Has the show lost it's heart?

[Channel4s-JonSnow]

 

I agree the books would be hard to film page by page. But this doesn't mean D&D get an excuse for plotholes, bad writing and inconsistent characterization. 

 

For example Brienne storyline. I can understand why they didn't want to film it, and I agree. But this doesn't make their version any less bad. They also have material from the next books to work with. This season gave us plenty of spoilers and and surpassed the books in some plotlines. But they couldn't do anything with Brienne because Brienne's story ends with LSH. So if they followed the books more closely, Brienne storyline could be good. Instead she wanders around, (just like in the books!!!) slaughters everyone and waits in a tower. She did nothing. She also lets Sansa get away and kills Stannis after he is already utterly defeated.

 

And Jaime's storyline is the perfect example of how incompetent D&D are. They skip Jaime's book arc for fanfiction. People say it's the books fault and D&D did what they could. Yet... they are backtracking to these awful books to incorporate a story they skipped (Riverlands). They are also bringing in Euron and the northern lords. So apparently even D&D disagree with show apologists on this one. Apparently the books are just fine. The books being bad has no effect on D&D's bad writing. 

 

@Khione

 

The whole season 5 has little to do with the source material. Small wonder a fight scene is the best, when dialouge and characters are so bad.

I disagree about the Brienne part for a start. Yes they deviated quite far from the books, but really its because they had to follow a bigger picture that had to do with, I'll say it again, keeping the storylines connected and not wandering off into wild random directions. 

They could have kept Briennes story the same in the books. But what would that achieve. She has zero connection with any other major characters in the book until LSH. She does literally nothing. In the show at least she meets Sansa and it gives her a reason for continuing her quest. I'd much rather than than pointless watching her wandering around looking for her.. not finding her. You may say she did nothing in the TV show but thats not true, she has some effect on Sansa and the Winterfell storyline, and she affects the Stannis storyline also. In the book her story is almost entirely irrelevant until the very last page.

As for Jamie, AGAIN, I'll keep saying it because it gets ignored. He gets moved to Dorne to give some connection to the main story instead of throwing a bunch of brand new characters at the audience and expect them to care. Doing that in the book was a mistake and it would have been a mistake in the tv show as well.  

[protar]

As has been said many times, this was always going to be a MEH season. No way could it compete with 4 or 1, there was nothing in the books to allow it to do so. Yes it also had some truely crappy moments that had nothing to do with the books, but I knew before this season started it was going to be worse than all before.

 

Can you (and others) really not see the hypocrisy in constantly harping on about how the show and the books are different, but then you immediately claim that S5 was destined to suck because of the latter two books? If the last two books sucked so much, and if D+D are such good writers, and if the show and the books are completely different entities, they should have been able to come up with something interesting. Especially as there was actually a lot of great stuff in Feast and Dance, it was just spread over two large books. By condensing those two stories together this season should have been incredibly action packed. 

[Channel4s-JonSnow]

 

Can you (and others) really not see the hypocrisy in constantly harping on about how the show and the books are different, but then you immediately claim that S5 was destined to suck because of the latter two books? If the last two books sucked so much, and if D+D are such good writers, and if the show and the books are completely different entities, they should have been able to come up with something interesting. Especially as there was actually a lot of great stuff in Feast and Dance, it was just spread over two large books. By condensing those two stories together this season should have been incredibly action packed. 

Really? Where are these 'action packed' bits of the book that could have been included? Can you include them whilst still moving the story forward, maintaining focus on character, keeping storylines connected, introducing new characters, and do it all in 10 episodes?
 

In reality this season has a large percentage of its plot straight from the books. Its had to move things around and swap characters, but mostly its the same. It was always going to have the same issues as those books and its not like the producers can suddenly throw everything out and start again. Its still going to be a series where it has to have a slow start, with new storylines building up slowly, where characters don't have many major events happen to them.. because thats what the books are like. 

You are basically saying D&D should have just made up a load more stuff. So that Seasons 1-4 are from the books and then from season 5 onwards its all made up.

