Rant and Rave Without Repercussion 3 (Book Spoilers)

[Crixus]

A bunch of people on this board and many others talk about how Game of Thrones isn't schlock like Starz's Spartacus. I don't know why people continually compare the two, since they have nothing in common beyond a blood&boobs quota and a quasi-historical setting. If I had to guess, it's because the two shows aired around the same time up until 2013.

Incoming rant:

While Spartacus may have had an even higher (almost nonsensical) blood&boobs quota, and while its pilot may rank among the worst hours of television ever, it actually told a really good story. It had themes and consistent characterization and good character development, it made you invest in what was happening to its characters, it had moral ambiguity, and its shocking moments and twists were organic and felt earned.

(Oh, and it had a pretty tragic deconstruction of the Rape as Empowerment trope)

You could tell it had professional writers and storytellers behind it. Even something as depressing and nihilistic as the failure of the slave rebellion was injected with hope, levity and love. Because there are other feelings than moping in a corner and wanting to slit your wrist!

And at least the writers had enough confidence and integrity to admit that the show had little historical accuracy, and that they were going for a hyper-stylized retelling of the basic story. No nonsensical justification that the "first and last scenes are historically accurate, so we're being faithful to history" :rolleyes:

Ugh, this shitfest of a season now makes me want to go back and watch Spartacus. And I never thought I'd say that when speaking about an adaptation of Martin's work.

I couldn't agree more with your take on Spartacus. IMO that show is heads and shoulders above GoT: they handled difficult themes very well. It's sad how so many people dismiss it without having watched it.

[protar]

Eh, I wouldn't call St. Tyrion and Che GueVarys "devious backstabbing assholes", since they're none of those things anymore. They're just walking bags of hot air now.

To be honest I think the shoe horned character archetypes only really applies to female characters. All the characters are poorly written at this point, but at least there is some variety in the male characters.

[Red Helm]

I don't see how that's different from the other characters? All fans are very defensive of the characters they love, especially if they get a lot of hate in the fandom, or have been particularly mistreated by the show. Stannis fans, Dany fans, Catelyn fans, every Tyrion thread turns into a big debate... And there are lots of in-depth analysis threads in the Re-read section, the Dany re-read was very extensive and afterwards the threads about Dany's parallels with other characters have been started, there have also been re-reads of Catelyn, Jon, Theon, Tyrion, Bran, Arianne, or those focused on non-POVs like Sandor or Stannis... and even a re-read focused on the direwolves.

I refer to that only partially. I've noticed the rereads for the other characters, but there seems to me to be even more analysis for Sansa than the other characters. And I very much enjoy the character of Sansa.

[Lord Freypie]

http://gotgifsandmus...sm-shaped-sansa

I disagree with a large part of this article (out of the fact they have butchered Sansa characterization). Most of the changes made to her in KL were here to make her more sympathetic.

Without Sansa thoughts, and with Tyrion being a fan favorite, keeping the full courtesy armor aspect would have made Sansa the most unpopular character of the show (out of bookreaders-Sansa-fans, a minority in a minority). It was not a question of "sexism" at this stage imo, but simple anticipation of viewers reaction.

Not to say it doesn't suck that GoT doesn't have writers able to make this kind of character work on screen. But considering their limited writing talent especially for making nuanced characters, I prefer not to imagine what would have happened had them tried.

[Le Cygne]

I couldn't agree more with your take on Spartacus. IMO that show is heads and shoulders above GoT: they handled difficult themes very well. It's sad how so many people dismiss it without having watched it.

Spartacus was much better. They handled sensitive issues far better, and I never felt they were sexist or homophobic.

[Good Guy Garlan]

To be honest I think the shoe horned character archetypes only really applies to female characters. All the characters are poorly written at this point, but at least there is some variety in the male characters.

Yeah, I agree, though the trend of making characters more "saintly" (and therefore more boring) seems to be more pervading in male characters

[a free shadow]

:leaving: :leaving:

[Red Helm]

I disagree with a large part of this article (out of the fact they have butchered Sansa characterization). Most of the changes made to her in KL were here to make her more sympathetic.

Without Sansa thoughts, and with Tyrion being a fan favorite, keeping the full courtesy armor aspect would have made Sansa the most unpopular character of the show (out of bookreaders-Sansa-fans, a minority in a minority). It was not a question of "sexism" at this stage imo, but simple anticipation of viewers reaction.

