The show isn’t diverting from the books that much after all.

[ni2tre]

This might be controversial but honestly, if Trystane turns out to be Aegon or take his role atleast and Euron appears next season then D&D have done a wonderful job of IMPROVING on the source material that is AFFC/ADWD.

It's just a personal opinion but I'm not missing Victarion, Aeron, Quentyn, Arianne etc... Aegon/Euron are necessary for the story to keep it's complexity but these others really aren't and D&D have done a wonderful job of combining storylines/characters while achieving the same result without overspending all their budget on new unnecessary characters/locations.

[Winter Rose Crown]

Why again can't Grey Worm and Missandei be falling in love? Because he doesn't have a dick? Please. People are not attracted to genitals, romantically or sexually.

Her being the Harpy goes against everything we are shown about the character, verbal and nonverbal. Missandei is loyal to Daenerys because she is personally grateful, and grateful on behalf of all enslaved persons, and furthermore like Jorah, Barristan, and other Dany supporters, she sees first hand that Dany has a gentle heart underneath that Fire and Blood.

There is none of this that does not make sense.

and if it happened in the books, I'd agree wwith you. There's all different types of love and whatnot. But they totally invented this storyline for the show which me and they're using it to get at something important, it isn't JUST love.

have you read the theory about missandei as a faceless man? That puts her motives into a new light.

[Witchy]

I agree. I think it's going to end up being a very faithful adaptation. There is no way to include all of the subplots and characters from the books. I gather from a lot of posts on this forum demanding that every piece of dialogue stay the same that it's akin to dropping a bomb around here to say so, but I think most of the big changes D&D have made are improvements over the original story. George is a genius, but he's not perfect, and he really needed an editor with more spine to convince him to cut it out when he introduced brand new story lines that weren't going anywhere late in the series (Kingsmoot, Griffs, etc.)

The only thing they deleted that I've really missed is Lady Stoneheart. I get why they didn't do that, though. They feared it would be hokey, and maybe it would have been.

[Mithras]

Is it really that controversial? I'm more disappointed because it signals very strongly that Aegon is going to be another dead end like Quentyn was, and he will have been introduced late in the game and in the end, won't matter.

In the same way, if there are no Greyjoys it only means they were another authorial indulgence.

I don't think we need TV show scenario to see these. For me it is obvious that both fAegon and the Greyjoys are simple plot devices. Those who acquired wrong ideas or unrealistic expectations will surely be disappointed. For example there are a lot of Euron fanboys who expect major things from him. But I think all the clues point that he will die at Oldtown not long into TWoW. I think Asha, Jorah and Barristan will die even before Euron. So, this will also be major disappointment for those who expect Asha to rule the Iron Islands, marry someone etc. or Barristan to return to Westeros or Jorah to confront Lynesse, take the black etc.

[Arplus Elisjay]

Keep in mind that there isn't a huge amount of plot movement in AFFC and ADWD. These departures seem huge because D&D are reaching into TWOW for some of their amalgamations (think Winterfell).

People say that the show was a lot more "loyal" to the books in seasons 1 and 2, but keep in mind that as you go through the books, characters keep getting introduced and thrown in all different directions, something that a TV show can't do, so the writers have to go through increasingly complex plot acrobatics in order to keep the story on the same trajectory as the books - that means that quite often, the place we currently stand in the show looks a lot different than the books on the surface, even though its not substantially different in a real sense.

[Winter Rose Crown]

I will say I am disappointed to not see Aegon because I was sure he was for real. "Mummers Dragon" was just too obvious, too literal. I liked the theory that quentyn was the "mummers Dragon" because he thought his targaryen blood would save him from being burned and Aegon was the "Sun's son" because he was Elia's son. Sigh. I guess the show is confirming it, though.

