(BEWARE SPOILERS) Book Lovers beware this episode was better than we expected

[Daske]

I agree, although my friends and family do watch the show and the jokes are still there. And it begs the question - if most viewers aren't watching the show for the nudity, why do D+D insist on scenes whose primary purpose is titillation rather than the more plot meaningful sex scenes in the books? In the show any plot relevant sex scenes are usually:

a.) from the books or

b.) provide some form of plot progression that is irrelevant to the sex, e.g the infamous sexposition.

Some scenes are there at least in part for titillation I grant you, and it probably would 'help' if they toned it down a bit, but it's not fair to lump any scenes with nudity together. Craster's for example clearly wasn't meant for titillation - that was setting a scene of horror.

If they followed everything in the books, Danny would be walking around half the time with one breast out!

[Miodrag]

This is simply not true. All the millions of people watching around the world are watching for many varied reasons. There is the action, the politics, the relationships, the costumes, the scenery, the witty dialogie, the world-building - Game of Thrones does have some sex & nudity, and may even be famous for it, but it is hardly defined by it. It simply would not be surviving if the resulting small audience was there just for that reason and that reason alone. Take a look on Tumblr, Twitter or other blogs and you will see (or more likely ignore) what other things fans and viewers generally are enjoying about the show.

I didn't say the show's defined only by sex scenes. But, one of the things it's defined by, is sex scenes. And that is why I listed those other shows that also contain sex scenes, but the difference is, those shows aren't looked at and analyzed through the lens of sex scenes, because they 'depend' on sex scenes infinitely less than GoT does. Those shows weren't defined by their sex scenes, even though they had more than their fair share of those. Just compare Omar's scenes from "The Wire", with Loras' scenes from GoT. And let me tell you, as a heterosexual, I'm really not comfortable with either, but Omar's scenes were written and filmed and acted in a very different way than Loras' scenes. Omar's scenes were about his emotional life, just like McNulty's were about his and Stringer's were about his and Kima's were about hers. And, even more important, their emotional lives mattered for the story. And that is not the case with GoT, where we get scenes like Oberyn's - unless they deviate from the books, his emotional life won't matter at all for his arc and for the role he plays in the story.

Also, I'm not saying all of the sex in GoT is solely for the purpose of catering the primal needs of the audience. For example, "Play with her arse" was probably meant to depict how twisted that universe is. But actually, it just showed how insecure D&D are with the material they're adapting: if you need sexual perversions to 'prove' how mature the universe you're depicting is, you're only proving how immature your writing is. And they did the same with Joff's scene with two whores - it's not gratuitous, it's stupid. But then, many scenes are purely gratuitous, like the infamous whore in Bronn's lap in "Blackwater", or TV Ramsay's assistants playing with Theon.

So, before assuming what I am or would be ignoring, please be sure you didn't ignore some context of my post you're replying to.

[protar]

Some scenes are there at least in part for titillation I grant you, and it probably would 'help' if they toned it down a bit, but it's not fair to lump any scenes with nudity together. Craster's for example clearly wasn't meant for titillation - that was setting a scene of horror.

If they followed everything in the books, Danny would be walking around half the time with one breast out!

I agree about the stuff at Craster's. It set the tone of horror and it wasn't overextended. And interestingly there's indications that it was originally going to be a lot more graphic, but it was toned down. So I'm glad to see that they're taking that approach.

[Miodrag]

Not to mention how stupid some nude scenes look in hindsight. For example, Margaery's attempt to have sex with Renly: besides some outrageous suggestions (to invite Loras in to help!), she was teaching Renly about the ways of the court and of The Game. But this season, she's shocked by the revelation that Joff was murdered! And by the fact her grandma was involved! (And then, she, Margaery, the woman who said to Littlefinger that she wants to be The Queen, has to be schooled into what to do with Tommen.) In all honesty, TV Margaery is one of the most ridiculous characters ever (looks like she overtook that position from the storytelling abomination called Talisa), and her nude scenes were, as we can see now, without any narrative purpose or meaning.

