GOT - A reasoned critique

[rosehustle1]

Okay, but there's a difference between small plot holes and "No internal logic, no character consistency, complete disregard for character development, and gigantic plot holes". That's from one post; I'm sure, if I looked around, I could find other equally as harsh criticisms from them of other aspects of the show. There's still a huge difference between that and a few stupid/illogical plotlines. There's simply no way GoT would be as highly rated as it is if people widely believed that to be true. That's well beyond what people would be willing to ignore. Which returns to my original question.

Maybe that's true and maybe that's not (for the record, I completely disagree with that, but that's a different discussion), but for this question it doesn't matter because "pretend the books don't exist for argument's sake" If you're judging it as if it's a original work then whether reading ASOIAF gives you more insight is immaterial.

But I think people can watch the show, not have read the books, and think that a lot of stuff isn't measuring up. My mom hasn't read any of the books and she brought up on her own how dumb that candle plot line was. "How is anyone going to see that little candle, in the day, when a battle is raging too?" Is what she said. She likes the show but she even thought it didn't make any sense for Tyene to poison Bronn, flash her boobs, and then give him the antidote anyway. She's like binge-watched all the first four seasons and watched every episode this season, but she does criticize the show's inconsistencies and treatment of women characters. It's a popular show and it has a huge effect on pop culture so a lot of people are going to tune in, but that doesn't mean that people aren't noticing stuff or getting annoyed by what choices have been made in terms of characterization or plot.

[Joe Pesci]

complete disregard for character development and gigantic plot holes

An example of these from s5, for me at least, is LF leaving Sansa alone in WF. For one, it makes zero sense for Sansa to agree to marry the son of the man who helped kill her mother and brother. Two, after 4 seasons of LF always seeming to be one step ahead of everyone else and knowing so much, he actually doesn't know anything about Ramsay? Three, he expects Sansa to sexually seduce Ramsay when she admits it herself she has no idea how to do it. Four, when he departs for KL, he leaves her by herself? These add up to making LF look completely different and grossly incompetent, which is so far off of what we have seen him to be in the first four seasons,and it throws the whole WF plot into disarray.

[rosehustle1]

An example of these from s5, for me at least, is LF leaving Sansa alone in WF. For one, it makes zero sense for Sansa to agree to marry the son of the man who helped kill her mother and brother. Two, after 4 seasons of LF always seeming to be one step ahead of everyone else and knowing so much, he actually doesn't know anything about Ramsay? Three, he expects Sansa to sexually seduce Ramsay when she admits it herself she has no idea how to do it. Four, when he departs for KL, he leaves her by herself? These add up to making LF look completely different and grossly incompetent, which is so far off of what we have seen him to be in the first four seasons,and it throws the whole WF plot into disarray.

This is a great example. His character for 4 seasons used knowledge as power, but in this instance he admits he knows nothing about Ramsay. What's worse is that he is okay with that lack of knowledge. Sansa is a huge political piece for him, and he will leave her with a man he knows nothing about? That seemed way inconsistent with who he has been for the last 4 years.

[shadow282]

An example of these from s5, for me at least, is LF leaving Sansa alone in WF. For one, it makes zero sense for Sansa to agree to marry the son of the man who helped kill her mother and brother. Two, after 4 seasons of LF always seeming to be one step ahead of everyone else and knowing so much, he actually doesn't know anything about Ramsay? Three, he expects Sansa to sexually seduce Ramsay when she admits it herself she has no idea how to do it. Four, when he departs for KL, he leaves her by herself? These add up to making LF look completely different and grossly incompetent, which is so far off of what we have seen him to be in the first four seasons,and it throws the whole WF plot into disarray.

Yes, that was stupid. But that's one aspect of one plotline.

But I think people can watch the show, not have read the books, and think that a lot of stuff isn't measuring up. My mom hasn't read any of the books and she brought up on her own how dumb that candle plot line was. "How is anyone going to see that little candle, in the day, when a battle is raging too?" Is what she said. She likes the show but she even thought it didn't make any sense for Tyene to poison Bronn, flash her boobs, and then give him the antidote anyway. She's like binge-watched all the first four seasons and watched every episode this season, but she does criticize the show's inconsistencies and treatment of women characters. It's a popular show and it has a huge effect on pop culture so a lot of people are going to tune in, but that doesn't mean that people aren't noticing stuff or getting annoyed by what choices have been made in terms of characterization or plot.