[Balerion the one eared cat]

I don't know who said this, or on which thread, but whoever they are, I think they summed it up well:

They were talking about Tyrion's storyline just being a checklist of places he's supposed to visit (Pentos, Volantis, Sorrows/Valyria). That's what the show has become: "this person needs to geographically and chronologically end up here so lets get them, or someone who we think could replace that character, there". There doesn't seem to be any meaning or "feeling" (for want of a better word) to any of the events in the show, it's like they've taken all the life out of it (basically, D&D are Dementors. That is the only way I can explain this feeling).

If it's just the bare skeleton of the story, is it the same story? I feel, really, like I'm watching the opening credits through the whole episode: a series of scenes in places saying "this person is here. This person will get to this place at this time" rather than feeling any character development or emotional attachment to what's happening.

ETA: If you were the person I stole the Tyrion analogy off, feel free to come forward and take all the credit!

[Faint]

Is it really that controversial? I'm more disappointed because it signals very strongly that Aegon is going to be another dead end like Quentyn was, and he will have been introduced late in the game and in the end, won't matter.

In the same way, if there are no Greyjoys it only means they were another authorial indulgence.

I'm a little more baffled by no riverlands and so little of the direwolves because it's hard to believe that there isn't going to be any type of resolution of this plot point in the books...Stoneheart, the Freys, Nymeria's pack, the Blackfish. It would be really sad if this all peters out to nothing in the books.

Well, firstly, I would be careful in drawing such definitive conclusions from what has been adapted on the show.

On the subject of Aegon, my belief is that Martin was a bit too clever for his own good. His obsession with shocking his readers lead him down a path that involved laying as little groundwork as possible for Aegon's arrival, with only an opaque prophetic vision and a few throwaway lines here and there to go by. And while he might have achieved the desired reaction from his readers, it was at the expense of either telegraphing Aegon's relative importance, or worse, introducing a very important character much too late in the proceedings to make readers become invested in his story.

As for the Riverlands and the Iron Islands, I think what is happening there is that those narratives are rather self-contained, so they can be excised from the greater plot without doing too much damage to its overall cohesiveness.

So, in that sense, yes, those parts of the story are not "important," but what does that mean anyway? The pleasures of a story are not a direct function of how economical it is in getting to its end, with as little plot digression as possible.

That is ultimately why the television show, in my opinion, cannot "spoil" Martin's book. Sure, I will get to know how the story generally concludes before I read about it, as well as the fates of the most important characters, but there will be no languishing in all the wonderful and entertaining sidebars that litter Martin's books.

And for me, at least, I have as much interest in the ultimate conclusions for tertiary characters as I do in what happens to Jon, Daenerys or Tyrion. I would not be satisfied never knowing what becomes of Arianne Martell, Jeyne Westerling, Jeyne Poole, Harry the Heir, and on and on, even with confirmation that they are not absolutely vital to the conclusion of the series.

[aeon-dead mysteries]

I actually started reading the books around season 3, so I got to see season 4 (and now 5) as one of the "readers". I was wary about Feast/Dance before starting on them due to their reputation, but to my surprise I came to enjoy those the most out of all the books in the series. I think people have vastly overstated how much "indulgence" or "fat" there is in those books, the only problematic bits for me were the Dany chapters as they seemed to pop up a bit too often and not a lot seemed to happen, but as I read the last few ones it all fell into place in a very satisfying way. Now, since I came into the books as a show viewer, I naturally loved the show, but I feel like they started getting a bit lost during season 4.

This season has been a total disappointment for me, and it's frustrating because I can see how well they've adapted the first three(ish) books. Now it seems increasingly clear that the sheer volume of the plot has overwhelmed the writers, and I feel like I'm watching small skits and bits with characters that have become caricatures of themselves just "doing what they do". They started out with a lot of elegance and subtlety both in how they adapted the books and produced the show, but I think a lot of that has been lost now.

They're definitely diverting from the books, quite massively in a lot of cases. It doesn't matter if they "end up" in the same place when the journey is the point anyway, and their King's Road is full of potholes

[Valetudo]

Here we are again with the show apologists argument that D&D are actually "fixing" the books by cutting the fat, and that "it's the same story because it will end the same".

