Adapting ASOIAF For the Screen...

[HellaGood]

Just a few suggestions...

For the opening of the first episode, I think it would be good to have something almost as fast as a trailer to open up. It would be about Robert's rebellion and could work in a similar way to the opening of Baz Lurham's Romeo&Juliet. It would only last about five minutes and would end with a fade out to the title: A Song of Ice and Fire. In future episodes, this title screen would be all that was shown to open the episode.

As for the Prologue, I would suggest having this as a prologue to one of the future episodes, perhaps even the episode when Osha says that Robb is marching the wrong way. Before this episode, we could have all sorts of hints that something creepy is going on beyond the wall. For example, at the opening of the first episode with Gerad's execution he could try and warn them about wight's but it would just be disregarded by the characters. This way, we get to build up the storyline as something important, rather than put it all in right at the start then drop it for several episodes. Also, it means things like Osha's comment won't go unnoticed.

While I'm on the subject of prologue's, I'd suggest the prologue for episode 2 being Elia's murder and the escape of Dany and Viserys, so that the audience would have an idea who they were rather than just introducing them out of the blue. We'd also get an introduction to Gregor and Tywin, possibly showing how Tywin is related to the Lannister kids.

Also, I'm afraid I agree with Tysha that PoV cards just wouldn't work. It's a brilliant literary technique but it really doesn't translate visually. It would be pretty pointless as well as making it jerky. I also don't like the idea of monologues and voiceovers. They really just don't work on screen very well. Sure, they're one of the best elements of the books but they just don't work the same on screen. It's regrettable but it just has to be accepted when doing an adaption from a book.

[Lies And Perfidy]

Here's an idea - cross-cut between the execution and the prologue. If anyone's ever seen Suicide Kings, consider the way the film cuts

SPOILER: Suicide Kings

between the planning of Charlie Barret's kidnapping and the actual kidnapping itself.

Something like that - three Black Brothers investigate the disappeared corpses/the Starks ride out, Will, Gared and Waymar argue/Gared is set up for execution, the Others kill Waymar/Gared is decapitated, Will is killed by Wightmar/Bran and Ned talk about bravery and stuff. Then we go straight to the direwolves.

[Maester Yobjascz]

I'm still turning the options over in my head for the first episode.

Some things are fairly clear... most series have a 'Previously, on ..." segment before the prologue and title sequence. For the first episode, this is non-existent, and this is where I'd insert the history of the rebellion. I'm toying with the idea of having Old Nan telling the tale of the Rebellion, fading to a voice-over flashback.

After that, I'd be tempted to go straight to the Prologue... I can understand wanting to go to the Starks at Winterfell to get acquainted, but I think it would detract from the power of the Prologue. Moreover, I think it would create too much focus on the Starks. I would go from the history up to the Wall. We've been introduced to the events south of the Wall, now it's time to turn our attentions to the North. I'd expand on the Prologue... Gared and the men laughing at Royce as the 'mighty warrior' for killing the minks himself. The Old Bear and Benjen discussing recent wildling activity; Royce overhears this and asks (begs?) the Old Bear for the command. Then the Prologue proper.

Then it's the title sequence, and off to Bran I. I do love the idea of Jon talking to Robb about joining the NW... but this is more easily inserted into background conversation that Bran overhears while they ride to the beheading.

I think it would work better to have the Others being a slow, creeping threat that seep in slowly and grab you by the jugular before you've had time to realise they're there.

True... but unless you know that they're there in the back of your mind somewhere, all you've got is Others jumping out of nowhere. By showing them at the very beginning, the audience is told that they're there. They won't be aware of how big a threat they are until the clues start accumulating. As events to the south pile up, the audience will forget about the Others... which is what we want them to do. And Jon's woken up by wights in the tower, and all hell breaks loose.

Without the Others to set the stage, all you've got is a freak occurrence... two zombies among tales of snarks and grumkins. But with the audience having seen the Others... well, then the wights take on a whole new meaning.

As a note on the 'title cards'... I agree with you that they wouldn't work so well... I'm just trying to keep an open mind about these various ideas. So don't take it to heart if I argue stubbornly against something... most of the time, I'm just 'kicking the tires', to see how stable they are. I test ideas by arguing them as strongly as possible, and see how much abuse they can take.

