Jump to content
Ran

How would you rate episode 601?

How would rate episode 601?  

598 members have voted

  1. 1. What's your rating from 1-10, with 10 being the highest/best

    • 1
      78
    • 2
      39
    • 3
      38
    • 4
      40
    • 5
      50
    • 6
      63
    • 7
      103
    • 8
      105
    • 9
      41
    • 10
      31


Recommended Posts

Quote

 What you are saying is basically that just because the majority of viewers like the show, it means it's awesome, and therefore all those who don't like it are morons or trolls. That's both offensive and a fallacious argument. 

I don't understand why so many are so bothered by the fact that there are people who dislike the show. And it's not out of spite or hatred, that's an assumption on your part. There is plenty do dislike about the show. There are lots of things that don't make sense; characterisation is either nonexistent or inconsistent, and characters change motivations and behaviour as often as the plot demands; continuity is a joke; events and actions are ham-fistedly shoved into storylines just to create completely unbelievable shocks and twists. And that's just to name a few issues. 

You love it? Excellent, more power to you. But don't try to argue that the opinions of those  who don't like it are any less valid than yours. As I've asked another poster upthread, who died and made you the king of valid opinions? 

Of course the quote option is broken on mobile.

You can't hide behind the excuse that, "it's a personal opinion". If you go up to a guy and ask him how the Grilled Chicken is that he just ate. And his response is that it sucks because the Chicken is was killed inhumanly. Yes, it's his opinion but it has nothing to do with the quality of the food. His judgement is clouded, pre-determined. Go look at some of the people who review the episode 1-3, it's not just this episode. It's a common occurring thing, the post history clearly shows that they are biased in some way. If you see a guys history post calling GoT to end, or calling the directors horrible, or even "showing sympathy to the poor souls who have to watch GoT, you know that the vote or opinion is already clouded. 

 

This is is why in statistical inference, there are outliners in sample populations. In this case, 1 on the voting poll is clearly an outliner. It has 15% and every other number close to or bigger than it is a 7, where the average is. 

I'm not saying that your opinion is irrelevent because it's different than the majority of viewers. No! That's not what I'm saying. What I am saying is, that if your opinion is on the opposite side of the spectrum consistently and there "may" be a problem. If the average review on most side is a 8, and you decide to give the show a rating of a 5, hell even a 4, I get it. Giving it a one when most give it a 8.5, i don't get. I'm also not alone, read on IMDb or metacritic sites and they also explain that they remove outliners (among other things). 

 

Most people giving it a 1 wouldnt know what to rate a show that REALLY is on average a 2, let alone a 1. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, xjlxking said:

Just glancing over the posts, it really shows how some book readers have grown to have such hatred for the show. If you can't take out the idea that this is an adaption of the novel when judging the episode, you probably should not even vote. Giving this episode a 1 or 2, even a 3 is both ridiculous and moronic. 

 

Normally, when some people do this for certain products like games or movies, I usually respond with, "thank you for supporting the product by paying for it despite hating it". In this case, I will say that vote 1-3, thank you! please continue watching and paying HBO monthly. Your support is greatly appreciated

 

This episode was a solid 7.5-8/10. Without a doubt, the weakest part is is and likely always will be, Dorne

 

well i was expecting a show of the same quality of the wire, or sopranos, or rome, or even boardwalk empire, an "HBO quality" show.

 

a show like the one that had tywin lannister skinning a buck givin' me the chills, or a robert-cersei moment that was never in the books but was awesome too. i wasn't expecting dorne, or st. tyrion, or bi-polar jaime or a davos that must have been posesed between season 5 and season 6 or a cersei that isn't cersei.

and the biggest sin of all, the one that shows that D&D can't or won't think things through: jon's body being guarded by davos, dolorous edd and a bunch of strangers that we (or at least i) don't give a f*** if the live or die, i could've been on the edge of my sit if the guys on that room were grenn or pyp maybe even mance, but nooo we needed to kill those characters for shock value guyzzzz!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This thread is for posters to rate the episode and perhaps give their reasoning behind their vote, not to judge said reasonings. For people who can't stomach opinions that go against their own, I'd advise to shut up and keep it to themselves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, xjlxking said:

You can't hide behind the excuse that, "it's a personal opinion". If you go up to a guy and ask him how the Grilled Chicken is that he just ate. And his response is that it sucks because the Chicken is was killed inhumanly. Yes, it's his opinion but it has nothing to do with the quality of the food. His judgement is clouded, pre-determined. Go look at some of the people who review the episode 1-3, it's not just this episode. It's a common occurring thing, the post history clearly shows that they are biased in some way. If you see a guys history post calling GoT to end, or calling the directors horrible, or even "showing sympathy to the poor souls who have to watch GoT, you know that the vote or opinion is already clouded. 

 

This is is why in statistical inference, there are outliners in sample populations. In this case, 1 on the voting poll is clearly an outliner. It has 15% and every other number close to or bigger than it is a 7, where the average is. 

So a personal opinion is an excuse now? And I gave it a 2, so I obviously have some pre-determined reasons that can't possibly do with the fact that my personal opinion was that it was  just a bad episode of tv? And the grilled chicken "example" you gave is just ridiculous.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, xjlxking said:

The big difference is that despite reading all the books, I can easily judge the tv series independently. If you can not do that simply thing, you should not vote

 

How can you say an episode is a 1-3. Iassume you think that this episode is just as bad as Keeping up with kardashians.