[scotcat]

It's tv, they need immediate stakes and semi immediate pay offs with characters put in risky situations

Basically.

Television and books could not be more different - what works in one will not do so well (or outright suck) in the other.

[Daske]

I didn't say the show's defined only by sex scenes. But, one of the things it's defined by, is sex scenes.

The show is practically defined by its sex scenes

I think this comes across as two different things. But I don't want to get involved in an argument about semantics.

Yes, GoT will never be The Wire, but also The Wire will never be GoT. Many of us enjoy both and they don't need to treat all aspects of their art in the same way to both be enjoyed. A sculpture can be held as good as a painting. Or vice versa. But not all appeal to everyone.

[Miodrag]

Yes, GoT will never be The Wire, but also The Wire will never be GoT. Many of us enjoy both and they don't need to treat all aspects of their art in the same way to both be enjoyed. A sculpture can be held as good as a painting. Or vice versa. But not all appeal to everyone.

I don't want an ASOIAF adaptation to be The Wire. I want ASOIAF adaptation to be, I don't know, a good adaptation. Because, a more faithful ASOIAF adaptation would dwarf all the other TV shows, The Wire included. As someone (I think Patrick Stormborn) wrote last year, the fact ASOIAF is not in accordance with standard rules of television is actually a great thing. Why adapt a story like ASOIAF in the first place, if you're going to subdue it to standard TV rules and cliches?

So it's not that GoT is different from The Wire, The Sopranos, True Detective etc. It's that GoT is written by fellows who are so incompetent, they're uncomfortable with the very source material they chose to adapt. And they're trying to write their show the way some other shows were written, but it looks like they aren't any better at understanding those shows than they are at understanding ASOIAF potentials. As someone noticed three weeks ago, they're even trying to shoehorn lines from The Wire ("A man must have a code"), only to contradict even that two episodes later, when it turns out Sandor actually doesn't have a code.

[Daske]

I don't want an ASOIAF adaptation to be The Wire. I want ASOIAF adaptation to be, I don't know, a good adaptation. Because, a more faithful ASOIAF adaptation would dwarf all the other TV shows, The Wire included. As someone (I think Patrick Stormborn) wrote last year, the fact ASOIAF is not in accordance with standard rules of television is actually a great thing. Why adapt a story like ASOIAF in the first place, if you're going to subdue it to standard TV rules and cliches?

So it's not that GoT is different from The Wire, The Sopranos, True Detective etc. It's that GoT is written by fellows who are so incompetent, they're uncomfortable with the very source material they chose to adapt. And they're trying to write their show the way some other shows were written, but it looks like they aren't any better at understanding those shows than they are at understanding ASOIAF potentials. As someone noticed three weeks ago, they're even trying to shoehorn lines from The Wire ("A man must have a code"), only to contradict even that two episodes later, when it turns out Sandor actually doesn't have a code.

There's nothing wrong with homages (if it was even that, it's not even all that an unusal or awesome thing to say). And that episode was a lot about people showing their true colours - we were reminded several times that episode that people we might have been starting to like were actualy still 'shits' - as Arya says. If there is a need to criticise things as trivial as this then the show must be doing something right. But this is going way off-topic.

[Miodrag]

There's nothing wrong with homages (if it was even that, it's not even all that an unusal or awesome thing to say). And that episode was a lot about people showing their true colours - we were reminded several times that episode that people we might have been starting to like were actualy still 'shits' - as Arya says. If there is a need to criticise things as trivial as this then the show must be doing something right. But this is going way off-topic.

There is no "need to criticize" anything. Looks like it's the very opposite: some posters obviously feel the need to defend the show, which probably means the show is doing a lot of things wrong.

[canguru]

Locke in the NW!!!

Lord Bolton ask him to get Bran or Rickon. And he decide to take the best way to achieve that is to get the black.

A sadistic pal of Ramsey Bolton. A nice fighter, but most of all a non-book character.

I am betting he will be pivotal in the new plot of the NW-Others-Bran-Jon Snow.

