Jump to content

[TV SPOILERS] Game of Thrones World Premiere


Stego

Recommended Posts

Got to see it last night in Houston, and it was well worth the drive (and the almost moving violation, too).

It would probably be easier to just mention the things I didn't like, or that I didn't like as much as everything else:

1. The (presumed) greenscreening of Bran running along the heights of Winterfell, seen against the sky. Either it was really awkward lighting but genuinely done, or it was greenscreened. Either way, it *looked* very fake on the big screen.

2. I think the title sequence was amazing, but lost out by being on the not-quite-focused screen. I cannot wait to see this on the HDTV at the hotel.

3. I missed "silver for the silver of your hair" and "Tell Khal Drogo that he has given me the wind" -- especially getting that sense of fleeting freedom Dany feels while riding her silver for the first time. I get that they can't necessarily have them actually jumping a firepit, but even a little gallop (and Drogo's smile at her joy) would have been nice. Of course, I have no idea what I would have cut out instead, in order to make time for it....

4. I also missed any sense of concern or tenderness from Drogo -- there's a huge difference, to me, between the scene as shown in the series, which is pretty much just unadorned rape, and the fact that he does actually stop and ask her for permission in the books*. Now maybe they're going to compress some of the in-between scenes, where she's sore from riding her horse and sore from Drogo riding her, so they tied that into this scene. I don't know yet. It does certainly continue to highlight how very out of her own control Dany's life is.

5. I know they had to shift things around to still show what an ass Theon is, so it made sense that he made a cutting comment about Ghost/Jon, but I also missed Jon standing up to him at that point.

6. I didn't like that Jon was excluded from the feast entirely, though it nicely gave him & Tyrion the chance to interact.

*Yes, it's minimal how meaningful the consent of a coerced 13-year old can be, but there at least was a sense that she liked what he was doing, even if she maybe didn't fully understand the rest of it.

Absolutely in 100% agreement on points 1, 3, and 4. It'll be interesting to see if Bran's greenscreening looks as weird on my TV as it did large.

I suppose it isn't really THAT important right now that we see Dany's relationship with her horse, but it does foreshadow that she will be able to fit into the Dothraki culture at some point, as alien as she seems now.

I'm assuming that the Drogo/Dany thing was done this way to make the eventual closeness between them seem more of a revelation, but... that "No... no... no..." "Yes" scene was quite impactful for me in my first read of the books.

Those things all did rankle.

However, I have to add my voice that overall, these are very small nitpicks and generally I think that we could not really have asked for a better pilot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Khal Drogo does still say, "No," but it's much more threatening than in the books. I agree that's an element I think people will have problems with.

The Bran-running-against-the-sky sequence looked fine on the big screen I saw it on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Khal Drogo does still say, "No," but it's much more threatening than in the books. I agree that's an element I think people will have problems with.

The Bran-running-against-the-sky sequence looked fine on the big screen I saw it on.

Correct, but in the books Drogo's last "No" is a question, and Dany replies "Yes". I do believe that that's the omission both Babs and I are talking about, not the "No" in general.

As for Bran, it's possible that you've seen a final (or at least closer-to-final) version and we haven't; not only did the Houston showing get the "for review only" intro, but I didn't notice the ADR points you mentioned. (I hope that's the case; cleaning up the Bran scene and having a more natural Tyrion would be wonderful.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Correct, but in the books Drogo's last "No" is a question, and Dany replies "Yes". I do believe that that's the omission both Babs and I are talking about, not the "No" in general.

She could've said "take me hard" in fluent Dothraki, and it would still be full-blown rape. I've always wondered why some readers (not referring to you here) seem to have found that scene tender or merciful in the book. It's really uncomfortable. As someone who hasn't yet seen the episode, I think I'm going to prefer the TV version as it sounds like they're leaving out the romantic illusions about what's happening, regardless of who says yes or no or eh what.

