Headey, Coster-Waldau on Sept Scene

[Mr Fixit]

Then they tried to backpedal after everyone’s outrage.

Thing is they didn't try to backpedal. If you'll remember, Graves himself said in an interview that was conducted prior to the shitstorm that his first reaction upon reading the script was, and I paraphrase, "so we're filming a rape". Benioff also said that Jaime "forced himself on Cersei" in a "very ugly" scene. He said that on "Inside the Episode" feature that was recorded well in advance. NCW himself noted the same as Benioff. Let's be honest here, that's the least we can do.

[Hard Hugh]

Thing is they didn't try to backpedal. If you'll remember, Graves himself said in an interview that was conducted prior to the shitstorm that his first reaction upon reading the script was, and I paraphrase, "so we're filming rape". Benioff also said that Jaime "forced himself on Cersei" in a "very ugly" scene. He said that on "Inside the Episode" feature that was recorded well in advance. NCW himself noted the same as Benioff. Let's be honest here, that's the least we can do.

So he said that before....now they are saying the scene was meant to be consensual and was just not conveyed well.

To me that is the very definition of backpedaling?

[jaimecersei]

So he said that before....now they are saying the scene was meant to be consensual and was just not conveyed well.

To me that is the very definition of backpedaling?

lol right??? it seems to me that it was meant to be rape scene from the very beginning that they threw in for "shock value" and decided it was going to be no big deal since cersei/jaime is already a fucked up relationship. and now since there's so much backlash, they're trying to damage control by saying its consensual which just makes them look WORSE

[Konradsmith]

Jaime would also rather die than be crippled but Brienne taught him that that was a stupid way to think. I agree with Olenna in Breaker of Chains, nothing is as bad as death because as Tyrion put it "life is full of possibilities" for victims of all kinds.

We may not have "castration culture" or "defenestration culture" but if we're going to throw together phrases in this way, why isn't there a "murder culture"? A lot of people DO want art and entertainment to be censored because they think that the media normalizes violence. Even if the media is capable of making horrible things more acceptable, it is way worse IMO to ban it from depicting certain things (no matter how good your intentions are) than it is to allow artists and entertainers to depict "problematic" things as they please to.

If we're going to be arguing this from radical ideological perspectives, then there's mine.

[Mr Fixit]

So he said that before....now they are saying the scene was meant to be consensual and was just not conveyed well.

To me that is the very definition of backpedaling?

It was meant to be a very complex scene where Jaime forces himself on Cersei who protests and clearly says "no". However, she also sends mixed signals and kisses Jaime back, wraps her legs around him, etc, indicating that maybe she wants sex after all. So, yeah, it's ugly, it's quasi-rapey and yet Cersei seems to want it to an extent. And that's pretty much what everyone involved has been saying all the time.

[Hard Hugh]

It was meant to be a very complex scene where Jaime forces himself on Cersei who protests and clearly says "no". However, she also sends mixed signals and kisses Jaime back, wraps her legs around him, etc, indicating that maybe she wants sex after all. So, yeah, it's ugly, it's quasi-rapey and yet Cersei seems to want it to an extent. And that's pretty much what everyone involved has been saying all the time.

I have a word I like to use in place of "quasy-rapey" it's called rape. If ever you find yourself in a situation where you think the word "Quasy-rapey" applies. Immeadiatly change it out for rape.

[Mr Fixit]

We may not have "castration culture" or "defenestration culture" but if we're going to throw together phrases in this way, why isn't there a "murder culture"? A lot of people DO want art and entertainment to be censored because they think that the media normalizes violence.

Exactly! Even here, I'd say that GoT is much more honest and critical of violence. When you watch an episode of this show, you're not meant to be turned on by all the killing and murdering. It is ugly, it is hideous and the show doesn't shy away from it.

That is light years better than your average summer action flick where the charming good guy mows down dozens of mooks without giving it a single thought. Now that's glamourising violence and turning it into a video game. For all its superficial PC sensibilities, it's actually completely opposite to what PC should mean.

[Mr Fixit]

I have a word I like to use in place of "quasy-rapey" it's called rape. If ever you find yourself in a situation where you think the word "Quasy-rapey" applies. Immeadiatly change it out for rape.

Yeah, in a 21st century courtroom. Your point?

When Ned decapitated the NW deserter without a trial, that also means Ned's a murderer, right?

[jaimecersei]

Jaime would also rather die than be crippled but Brienne taught him that that was a stupid way to think. I agree with Olenna in Breaker of Chains, nothing is as bad as death because as Tyrion put it "life is full of possibilities" for victims of all kinds.

We may not have "castration culture" or "defenestration culture" but if we're going to throw together phrases in this way, why isn't there a "murder culture"? A lot of people DO want art and entertainment to be censored because they think that the media normalizes violence. Even if the media is capable of making horrible things more acceptable, it is way worse IMO to ban it from depicting certain things (no matter how good your intentions are) than it is to allow artists and entertainers to depict "problematic" things as they please to.

