books of course The Tale of Aragorn and Arwen is almost appendice-only but there was no doubt in that regard; she just waited for him.)

 

The point I'm making is that there were differences between books and films in LOTR too. So the Jon that you want to see--and the Jon I want to see--the "Aragorn" Jon with the semi-happy ending--may not come to pass. I'm still dreading the Jon/Frodo ending, where Jon wants the Throne/power in the end and is "Divinely" punished for it.

it depends on just how far George takes the "Scouring" parallel..and if D/D do end at the same place George does, even with any and all show divergences. Honestly, I think it could go either way...it's a Targaryen 50/50 coin toss! 

[Deadlines? What Deadlines?]

38 minutes ago, Meera of Tarth said:

Casual viewers watch shows that are popular and the "cool" thing. If they are not popular these people don't even try watching them. A show gets renewed when the first seasons have good quality enough so as that the viewers are invested in the story and continue watching it, and then recomment it to other Friends, making it popular. Once the show is super popular (by season 5 in thrones) the ratings increase because media start talking about them, or they start winning Emmys (even if not deserved) so more casual viewers are gonna watch it due tot he popularity and the fact that people are intrigued by it. Why is Thrones everywhere? Let's give a try.. @Blackwater Revenant explained this very well. And yeah, I also think that the core of the ratings are still the people who started watching it since the start and are invested in the story or characters. The ratings differ quite a lot depending on the episode in the same season. The casual viewers are tuning it when they want, especially in the premieres and finales or when something has been leaked, because it generates expectation. if everyone was watching all the epis then the figures would be the same, always. So basically, it's a matter of good advertising, a core of fans who startedd watching it for the quality (regardless if they still like it now or not) and the casual viewership phenomenon.

I don't buy this.

Marketing buzz and word of mouth might get a mediocre picture a first week bump at the box office but it isn't going to sustain or increase viewership over span of years.

If you look at HBO's previous hit show, The Sopranos ran for 6 seasons.  Peak viewership happened in season 4. Season 5 was pure filler and season 6 was OK IMO.

[Meera of Tarth]

Just now, jcmontea said:

What you write here could apply to every show. But not every show has the continued growth in popularity that GoT has. Most shows that suffer actual declines in quality also start suffering declining ratings and lose popularity as people abandon the show. 

The fact that that has not happened with GoT and in fact the opposite has happened, suggests to me that any perceived decline in quality is either not a universal opinion or whatever decline in quality is simply not that material. 

I explained that in my previous post. There are peaks of popularity from casual viewers, extremely good advertising (lot of money there), leaks, etc. If got was gonna last ten seasons thr popularity would decline but we are reading the ending so it won't decline now even if its not as good. Also, some people like the mid season epis that include battles or CGI. They are put in the middle for strategic reasons.

[Meera of Tarth]

reaching, not reading. Can't edit the post

[Meera of Tarth]

Just now, Deadlines? What Deadlines? said:

I don't buy this.

Marketing buzz and word of mouth might get a mediocre picture a first week bump at the box office but it isn't going to sustain or increase viewership over span of years.

If you look at HBO's previous hit show, The Sopranos ran for 6 seasons.  Peak viewership happened in season 4. Season 5 was pure filler and season 6 was OK IMO.

ywars? Season six was not as bad cause it still had book elements so actually its only two seasons and a half of nonsense, and as I said reaching the ending.

yeah I'm afraid marketing and money have a lot to say. Alot to say. I read local newspapers talking about got. Even praising the Wight hunt episode. Lots of money there.

[Deadlines? What Deadlines?]

15 minutes ago, jcmontea said:

Season 6 is my favorite. 

I still think season 7 is excellent but it doesn't quite meet the standard of the previous two seasons for me:

• It felt a bit "off" to me, right from the beginning of the first episode.  I think this is because we had so many prominent story threads end last year, particularly in the final two episodes.  When you think about it, they liquidated a lot of the Kings Landing cast in S6E10, some of them having been around since season 1 and some of them being very prominent in recent seasons.  Plus no more Walder Frey, no more Boltons, no more Daario, and no more Allister Thorne.  It never really hit me how major that was until this season.
• The pacing was also a little uneven. Six out of seven episodes features a battle! The battles were great but that's a bit crazy.
• avoiding the internet in the second half of the season for fear of spoilers sucks.  There were details that I had spoiled for me totally by accident, because I watch GOT related stuff on YouTube so GOT vids show up in my feed.  Some asshole was spoiling show details IN THE TITLES of his leaked footage videos.  I can stay clear of the videos but how do you avoid accidentally reading a video title?  I had the loot train battle and Viserion's death/resurrection spoiled for me because of this.

[Deadlines? What Deadlines?]

43 minutes ago, Meera of Tarth said:

ywars? Season six was not as bad cause it still had book elements so actually its only two seasons and a half of nonsense, and as I said reaching the ending.

yeah I'm afraid marketing and money have a lot to say. Alot to say. I read local newspapers talking about got. Even praising the Wight hunt episode. Lots of money there.

Yeah, and in the final seasons of The Sopranos, they were doing weekly reviews in the New York times and you could see so-and-so's on CNN and Fox news talking about the final season. There was no lack of marketing or buzz for a critically acclaimed show.  They still couldn't build the viewership past the season 4 peak. 