The eventual development of a romantic relationship between Dany and her rapist is probably still going to be handled as actual love in the TV series, unfortunately. It's one of the few places where I've always felt GRRM misstepped. One thing is to accept that there are probably all sorts of Stockholm-like syndromes where an abductee falls in love with her rapist over time, but I never got the sense from AGOT that Dany's and Drogo's relationship was anything but romantic and healthy (Dothraki circumstances taken into consideration).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My early review of the first two episodes:

Last night I attended the premiere of Game of Thrones at BAFTA's HQ in London. Twelve years after reading the first book, sitting down to watch the first two episodes on a huge cinema screen with the actors playing Robert Baratheon, Benjen Stark, Theon Greyjoy and Viserys Targaryen sitting two rows in front of me was a surreal - but cool - experience.

Things got off to a slightly amusing start when the rep for Sky Atlantic (the new home of HBO in the UK) came out and gave a marketing spiel about the show and the channel. His statement that, "Sky Atlanic is free for all existing Sky customers," isn't completely accurate, as a commentator in the audience couldn't help pointing out: "Until August!" Once the introduction was over the traditional HBO logo came up and the first episode, Winter is Coming, began.

Generally speaking, I was impressed. The opening title sequence is gorgeous, a work of art in its own right. Basically it's a map of Westeros assembled out of blocks, like a high-resolution version of MINECRAFT, and as the camera pans to each city or castle the buildings rise up out of the map, spinning around like cogs and gears. The sequence changes every episode as well: Episode 1 focuses on King's Landing, Winterfell, the Wall and sweeps across the Narrow Sea to Pentos. Episode 2 drops Pentos and moves much further east to Vaes Dothrak. People who've seen the first six episodes confirm this continues: later episodes bring in the Eyrie, for example, and I hear that the Twins will also appear before the end of the season. The series logo appears over a seal made up of four of the sigils of the Great Houses: Stark, Baratheon, Lannister and Arryn (slightly odd choice that last one, but I suppose a falcon's head looks better than the jumping fish of Tully), whilst each actor's name is accompanied by the sigil of the house he or she belongs to.

The acting is excellent throughout. Sean Bean adds a dash of humour and warmth to differentiate Eddard from Boromir: Eddard is a much more rounded and complex character and Bean brings a solid maturity and experience to the role. However, whilst Bean has been focused on a lot, this is an ensemble show and it's surprising how long he goes without appearing (particularly in the second episode). Michelle Fairley is also excellent as his wife Catelyn, though the script has deviated from the books in softening her hard-edged political acumen to make her more sympathetic. Possibly a mistake, as it makes a decision she makes in the second episode slightly less plausible. Kit Harington is a serious but sympathetic Jon Snow, whilst Richard Madden makes the most with limited material as Robb Stark (expect him to come into his own later in the season). Sophie Turner puts in a good performance as the (at this point) air-headed Sansa, but the character suffers from losing a couple of character-establishing scenes from the book. Maisie Williams and Isaac Hempstead-Wright are both outstanding, bringing maturity and acting skills way beyond their years to make Arya and Bran compelling characters. Hempstead-Wright will break your heart in one pivotal scene in the first episode. Joseph Mawle makes the most of his short appearance as Benjen Stark, bringing 150% to the role. I remember that when he showed up in Season 2 of MERLIN he seemed to be in a different show to everyone else, with a notable focus and intensity that seemed a bit out of keeping with the camp elsewhere in the show. He's more at home here on THRONES.

In the Lannister camp, Lena Headey brings a steely cold reserve to Cersei in public, but her private scenes with her children or with her brother show flashes of warmth and humour. She has an absolutely outstanding scene in the second episode with Fairley where Cersei and Cat have a moment of common bonding as mothers. Nikolaj Coster-Waldau pretty much nails Jaime Lannister: the brash arrogance, the flamboyant disdain for others and a hint of cruel humour in his dealings with others. However, he becomes more sympathetic in his dealings with Tyrion, letting the mask slip a bit. Of course, Peter Dinklage is every bit as good as Tyrion as anyone was expecting: sardonic, witty, funny but also on occasion furious and hinting at his loneliness. His exchanges with Jon Snow are particularly good. Tyrion also has a highly memorable first scene. Jack Gleeson is effectively tosserish as Prince Joffrey, bringing a cruel streak to the role that makes you want to punch him before he even says anything. Rory McCann is much quieter and more reserved than in the books, which is a different approach though it is still hinted that he is dangerous. Mark Addy is also great as King Robert, Henry VIII as played by Brian Blessed only not quite so loud and OTT. A terrific, charismatic performance.