Lies -

I like the idea of cross-cutting chapters like that, but I wouldn't do that for these two chapters in particular. My reasoning is that Bran I should be about the Starks and their wolves. It's an introduction to Bran, Robb, and Jon... as well as Theon and Eddard. The execution of Gared is something that happens in the background. That it's Gared being executed is a nod to those paying attention, and a clue as to what happened to the man. This could be fleshed out later, but cross-cutting the scene with the prologue places the attention squarely on Gared, and takes it away from the character development that's sorely needed at this stage.

[Tysha]

I'm toying with the idea of having Old Nan telling the tale of the Rebellion, fading to a voice-over flashback.

I don't think that would work. It would be much better to just show it. Besides, if Old Nan tells it then who's to say it's not just ... well, one of Old Nan's stories? It shouldn't be presented as a story or a myth, it should be fact, and it should be fast and shocking and visceral, not a story an old woman could tell to children in her care.

After that, I'd be tempted to go straight to the Prologue... I can understand wanting to go to the Starks at Winterfell to get acquainted, but I think it would detract from the power of the Prologue. Moreover, I think it would create too much focus on the Starks. I would go from the history up to the Wall. We've been introduced to the events south of the Wall, now it's time to turn our attentions to the North.

But then you've got the problem that the prologue in the book has nothing to do with the prologue on screen. We spend five minutes showing all these wonderfully dramatic events, setting up what looks like is going to be a belter of a story ... and then go to a whole new place with a whole bunch of new people without any indication whatsoever of what ties them to all the death and destruction we've just seen.

The Winterfell scene only needs to be tiny. Two minutes, tops. Just something to show where Ned is now and how the NW ties in to the world we've just been introduced to. It would make the story flow better and just make whole world seem more complete and real.

[Michael Jon Snow]

I like the idea for the first episode of rearranging the plot a little bit to lead the audience through the introduction. However I think that the Robellion makes a better movie than to try to distill it down to a 15 minute prologue. HBO could put the movie out in theaters 6 months before the premier and then air the movie as a 2 hr special the week before the premier. Take more time to develop those Characters before you see how they have changed.

Remember that with Tivo, you do have the ability to “back up a few pages†and check things again. Also, with DVD sales of the series out just before th next season, people can keep up with the things that they missed.

Also, one of the beautiful things about GRRMs story telling is the Oh yeah, now I understand what happened earlier by putting the explanation half a book or more after the event takes place.

With the popularity of shows like LOST, this type of “I don’t understand what I just saw†storytelling might be very acceptable.

I think that keeping the story in more isolated blocks of POVs would be in better keeping with the books. The chop that was proposed for Prologue and first chapter would work too, and I wouldn’t complain if it were done that way, but the show would have a very different flavor than the books because that sense of POV would be lost.

In Fantasy there are two general patterns. Either you see the entire book from a single character POV or the story jumps helter-skelter from an omnipotent POV who sees what is happening from everywhere at once and skips from place to place. GRRMs take is unique in my experience and certainly rare in fantasy. I would want a TV adaptation to have that same flavor.

As has been said, POVs on film are more subtle than POVs in books. They have to do as much with camera angle and how the scenes are set than on page. Perhaps this show could emphasize POV a little more than is typically done to give the POV a bit larger presence than is normally done. Push the envelope just a bit. If the extent of POV is a little more dramatic, perhaps the transitions become

As an example, the over-the-shoulder shot is often used to convey POV. In a Dany chapter, there might be several different shot angles, but the only over the shoulder views are over Dany’s shoulder.

[Paul H]

Also, one of the beautiful things about GRRMs story telling is the Oh yeah, now I understand what happened earlier by putting the explanation half a book or more after the event takes place.

With the popularity of shows like LOST, this type of “I don’t understand what I just saw†storytelling might be very acceptable.

Keep in mind there is a large amount of bitching from the people who watch LOST. They whine and complain. I still don't think the books can EVER be done as anything other than books. Too much going on in too many places.

[Maester Yobjascz]

I think the main problem with LOST is that they intertwine flashbacks with current time without any real distinction or warning. They also are doing this in what functions as a mystery series... so the combination of unexplained mystery and interlaced scenes and times gets confusing.