If we're going to be arguing this from radical ideological perspectives, then there's mine.

I have no problem with there being a rape scene in fiction as long as it serves a purpose and the effects and repercussions of it are explored. however this does not seem to be the case here. the scene in breaker of chains was very clearly a rape to a majority of the audience and reviewers. the scene cuts away with cersei crying while saying "its not right" and trying to get jaime off of her while he's thrusting into her and repeatedly saying "i dont care" jfc. that IS rape. its the fact that Graves and Nikolaj are saying stupid bullshit like "well she was kissing him back for a few seconds and held onto the tablecloth so it was consensual lol" is the MAIN issue here. hence why there's so much outrage over this.

[Hard Hugh]

Yeah, in a 21st century courtroom. Your point?

When Ned decapitated the NW deserter without a trial, that also means Ned's a murderer, right?

I thought we were discussing it as a TV show? Not Jamies legal rights. Even so....lets say Tywin (in westeros) busted in on them. How would that have gone over?

[Konradsmith]

Well the outrage is multi-faceted, jaimecersei, it's a convergence of different groups of angry people. There's the usual outrage from book purists which is IMO the most understandable type, because its the simplest really; when the show changes something, they don't like it. Then there's the sort of radical feminist bloggers and journalists who make a living railing against things and look for things to get pissed off at around every corner. I have much less sympathy for them because their anger is much more opportunistic and seems to correlate more with the show's growing popularity (which they could use to propel their own careers). While the purists ire is a more principled one to do with what they feel is the best way to adapt a text, the bloggers and writers who've jumped on this are doing this with much nastier motives IMO (tarnishing people's names, self-aggrandizement etc.)

[jaimecersei]

Well the outrage is multi-faceted, jaimecersei, it's a convergence of different groups of angry people. There's the usual outrage from book purists which is IMO the most understandable type, because its the simplest really; when the show changes something, they don't like it. Then there's the sort of radical feminist bloggers and journalists who make a living railing against things and look for things to get pissed off at around every corner. I have much less sympathy for them because their anger is much more opportunistic and seems to correlate more with the show's growing popularity (which they could use to propel their own careers). While the purists ire comes is principled, the bloggers and writers who've jumped on this are doing this with much nastier motives IMO.

lol why though?? imo graves and nikolaj's comments have some deeply self internalized misogyny ingrained within them. graves pretty much said in one interview that its okay for jaime to rape cersei because cersei would enjoy it. thats some really fucked up way of thinking and most importantly makes 0 sense with cersei's character. i think its very good that so much of the mainstream media has latched onto this, D&D are fucking morons who don't know the meaning of "nuance" for shit and seriously have the POV of 14 year old boys when it comes to sexuality and nudity. of course, none of this outrage matters in the long run because people have short term memories and the show will go and continue to get good rating. however i'm really glad that its brought so much conversation about rape culture and how harmful it is from the media. GOT is a very popular tv show that a lot of people watch and its important that its criticized when it fucks up in such a big way

[Mr Fixit]

I thought we were discussing it as a TV show? Not Jamies legal rights. Even so....lets say Tywin (in westeros) busted in on them. How would that have gone over?

Mmmm, maybe he'd jump in? :cool4:

graves and nikolaj's comments have some deeply self internalized misogyny ingrained within them

To paraphrase Tyrion's "heads, spikes, walls", I'd go with "soapboxes, relevance, bandwagons".

Not as catchy, I know. Sometimes inspiration fails me!

[Konradsmith]

Directors and actors have to try to empathize with what their characters do. Nikolaj often justifies Jaime throwing Bran out of the window but none of you have accused him of being sympathetic to child murder. But now he's a misogynist? You're reading his interviews very selectively, he's said that that was Jaime's lowest point (I disagree I think trying to kill kids is much worse) and he also said that that was the hardest thing to wrap his head around and embody. As for Alex Graves, please just listen to his commentary for And Now His Watch is Ended, he's not some macho prick, he's actually a very sensitive fellow. The thing is when you direct a scene like that, you have to wade into the character's fucked up rationales and present them through what they do. The two characters you're named after are very fucked up, so a scene of them going at it is not going to be a simple affair.

[Hard Hugh]

Directors and actors have to try to empathize with what their characters do. Nikolaj often justifies Jaime throwing Bran out of the window but none of you have accused him of being sympathetic to child murder. But now he's a misogynist? You're reading his interviews very selectively, he's said that that was Jaime's lowest point (I disagree I think trying to kill kids is much worse) and he also said that that was the hardest thing to wrap his head around and embody. As for Alex Graves, please just listen to his commentary for And Now His Watch is Ended, he's not some macho prick, he's actually a very sensitive fellow. The thing is when you direct a scene like that, you have to wade into the character's fucked up rationales and present them through what they do. The two characters you're named after are very fucked up, so a scene of them going at it is not going to be a simple affair.