Okay, again, its a huge, sprawling show. There are stupid plots, stupid plotholes, inconsistency. As there are in most works of fiction. As there are in the source material. But some plotholes is not the same as frequent gigantic plotholes. Some inconsistency is not the same as "complete disregard for character development. Ect, ect. The argument isn't that some of it is flawed; kissdbyfire stated all of it was flawed. Which, if that was a widely held opinion, would quite obviously lead to significantly lower ratings as well as be obvious in all reviews of the show. Since the ratings don't reflect that, It quite clearly isn't.

[RGBeyondAsshai]

, after 4 seasons of LF always seeming to be one step ahead of everyone else and knowing so much, he actually doesn't know anything about Ramsay? Three, he expects Sansa to sexually seduce Ramsay when she admits it herself she has no idea how to do it. Four, when he departs for KL, he leaves her by herself? These add up to making LF look completely different and grossly incompetent, which is so far off of what we have seen him to be in the first four seasons,and it throws the whole WF plot into disarray.

:agree: Him not knowing about Ramsay is ridiculous. Him leaving her without any protection at all is ridiculous. But if he's lying and he did it for his usual selfish ambitions, then it's a gamble that also makes no sense. Befriending Sansa and telling her truths would win her loyalty if Stannis gave her Winterfell, but while she's waiting for the guy who lost in the fastest battle on record, she's married and horrifically abused and doesn't get a chance to enact any vengeance for the Red Wedding, so she won't thank him for that. It makes him look beyond foolish.

[rosehustle1]

Yes, that was stupid. But that's one aspect of one plotline.

Okay, again, its a huge, sprawling show. There are stupid plots, stupid plotholes, inconsistency. As there are in most works of fiction. As there are in the source material. But some plotholes is not the same as frequent gigantic plotholes. Some inconsistency is not the same as "complete disregard for character development. Ect, ect. The argument isn't that some of it is flawed; kissdbyfire stated all of it was flawed. Which, if that was a widely held opinion, would quite obviously lead to significantly lower ratings as well as be obvious in all reviews of the show. Since the ratings don't reflect that, It quite clearly isn't.

But you equate high ratings to everyone being fine with a show. A lot of poorly written shows and movies may have huge ratings or sales but not be very well made or universally received well.. Also a decent quality show can suffer from poor ratings due to the night it airs and lack of advertising i.e. Hannibal. A lot of people liked that show but never knew when it was on. My point is ratings aren't everything.

You also have to account for the guilty-pleasure effect and that this is another reason people are still watching GOT.Regarding critics, I think that most of the critics are in bed with HBO and other corporations which makes many of their reviews suspect. I only really see thoughtful reviews from critics that are not within the entertainment industry. I don't trust reviewers who work on sites such as Tvline or Entertainment Weekly where their main platform is focused on playing nice with actors, directors, and broadcasters in order to get inside scoops.

[xjlxking]

But you equate high ratings to everyone being fine with a show. A lot of poorly written shows and movies may have huge ratings or sales but not be very well made or universally received well.. Also a decent quality show can suffer from poor ratings due to the night it airs and lack of advertising i.e. Hannibal. A lot of people liked that show but never knew when it was on. My point is ratings aren't everything.

You also have to account for the guilty-pleasure effect and that this is another reason people are still watching GOT.Regarding critics, I think that most of the critics are in bed with HBO and other corporations which makes many of their reviews suspect. I only really see thoughtful reviews from critics that are not within the entertainment industry. I don't trust reviewers who work on sites such as Tvline or Entertainment Weekly where their main platform is focused on playing nice with actors, directors, and broadcasters in order to get inside scoops.

Conspiracy theories on HBO in bed with critics?

Anyways, I said this in another thread. You can say there are many other shows that are popular and then don't provide an example. It's rather weird, no? Secondly, in terms of GoT, the show is praised by viewers and critics; it's the most watched show in HBO history; it's pirated more than any other show; and it has been nominated. So why you can name a show that say is very popular with viewers and critics in terms of rating, generally, it won't say have huge viewer count or other factors. In that regard, GoT is hitting all the notes; granted its overall outlook has gone down in s5 but numbers are still high and some have risen. I'd argue it will go stale next season and likely go down in s7

[rosehustle1]

Conspiracy theories on HBO in bed with critics?

