Why do people say it is the books fault season 5 was bad?

[Toth]

The fate of the major characters will be the same for both the show and the books. If Dany and Tyrion die in the books, then they'll die in the show.

Tell this to Balon... :lol:

[Cashless Society]

^ Balon is biting it next season.

[WSmith84]

I've never understood the 'blame the show on the books' argument. Surely if your saying that Feast and Dance led to what some people feel is a downturn in quality, you are saying the first 3 seasons are down to the excellence of Game, Clash and Storm which surely indicates D&D have little effect on the show? I Think the way the books were split did make them harder to adapt, but things like forgetting Sansa's necklace are mistakes.

That's a good point. Their choices in what to keep and what to cut were a little strange, imo, although they do have the benefit of knowing what plays into the endgame.

I found that this year their decision to include Dorne and the Sandsnakes but cut Arianne baffling and truly indefensible; it's like cutting out the meat, leaving the fat and then adding your own fat (Trystane)

Did we need so much Arya this year? Could they not have showed her joining the FM, seeing the Hall of Faces and being told she needs to discard all of her possessions and then have the last scene her refusing to discard Needle, but continuing to train with them? Do we actually have to see the training itself or could we not just see her next season with her training completed, or at a certain stage? I don't know; I don't have the benefit of knowing where the story is going, but I did feel that Arya had an unnecessary amount of screentime this year.

[WSmith84]

Tell this to Balon... :lol:

Schrodinger's Balon. We won't know whether he's alive or dead until we look into the box (Iron Islands) again. Whoever came up with that name, I love you.

[Lord Freddy Blackfyre]

How can anyone say that a show with a metascore of 91 is bad?....When the ATAS announce the Emmy's nomination next thursday many people will be eating crap.

[LannisterKing]

Season 5 was bad, imo, because of Shireen's unnecessary burning (it should've happened in season 6 with a better explanation for it) and the writers' ridiculous obsession with making Stannis look as pathetic and as evil as possible. I thought it was horrible writing and I'm not even a Stannis fan.

[WSmith84]

The argument that because something is popular and/or well-reviewed therefore it must be good is not one I'm particularly fond of. The Dark Knight Rises was a very popular, well-reviewed film; in my opinion, it was a pretentious, plot-hole filled, poorly paced disappointment.

[Alayne's Shadow.]

The thing is, since the books were hardly adapted this year, it's kind of hard to blame them.

Take the two worst storylines - Winterhell and Porne. They do exist on the books, but they were brutally changed on the show. I still don't get why cast Three Sandsnakes over Arianne. And even if Arianne was cut, honestly, the slap game? The poisoned boobs scene? The Poison Ivy kiss of death?

Winterhell is worst, because it's supposed to be based on George's best work. Gone were the things that made Winterfell interesting, like all these Lords, Theon and the heart tree, the deaths, Manderly and Dustin, Jeyne. Instead, we got whatever that was.

[Connartist92]

Because most of them haven't even read the books and just find it easier to blame George instead of the show's producers and writers.

[shadow282]

Tell this to Balon... :lol:

Because Balon is a major character (who's going to die next season anyway, so he's still sharing the fate of his book character)?

[Toth]

Because Balon is a major character (who's going to die next season anyway, so he's still sharing the fate of his book character)?

Not a major character, but only an example that it is quite possible to survive your book counterpart by a large margin, even if only because they didn't care to mention him again.

Considering how far off they are with the book material, they really needn't stick to whatever ending GRRM told them. Basically anything could happen to their favourites as long as it makes sense to them. Creatively...

[Humble AK]

The argument that because something is popular and/or well-reviewed therefore it must be good is not one I'm particularly fond of. The Dark Knight Rises was a very popular, well-reviewed film; in my opinion, it was a pretentious, plot-hole filled, poorly paced disappointment.

The argument that something isn't good because in my opinion it's bad, and look, there are a few others who agree with me - that's even less persuasive.

Anyway, to the topic of this thread: I think that this season had problems and most of that was due to pacing, and this is a problem of the books. While I certainly appreciate what Martin was trying for in expanding the PoVs and the story, and I did enjoy the books, his execution was problematic. The new characters were not as engaging, most of the resultant plot was meandering (and sometimes outright bad, like circus act Tyrion and Dorne and the Greyjoys and Sansa), and the pacing was absolutely destroyed. There was no sense of momentum, there was essentially no climax, and there was too much sprawl.

I think people are deluding themselves if they believe that there is any faithful way to adapt that material and not be a soporific mess.

This is the point where I think the story got out of hand for Martin (and this is substantiated by all the problems he's had writing it, and his slow progress after Storm). And the creators wanted to avoid that trench, where even Martin can't seem to find his way out.

So they took measures to avoid being stuck in that same trench. This meant drastic changes. So they had to change a lot, while still desiring to remain true to the overall narrative. This problem, particularly to this degree, isn't something they had to deal with previously.

And that is why people blame the books. The show is very closely tied to the books, so when the books misstep, it is very difficult for the show not to misstep.

[Toth]

The argument that something isn't good because in my opinion it's bad, and look, there are a few others who agree with me - that's even less persuasive.