See thats another thing that bothered me. How out of character. He has attempted murder of a child for Cersi. He has jumped in a bear pit and risk his life to protect Briene from rape. In the books he tried to protect Pia. Then out of no where this....and immeadiately right back to status quo the next episode.

[Sun]

Yeah.

In all seriousness, no, the "show's view" is not what you see. The show's view of things is its continuity, its cause and effect. What you see does not influence that. What the writers see, that's what decides it all. They control the narrative. Once it's out there, it's for you to interpret, but your interpretation does not create anything, does not control anything. It's just your perception.

You really have two options:

1) See it as the badly edited and conceived, dark but consensual sex scene they intended.

2) See it as the rape scene you conceive it to be, and probably become increasingly angsty over the fact that the show might blithely continue as if no rape occured. Which NCW seems to suggest will happen, when there's a "payoff" to the scene at the end of the season which, apparently, turns on their intent rather than anyone's interpretation.

When you say the show's view is a thing of continuity and cause and effect, I agree, but by adding that those things are represented by what they put on screen, not what they say offscreen.

The story, the characterization, continuity, cause and effect are all things that most audiences absorb during that leisurely hour allocated to the show. Now, if they show a rape scene, and then go on to deal with the characters in a way that ignores that rape scene, that leaves just one option:

- To see it is an example of a badly written and executed show.

It's not my job to cut this show, or any other for that matter, slack for shoddy work.

You and I differ in that you see the rape scene as a matter of interpretation that can be fudged, I see the rape scene as a rape scene.

[Night'sQueen]

Its now very clear to me that people have yet to grasp why im balking at the outrage. Because im not exactly disagreeing with the fact the scene is handled horribly and i am most certainly not seeing it as a scene of consensual sex. Im actually rather miffed at Graves' comments about the scene due to how D&D and NCW have stated: "Jaime forces himself on [Cersei]." Graves flipflopped saying it was consensual. NCW outright states that his character is forcing himself on Cersei. Headey explains more or less how Cersei is feeling about the situation.

I was explaining how this scene ends up being one of the reasons why there is now a very visible wedge between Jaime and Cersei in episode 4. If you cant see that theres a visible difference in how they interact in this episode and say, an episode in season 1, i really gotta wonder if we are watching the same show.

I actually agree with that. Why then do i have a beef about this outrage? Because its degraded to the same ol' Finger Wagging/Shaming Olympics. I question the method of the outcry, not the outcry itself.

The scene will not be removed from the home releases. I could also see them editing in something as well. In fact, it would be pretty beneficial to do so. The complete removal of the scene would be very hamfisted and even too extreme. (and then theres the ugly topic of censorship rearing its ugly head.)

Huh. I'll be looking forward to that payoff then. Let's hope it will be worth it.

Agreed. Censorship has been running wild in the movie and TV industries over the last years (they are actually planning to change Loui's song in the re-release of Disney's jungle book because it is considered "too racist" nowadays). Just leave the scene as it is, have the director's commentary be "we apologize that our intend didn't come through clearly" and be done with it.

How is it "censorship" if the producers decide re-edit the scene of their own accord for future releases?

There are people saying this wasn't rape, that rape is somehow a matter of perception. That's the problem and that's why this topic won't die.

On initial viewing I was shocked at what I saw as a change in character arcs and relationship dynamics due to the rape. I can deal with that. In fact, at this point I don't even care. The show mishandles a lot of the characters IMO and I get over quickly. The show is a separate entity from the books, period.

However, the flip-flopping and hedging that's come from those in charge of the show since about whether the scene was or was not a rape -- or the worst, that this encounter started as a rape that turned consensual :ack: -- is what has sparked the outrage. That, and the fact that some are saying that rape is in the eye of the beholder. Her words said "no" but her hand clutching the table said "yes" so it wasn't rape. That she kissed him back so it wasn't rape. That she could have fought harder so it wasn't rape. That she likes it rough so it wasn't rape. That the director says that the rape I saw wasn't meant to be a rape so it's not a rape.

These are all modern day excuses for rape not being "real rape" and these statements are not being made in context of the show/book and the medieval-like time period and culture, rather they are reflective of the way people view rape NOW. All these statements have the nasty ring of "she wanted it." Hard Hugh had it right in the post above. Rapey and quasi-rape are really just rape.

[Ran]

There's no flip-flopping. Graves, Coster-Waldau, Headey have been consistent, and Benioff wasn't inconsistent (but very brief).