[protar]

Really? Where are these 'action packed' bits of the book that could have been included? Can you include them whilst still moving the story forward, maintaining focus on character, keeping storylines connected, introducing new characters,

 

We've had this discussion before. I've listed a lot of the stuff that happens in Feast/Dance. It isn't my fault you didn't like Aegon or Arianne or the Northern Lords, or Cersei going mad or Theon's arc etc.

 

and do it all in 10 episodes?

 

This is another piece of hypocrisy. Either there's not enough happening in these books, or there's too much to include in just 10 episodes. You're claiming both these things at once. That's some serious cognitive dissonance.
 

In reality this season has a large percentage of its plot straight from the books. Its had to move things around and swap characters, but mostly its the same. It was always going to have the same issues as those books and its not like the producers can suddenly throw everything out and start again. Its still going to be a series where it has to have a slow start, with new storylines building up slowly, where characters don't have many major events happen to them.. because thats what the books are like. 

 

Season 5 was very little like the books. Only one story (Arya's) was not drastically changed - both in events and themes - from the books. And most relevant to this particular debate is that the show removed a lot of dramatic moments and sapped the other big moments of their dramatic weight.

You are basically saying D&D should have just made up a load more stuff. So that Seasons 1-4 are from the books and then from season 5 onwards its all made up.

 

That's not what I would want. But if D+D and their fans are truly insistent that the show is the show and the books are the books then yes - they should stick to that. If AFFC/ADWD were truly as bad as people say, then D+D should have stood by that ideology. 

[Doremus Coldwater]

As for Jamie, AGAIN, I'll keep saying it because it gets ignored. He gets moved to Dorne to give some connection to the main story instead of throwing a bunch of brand new characters at the audience and expect them to care. Doing that in the book was a mistake and it would have been a mistake in the tv show as well.  

 

I don't think anyone is suggesting that they should've done the Dorne storyline (which was pretty much invented wholecloth) without Jaime, but that they should have omitted it altogether (or, if they thought it was absolutely crucial to kill off Myrcella, do it in 1 or 2 scenes).

[Channel4s-JonSnow]

 

I don't think anyone is suggesting that they should've done the Dorne storyline (which was pretty much invented wholecloth) without Jaime, but that they should have omitted it altogether (or, if they thought it was absolutely crucial to kill off Myrcella, do it in 1 or 2 scenes).

Actually some people are saying that. But yes Dorne was pretty awful, not sure anyone is saying it wasn't. My point is the reason they pushed Jamie into that storyline was due to the very sensible reason of keeping the viewer connected to the main storylines. It was a good decision. Just very poorly executed.

[Spilt Pea Soup]

I think the point Channel4 and others is making is that many had predicted that Season 5 wouldn't be as good as previous seasons well before it was released because it couldn't have been, due to the source material.  So when it wasn't, it wasn't a surprise.  It was expected.  

[Pyat>Daenerys]

 

You are basically saying D&D should have just made up a load more stuff. So that Seasons 1-4 are from the books and then from season 5 onwards its all made up.

Maybe if the books are at fault they should have made it all up? Aren't you the one who keeps saying the books are un-filmable? Maybe if it would be all fanfiction it would be better? After all D&D are good writers, or not? Oh wait, the one 100% show invented plotline is universally considered a failure. No wonder they are backtracking to these awful books to include all they've left out.

 

 

I disagree about the Brienne part for a start. Yes they deviated quite far from the books, but really its because they had to follow a bigger picture that had to do with, I'll say it again, keeping the storylines connected and not wandering off into wild random directions. 

They could have kept Briennes story the same in the books. But what would that achieve. She has zero connection with any other major characters in the book until LSH. She does literally nothing. In the show at least she meets Sansa and it gives her a reason for continuing her quest. I'd much rather than than pointless watching her wandering around looking for her.. not finding her. You may say she did nothing in the TV show but thats not true, she has some effect on Sansa and the Winterfell storyline, and she affects the Stannis storyline also. In the book her story is almost entirely irrelevant until the very last page.