For the first point, I believe that nobody, even the biggest die-hard fan of the books, was expecting a 100% exact adaptation. So we all agree that cutting and/or transforming some elements of the books was inevitable.

But lets take a look at what they've done instead of just believing in some preconceptions:

They've cut a lot from the books (iron islands, Manse going to Winterfell, Riverlands, Aegon, ...) and changed other stories (Sansa in Winterfell instead of the Vale). So, at first look, it may seem great.

But what did they achieve with the extra screen-time allowed by these cuts? They added their own stories. (Missandei and Grey Worm, Ramsey and Myranda, Loras and Olyvar, Jaime and Bronn, ...). These are certainly not stories that are crucial to the end game. If we followed your logic, they shouldn't be here too.

Replacing what you believe is filler on the books by their own filler on the show is not what I call an improvement.

Then, we have the basic "he's not gonna be important in the end, so it's better to cut him" argument. Again, lets look at some characters: Ned, Robb, Cat, King Robert, Joffrey, Tywin, Oberyn,...

Neither of them is going to have an active role in the end game. So, why weren't they cut too?

Then, we have the transformed stories, that will surely take the characters to the same place than the books, but without caring at all about previous character progression or motives.

Sansa may end in Winterfell in the books, but do we really believe that Show!Sansa, after suffering another marriage with a psycho, will be the same character that Book!Sansa? How is a still in love and preoccupied about his family Jaime the same character? But we're supposed to believe that they will end doing the same thing than in the books, despite being totally different persons?

The show is only doing this to add more shocking moments, because in D&D's point of view, that's what the books are about. So Sansa has to be abused in order to become empowered and Jaime can only turn against Cersei after a "shocking" revelation!

All these transformations were supposed to "spice up" the books. Guess what, they've failed lamentably. The show is more boring than ever. And this is due in part to the changes.

The tension present in book Winterfell is gone, replaced by a "will he rape her or not" story. All the aftermath of the war is gone, bringing us sparrows coming out of nowhere. Sparrows transformed from men unhappy with the way the small folk his being treated to homophobic fanatics. Ellaria goes from pacifist to willing children-slaughterer, just because strong women need revenge! Tyrion departed from Jaime in good terms, so we won't see him reach the low points of his story, ...

All the complexity that brings the books to life is gone.

All that to say that, it's not only the end that matters, it's the journey.

[The Northern Scholar]

Here we are again with the show apologists argument that D&D are actually "fixing" the books by cutting the fat, and that "it's the same story because it will end the same".

For the first point, I believe that nobody, even the biggest die-hard fan of the books, was expecting a 100% exact adaptation. So we all agree that cutting and/or transforming some elements of the books was inevitable.

But lets take a look at what they've done instead of just believing in some preconceptions:

They've cut a lot from the books (iron islands, Manse going to Winterfell, Riverlands, Aegon, ...) and changed other stories (Sansa in Winterfell instead of the Vale). So, at first look, it may seem great.

But what did they achieve with the extra screen-time allowed by these cuts? They added their own stories. (Missandei and Grey Worm, Ramsey and Myranda, Loras and Olyvar, Jaime and Bronn, ...). These are certainly not stories that are crucial to the end game. If we followed your logic, they shouldn't be here too.

Replacing what you believe is filler on the books by their own filler on the show is not what I call an improvement.

Then, we have the basic "he's not gonna be important in the end, so it's better to cut him" argument. Again, lets look at some characters: Ned, Robb, Cat, King Robert, Joffrey, Tywin, Oberyn,...

Neither of them is going to have an active role in the end game. So, why weren't they cut too?

Then, we have the transformed stories, that will surely take the characters to the same place than the books, but without caring at all about previous character progression or motives.

Sansa may end in Winterfell in the books, but do we really believe that Show!Sansa, after suffering another marriage with a psycho, will be the same character that Book!Sansa? How is a still in love and preoccupied about his family Jaime the same character? But we're supposed to believe that they will end doing the same thing than in the books, despite being totally different persons?