Across the Narrow Sea Harry Lloyd brings his eye-rolling dementedness from DOCTOR WHO (he played one of the aliens in the HUMAN NATURE two-parter) but dials it down a notch as Viserys. He's as cruel, capricious and Caligula-like as in the books, but also gets across his anger at having his throne stolen from him, as well as brieft bursts of good humour. Viserys is a more nuanced character on-screen than in the books (the only character who is improved from the novels so far). Emilia Clarke is quiet and reserved as Daenerys, as Dany herself is at this stage, but shows signs of steel and intelligence. The two episodes don't really give Dany much to do apart from hanging around naked for long periods (though Dany's first scene of the season cleverly foreshadows the last). The same is true of Jason Momoa as Khal Drogo: he's a bit of a blank slate so far. Later episodes should give him more to do. Iain Glen brings gravitas and presence to the situation as Ser Jorah, and one exchange between him and Lloyd is terrific as Glen is able to transmit a lot of what he's feeling without resorting to eye-rolling or obvious signs of bemused disgust. Unfortunately, Roger Allam, a very fine actor, seems a bit out-of-sorts as Illyrio. He does an okay job, but he has a couple of iffy moments (possibly down to his exposition-heavy dialogue).

Unfortunately, if THRONES stumbles somewhere, it's with the Dothraki scenes in the east. Whilst Lloyd and Glen get everyone to raise their game, there's still a whiff of corncheese to the Dothraki and Dany learning the 'womanly arts' from a bed slave (played by Roxanne McKee from HOLLYOAKS). Some pretty awful sex scenes push it towards TRUE BLOOD territory, not helped by the ambiguity of the Drogo-Dany relationship not being handled as sensitively as in the book, leading to some uncomfortable moments.

Taken as a whole the series gets off to a good start: exposition is balanced against drama, dialogue is pretty good and performances are strong. According to my girlfriend, it's also well-balanced for newcomers who haven't read the books, though there are a couple of moments of confusion (for example, the Mad King is referenced but I don't think named, leading to confusion between him and his son Rhaegar; both being dead when the story begins and not appearing in flashback adds to the confusion) due to this desire to reign in the exposition but also having to provide information. The effects - what there are so far - are also great, though outside of the main title the music is a bit forgettable. Possibly a bigger problem is that whilst Episode 1 works really well, Episode 2 feels less strong, possibly because everyone is journeying from Point A to Point B and it's all a bit transitory. Once Eddard is established in King's Landing and Dany in Vaes Dothrak (their bases for much of the rest of the series) that should be less of an issue.

Overall, it's good. Not outstandingly brilliant from the off, but some excellent moments and assured performances overcome the problems. It's interesting to reflect that by the end of Episode 2 many of the book's more iconic characters (Barristan Selmy, Littlefinger, Varys, Alliser Thorne, Samwell Tarly etc) haven't even shown up yet, so there's plenty left to look forward to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

She could've said "take me hard" in fluent Dothraki, and it would still be full-blown rape. I've always wondered why some readers (not referring to you here) seem to have found that scene tender or merciful in the book. It's really uncomfortable. As someone who hasn't yet seen the episode, I think I'm going to prefer the TV version as it sounds like they're leaving out the romantic illusions about what's happening, regardless of who says yes or no or eh what.

The eventual development of a romantic relationship between Dany and her rapist is probably still going to be handled as actual love in the TV series, unfortunately. It's one of the few places where I've always felt GRRM misstepped. One thing is to accept that there are probably all sorts of Stockholm-like syndromes where an abductee falls in love with her rapist over time, but I never got the sense from AGOT that Dany's and Drogo's relationship was anything but romantic and healthy (Dothraki circumstances taken into consideration).