Anyways, I said this in another thread. You can say there are many other shows that are popular and then don't provide an example. It's rather weird, no? Secondly, in terms of GoT, the show is praised by viewers and critics; it's the most watched show in HBO history; it's pirated more than any other show; and it has been nominated. So why you can name a show that say is very popular with viewers and critics in terms of rating, generally, it won't say have huge viewer count or other factors. In that regard, GoT is hitting all the notes; granted its overall outlook has gone down in s5 but numbers are still high and some have risen. I'd argue it will go stale next season and likely go down in s7

Not a conspiracy theory. Much of the media is owned by corporations and conglomerates. Often to find out what is really happening around the world one has to go to independently funded news magazines or publicly funded organizations. Corporations have a ton of power over our media.

[xjlxking]

Not a conspiracy theory. Much of the media is owned by corporations and conglomerates. Often to find out what is really happening around the world one has to go to independently funded news magazines or publicly funded organizations. Corporations have a ton of power over our media.

not that I'm disagreeing with this.

But doesn't this applies to eveything and every argument? I'd argue HBO has less hold because they aren't pressured by even bigger companies. See abc must cut shows that are rated really good because they are pressured, HBO has better luxury in that regard, no?

[rosehustle1]

Conspiracy theories on HBO in bed with critics?

Anyways, I said this in another thread. You can say there are many other shows that are popular and then don't provide an example. It's rather weird, no? Secondly, in terms of GoT, the show is praised by viewers and critics; it's the most watched show in HBO history; it's pirated more than any other show; and it has been nominated. So why you can name a show that say is very popular with viewers and critics in terms of rating, generally, it won't say have huge viewer count or other factors. In that regard, GoT is hitting all the notes; granted its overall outlook has gone down in s5 but numbers are still high and some have risen. I'd argue it will go stale next season and likely go down in s7

The Walking Dead is super popular and has high ratings, I even like the show, but it's not very consistent and there are a lot of illogical characterizations. It has lots of good critiques as well but that doesn't change a lot of the problems that viewers have become aware of and have complained about. A lot of stuff in the industry is about popular equals good, but what is popular is not always good. It's like that quote "what's right is not always popular, and what is popular is not always right." Sometimes people really don't see the flaws until later. Some things don't age well and inconsistencies become more glaring. Like I said, Independence Day was fun and super popular, I even liked it, but watching it now I realize how unbelievably dumb it was.

[rosehustle1]

not that I'm disagreeing with this.

But doesn't this applies to eveything and every argument? I'd argue HBO has less hold because they aren't pressured by even bigger companies. See abc must cut shows that are rated really good because they are pressured, HBO has better luxury in that regard, no?

But Time Warner owns HBO, Time Inc. owns Entertainment Weekly. Penske Media Corporation owns Tvline, Variety, Deadline etc. I think that this type of corporate ownership can influence a situation for a journalist working for these various platforms. I'm not saying they can't genuinely like a show but when some reviewers from these sites don't even analyze the episode or take notice of lack of continuity in the same episode, I feel like they are either bad at their job or being encouraged to only praise certain works.

[Monoman32]

The writers had good ideas for this season, but the execution was poor. I think that sending Sansa to Winterfell to marry Ramsay instead of a fake Arya is a really good idea and then combining Brienne and Pod into that story line was clever, but the execution was poor. The reason Roose gave for marrying Sansa to Ramsay was for a better claim to the North, so that the other Northern Houses would be loyal and such, but it looks like the Boltons are having no problems with the other Northern Houses which would make the marriage pointless. Had they added the Greatjon or Manderly to the Winterfell plot then it would have been more dramatic and better and given us more prespective. In the books there was a lot of chaos in Winterfell with the Manderlys, Freys, Boltons and house Northern Houses plus there was the murders committed in Wintefell and who is better at creating chaos than LF? If Sansa is the one creating chaos in Winterfell then it would be an exciting story line.

Sending Jaime and Bronn to Dorne was a good idea since Bronn does nothing in the books and all Jaime does is go to houses in the Riverlands and negotiates the after effects of the Red Wedding, this shows Jaime's increasing political ability but this would be a very boring story line in the show so sending him to Dorne was more exiciting as it is an easier way to introduce the Martells and the Sand Snakes. But the execution was very very poor as Jaime and Bronn sneaking into Dorne to steal Myrcella while the Sand Snakes and Elliara try to kill her just didn't work. The Queenmaker plot would have been good, but the only way it makes sense is to cast Arianne but if she eventually marries fAegon and then if you cut fAegon(which i'm fine with) then what does Arianne do? They should of had Jaime play the Balon Swann role which would have worked and if Jaime was able to convice the Martells to let Myrcella come home then it would show Jaime's increasing political ability.