Not to say it doesn't suck that GoT doesn't have writers able to make this kind of character work on screen. But considering their limited writing talent especially for making nuanced characters, I prefer not to imagine what would have happened had them tried.

I'm willing to hear out any claims of sexism for Sansa's arc which seems viable actually even on the onset, it is merely the claim Sansa in s5 is a "punishment" for her rejection of Tyrion (though this is something those idiots twisted in the show (to the point where air-head thinks it is sweet and lovely)), whom they apparently love so much to be very, very odd, and grasping.

[Le Cygne]

Yeah he came across very badly there. I haven't been defending him as such. As I said he has gone a long way down in my estimation this year. It would be nice if D&D were more willing to engage directly with criticism though.

I only hope Cogman took something away from the exchange.

I agree. The buck should stop with them. They are the showrunners.

[kissdbyfire]

Poor NCW.

HBO: What do you hope is next for Jaime in Season 6?

Nikolaj Coster-Waldau: I can't wait to read the scripts. Jaime has no idea what's been going on in King's Landing while he was away and is going to come back to this religious circus. I would hope that he'd make a very quick pit stop and then get out of town. There's a war and an enormous threat beyond the Wall. I think that maybe Jaime would be involved somehow. I'm just curious to see what happens. I try not to speculate too much because I'm always wrong.

[Cas Stark]

Yeah, I agree, though the trend of making characters more "saintly" (and therefore more boring) seems to be more pervading in male characters

I don't think it's sexism per se, the characters are reduced to cliches. Wise cracking blah blah, damsel, badass, lovable rogue, evil witch. It just so happens that the cliches for women tend to be in the traditional mold, so they're viewed by many as sexist. All the characters are robbed of nuance and complexity though.

[Annara Snow]

A bunch of people on this board and many others talk about how Game of Thrones isn't schlock like Starz's Spartacus. I don't know why people continually compare the two, since they have nothing in common beyond a blood&boobs quota and a quasi-historical setting. If I had to guess, it's because the two shows aired around the same time up until 2013.

Incoming rant:

While Spartacus may have had an even higher (almost nonsensical) blood&boobs quota, and while its pilot may rank among the worst hours of television ever, it actually told a really good story. It had themes and consistent characterization and good character development, it made you invest in what was happening to its characters, it had moral ambiguity, and its shocking moments and twists were organic and felt earned.

(Oh, and it had a pretty tragic deconstruction of the Rape as Empowerment trope)

You could tell it had professional writers and storytellers behind it. Even something as depressing and nihilistic as the failure of the slave rebellion was injected with hope, levity and love. Because there are other feelings than moping in a corner and wanting to slit your wrist!

And at least the writers had enough confidence and integrity to admit that the show had little historical accuracy, and that they were going for a hyper-stylized retelling of the basic story. No nonsensical justification that the "first and last scenes are historically accurate, so we're being faithful to history" :rolleyes:

Ugh, this shitfest of a season now makes me want to go back and watch Spartacus. And I never thought I'd say that when speaking about an adaptation of Martin's work.

I couldn't agree more with your take on Spartacus. IMO that show is heads and shoulders above GoT: they handled difficult themes very well. It's sad how so many people dismiss it without having watched it.

Completely agree. And I'd also add the vast difference in how the two shows treat nudity and sex:

- in Spartacus, there are equal amounts of male and female nudity. They aren't dick-phobic like the GOT showrunners;

- since most of the nudity is explained by the fact that the slaves (in season 1 and the prequel) are almost naked most of the time, they don't actually need to insert pointless scenes and waste screentime on them just to show nudity, while running out of screentime to do more important things;

- it's not an exclusively or predominantly male-centric view of sex, the women are not just objects in sex scenes, they have their own desires and assert their sexual agency (and don't have sex just to manipulate men, which seems to be GOT's default setting, but because they like it);

- or when they are reduced to objects in-universe and sexually abused, the show treats it as such and conveys their pain and trauma over it. In spite of how often it happens in the series, rape is never "normalized". We don't get nonsense like happy sex slaves who want to get more male attention and aren't traumatized at all;

- the men are also sex objects, and men are also victims of sexual violence/abuse (by men or by women). Male slaves also get raped and pimped out by their masters just as female slaves do. Including the title character and other major male characters;

- homosexual sex and relationships are shown and treated the same way, homosexual romances are portrayed as seriously and with the same emotion as the heterosexual ones;

- homosexual characters are not anachronistic gay stereotypes, they are not made into a joke or reduced to their sexuality.