To quote the book, denstore...

"'No?' he said, and she knew it was a question.

"She took his hand and moved it down to the wetness between her thighs. 'Yes,' she whispered as she put her finger inside of her."

Now, look. I'm pretty damn touchy about feminist issues. One of the very touchiest on this board, probably. But I am not sure how you could by any stretch call that passage rape. I'm not sure I'd call it "tender" either, but I'd definitely call it a sign that Drogo is not the monster he seems.

In the pilot, however, that was completely, utterly omitted, which changes the whole tenor of the relationship. Drogo gets none of that redemption. He's all monster, and it *is* rape.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

edited to put the whole thing in spoilers because I realized this thread was marked TV Spoilers and we are discussing the book and things from the show that haven't yet aired. Better safe than sorry, ey?

To quote the book, denstore...

"'No?' he said, and she knew it was a question.

"She took his hand and moved it down to the wetness between her thighs. 'Yes,' she whispered as she put her finger inside of her."

Now, look. I'm pretty damn touchy about feminist issues. One of the very touchiest on this board, probably. But I am not sure how you could by any stretch call that passage rape. I'm not sure I'd call it "tender" either, but I'd definitely call it a sign that Drogo is not the monster he seems.

In the pilot, however, that was completely, utterly omitted, which changes the whole tenor of the relationship. Drogo gets none of that redemption. He's all monster, and it *is* rape.

I'd go ahead and call it rape because she is 13 years old and it was made clear to her from several sources that "no" wasn't really an option. Obviously this is a culture in which barely pubescent girls are expected to be sexually available to the spouses their families choose for them, so there is a sense in which you can interpret it as a normal and acceptable and even exceeds-expectations-gentle interaction within the context of that society, but if you ask modern me whether I think that scene is a rape, the answer is yes. I know one woman who put down the book after reading that scene and refuses to have anything more to do with it, and although I'm disappointed for her, it was hard for me to tell her she was wrong.

I think what makes it a powerful, if upsetting, scene is to realize that, as fucked up as the interaction is, it is the first time that somebody has really acted as though Dany gets a say in how she is going to be used, and I get the sense that when she says yes she is responding to being given the choice as much as to actual physical arousal. Lacking that element, I have to say it will be weirder for me to actually see her fall in love with Drogo after he rapes her.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now, look. I'm pretty damn touchy about feminist issues. One of the very touchiest on this board, probably. But I am not sure how you could by any stretch call that passage rape. I'm not sure I'd call it "tender" either, but I'd definitely call it a sign that Drogo is not the monster he seems.

You don't sound that touchy at all. My girlfriend did exactly what nihil's friend did; she stopped at that passage and never returned to the book, and I didn't even try and persuade her that she was judging wrongly, because she wasn't. I personally always find that scene really uncomfortable. I accept it because the rest of the series is damn good and because GRRM's voice usually is a lot more detached and less accepting of what takes place 'on screen', but that doesn't make this particular scene any less awkward.

The thing is, you can read that passage on two levels. On a purely textual level, where the author's word is law and what he writes is absolute truth (this is what happened), yes, it is a romantic scene because Dany just so happens to get aroused by the hulking barbarian horselord pinching her. Everybody wins. If you read it like that, which is obviously what GRRM intends, it's sort of a case of consensual rape or something like that; it's clear that while Dany doesn't have a choice, she luckily finds the whole deal pleasant, which, as the author communicates, makes the whole thing 'sorta OK'. I feel GRRM made a colossal misjudgment here; not only is it still not OK, and very likely wouldn't lead to actual, healthy, romantic involvement down the line, it's also a huge stretch of the imagination to believe that it could concievably happen in the first place - with no acknowledgment from the author that there's something very wrong with this picture. Morally reprehensible I can live with, but this scene, read on this level, is both naive and implausible as hell.