This and your post in the other thread makes me think you have never ever read a single post about a plothole on this side. People aren't only saying they don't like and leave it at that. They can point with their finger at quite a lot of things that openly make no sense if you think about them from the perspective of a character in the show-world.

And you are saying that it is the book's fault if the writers feel the need to do their own thing and fail miserably? Sure. Why not.

[ShadowKitteh]

Yes. All characters TALK. I'm sorry I didn't spell it out simpler and more clearly.

Sansa in the Vale, talking about characters that don't drive hers or the overall plot of the story forward (and about things she has no knowledge of), would be a waste of a main character and precious time they don't have much left of, was my point.

[Humble AK]

This and your post in the other thread makes me think you have never ever read a single post about a plothole on this side. People aren't only saying they don't like and leave it at that. They can point with their finger at quite a lot of things that openly make no sense if you think about them from the perspective of a character in the show-world.

And you are saying that it is the book's fault if the writers feel the need to do their own thing and fail miserably? Sure. Why not.

I know what a plot hole is, of course. Almost every piece of fiction, with a sufficient degree of exegesis, has plot holes. Fiction is contrived by fallible minds, and no one mind, or group of minds, understands reality and human behavior enough to write a narrative ecosystem of interactions that is perfectly rendered. It's a predicted simulation of reality with altered parameters. And so, too, are consumers of fiction fallible, so even when they analyse a plot and believe they've discovered a plot hole, that doesn't necessarily mean they have perceived correctly. And even if they have, the egregiousness of that plot hole is entirely a subjective matter.

[Primalsplit]

Yes. All characters TALK. I'm sorry I didn't spell it out simpler and more clearly.

Sansa in the Vale, talking about characters that don't drive hers or the overall plot of the story forward (and about things she has no knowledge of), would be a waste of a main character and precious time they don't have much left of, was my point.

precious time they spent with?

[Toth]

Yes. All characters TALK. I'm sorry I didn't spell it out simpler and more clearly.

Sansa in the Vale, talking about characters that don't drive hers or the overall plot of the story forward (and about things she has no knowledge of), would be a waste of a main character and precious time they don't have much left of, was my point.

Well, nobody would have argumented that she only witnesses people talking about stuff which happened somewhere else. This is not what happens in her Vale chapters and most certainly won't happen in Winds of Winter. "Make him hers" was an advise from Littlefinger regarding Harry the Heir. If they had sticked to the book storyline we would have seen Sansa succeeding in bewitching and manipulating the guy she will turn into her 'get out of jail'-card. Together with Littlefinger feeding Sweetrobyn with milk of the poppy there are quite a lot of plot points which contribute to Sansa's growth as a character.

Instead she was forced into the skin of a tertiary character supporting the story of Theon who then also lost his protagonist status to Ramsay, bringing her own story to a complete halt if not outright abort it.

I know what a plot hole is, of course. Almost every piece of fiction, with a sufficient degree of exegesis, has plot holes. Fiction is contrived by fallible minds, and no one mind, or group of minds, understands reality and human behavior to write a narrative ecosystem of interactions that is perfectly rendered. And so, too, are consumers of fiction fallible, so even when they analyse a plot and believe they've discovered a plot hole, that doesn't necessarily mean they have perceived correctly. And even if they have, the egregiousness of that plot hole is entirely a subjective matter.

So according to your logic every piece of fiction doesn't need to establish an internal logic, because the writers are free to just let things happen without explanation or even against the stated explanation just because they feel like it. Sure. Why not.

[Khal Boner]

And you are saying that it is the book's fault if the writers feel the need to do their own thing and fail miserably? Sure. Why not.

Fail miserably? GoT continues to be a huge success. Ratings are high, reviews are positive and the show makes a fortune for HBO. S5 is a successful adaptation of a pair of challenging books. A few purists and nit pickers moaning on the internet about how they would have done it differently is neither here nor there.

[Toth]

*sigh* Not again. Don't. Even. Dare. To use this argument. This whole thread is about the writing. I wrote about the decisions of the writers in the post you are quoting. The writing is bad. That's it. Nobody speaks about success.

It doesn't matter that HBO makes shitloads of money with it. They could sell bottled dog poo for all I care. If they'd make money with it, it wouldn't change the fact it is bottled dog poo. Maybe the bottles are nice and have pictures of boobs on them, but it still contains dog poo.

[Khal Boner]

*sigh* Not again. Don't. Even. Dare. To use this argument. This whole thread is about the writing. I wrote about the decisions of the writers in the post you are quoting. The writing is bad. That's it. Nobody speaks about success.

It doesn't matter that HBO makes shitloads of money with it. They could sell bottled dog poo for all I care. If they'd make money with it, it wouldn't change the fact it is bottled dog poo. Maybe the bottles are nice and have pictures of boobs on them, but it still contains dog poo.

Newsflash. This site isn't the arbiter of wether D & D have failed or succeeded at anything. Opinions are just opinions. The writing isn't bad (imo) and their ability has never been questioned before. Dislike of some of the the story choices they made is the root cause of this criticism. It's neither constructive nor accurate. AFFC was a bitch of a novel to adapt. ADWD not much better.