From the perspective of those three, and perhaps all parties involved, that scene was intended to represent a dark moment of consensual sexuality between two people struggling with a great deal of baggage and emotion. There's no excuses here, simply an acknowledgment that the spectrum of sexual behavior is quite broad, and that between two people can be very hard to judge by outsiders without the full context of their relationship in the past. The show has greatly elided much of anything about their sexual relations up to now, and that's a problem for the show's decision to present the scene without sufficient contextualization.

[Seneti]

Yeah.

In all seriousness, no, the "show's view" is not what you see. The show's view of things is its continuity, its cause and effect. What you see does not influence that. What the writers see, that's what decides it all. They control the narrative. Once it's out there, it's for you to interpret, but your interpretation does not create anything, does not control anything. It's just your perception.

You really have two options:

1) See it as the badly edited and conceived, dark but consensual sex scene they intended.

2) See it as the rape scene you conceive it to be, and probably become increasingly angsty over the fact that the show might blithely continue as if no rape occured. Which NCW seems to suggest will happen, when there's a "payoff" to the scene at the end of the season which, apparently, turns on their intent rather than anyone's interpretation.

Thank you, voice of reason.

How is it "censorship" if the producers decide re-edit the scene of their own accord for future releases?

There are people saying this wasn't rape, that rape is somehow a matter of perception. That's the problem and that's why this topic won't die.

On initial viewing I was shocked at what I saw as a change in character arcs and relationship dynamics due to the rape. I can deal with that. In fact, at this point I don't even care. The show mishandles a lot of the characters IMO and I get over quickly. The show is a separate entity from the books, period.

However, the flip-flopping and hedging that's come from those in charge of the show since about whether the scene was or was not a rape -- or the worst, that this encounter started as a rape that turned consensual :ack: -- is what has sparked the outrage. That, and the fact that some are saying that rape is in the eye of the beholder. Her words said "no" but her hand clutching the table said "yes" so it wasn't rape. That she kissed him back so it wasn't rape. That she could have fought harder so it wasn't rape. That she likes it rough so it wasn't rape. That the director says that the rape I saw wasn't meant to be a rape so it's not a rape.

These are all modern day excuses for rape not being "real rape" and these statements are not being made in context of the show/book and the medieval-like time period and culture, rather they are reflective of the way people view rape NOW. All these statements have the nasty ring of "she wanted it." Hard Hugh had it right in the post above. Rapey and quasi-rape are really just rape.

In that case, it is self-inflicted censorship, motivated by media outcry, which still makes it censorship (as in change/cut to the original content as shown). Who does the censoring does not matter.

As for the other marked part: IMO, rape is not in the eye of the beholder, it's in the eye of the involved people. If my boyfriend bends me over a table and takes me "like a hound takes a bitch" while I cry out for him to stop, but I know that between the two of us this is perfectly normal sexual behaviour and I actually want it like that, is it still rape? No. It isn't. So at least IMO this scene was not rape until Cersei declares it to be just that. It may have looked like it to everyone but her and Jaime, but we are not inside their heads. There's a difference between saying "this is rape" and "this looks like rape". You are welcome to disagree with my opinion, but you won't change it. Likewise, I respect that you seem to have different views on this. I'm not trying to change your opinion here, just trying to explain my point of view. Maybe we can agree to disagree?

[Night'sQueen]

Thank you, voice of reason.

In that case, it is self-inflicted censorship, motivated by media outcry, which still makes it censorship (as in change/cut to the original content as shown). Who does the censoring does not matter.

As for the other marked part: IMO, rape is not in the eye of the beholder, it's in the eye of the involved people. If my boyfriend bends me over a table and takes me "like a hound takes a bitch" while I cry out for him to stop, but I know that between the two of us this is perfectly normal sexual behaviour and I actually want it like that, is it still rape? No. It isn't. So at least IMO this scene was not rape until Cersei declares it to be just that. It may have looked like it to everyone but her and Jaime, but we are not inside their heads. There's a difference between saying "this is rape" and "this looks like rape". You are welcome to disagree with my opinion, but you won't change it. Likewise, I respect that you seem to have different views on this. I'm not trying to change your opinion here, just trying to explain my point of view. Maybe we can agree to disagree?

Regarding the first point, if the show runners decide that the broad interpretation of the scene is not what they intended to portray then showing an alternate cut isn't censorship but merely clarification. I don't know if they will or won't and I don't care either way, btw.

Agreeing to disagree is all we can do. I'm not out to change anyone's mind on this forum ever, about any topic. I was stating my view on why this is a topic that has not died yet. As to your example, I don't think that the show has given us prior setup that a pretend rape scenario is part of their usual intimate routine, and without any statement from either character (not actor) all we have to go with is what we see on screen. I, and a lot of other people, saw a rape. Based on comments from the actors, directors and producers I don't know if they know what the hell they were trying to portray, but if it was meant to show consensual sex it was a big FAIL in my opinion.