On another level - where we interpret the scene based purely on what we know about the circumstances and without getting lulled by the actual presentation of the events - there's no way this is not rape. 13-year-old girl is sold to a man four times her size, introduced into a culture where rape is commonly encouraged as part of social gatherings (as evidenced during the arena fights), taken to a remote location where she is undressed expressly against her will, etc.

That GRRM chooses to paint the scene in romantic colours shouldn't really fool anyone, and I strongly suspect the scene has been changed in the TV series exactly because there's no way you could show this scene on film and not make it awkward as hell. In that sense, I suspect I'll like the TV version more because it sounds like it's at least being honest about what's going on (although it still leads to romantic involvement later on). In the TV version, we see exactly what transpires, and there's just no way it doesn't qualify as rape.

I don't think you can be all that touchy about feminist issues if you uncritically accept this scene for what GRRM intends it to be, because this cannot be interpreted as romantic unless you willfully go along with the male author's rather naive presentation of things (an author who is usually a lot more adept at subtly injecting a sense of wrongness into scenes that may be perfectly acceptable by Westerosi standards, but not our own. This is to me the scene that sticks out, and it's really unfortunate that it happens so early in the series).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There was no way that was rape. Dany gave her consent before the actual act of intercourse.

You could at least bother to read the three preceding posts or something. Not sure why I'm bothering with this, but alright, once more for the slow dude:

1. Dany is 13 years old.

2. She is sold off to a barbarian tribe by her brother.

3. She enters into a forced marriage to a huge barbarian.

4. She attends a violent arena fight during which women are violent raped according to the standards of the tribe she's now part of.

5. She's taken away to a remote location by her physically superior husband and forcefully undressed despite repeatedly saying no.

6. After all of which, she finally says yes.

You can argue that it isn't rape from a completely literal and cynical viewpoint, in which case it becomes "it's okay to coerce an underage girl through force, violence and abduction as long as she sees the light in the end, in which case it's all good". Not sure if that's how things work where you come from, but as long as we're debating modern concepts like consent, there's no way Drogo should not be considered a rapist.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A little bird tells me they did have the scene, as written, in the original pilot. As in, they filmed it.

I think, from talking with D&D at the conference call, that the reason it was dropped was not because it was "awkward as hell", but because it sent a mixed message -- they decided to emphasize the terror and fear in the early going, to give Dany a clearer arc. This is, in some senses, a loss to the character, who (among others) is rendered somewhat flatter and more straightforward for the television screen.

For whatever reason, it's female characters more than the male characters who are getting their characterization simplified.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Any idea what they meant by 'mixed message'? That they didn't want Dany to make decisions for herself that early on, or that the scene would be somewhere in between rape and consensual sex with no real way to distinguish? In either case, it sounds like they wanted to make the scene more plausible than the book version can be considered.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I gather the former, her asserting herself and then falling back to being powerless and afraid until her first dragon dream. I don't know that they determined it was a plausability issue, merely that it was a complication to the character that they decided didn't mesh well in the narrative.

In the book, the scene says a fair bit about Drogo, I think, and not just about Dany. We're given the first look that both of these character are more complicated than they may seem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You could at least bother to read the three preceding posts or something. Not sure why I'm bothering with this, but alright, once more for the slow dude:

1. Dany is 13 years old.

2. She is sold off to a barbarian tribe by her brother.

3. She enters into a forced marriage to a huge barbarian.

4. She attends a violent arena fight during which women are violent raped according to the standards of the tribe she's now part of.

5. She's taken away to a remote location by her physically superior husband and forcefully undressed despite repeatedly saying no.

6. After all of which, she finally says yes.

You can argue that it isn't rape from a completely literal and cynical viewpoint, in which case it becomes "it's okay to coerce an underage girl through force, violence and abduction as long as she sees the light in the end, in which case it's all good". Not sure if that's how things work where you come from, but as long as we're debating modern concepts like consent, there's no way Drogo should not be considered a rapist.

You don't really know me, and are just basing the "you don't seem that touchy" thing on this one interaction, so I'll let that pass for now, other than to say ask anyone who's known me for years, like Yags, or TrackerNeil.