In ASOIAF, the PoV's would likely remain static. I agree with MSJ that it's a feature of GRRM's style that makes sense to port over. It provides some stability to the viewing audience... they know where they are, and who the main character is.

Further, ASOIAF isn't a mystery series. There are mysteries, no doubt... but they're not the central focus of the book. I tend to view ASOIAF more as a story about the people dealing with the world around them... it's about character development. The world they're in is epic and filled with magic, mystery, and conflict, but the stories are about the people and how they deal... how Eddard's honor gets him killed, how Littlefinger's ambition starts wars, how Cersei's pride blinds her to reality, and how Jaime's aspirations lead, perhaps, to redemption. This is what makes the series worth reading, and the ability to get this across would make it worth watching. There's plenty of action, violence, sex, and drama to make it interesting, but it's the characters that would make it great.

This said, I would prefer to keep the focus on characters and character development. There's plenty of time for visceral, gut-wrenching excitement later.

Does anyone disagree with this interpretation?

And Paul H. -

I'm reminded of a quote... 'Those who believe a thing cannot be done should not stand in the way of those who are doing it."

[Tysha]

This said, I would prefer to keep the focus on characters and character development. There's plenty of time for visceral, gut-wrenching excitement later.

We can't have both?

Come on, how much would a whistlestop tour through the Robellion in the opening minutes tell us about the characters? I'm not talking showing random battles and blood spattered everywhere, I'm talking about a montage showing the major events. It doesn't even all have to be shown chronologically - for example I think it would look great to start with Robert fighting Rhaegar and intercut it with Ned fighting the Kingsguard and finding Lyanna. See Rhaegar die, Robert takes off his helm (so we can see his face and recognise him when we see him again in ten minutes) as he and stares for a moment, linger on Rhaegar's body, the sound of the Trident the only thing we can hear ... Big dramatic music cue, cut to Tywin arriving at King's Landing and giving the order to sack the city, see the murders of Elia, Rhaenys and Aegon, the escape of Rhaella and Viserys, close-ups on Jaime, seeing the conflict in his eyes in the moments before he kills Aerys, and finally Ned bursting in and finding Jaime sitting on the throne. Jaime says he's just keeping it safe for Robert and then off Ned's face we fade to Winterfell for a quick glimpse at the Starks before going on to see the Night's Watch that Jon talks about.

As for LOST, that's very different from what's being suggested here. On LOST they introduce a mystery and two years later the audience still doesn't have a damn clue what's going on. Any confusion here will last about twenty minutes.

[Michael Jon Snow]

My comparison to LOST is more about the fact that some things are shown that don't make sense to the viewer at the time, but make sense only after some other clue that is given later. I gave up on the show for exactly the reason you state. It was extremely popular its first couple of seasons. Some mysteries get stretched out over way to much time. But for ASOI&F the mysteries are much more secondary and are more to make the show interesting the 3rd, 4th & 5th time its seen.

I didn’t catch that it was Garred that was executed in Bran’s chapter until I reread. It was about my 4th reread before I connected the Plumms. They are candy for the diehard fans.

[Michael Jon Snow]

How would you propose to deal with the prophecy & dream scenes. In text you can call someone the shy wolf and it is cryptic, but on screen its not so easy. Now That example isn’t to bad because the chrs are so much younger that you would have them played by a younger actor, or made up to be much younger so there can be a cryptic nature to it.

Also, there would need to be several actors for some parts. Robert, as an example. The Old Robert at Winterfel, the young Robert at the Trident, The teen age Robert who watches his parents perish at sea (Perhaps played by the same actor who plays Gendry?) Ned you might be able to cast as a single actor. Age him a bit for Lord stark. Cosmetically reduce his age for the Shy wolf scenes.

[Paul H]

And Paul H. -

I'm reminded of a quote... 'Those who believe a thing cannot be done should not stand in the way of those who are doing it."

So...You have obtained the rights from GRRM to do it?

[Michael Jon Snow]

I don't have the dump truck full of cash yet.

[Paul H]

I don't have the dump truck full of cash yet.