I think D&D have come up with good ideas but their execution was lacking, but if they had 12 episodes instead of 10 for season 5 maybe I think it would have worked better.

[Joe Pesci]

Okay, but there's a difference between small plot holes and "No internal logic, no character consistency, complete disregard for character development, and gigantic plot holes". That's from one post; I'm sure, if I looked around, I could find other equally as harsh criticisms from them of other aspects of the show. There's still a huge difference between that and a few stupid/illogical plotlines. There's simply no way GoT would be as highly rated as it is if people widely believed that to be true. That's well beyond what people would be willing to ignore. Which returns to my original question.

Maybe that's true and maybe that's not (for the record, I completely disagree with that, but that's a different discussion), but for this question it doesn't matter because "pretend the books don't exist for argument's sake" If you're judging it as if it's a original work then whether reading ASOIAF gives you more insight is immaterial.

I think something that might simply be getting overlooked in the argument here is that this forum is for ASOIAF/GOT fans, and many of us are very, very passionate about the books, show, or both. You really can't compare that to the casual fan, it is the old apples to oranges comparison. I believe the average viewership for s5 was around 6.9 million. So if there are 100,000 members on here and we all didn't watch the show, its average would still be high at 6.8 million. Now if these 100,000 people were already invested in the story prior to the show, their ideas and opinions are naturally going to be more biased towards the material than the casual viewer. If people aren't seeing what they want, then naturally some will look for weak aspects of the show and point out the fallacies, which is fine. Ratings do not affect whether an individual likes a show or not, and the internet is the perfect place to find like-minded people for just about everything, so this is naturally where you are going to find the 'vocal minority' as someone called it.

It is good to keep in mind the sample size of posters on here to the overall viewing numbers, if you do it is easier to see how people here can feel very different about the show compared to the masses while not affecting the ratings/viewer numbers.

[Zyxw]

For argument's sake, imagine the books don't exist and that the show is an original work.

Umm if they had managed to create this without any ASOIAF books then I'd rate this show the best ever. *Just kidding* - I get your point.

I think many of these comments like "Only Cat" have garnered cult status on the forums as people discuss those scenes and those phrases become synonymous with those scenes.

Good explanation although "Fetch me a block Ed" was much more than that. Even while reading it - it stood out as It symbolised his Starkness i.e. he must do it just as his father and brother did as he passed the sentence.

This is exactly what I say repeatedly, the only thing good in the episode are those cool battle scenes, it serves nothing, and it makes the later "for the watch" making little sense: how could you stab Jon Snow after not only Jon but so many brothers of the watch witness with their own eyes the imminent huge threats of white walker's army?

The only reason I can think of is this. They defended the wall against all the wildlings and rightfully think the wall is invincible - hell even the wildlings wanted to get across as they thought it would be safe against the others and wasn't it built for that exact reason? Now lets assume half or so of the wildlings that they defeated would become wights as the other dead were burnt. So they think regardless of the threat of the others/wights they are safe on this side of the wall. Lastly, people can be unreasonable/live in denial too - just look at all the stupid stuff that goes in our own world. I do agree that the show needed to show the knowledge transfer of the events at hardhome to CB though.

All in all, pretty happy that the posts haven't been visceral and mostly packed with substance and insights.

Quick sideQ: So what would they do next season from what they set up this season?

My thoughts:

1. Sansa could go to Jon at CB but most likely would look for Bran and Rickon with Brienne, Theon and maybe Davos.

Sam and gilly would do god knows what in Oldtown. Possibly include a run in with his Father - who might take margery in his custody prior to the trial.

Dany dropped her ring for tracking so that looks like it will be some time before she is found by Jorah and Daario. Tyrion/Varys are set to taking over Barristan's role in her absence.

Amplify threat from the others now that they have an army.

Cercei will get revenge and war will come to Dorne.

[The Kind Nihilist]

Is that the reason GoT season 5 is 97% fresh on rotten tomatoes? And basically the main criticism from real critics is that plot is not advancing. The same problem that books has.

You have brought light into my life! Moving forward, I shall abstain from critical reasoning regarding any cultural product until I check rotten tomatoes. Damn, no one can beat that argument: It is good because people say it is!

[The Kind Nihilist]

For fuck's sake, stop bleating that the problem book readers have is because of the changes. Try and pick a different argument for once.