As for Jamie, AGAIN, I'll keep saying it because it gets ignored. He gets moved to Dorne to give some connection to the main story instead of throwing a bunch of brand new characters at the audience and expect them to care. Doing that in the book was a mistake and it would have been a mistake in the tv show as well.  

 

And she does nothing in the show aswell, untill she kills Stannis (who was already defeated and broken anyway). Sansa was her reason for continuing. In the show she meets her and lets her go... And Jaime was not needed in Dorne to establish any connection. Good characters were needed for that, which the sandsnakes weren't. Introducing new characters in the book was not a mistake. Arianne is a very good character. I have yet to see a person dislike her. The whole Dorne arc in the book is a family drama and is character based.

[Pyat>Daenerys]

I think the point Channel4 and others is making is that many had predicted that Season 5 wouldn't be as good as previous seasons well before it was released because it couldn't have been, due to the source material.  So when it wasn't, it wasn't a surprise.  It was expected.  

 

If by expected you mean less eventful, ending on cliffhangers and mostly setting things up, introducing new players with focus on it's characters, then I agree. This was expected. Unfortunately what we got was just bad tripe. Bad writting, butchered characters and things that don't make any sense at all. And with butchered characters I don't just mean from book to show. But show to show. Compare Jaime from season 3 to this for example. Or Stannis loving father development turned around in a second.

[Channel4s-JonSnow]

Maybe if the books are at fault they should have made it all up? Aren't you the one who keeps saying the books are un-filmable? Maybe if it would be all fanfiction it would be better? After all D&D are good writers, or not? Oh wait, the one 100% show invented plotline is universally considered a failure. No wonder they are backtracking to these awful books to include all they've left out.

Their jobs are to adapt the books into a tv show to make it work as best they can. Its called adaptation. They can't just completely move away from the books and nor should they. They are incredibly difficult books to adapt, which you seem to find it impossible to acknowledge. Your argument goes round in circles constantly.

 

 

And she does nothing in the show aswell, untill she kills Stannis (who was already defeated and broken anyway). Sansa was her reason for continuing. In the show she meets her and lets her go... And Jaime was not needed in Dorne to establish any connection. Good characters were needed for that, which the sandsnakes weren't. Introducing new characters in the book was not a mistake. Arianne is a very good character. I have yet to see a person dislike her. The whole Dorne arc in the book is a family drama and is character based.

She does more than she does in the books, and she is relevant to the other plots. And she takes up much less screen time doing it.

Actually a lot of people were disappointed with the Dorne storyline in the books, I personally was incredibly frustrated with it as it had zero relevance on the overall plot and was full of characters who I didn't know and just took up space that would have preferably been taken up my characters I knew. I've seen numerous complaints about this on the Feast reviews.  Viewers would absolutely feel the same. I know you refuse to acknowledge this but maybe thats the reason why you are unable to grasp how tv shows are made.
 

[MoreOrLess]

Honestly I don't think the slow start in books or show is a "bad" thing so much as it is an inevitable consequence of the point the story is at. SOS and S4 had so many big conclusions that the story was naturally going to need to rebuild its setting/drama after that.

 

I'm wondering if recent comments don't rather hint at another reason for criticism? a lot of fans tend to get rather defensive about the criticism of the 4th and 5th books and the show making more changes to the narrative is taken as further criticism.

[JagLover]

 

Can you (and others) really not see the hypocrisy in constantly harping on about how the show and the books are different, but then you immediately claim that S5 was destined to suck because of the latter two books? If the last two books sucked so much, and if D+D are such good writers, and if the show and the books are completely different entities, they should have been able to come up with something interesting. Especially as there was actually a lot of great stuff in Feast and Dance, it was just spread over two large books. By condensing those two stories together this season should have been incredibly action packed. 

 

AFFC/ADWD do have a considerable amount of action in it is true, but too much of it happens to side characters with little importance to the main story (in the show universe in particular).