Maester Yobjascz was the one who made the comment about "doing it". Until you have the rights legally, you are either just making idle speculation, or infringing on someone else's work. I was trying to think of a away to do the work for the D&E stories, and then I realized how much time and effort I would be spending on something that would not even be my work, and I would have to get it approved by a financier and THEN acquire the rights to do it. So, I ended my idle speculation on that.

[L'Sana]

How would you propose to deal with the prophecy & dream scenes. In text you can call someone the shy wolf and it is cryptic, but on screen its not so easy. Now That example isn’t to bad because the chrs are so much younger that you would have them played by a younger actor, or made up to be much younger so there can be a cryptic nature to it.

These would be some of the more problematic scenes, I tend to agree. The dream scenes I think could be done fairly well with a skilled director, but I'm not sure about the stories. My inclination would be not to try to act them out. Just let Old Nan or Meera or Maester Luwin talk and tell the story like they do in the book, rather than letting the screen go all wavy and flash to a dramatic action. It feels to me like that would make things too childish.

OTOH, I don't know if you could just have someone talking and have that still be considered exciting TV.

[Michael Jon Snow]

The wavy screen thing would be childish, but it could be done without that and still be clearly a significant flashback. If you have the stories being told by the person telling the story as a voice over to the action, it might work. Kind-of like the intro to LOTR. Meera telling the story as a voice over to snip-its of silent action.

Paul

It is all idle speculation. None of us have the rights, and none of us would want to do anything like this without GRRM being involved. He is actually an accomplished screenplay writer and should definitely be involved in whatever form this takes on. We are simply fans speculating on how we would do it if we had the chance.

What the good Maester was trying to say, I think, is that if you don’t have the creativity to play along, go take your negative attitude somewhere else and stop pissing in our soup. Although his way was much more polite.

[dsandersiii]

A couple of comments. Good thread btw. Fun to speculate.

I agree this is fairly moot until we have the saga completed.

I agree with, and have thought all along the only way to do it it via a cable series (i.e.Rome, HBO)

GRRM does have a pretty good background in TV and will ensure it is given the proper care it will need. I can imagine him getting a chuckle from this thread.

I don't like the idea of title cards at all. Even if they are done with style, what do they accomplish

that cannot be accomplished using a different mechanism more suited to film. The POV's truly define the way this story is told in the books; this can be portrayed in various way in film.

The "soap" approach for some reason doesn't work for me; too "TV".

I've always like how the internal thoughts of the characters in the orginal Dune adaptation by David Lynch. I think that would work well here too. I DO think they need to be used. So many great lines and "tells" would be missing without them.

As for the prologue, a tough choice. Either you start with the events 14 years prior, OR the actual AGoT prologue. I could definitely see something that starts with a chaotic flashback using Garret as he is about to be executed. You could use Bran's first chapter to convey the Prologue this way. You could pull it off in a 5-10 minute segment as Garret is kneeling with the mad look in his eyes... You may as well use him to flashback on what got him to that state. You can't leave out Garret's execution though. WAY too much is learned about the North/Starks from this scene.

[Paul H]

What the good Maester was trying to say, I think, is that if you don’t have the creativity to play along, go take your negative attitude somewhere else and stop pissing in our soup. Although his way was much more polite.

Welcome to the internet, where if it is not porn, it is someone pissing in your soup.

I see what you are saying, and while I agree I am being a spoil sport, I do it because I have seen so many of these things over and over again since ASoS came out. I am a realist of sort when it comes to this, knowing that there is little chance of it getting done. And if it does manage to get made, I fear what Hollywood would do to GRRM's art...

[Maester Yobjascz]

MSJ - Thanks for stepping in.

A couple of thoughts/comments from last night...

First, the more I think on it, the less enamored I am with a Rebellion sequence at the start. GRRM did *lots* of screenwriting, and his novels do reflect that. He's got a good sense of how to lead the audience along, how much suspense is good, and in what doses.

That said, I think there were good reasons for introducing certain things when he did. If we've already seen Eddard confront Jaime in the throne room of King's Landing, what do Ned and Robert talk about when they gallop ahead of the column? Eddard repeats the story, voicing something we've already seen, and the audience gets bored. They've already seen this story. When Eddard's in the dungeon, and has that amazing ToJ dream, it loses a *lot* of impact, because the audience has seen it already. These things need to be new... hinted at, perhaps, but not seen.