Maybe he is also a good slasher....

i'm a bit afraid, the series will leave all the jon snow/lord commander/wildling-watch merger out of the story and kill jon snow right there at crasters...

[SerArthurHeath]

For those saying the books have no gratuitous sex, I give you Cersei and Merryweather

[Han Snow]

For those saying the books have no gratuitous sex, I give you Cersei and Merryweather

Sam and Gilly, Tyrion and whores (yes Shae included, much of him boinking her served nothing other then to have a description of him boinking her), Theon and the Captain's daughter, etc... I can find purpose and defend most of these scenes, but in truth the books could have easily been written without them. Same as the show. Period. Sadly, many of the book readers watch only to nitpick, no other reason. And no matter how many times someone points out to them that tv show by default just CAN NOT follow the books straight to screen it doesn't matter, because here they come again with same old arguments again and again. The show makes mistakes, yes, big ones, but if you can't live with it without throwing a tantrum, than just stop watching

[Miodrag]

For those saying the books have no gratuitous sex, I give you Cersei and Merryweather

The woman who, as Tyrion noticed in ACOK, was always furious she isn't a man, finally allows herself into a sexual relationship with another woman. That gratuitous to you?!

[SerArthurHeath]

Yes. Wishing she was a man isn't the same as wanting to sleep with a woman. You can justify it by talking about how it's all about Cersei's lust for power, but you can equally justify any sex scene in teh show. Even worse if anything is Dany not only masturbating when she's lonely which would be in character, understandable and fine but not something even the show would show, but then GRRM turning it into yet another lesbian scene using supposedly straight characters...

[Miodrag]

Sam and Gilly, Tyrion and whores (yes Shae included, much of him boinking her served nothing other then to have a description of him boinking her), Theon and the Captain's daughter, etc... I can find purpose and defend most of these scenes, but in truth the books could have easily been written without them. Same as the show. Period. Sadly, many of the book readers watch only to nitpick, no other reason. And no matter how many times someone points out to them that tv show by default just CAN NOT follow the books straight to screen it doesn't matter, because here they come again with same old arguments again and again. The show makes mistakes, yes, big ones, but if you can't live with it without throwing a tantrum, than just stop watching

It's not about how easily a story can be written without this or that development. That's some strange logic, because literally any story can be written some other way. Great stories usually get ruined when someone tries to rewrite them, but theoretically, any story can be rewritten. But here we're talking about things that actually are there, in the books or in the show respectively. And it has nothing to do with TV realities you imply. In fact, it seems like show-apologists aren't familiar with TV realities, as evidenced how often they invoke them in these discussions.

As for the examples you listed, sorry, but I think one needs to read those scenes very shallowly in order to miss their importance. You may say they're written or staged badly, of course, but to say they're gratuitous is odd, to say the least.

[Miodrag]

Yes. Wishing she was a man isn't the same as wanting to sleep with a woman. You can justify it by talking about how it's all about Cersei's lust for power, but you can equally justify any sex scene in teh show. Even worse if anything is Dany not only masturbating when she's lonely which would be in character, understandable and fine but not something even the show would show, but then GRRM turning it into yet another lesbian scene using supposedly straight characters...

But that's the case: you can't "equally justify any sex scene in the show". What's the justification for Oberyn's sexual adventures so far? In narrative sense, there are none. What about Ros? What about all those other scenes in Littlefinger's brothel? What about Mel's seduction of Gendry? And I could go on and on. There are very few show-invented sex scenes that are justified. Some of them were incorporated in a rather stupid plot-lines, like Rob and Talisa, but their sex scenes were not gratuitous. But, the majority of sex scenes in the show are quite pointless in narrative sense.

[Han Snow]

It's not about how easily a story can be written without this or that development. That's some strange logic, because literally any story can be written some other way. Great stories usually get ruined when someone tries to rewrite them, but theoretically, any story can be rewritten. But here we're talking about things that actually are there, in the books or in the show respectively. And it has nothing to do with TV realities you imply. In fact, it seems like show-apologists aren't familiar with TV realities, as evidenced how often they invoke them in these discussions.