 

Plenty of action with the Ironborn plotline for example, but entirely tangential. I would expect them to be briefly introduced next season before moving into their WOW storyline. Further examples would be Quentyn's last chapter, perhaps his only interesting one, or Faegon's invasion (when the show has far too little time for a second dance of dragons).

 

In terms of other events some needed to be omitted on the grounds of time and money. I wouldn't expect a TV show to be able to deliver multiple large battles in a season, hence why missing out the battle of fire made sense and replacing it with an internal threat instead.

 

I personally think S5 could have been one of the greatest seasons but only if they were far bolder (in terms of drawing on WOW when needed) and they executed completely original material (like Dorne) far better.

[Pyat>Daenerys]

 

Maybe if the books are at fault they should have made it all up? Aren't you the one who keeps saying the books are un-filmable? Maybe if it would be all fanfiction it would be better? After all D&D are good writers, or not? Oh wait, the one 100% show invented plotline is universally considered a failure. No wonder they are backtracking to these awful books to include all they've left out.

Their jobs are to adapt the books into a tv show to make it work as best they can. Its called adaptation. They can't just completely move away from the books and nor should they. They are incredibly difficult books to adapt, which you seem to find it impossible to acknowledge. Your argument goes round in circles constantly.

 

 

And she does nothing in the show aswell, untill she kills Stannis (who was already defeated and broken anyway). Sansa was her reason for continuing. In the show she meets her and lets her go... And Jaime was not needed in Dorne to establish any connection. Good characters were needed for that, which the sandsnakes weren't. Introducing new characters in the book was not a mistake. Arianne is a very good character. I have yet to see a person dislike her. The whole Dorne arc in the book is a family drama and is character based.

She does more than she does in the books, and she is relevant to the other plots. And she takes up much less screen time doing it.

Actually a lot of people were disappointed with the Dorne storyline in the books, I personally was incredibly frustrated with it as it had zero relevance on the overall plot and was full of characters who I didn't know and just took up space that would have preferably been taken up my characters I knew. I've seen numerous complaints about this on the Feast reviews.  Viewers would absolutely feel the same. I know you refuse to acknowledge this but maybe thats the reason why you are unable to grasp how tv shows are made.
 

 

 

I already acknowledged the books are difficult to adapt. The only one going in circles is you. Your whole logic is that it's not D&D's fault for anything because the books are bad and un-filmable. Last I checked there is this job called screen-writer. D&D are getting paid for it and failing miserably. The biggest departure from the books is widely considered the worst storyline. This is a fact. Also the books don't feature events that require every character to be a moron, massive plotholes, bad and cliche characters, and just god awful writing. You seem to excuse show only failures by blaming the books. When your book criticism only amounts to ''too boring and too many new characters''. Your ''arguments'' are simply stupid and I won't waste my time anymore with you. 

[JagLover]

 She does more than she does in the books, and she is relevant to the other plots. And she takes up much less screen time doing it.

Actually a lot of people were disappointed with the Dorne storyline in the books, I personally was incredibly frustrated with it as it had zero relevance on the overall plot and was full of characters who I didn't know and just took up space that would have preferably been taken up my characters I knew. I've seen numerous complaints about this on the Feast reviews.  Viewers would absolutely feel the same. I know you refuse to acknowledge this but maybe thats the reason why you are unable to grasp how tv shows are made.
 

 

People talk about the show returning to the riverlands as if this were an admission of failure but in reality Brienne could actually accomplish her essential AFFC/ADWD material in two episodes.

 

Episode 1-meet BWB and gets to choose whether to die or kill Jamie

Episode 2-go to meet Jamie and ride off with him.

 

Nothing else she did had any relevance to the main plot, so yes having her meet Sansa and take out Stannis was a massive increase to her relevance to the story.

 

Dorne is debatable but personally I think that people need to realise that the majority of show watchers are show only viewers, the size of the cast is a very real constraint and each additional character needs to be carefully considered and only included if absolutely necessary, characters for the sake of "world building" are definitely a luxury.