Edit: is there any evidence at all that HBO is marketing more aggressively now than say, season 4,5, or 6?   Seem to recall very little in the way of trailers and the trailers came later (closer to the premiere) than previous seasons.

[Meera of Tarth]

24 minutes ago, Deadlines? What Deadlines? said:

Yeah, and in the final seasons of The Sopranos, they were doing weekly reviews in the New York times and you could see so-and-so's on CNN and Fox news talking about the final season. There was no lack of marketing or buzz for a critically acclaimed show.  They still couldn't build the viewership past the season 4 peak. 

Edit: is there any evidence at all that HBO is marketing more aggressively now than say, season 4,5, or 6?   Seem to recall very little in the way of trailers and the trailers came later (closer to the premiere) than previous seasons.

Emmys, I think there's an inside job there since s5 is the worst season (I am not alone saying this, many people from the forum agreed on that on a thread from this board that was active until recently, even show lovers).

Also, Thrones has become a worldwide phenomenon, and I bet the money is also put outisde the US, they want good reviews from everywhere in Europe. I can't say that the campaign is bigger than in s6. I think that it all increased since season 6 and in season 7 they leaked episodes (or even the script) as another strategy. And it worked. The leaked epis had more viewers.

[jcmontea]

6 minutes ago, Meera of Tarth said:

Emmys, I think there's an inside job there since s5 is the worst season (I am not alone saying this, many people from the forum agreed on that on a thread from this board that was active until recently, even show lovers).

Also, Thrones has become a worldwide phenomenon, and I bet the money is also put outisde the US, they want good reviews from everywhere in Europe. I can't say that the campaign is bigger than in s6. I think that it all increased since season 6 and in season 7 they leaked episodes (or even the script) as another strategy. And it worked. The leaked epis had more viewers.

Maybe you should just accept that you have a subjective opinion that the show sucks and has declined in quality. Many other people have equally valid subjective opinions that the show is great and is as good now as it was in the past. Doesn’t mean they are stupid, or casual viewers, or influenced by what is popular etc. Just different subjective opinions reacting to the same work of art. 

[Deadlines? What Deadlines?]

25 minutes ago, Meera of Tarth said:

Emmys, I think there's an inside job there since s5 is the worst season (I am not alone saying this, many people from the forum agreed on that on a thread from this board that was active until recently, even show lovers).

Also, Thrones has become a worldwide phenomenon, and I bet the money is also put outisde the US, they want good reviews from everywhere in Europe. I can't say that the campaign is bigger than in s6. I think that it all increased since season 6 and in season 7 they leaked episodes (or even the script) as another strategy. And it worked. The leaked epis had more viewers.

So, hypothetical award show rigging and hypothetical clandestine leaking of footage and scripts explains a viewership jump from 6.88 million in season 5 to 10.26 million in season 7, and, (season 7) 95% critics and 92% audience scores on rotten tomatoes?

D&D clearly are geniuses.

Edit: Evil Geniuses.

[jcmontea]

1 hour ago, Deadlines? What Deadlines? said:

I still think season 7 is excellent but it doesn't quite meet the standard of the previous two seasons for me:

• It felt a bit "off" to me, right from the beginning of the first episode.  I think this is because we had so many prominent story threads end last year, particularly in the final two episodes.  When you think about it, they liquidated a lot of the Kings Landing cast in S6E10, some of them having been around since season 1 and some of them being very prominent in recent seasons.  Plus no more Walder Frey, no more Boltons, no more Daario, and no more Allister Thorne.  It never really hit me how major that was until this season.
• The pacing was also a little uneven. Six out of seven episodes features a battle! The battles were great but that's a bit crazy.
• avoiding the internet in the second half of the season for fear of spoilers sucks.  There were details that I had spoiled for me totally by accident, because I watch GOT related stuff on YouTube so GOT vids show up in my feed.  Some asshole was spoiling show details IN THE TITLES of his leaked footage videos.  I can stay clear of the videos but how do you avoid accidentally reading a video title?  I had the loot train battle and Viserion's death/resurrection spoiled for me because of this.

I loved Season 7. Loved Beyond the Wall. The whole Dany Jon relationship and their individual arcs really worked for me. Cersei and Jaime were amazing. All the Dragon stuff. Viserion’s death hit me in the stomach. The reunions. The themes about war, the futility of war, banding together to face a greater threat etc. It was great. 

There were some things that didn’t quite work or I wish had been handled differently. I wasn’t crazy about the Arya/ Sansa stuff. I get that they would have fought, i just would have wished that instead of structure it as a mystery/ suspense tale of will they kill each other or not they would have structured it as a regular drama of two sisters fighting because they grew so far apart and different but who are able to find each other again in the face of a common threat. I also think they should have spent a little more time explaining the strategic backdrop of the war, how Cersei/ Euron had such an informtation advantage relative to Varys, why Tyrion thinks his sister would listen to Jaime. I get why they did 7 episodes, but even just one more episode would have been nice. There where just slightly too many things handled with a little too much screen and narative economy for my tastes.

But overall I thought it was great.