The show is only doing this to add more shocking moments, because in D&D's point of view, that's what the books are about. So Sansa has to be abused in order to become empowered and Jaime can only turn against Cersei after a "shocking" revelation!

All these transformations were supposed to "spice up" the books. Guess what, they've failed lamentably. The show is more boring than ever. And this is due in part to the changes.

The tension present in book Winterfell is gone, replaced by a "will he rape her or not" story. All the aftermath of the war is gone, bringing us sparrows coming out of nowhere. Sparrows transformed from men unhappy with the way the small folk his being treated to homophobic fanatics. Ellaria goes from pacifist to willing children-slaughterer, just because strong women need revenge! Tyrion departed from Jaime in good terms, so we won't see him reach the low points of his story, ...

All the complexity that brings the books to life is gone.

All that to say that, it's not only the end that matters, it's the journey.

The bolded point is a fantastic one.

[ummester]

I don't think we need TV show scenario to see these. For me it is obvious that both fAegon and the Greyjoys are simple plot devices. Those who acquired wrong ideas or unrealistic expectations will surely be disappointed. For example there are a lot of Euron fanboys who expect major things from him. But I think all the clues point that he will die at Oldtown not long into TWoW. I think Asha, Jorah and Barristan will die even before Euron. So, this will also be major disappointment for those who expect Asha to rule the Iron Islands, marry someone etc. or Barristan to return to Westeros or Jorah to confront Lynesse, take the black etc.

Euron was cool - probably the Feast character I enjoyed the most. But I think the show can survive without him.

Although, Dany is going to need some way to get her troops to Westeros and I always thought that was the sole purpose of Euron/Victarion anyway. And that the Kraken rising is part of the start of Ragnarok.

Re the OP, overall, I think the show maintains the broad strokes of the books.

[Cas Stark]

Euron was cool - probably the Feast character I enjoyed the most. But I think the show can survive without him.

Although, Dany is going to need some way to get her troops to Westeros and I always thought that was the sole purpose of Euron/Victarion anyway. And that the Kraken rising is part of the start of Ragnarok.

Re the OP, overall, I think the show maintains the broad strokes of the books.

Daario already got her a navy last season, with 64? ships, which was a huge clue that Vic was out for sure. Euron may still show up since Balon isn't dead, so his death could give the reason for his entrance;or they may have forgotten about Balon like they did the black haired baby and third necklace, who knows.

[A spoon of knife and fork]

and if it happened in the books, I'd agree wwith you. There's all different types of love and whatnot. But they totally invented this storyline for the show which me and they're using it to get at something important, it isn't JUST love.

have you read the theory about missandei as a faceless man? That puts her motives into a new light.

Unfortunately (or fortunately??), I just don't think that the showrunners are that creative to be honest. Otherwise, Talisa would have been a Lannister spy instead of loyal to Robb.

Missandei is a facelessman/The Harpy = Talisa Honeypot

[Ingelheim]

The tension present in book Winterfell is gone, replaced by a "will he rape her or not" story. All the aftermath of the war is gone, bringing us sparrows coming out of nowhere. Sparrows transformed from men unhappy with the way the small folk his being treated to homophobic fanatics. Ellaria goes from pacifist to willing children-slaughterer, just because strong women need revenge! Tyrion departed from Jaime in good terms, so we won't see him reach the low points of his story, ...

All the complexity that brings the books to life is gone.

All that to say that, it's not only the end that matters, it's the journey.

That may be for Tyrion. Jaime now hates him.

[ummester]

Daario already got her a navy last season, with 64? ships, which was a huge clue that Vic was out for sure. Euron may still show up since Balon isn't dead, so his death could give the reason for his entrance;or they may have forgotten about Balon like they did the black haired baby and third necklace, who knows.

Yes, it does feel like a big mistake in the show not to address the death of Balon by now.

I think Daario with his 64 ships are part of how the Euron = Daario theories started. I'm still curious about this, even though show Daario now has this whole little slave sent to fight back story, he could be lying. Daario could still be Dany's 3rd lover to dread, because he has a whole ulterior motive of getting her and her dragons back to Westeros to conquer it for himself, rather than her.