[JagLover]

 

When your book criticism only amounts to ''too boring and too many new characters''. Your ''arguments'' are simply stupid and I won't waste my time anymore with you. 

 Both are valid criticisms when it comes to a book adaption.

 

I personally like AFFC/ADWD but the issues are with their suitability for adaption.

 

The pace is far too slow for the medium of TV and too many new characters is of critical importance with a TV show where everyone needs to be remembered by the audience with an extremely limited amount of screentime to properly develop a character.

 

Add in only one season's worth (if that) of plot development for key characters over two massive books and you are starting to look at a massive issue.

 

D&D started out well in terms of what they missed out, but yes failed in much of their original material and failed to flesh out key events (like For The Watch) that remained.

 

The fact remains though that AGOT, or a two season ASOS are far more suited to adaption to TV than AFFC/ADWD so a big chunk of the blame must lie with the books.

[Pyat>Daenerys]

I never disagreed with any of that. I only argue that the show problems can't be blamed on the books.

[Channel4s-JonSnow]

I never disagreed with any of that. I only argue that the show problems can't be blamed on the books.

But how can you make that argument. If we all agree that the books are problematic when it comes to an adaptation for tv, and if the tv show is an adaptation of the books, and the tv show has problems, then some of the blame has to be laid at the feet of the book it is based on. 

[protar]

 

AFFC/ADWD do have a considerable amount of action in it is true, but too much of it happens to side characters with little importance to the main story (in the show universe in particular).

 

Plenty of action with the Ironborn plotline for example, but entirely tangential. I would expect them to be briefly introduced next season before moving into their WOW storyline. Further examples would be Quentyn's last chapter, perhaps his only interesting one, or Faegon's invasion (when the show has far too little time for a second dance of dragons).

 

In terms of other events some needed to be omitted on the grounds of time and money. I wouldn't expect a TV show to be able to deliver multiple large battles in a season, hence why missing out the battle of fire made sense and replacing it with an internal threat instead.

 

I personally think S5 could have been one of the greatest seasons but only if they were far bolder (in terms of drawing on WOW when needed) and they executed completely original material (like Dorne) far better.

 

I fundamentally disagree that the Ironborn (who I would have introduced in S4 anyway), Aegon and Arianne are minor characters. They're not the Jons, Danys and Tyrions of the story but they are important characters. It's short sighted to think that just because they haven't fulfilled that purpose yet that they aren't being set up for something big. Game of Thrones is introducing new characters every season. It's the writer's job to make us care about the new guys. D+D chose the easy way out.

[TepidHands]

It's the writer's job to make us care about the new guys. 

As for the show's new guys, the only thing I care about seeing with Olly is how quickly Ghost can make a meal of him, and Olyvar how quickly Olenna can ... "Myranda" and Roz got theirs already. 

[protar]

But how can you make that argument. If we all agree that the books are problematic when it comes to an adaptation for tv, and if the tv show is an adaptation of the books, and the tv show has problems, then some of the blame has to be laid at the feet of the book it is based on. 

 

No it doesn't. Not if the flaws of the show are completely the opposite to the flaws of the books. The "flaws" of the last two books are that they introduce a lot of new characters and spend far more relative time on introspection than action compared to the first three books. The flaws of season 5 is that it's completely lacking in any sort of thematic or character depth. And it's grossly homophobic and misogynistic but I digress.  

 

And If D+D are so insistent that the show and the books are separate entities, then they don't get to hide behind the books when their show sucks. If they genuinely believed what they're saying, they would have just completely ignored the last two books which they apparently found so awful. Otherwise they're being hypocrites. "The show and the books are separate! But we're honour bound to stick to the last two books we didn't like! Except we're still going to change loads of it! Yay Cognitive Dissonance!"

 

And the notion that Feast and Dance are unadaptable is highly debatable. I think that they're very adaptable, and that there's a lot of stuff there which would make for great television. Stuff which didn't make it into the show.