Where GOT is sexist and homophobic in the way it deals with nudity and sex, Spartacus was not.

The discrepancy between the praise heaped on GoT and its image as a serious show and the casual dismissing of Spartacus by many is, IMO, simply due to the fact that one is on HBO and the other on Starz. If GoT were on Starz, it would be dismissed by the critics as the trashiest of trashy shows, especially now.

[Le Cygne]

Poor NCW.

HBO: What do you hope is next for Jaime in Season 6?

Nikolaj Coster-Waldau: I can't wait to read the scripts. Jaime has no idea what's been going on in King's Landing while he was away and is going to come back to this religious circus. I would hope that he'd make a very quick pit stop and then get out of town. There's a war and an enormous threat beyond the Wall. I think that maybe Jaime would be involved somehow. I'm just curious to see what happens. I try not to speculate too much because I'm always wrong.

Poor baby. I love what he said! "I would hope that he'd make a very quick pit stop and then get out of town." :lol:

[Ludo Kressh]

Don't worry, Euron being cast as the new psycho character the days of Ramsay look numbered...

LF : "Dear Sansa (sorry again, have a kiss baby)... Now we control the North we must search allies to achieve your revenge. I've heard the Iron Isles have a new king..."

:lmao: And Sansa's character development continues...

[JonCon's Red Beard]

[snip]

It's all right, hon... here.... breath... :lol:

Well, for once, there was no dragons in medieval times (that we know of...) so, it's always going to be a case that the story is "inspired" by that time and can be a little bit inaccurate (which is fine for me). Yet, Martin is basing mostly of ASOIAF society in middle times except some minor parts (like there is no a hierarchy in nobility, but that's mostly a mistake from his part).

Women in medieval times is a subject many have wrong. They weren't just there to be raped. They weren't poor victims. And they definitely did no go around dressed like men to have adventures or to prove their value. They saw being wives as a duty to honour their families, their husbands and their countries (states, provinces, lands, dunno). And the men were the same. They didn't drag their wives to the bed whenever they got horny because what kind of idiot would risk to be in bad terms with the woman that is meant to live forever with? Mostly marriages were polite rather then caring and while some men did have bastards and whored, not all of them. Pretend every other man was a disloyal dick is also sexist, imo.

Back to women, they were also taught to rule and lead, which is something that is happening now with Sansa in the Vale. She's learning how to rule a household which is something she could have learned to do at some point before being married. People believe (even today) that ruling a house is easy. It is not. They were educated to know how to, even to solve problems with their lands when the men were not around. They were smart and capable on their own terms. And even common girls were in charge of their families business whether they had brothers or not.

About "feminist" complains, well, let's say some people are very dense. We cannot pretend no women is ever going to be hurt in a story, that would be unrealistic. And not everytime a woman is hurt on screen is due to the writers being sexists assholes either. Like, as I said above, one woman has a quite gory dead in JW. People has accused the movie to be misogynist. The writers and producers have said is the first time a woman dies in the franchise, it was about time. Yet, is also the first time a woman is in charge of the whole park. Women have flaws. Having a complete and totally competent woman in a movie is as insulting as having one that can't do right at all (just look at Hermione in HP3).

But the thing with GoT is that they have changed EVERY SINGLE STORYLINE of every woman from the books. EVERY ONE. That's a red flag, specially when you see every male plot changed is to make them stronger, while the women exist to make a point on how things are wrong: Dany's rule is a mess, Ellaria's revenge is wrong, Sansa never had power, etc. I've never considered myself a "feminist". That doesn't mean I'm not involved in women issues at all, it's just that I don't like neither the label nor how the movement works nowadays. Yet, it's disturbing to see how a series of books that portray accurately women is ignored with the purpose to make them clichés that don't work. And, it also made me giggle how many of the feminists I know are DELIGHTED with the show and see nothing wrong with it. I suppose it's because they haven't read the books and are little aware of how these women are originally presented.