I agree with some of your points.

1. She is 13. This is very very young, and does point to "statutory" rape. This however is a legal definition. I'm not saying that it makes it better. I am saying, though, that it makes things kind of hard to judge from a MORAL standpoint. I can't definitely say "THIS IS WRONG" when it comes to statutory rape and a girl does say yes. If the law says it's wrong, then it's wrong. There was no law in this case saying it was wrong, and she did say yes, so... it makes it less firmly "WRONG" in my eyes. Am I saying I like 13 year olds having sex? No. But will it happen? Yes. And as long as it is their decision to do so, I cannot completely condemn it.

Our argument here is whether she actually did decide to do so, and I think that's where we may have to agree to disagree, but I'll give my arguments on that after I go through the rest of your points.

2. True. I cannot debate this, and it does put her in a position of less power. More on this in a moment.

3. This basically is a repeat of your point 2.

4. I also cannot argue this. It's clearly spelled out in the book. I don't see this as relevant to the specific scene in question, though, other than to build terror in her of what may be to come, and maybe as a point of irony that this is actually NOT what she actually gets in Drogo. (I.E. -- He *could* have just ripped her clothes off and taken her, no talking, like all the Dothraki did at the wedding -- why didn't he?)

5. Actually, re-read that scene. If that were true, I would have had the same conclusion as you. However, she doesn't say "no" to him, except once. And then, it's repeating him, when he says "no" to her for being shy and covering her breasts. From the text:

"His fingers were deft and strangely tender. He removed her silks one by one, carefully, while Dany sat unmoving, silent, looking at his eyes. When he bared her small breasts, she could not help herself. She averted her eyes and covered herself with her hands. 'No,' Drogo said. He pulled her hands away from her breasts, gently but firmly, then lifted her face again to make her look at him. 'No,' he repeated.

"'No,' she echoed back at him."

A few things of note here. A) I agree that due to your points above she is kind of trapped in the situation, and that kind of makes the situation ugly. BUT! B) Drogo himself is hardly a raping monster as portrayed in the scene. He is not rough with her. According to George's word choice, he is being "tender," "gentle," he wants to see Dany's face and eyes. He does not rip her clothes or savage her. C) Dany's only "No" is one of agreeing to abandon her shame and not cover up. So it is not quite the "repeated nos and then yes" as you stated.

He is also asking as seen in my previous quote -- why ask "No?" with a question mark if you are not prepared for an answer of either a "yes" OR a "no?" And in this case, Dany DOES answer "Yes."

I'm not saying it's a purely white moral situation, because George doesn't write those. If he did, we wouldn't read him. I'm just saying it's not classic rape either. Sex trafficking, yes. Statutory rape, probably, if laws like that existed in I&F, which they don't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know if you'd legally call Dany/Drogo rape, but I do know that I found their relationship damn uncomfortable whilst reading the books. The whole Dany story is also in my mind the weakest aspect of the series, with almost every character involved (with the exception of Jorah Mormont and Dany later on) being basically one note. When I saw the first two episodes I didn't have high expectations for those scenes.

Different strokes for different folks I guess.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There was no way that was rape. Dany gave her consent before the actual act of intercourse.

She gave her physical consent (i.e. not resisting). But that's because she was resigned to the fact and it was preferable to getting beaten along with raped.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

She gave her physical consent (i.e. not resisting). But that's because she was resigned to the fact and it was preferable to getting beaten along with raped.

She has reason to fear Viserys, and what he would do to her if the marriage failed, but Drogo never gives her any sign that he will abuse her.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

She has reason to fear Viserys, and what he would do to her if the marriage failed, but Drogo never gives her any sign that he will abuse her.

He's a grunting, guttural, ruthless warlord who has never been defeated in battle. To a 13 year old kid thats going to hint something.

Fuck, the entire society of the Dothraki is basically based around rape. You have to be blind if you think Dany wasn't slightly intimidated. The whole thing was brutal, and her subsequent 'love' never rang true to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...