As for the examples you listed, sorry, but I think one needs to read those scenes very shallowly in order to miss their importance. You may say they're written or staged badly, of course, but to say they're gratuitous is odd, to say the least.

gra·tu·itous adjective \grə-ˈtü-ə-təs, -ˈtyü-\

: not necessary or appropriate

from Merriam Webster dictionary

There is a ton of stuff, characters, plots in the books that are simply not necessary, like much of the sex scenes. I love the books with every fiber of my being but that is how it is. And just because I can write an essay on how Cersei fisting Taena further evolves her character and shows us this and that about who she is, that doesn't mean that the scene was crucial or necessary.

And bollocks for everything you just wrote. I'm definitely not a show apologist, there is plenty of wrong in this episode alone, but you are gravely mistaken if you think you know how a tv show is made or what it takes for it to survive on air. GOT has to be watched by a wide audience, including all of the dumb Joe Blows who don't even know their precious Khaleesi's true name. The show has to be dumbed down, streamlined, changed. If you are going to bitch about it like a little girl constantly, be my guest, but maybe it would be more beneficial to just stop watching.

[Han Snow]

But that's the case: you can't "equally justify any sex scene in the show". What's the justification for Oberyn's sexual adventures so far? In narrative sense, there are none. What about Ros? What about all those other scenes in Littlefinger's brothel? What about Mel's seduction of Gendry? And I could go on and on. There are very few show-invented sex scenes that are justified. Some of them were incorporated in a rather stupid plot-lines, like Rob and Talisa, but their sex scenes were not gratuitous. But, the majority of sex scenes in the show are quite pointless in narrative sense.

Oberyn: To quickly sum up the nature of his character. He is a bisexual cocky fucker who happens to be a prince with vendetta on his mind.

Ros: Her character was meant to cut down the cost of having to hire whores who know how to act. LF's brothels are a part of the books as much as the show.

... you know what? It's pointless to argue. You will never see it the way I see it and while I can understand where you are coming from and your position I will not concede to it. So yeah, good luck to you Ser.

[Ingelheim]

No one is talking about it but...Marg scene with Tommen was one of the finest acting Natalie has done untill now. Also, it gave us ser Pounce. Brilliant.

[Miodrag]

gra·tu·itous adjective \grə-ˈtü-ə-təs, -ˈtyü-\

: not necessary or appropriate

There is a ton of stuff, characters, plots in the books that are simply not necessary, like much of the sex scenes. I love the books with every fiber of my being but that is how it is. And just because I can write an essay on how Cersei fisting Taena further evolves her character and show us this and that about who she is, that doesn't mean that the scene was crucial or necessary.

And bollocks for everything you just wrote. I'm definitely not a show apologist, there is plenty of wrong in this episode alone, but you are gravely mistaken if you think you know how a tv show is made or what it takes for it to survive on air. GOT has to be watched by a wide audience, including all of the dumb Joe Blows who don't even know their precious Khaleesi's true name. The show has to be dumbed down, streamlined, changed. If you are going to bitch about it like a little girl constantly, be my guest, but maybe it would be more beneficial to just stop watching.

What is the most gratuitous thing here is your tone. It is you who are gravely mistaken if you think you know on what is the budget of any show spent on, and especially if you think you know how the budget of GoT is used. It is you who disregard all the other shows that not only survived on air, but had an audience as big as GoT, without being dumbed down - The Sopranos and True Detective being the prime examples. It is you who deal with some abstract Joes in a discussion of artistic merits of a TV product. It is you who bitch like a little girl about other posters' complaints. So just calm down.

As for your advice about what would be more beneficial for myself, thanks, but no thanks. An adaptation of this scale is a phenomenon in itself. Even if it's a terrible adaptation, like GoT happens to be. But don't worry, once it overpasses the books, I'm out. Not because I don't want to get spoiled, because nothing D&D do would make me thing they're respecting the canon. I'll stop watching the show because, as evidenced by the show-invented stuff so far, it's going to be unwatchable. Even better shows lost me after a sub-par season, because they weren't adaptations of books I'm obsessed with.