[Ser Quork]

Poor NCW.

HBO: What do you hope is next for Jaime in Season 6?

Nikolaj Coster-Waldau: I can't wait to read the scripts. Jaime has no idea what's been going on in King's Landing while he was away and is going to come back to this religious circus. I would hope that he'd make a very quick pit stop and then get out of town. There's a war and an enormous threat beyond the Wall. I think that maybe Jaime would be involved somehow. I'm just curious to see what happens. I try not to speculate too much because I'm always wrong because I read the books and this crapfest is nothing like that.

FTFY.

[Good Guy Garlan]

Poor baby. I love what he said! "I would hope that he'd make a very quick pit stop and then get out of town." :lol:

And by "town" he probably means the show.

[JonCon's Red Beard]

Yeah, I agree, though the trend of making characters more "saintly" (and therefore more boring) seems to be more pervading in male characters

They have not only whitewashed Ramsay. They've done the same with LF. Like Lord Stoneheart said in a thread, he's not at all a nice kind man: he has caused the destruction of their world alone and doesn't care. The show is giving him the same treatment they give to Jorah (with the big difference that Jorah is not a bad person): poor guy who was rejected by pretty girl and now deserves a second chance in life. Baelish is, imo, the character who exploits women the most so far. I'm sure a lot of terrible things happen in his brothels (look at Jeyne) and Sansa is going to be shipped as a weapon to have more power. Batfinger is, well, a poor guy who never stopped loving Cat.

[Ello Stark]

It's all right, hon... here.... breath... :lol:

Well, for once, there was no dragons in medieval times (that we know of...) so, it's always going to be a case that the story is "inspired" by that time and can be a little bit inaccurate (which is fine for me). Yet, Martin is basing mostly of ASOIAF society in middle times except some minor parts (like there is no a hierarchy in nobility, but that's mostly a mistake from his part).

Women in medieval times is a subject many have wrong. They weren't just there to be raped. They weren't poor victims. And they definitely did no go around dressed like men to have adventures or to prove their value. They saw being wives as a duty to honour their families, their husbands and their countries (states, provinces, lands, dunno). And the men were the same. They didn't drag their wives to the bed whenever they got horny because what kind of idiot would risk to be in bad terms with the woman that is meant to live forever with? Mostly marriages were polite rather then caring and while some men did have bastards and whored, not all of them. Pretend every other man was a disloyal dick is also sexist, imo.

Back to women, they were also taught to rule and lead, which is something that is happening now with Sansa in the Vale. She's learning how to rule a household which is something she could have learned to do at some point before being married. People believe (even today) that ruling a house is easy. It is not. They were educated to know how to, even to solve problems with their lands when the men were not around. They were smart and capable on their own terms. And even common girls were in charge of their families business whether they had brothers or not.

About "feminist" complains, well, let's say some people are very dense. We cannot pretend no women is ever going to be hurt in a story, that would be unrealistic. And not everytime a woman is hurt on screen is due to the writers being sexists assholes either. Like, as I said above, one woman has a quite gory dead in JW. People has accused the movie to be misogynist. The writers and producers have said is the first time a woman dies in the franchise, it was about time. Yet, is also the first time a woman is in charge of the whole park. Women have flaws. Having a complete and totally competent woman in a movie is as insulting as having one that can't do right at all (just look at Hermione in HP3).

But the thing with GoT is that they have changed EVERY SINGLE STORYLINE of every woman from the books. EVERY ONE. That's a red flag, specially when you see every male plot changed is to make them stronger, while the women exist to make a point on how things are wrong: Dany's rule is a mess, Ellaria's revenge is wrong, Sansa never had power, etc. I've never considered myself a "feminist". That doesn't mean I'm not involved in women issues at all, it's just that I don't like neither the label nor how the movement works nowadays. Yet, it's disturbing to see how a series of books that portray accurately women is ignored with the purpose to make them clichés that don't work. And, it also made me giggle how many of the feminists I know are DELIGHTED with the show and see nothing wrong with it. I suppose it's because they haven't read the books and are little aware of how these women are originally presented.

I totally agree.

[kissdbyfire]

Poor baby. I love what he said! "I would hope that he'd make a very quick pit stop and then get out of town." :lol:

I know, and 'religious circus' is spot on too! :lol:

FTFY.

Much better!