Borodin Posted June 17, 2015 Share Posted June 17, 2015 Really you read the scenes where LF got Sansa got seduced into kissing LF which prompted Lysa to attack her, thus needing LF once again, hearing about the murder of Jon Aryn (which started Sansa's entire fucking ordeal by making her dad go to KL), watching him kill her mother's sister, and then protecting him because he put her in a situation where she needed him because his actions put her in danger as her becoming a "player". Not a single thing she did was not manipulated by LF either by dragging her into a mess or creating a scenario where she needed his help. She did two notable things lie for LF and dye her hair. If that's what a player in Westeros is then they are all fucked. LF seduced Sansa now? LOL! Showpologists are awesome. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lancerman Posted June 17, 2015 Share Posted June 17, 2015 Precisely. If it was Jeyne and they showed what GRRM wrote then... I don't know. Could they even allude to that on TV? It would probably be one of the most controversial instances of televised portrayals of sexual violence on television and that's not even close to hyperbole. You'd have feminist groups and things like one million moms calling for the show to be cancelled. And then the ratings would spike. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lancerman Posted June 17, 2015 Share Posted June 17, 2015 LF seduced Sansa now? LOL! Showpologists are awesome. Why don't you tell me how you read the situation? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grufolo Posted June 17, 2015 Share Posted June 17, 2015 I don't usually give such judging light-heartedly but I found the review laughable. Saying that the show had a thing for violence perpetrated against women, just as an example, is theclosest thing to a confession of blindness I have ever seen. Throughout the show violence towards men dwarfes that towards women (as well as in the books). Saying that nothing happened because many characters are where they were at the start of the season refuses to acknowledge one basic thing:that not all changes are travels from one place to the other. Several major characters are dead (a good bunch in the last episode only) and on top of that, I am quite sure that the writers needed to stay on this side of the DiD novel to avoid spoiling it to much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King's Bane Posted June 17, 2015 Share Posted June 17, 2015 "Princess Sansa".... Eh, while I can agree with some of the criticism I've seen in various reviews around the web, that NY article was clearly written by someone who never gave a fig anyway. Which made reading it a waste of time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The hairy bear Posted June 17, 2015 Share Posted June 17, 2015 "Princess Sansa"....Eh, while I can agree with some of the criticism I've seen in various reviews around the web, that NY article was clearly written by someone who never gave a fig anyway. Which made reading it a waste of time. From the appendixes of ACOK and ASOS, in the King in the North section:his sister, PRINCESS SANSA, a maid of twelve I guess those books were also clearly written by someone who never gave a fig anyway. Probably reading them is a waste of time... :bang: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonCon's Red Beard Posted June 17, 2015 Share Posted June 17, 2015 From the appendixes of ACOK and ASOS, in the King in the North section: his sister, PRINCESS SANSA, a maid of twelve I guess those books were also clearly written by someone who never gave a fig anyway. Probably reading them is a waste of time... :bang: Bran is also called a Prince in books, IICR. But I think Sansa is not more a Princess after Robb's death and now the North is not a separate Kingdom any more, so, while accurate by the times of ASOS, is a bit out of place atm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aeu Posted June 17, 2015 Share Posted June 17, 2015 when show only fans (oblivious to book character assassination) give a bad review... something is reeeeeealy wrong with the writters... http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/16/arts/television/in-game-of-thrones-finale-a-breakdown-in-storytelling.html This article from the New York Times expresses the concerns many of us have raised. As the writer is a show-only viewer, I find it all the more compelling that they raise some of the issues that book-reader viewers have also raised...it seems the show runners might have made a commercial as well as an artistic mistake in some of the decisions they made......and that it is not just the hardcore book-fans who are upset. This has been said many times upthread but, I just don't get these arguments. The review (and many non-book readers that I know) are complaining about things that are coming directly from books. Regardless of what you think about the quality of the last two books, it seems pretty clear that they would not make for good TV, particularly for those who have not read the books. Is anyone seriously thinking "if only they stuck more closely to the books, the non-book readers would love this season"? :dunno: Watching it for ten hours was better than slogging through the two most disappointing books I ever picked up. Try waiting 5 years for those books. For each one... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aeu Posted June 17, 2015 Share Posted June 17, 2015 dp. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King's Bane Posted June 17, 2015 Share Posted June 17, 2015 From the appendixes of ACOK and ASOS, in the King in the North section:his sister, PRINCESS SANSA, a maid of twelveI guess those books were also clearly written by someone who never gave a fig anyway. Probably reading them is a waste of time... :bang:Hah! Alright then, I stand corrected. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The hairy bear Posted June 17, 2015 Share Posted June 17, 2015 But I think Sansa is not more a Princess after Robb's death and now the North is not a separate Kingdom any more, so, while accurate by the times of ASOS, is a bit out of place atm. Sansa would still be technically a Princess from the perspective of a Stark loyalist. Maege Mormont and Galbart Glover, for instance, would consider her as such. But anyway, calling her the "lost princess Sansa Stark" in the article is not indicative of an ingnorant reviewer whose opinion should be ignored. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A Ghost of Someone Posted June 17, 2015 Share Posted June 17, 2015 LF seduced Sansa now? LOL! Showpologists are awesome. Agreed, LF would like to seduce her but coerced, bullied and intimidated, tricked but not seduced. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonCon's Red Beard Posted June 17, 2015 Share Posted June 17, 2015 BTW, saying "the season is better because at least is not as bad as Feast/Dance or because we don't have to wait for five years for a resolution" is like saying it doesn't matter if your boyfriend beats you as long as you have a boyfriend. After watching what they did to Stannis, I rather wait one, two, three, five years and see how Martin has set up Stannis in the books. It's not like I have nothing else to do than wait for the books. I won't go anywhere and I doubt Martin will die. This last season is the living proof of what happen when you rush things because you need to finish them quickly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Faint Posted June 17, 2015 Share Posted June 17, 2015 I hope everyone realizes that the New York Times has a vendetta against all fantasy fiction in general or anything else it considers a "genre" work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lancerman Posted June 17, 2015 Share Posted June 17, 2015 BTW, saying "the season is better because at least is not as bad as Feast/Dance or because we don't have to wait for five years for a resolution" is like saying it doesn't matter if your boyfriend beats you as long as you have a boyfriend. After watching what they did to Stannis, I rather wait one, two, three, five years and see how Martin has set up Stannis in the books. It's not like I have nothing else to do than wait for the books. I won't go anywhere and I doubt Martin will die. This last season is the living proof of what happen when you rush things because you need to finish them quickly. I'd argue that watching a show you hate because it's related to a novel you like is a lot closer to staying with a boyfriend who beats you. Most people who defend the show also generally like the show. Comparison not apt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The hairy bear Posted June 17, 2015 Share Posted June 17, 2015 Is anyone seriously thinking "if only they stuck more closely to the books, the non-book readers would love this season"? :dunno: The most common criticisms to the books (pace, delay in publication, division of the plots by geography) are very different from the most common criticisms to the show (terrible characterization and lack of proper build-ups). Most people agree that it was a right decision to unify the books, and simplify the storylines. Nearly everything else would have improved "if only they stuck more closely to the books". For instance, it seems to me that there's a near-consensus that the subplots in Dorne and Winterfell are better in the books. Or that Shireen's sacrifice came out of nowhere. Or the motivations for Jon's murder where very badly constructed. Or that the way Tyrion and Dany met was a complete lackluster, while the speed at which he entered her inner circle was ridiculous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cas Stark Posted June 17, 2015 Share Posted June 17, 2015 I hope everyone realizes that the New York Times has a vendetta against all fantasy fiction in general or anything else it considers a "genre" work. The arts beat guy who does the recaps loves the show. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jet199 Posted June 17, 2015 Share Posted June 17, 2015 At least Stannis got a full story arc rather than two thirds and a cliffhanger. This season was the story of his tragedy really. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Borodin Posted June 17, 2015 Share Posted June 17, 2015 The arts beat guy who does the recaps loves the show. Impossible. Bad reviews can only result from book snobbery and vendetta. The show is not critiqued by any serious publication. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonCon's Red Beard Posted June 17, 2015 Share Posted June 17, 2015 I think sticking to the books is what has damaged this season. It's like a loop. The characters started as something from the books, then they act in a different way only to return to their original paths, even if it makes little sense. Then, it would have been better to keep them going in a different direction. The season has actually showed scenes that are exactly as the books describe: Dany's meeting with the Dothrakis, WoS, Jon being stabbed. But they lack the context. The characters are in that situation because the books say they should, not because it does make sense in the show as an independent identity. Look at Jon. The show wanted him dead because the book said so. Yet, they made him go to Hardhome with other members of the Watch who can testify he was right all along about Hardhome. Also, he now knows how to defeat the Others. So, why kill him? Because he brought the wildlings? He only needed to say "if I didn't bring them, they would be now wights and the enemies". He has a few other of his brothers there to certify his words. In the book, Hardhome is an "what if". They don't know if Jon is right or not. The show proved he was right. It makes zero sense to kill him at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.