The problems the show has are of its own making. I've rated several episodes 8 - 9 in the past, even a few 10/10 here and there.

But not this year. The highest I rated an episode this year was 5 or 6, can't remember. Gave it quite a few 1s and 2s as well.

Oh, come on! I'm a book reader and I couldn't care less about the hundreds of obvious plotholes and inconsistencies you guys bother to point out in your threads. They got boobs and dragons! Boobs AND dragons, you feel me!!! Plus, no one is safe, and wow, that is cutting-edge! Everyone can die, and sometimes they do it in pairs or even families. Even in slower seasons they always take trouble to kill a fucker or two every other episode. You can always expect a huge death toll, it's so exciting! Moreover, I twit my ass out over it and post all sorts of clever fanstuff other people have created on my Facebook page. Everybody loves it! And did I mention they have dragons?

[The Kind Nihilist]

I love it that it's cool to enjoy dragons now. I always felt so weird...

[JagLover]

This is BULL, this is so not true, first let me give you a list the failuare of the season 5 plots:

1) Everything relate to Dorne

2) Sansa goes to wintefell and marry Ramsay

3) Stannis and battle of Wintefell

4) For the watch

5) sons of the harpy and other ridicules of meereen

I can ensure you have these failures ABSOLUTELY nothing to do with GRRM's novels, I am not saying there are no fault in GRRM's books, but the plot used by D&D in the season 5 is NOT from GRRM's novel, but from their own creation, the only things in common between season 5 and GRRM's book 4 and 5 are the characters and geographical locations share the same names. If you have read the books, you ought to know that, if not, then you are lying to yourself or worse.

I saw so many such kind of ridiculous such season 5 is not that good simply because GRRM's book 4 and 5 sucks, so what could you expect? Now I just wonder whether this is an organized effort

I think you have misunderstood my post.

I said the issue was with the execution of the plotlines they did choose to pursue, whether that be Dorne, Winterfell of For the watch. The writing of those respective plotlines and the decisions made is part of that failure.

One part of the failure is keeping scenes almost exactly as they were in the book, while setting up virtually none of the story that led to that point. Another part of the failure is keeping the structural flaws of AFFC/ADWD and not giving us a climax to a story when one is needed.

[RedShirt47]

Also something to consider, battle of ice should come first before hardhome. Skip a canon battle and show a fanfiction battle? It is bad priority I'd say. Well... maybe tv audience simply needed to be reminded of Others. I dunno. There's still something I'm not entirely ok with here.

Well I agree about the battle of Ice, The demise of Stannis and his storyline was my main disappointment this season. Dorne was bad but meh. I was expecting more of the Stannis storyline.

I agree that action for the sake of action is pointless. The Sand Snakes scenes were dreadful and didn't really progress story or character.

I don't agree with Hardhome being "FanFic" though. It was in the books but we had no POV there to tell it first hand. But to have such a major event happen off screen on a tv show would be utterly ridiculous. We hear about the dead things from the ravens sent by Pyke so we know the wildlings there were attacked by Wights and possibly Others.

[The Kind Nihilist]

Well I agree about the battle of Ice, The demise of Stannis and his storyline was my main disappointment this season. Dorne was bad but meh. I was expecting more of the Stannis storyline.

I agree that action for the sake of action is pointless. The Sand Snakes scenes were dreadful and didn't really progress story or character.

I don't agree with Hardhome being "FanFic" though. It was in the books but we had no POV there to tell it first hand. But to have such a major event happen off screen on a tv show would be utterly ridiculous. We hear about the dead things from the ravens sent by Pyke so we know the wildlings there were attacked by Wights and possibly Others.

Man, it's what you don't see that you dread the most... 'Dead things in the water...' did it for me. Fast easy-to-kill zombies, denying all previously-established show cannon, didn't... Not to mention how fake it all looked (but hey, I'm with those that think CGI ruined horror movies). Also, it was predictable as fuck, from the wildling woman dying to the dead being raised in the aftermath, no matter how good those last shots were. I could also give you a list of shit that doesn't make sense that happened before, during and after the conflagration, but above all is the NW having opened the gates to Jon and the wildlings, only to murder him a short (hey, it's GoT, who the fuck knows, it might have been six years in Sam Junior's time) time afterwards because of having lead said wildlings across the Wall. Shit, I could write an essay on how much the plot got fucked by them placing Jon in Hardhome, but somehow I think that has already been done.