It would be interesting if right at the end of Season 5 Daario heads to Westeros for some reason.

[Ser Pounce FTW]

So, is it just me, or isn’t the show diverting from the books after all.

No, it's not just you. I agree, the changes are not earth shattering at all and in the end, pretty true to the "story" of the books.

I do agree about the Riverlands stuff. Don't quite understand why it has been cut so completely as well as the Direwolves.

I think it's as simple as the point of the Riverlands is the devastation of war and it will be shown later and faster. I think the direwolves are a question of resources and it's more important to show the dragons now. Just like it was more important to show the direwolves in season 2 and when Dany had to show the dragons, she said "no" and kept them in a basket. They can't afford to CGI both. At least not yet.

Why again can't Grey Worm and Missandei be falling in love? Because he doesn't have a dick? Please. People are not attracted to genitals, romantically or sexually.

Her being the Harpy goes against everything we are shown about the character, verbal and nonverbal. Missandei is loyal to Daenerys because she is personally grateful, and grateful on behalf of all enslaved persons, and furthermore like Jorah, Barristan, and other Dany supporters, she sees first hand that Dany has a gentle heart underneath that Fire and Blood.

There is none of this that does not make sense.

I suspect that Missandei will betray Dany. It screams Martin: not expected, betrayal from someone trusted, and devastating. I think the betrayal will be for love and that's why we have the Grey Worm/Missandei love story. In the books, it will be one of her brothers.

[Winter Rose Crown]

Daario already got her a navy last season, with 64? ships, which was a huge clue that Vic was out for sure. Euron may still show up since Balon isn't dead, so his death could give the reason for his entrance;or they may have forgotten about Balon like they did the black haired baby and third necklace, who knows.

Are you referring to the baby Cersei mentions losing in season 1? I am new to this forum so I haven't had anyone to talk about that with but it has always bothered me. As a first born, that kid would have been heir to the realm, there's no way Catelyn wouldn't have known about it, never mind that Robert and Ned were friends.

Weren't there 4 necklaces? One for Cersei, one for Myrcella, one for Sansa, and one for that whore Cersei thinks Tyrion is sleeping with. That's how Cersei found her in the show, by the necklace.

[Direwight]

I do think some of the changes are rather bizarre. Of course stuff needs to be cut, but regularly there's a lot of screentime devoted to scenes which don't really seem to have any real storyline function (beetle speech and Podrick's sex skills, for example), time which could have been spent on those cut storylines or scenes that ended up feeling rushed.

I also think that cutting/changing notable plotlines has made a lot of characters and their plans make no sense, most importantly Varys. If he's really a Daenerys supporter, chances are slim his actions make much sense. If he for example shows up in Meereen to take Quentyn's place (more likely trying to kill the dragons, however, considering he hates magic and dragons are magic), then that's all fine and good, but I very much doubt it. Similarly Littlefinger's plan with Sansa doesn't really seem to make any sense, at least so far. Jaime's plan to sneak into Dorne with Bronn and ride away with Myrcella sounds like an incredibly poorly thought-out plan. It's fine to make changes, but they have to make at least as much sense as everything else, and you have to make sure that no character becomes a plothole as a result.

[Cas Stark]

Yes, it does feel like a big mistake in the show not to address the death of Balon by now.

I think Daario with his 64 ships are part of how the Euron = Daario theories started. I'm still curious about this, even though show Daario now has this whole little slave sent to fight back story, he could be lying. Daario could still be Dany's 3rd lover to dread, because he has a whole ulterior motive of getting her and her dragons back to Westeros to conquer it for himself, rather than her.

It would be interesting if right at the end of Season 5 Daario heads to Westeros for some reason.

I can't believe people really seriously think that Euron is Daario, I know GRRM has done some semi crazy things in the later books, but that would be utterly ridiculous. He is what he appears to be, in my opinion.

I also doubt very much Missy is going to betray Dany in the books or the show, the love story is also exactly what it appears to be, the show's idea of a nice poignant romance.