I understand the desire to open the series with a bang, but to begin by spoiling several of the surprises will cause the season to peter out quickly. We want the audience to wonder why certain things are... that's one of the things that brings them back (along with 'what happens next', obviously).

As for stories, I agree that the best way to do it is to have the storyteller tell the tale, fading to live-action sequence *with* the storyteller continuing to narrate the story as written. No 'wavy dream' lines required. We could further delineate such stories by shooting in sepia tones, or other after-effects (like the 'sketch animation' used in those old United Airlines ads). This keeps the stories intact as 'stories', but gives the audience something to look at aside from a bunch of people sitting around.

Dreams shouldn't be much different... though there are one set of sequences that will be *really* tricky... and those are the various warg dreams of the Starks. A lot of them revolve around thought and smell. The thoughts could be given voice, but the smells can't... but perhaps they'd have to be converted to dialogue as the character explains the dream to friends afterwards?

[L'Sana]

First, the more I think on it, the less enamored I am with a Rebellion sequence at the start. GRRM did *lots* of screenwriting, and his novels do reflect that. He's got a good sense of how to lead the audience along, how much suspense is good, and in what doses.

True, but he wasn't writing a screenplay here: he was writing a novel. There are things you can do in a book that you couldn't do on screen and vice versa.

Now if Martin were to join this discussion and say, "No, no, as an experienced screenwriter, I think we definitely want the same prologue as we had before. Don't introduce anything new," then I would defer to him, obviously. But I don't think that just because he chose to start the book this way means its the right way to start a movie.

That said, I think there were good reasons for introducing certain things when he did. If we've already seen Eddard confront Jaime in the throne room of King's Landing, what do Ned and Robert talk about when they gallop ahead of the column? Eddard repeats the story, voicing something we've already seen, and the audience gets bored. They've already seen this story. When Eddard's in the dungeon, and has that amazing ToJ dream, it loses a *lot* of impact, because the audience has seen it already. These things need to be new... hinted at, perhaps, but not seen.

We don't have to show everything. A prologue that goes into the basic facts of the rebellion doesn't need to go into exactly how Rickard and Brandon were killed, every incident in the throne room, the action at the Tower of Joy. We can give people the same knowledge of the rebellion you would get by reading, say, Dany and Eddard's first chapters. Enough so that it all ties together, but light on the details.

As for stories, I agree that the best way to do it is to have the storyteller tell the tale, fading to live-action sequence *with* the storyteller continuing to narrate the story as written. No 'wavy dream' lines required. We could further delineate such stories by shooting in sepia tones, or other after-effects (like the 'sketch animation' used in those old United Airlines ads). This keeps the stories intact as 'stories', but gives the audience something to look at aside from a bunch of people sitting around.

Hmm...not sure I have ever seen this done well in a TV show, though it's not like I watch so much that I neccessarily would.

Dreams shouldn't be much different... though there are one set of sequences that will be *really* tricky... and those are the various warg dreams of the Starks. A lot of them revolve around thought and smell. The thoughts could be given voice, but the smells can't... but perhaps they'd have to be converted to dialogue as the character explains the dream to friends afterwards?

Dreams I think would be easier than stories. Dreams are a series of images, which could be done fairly well on screen. The Tower of Joy scene, for example, could have the dialogue with the kingsguard, flashes of blood and steel for the battle, blood spilling out onto the ground and the flowers, then that blood turns into Lyanna's bed of blood and her cry of "Promise me!"

For Jon and Theon's dreams of Winterfell or Jaime's dream of Casterly Rock, I think something like the Buffy dream episode at the end of the fourth season, minus the cheese, might work nicely.

The warg dreams might be more difficult, but you would have to find a way to translate the smells into images. Not easy, but I don't think impossible either.

[Michael Jon Snow]

The wolf dreams revolve around smells because it’s a book. Similar effect could be had by keeping the camera angle low and the camera movement fast pace. If the entire wolf dream is shot from the wolfs POV, you get the sense of being there without the scents. That is what the scents do in the story.