Like at what point does this make sense? If it is a 1, if it is so bad, why even watch it? There is a clear hatred for a show that has been built up in order for you to say it's a 1.

 

Luckily, besides forums for book readers, you won't find viewers rating the show a 1. I'm not saying all books readers but a small minority definitely give it a 1 out of spite and hate. Pretty much a huge majority of viewers tend to rate most episodes 8+. It's clear that in any statistical inference that the small minority that are voting it a 1 would be a outliner.

 

its only forum like this one where you see 1/10 having ~15% of votes. Nope, nothing idoitic about those votes..not ONE BIT

 

The big difference is that despite reading all the books, I can easily judge the tv series independently. If you can not do that simply thing, you should not vote

As can I. My vote is based on the content of the show and whether I enjoyed it. 
 

How can you say an episode is a 1-3. I'm assume you think that this episode is just as bad as Keeping up with kardashians.

I wouldn't know, I've never seen it, in fact, the only show on tv that I watch is GOT. It used to be the only show that I enjoyed. I had my complaints with the first three seasons, but still enjoyed watching, and rated accordingly, with scores ranging from 6-10. The quality of the show since then has declined astronomically, in my opinion, thus my rating that reflects that. Why would I compare GOT to others shows. I rate it based I what I see when I sit down and watch the show, period. 

Like at what point is does this make sense? If it is a 1, if it is so bad, why even watch it? There is a clear hatred for a show that has been built up in order for you to say it's a 1.

Of course there is hatred, but it's not blind. You have D&D to blame for it. I hate what they have done to this show, and I hate that they have taken from me the only show I really looked forward to watching. 

I don't understand why you and others feel the need to insult people that have different opinions than you. I might might feel that a high rating is ridiculous or moronic, but you won't see me calling people out and insulting them. If you enjoy the the show, all the power to you, it doesn't affect me one bit. 
 

 


 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's funny, I constantly see the argument by show lovers that GOT must be a quality show  because so many people like it, and then they turn around and make the argument that I can't rate it a 1 because it's way better than shows like the kardashians. (a show that is quite popular)

Hmmm... :dunno:  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, xjlxking said:

The big difference is that despite reading all the books, I can easily judge the tv series independently. If you can not do that simply thing, you should not vote

 

I am capable of judging them independently and I gave a score of 1 because both the storyline and the dialogous are atrocious. It is like teenage boys writing the scripts instead of professionals, using cliches and bad jokes. This show was so good becuase it combined the writing of G.R.R.M and the visual implementation of D&D. The problem as it seems to me is that D&D forgot about it; i.e. that they were standing on the shoulder of a giant and now that the giant is gone they cannot find their way out of the tall grass. The visual implementation and the music is still outstanding  (and the "old" actors, like Jorah or Davos) but the storyline is totaly clueless and full of plotholes and inconsistencies. Unfortunateely it is just terrible. I gave a score of 1 to call attention (or to show my disatisfaction) to this atrocious storywriting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Voting a 1 to almost anything is nothing more than a massive over-reaction. There are very few tv shows or movies I can honestly say deserve a 1.Even the ones I've thought were awful in so many ways would gain a couple of points for reasonable acting or being visually appealling, or being entertaining enough that I didnt want to be sick. I could say that something like American Horror Story or Revenge are absolutely awful tv shows and I hate them.. but even them I couldnt give them a 1 because on some level they show some sort of expertise and have some entertainment value.

Which why voting a 1 to GoT is such an obvious attention grabbing move, and everyone can see through it. Its the equivilent of a child throwing his toys out of the pram. Even if you hated the storyline, the changes, the writing (which you are entitiled to do, though I'd say that was up for debate) .. on some basic level the show at the very least.. 'looks nice', it has good music, and a lot of very talented actors. To give it a 1 would be to willfully ignore everything decent about the show. 

So go ahead, do that, doesn't bother anyone, but we all know whats really going on. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, Channel4s-JonSnow said:

Voting a 1 to almost anything is nothing more than a massive over-reaction. There are very few tv shows or movies I can honestly say deserve a 1.Even the ones I've thought were awful in so many ways would gain a couple of points for reasonable acting or being visually appealling, or being entertaining enough that I didnt want to be sick. I could say that something like American Horror Story or Revenge are absolutely awful tv shows and I hate them.. but even them I couldnt give them a 1 because on some level they show some sort of expertise and have some entertainment value.

Which why voting a 1 to GoT is such an obvious attention grabbing move, and everyone can see through it. Its the equivilent of a child throwing his toys out of the pram. Even if you hated the storyline, the changes, the writing (which you are entitiled to do, though I'd say that was up for debate) .. on some basic level the show at the very least.. 'looks nice', it has good music, and a lot of very talented actors. To give it a 1 would be to willfully ignore everything decent about the show. 

So go ahead, do that, doesn't bother anyone, but we all know whats really going on. 

First of all I do not care about other shows. I watched GoT because of GoT and so far I loved it: the music, the actors, the storyline everything. That is why the sharp drop of quality in storywriting is so obvious and frustrating.

Second, you can call it childish or attention grabbing, but no amount of name calling and belittleing analogies will change the fact that there are a lot of people disapponted with the story and with the dialoges.

Third, feel free to ignore the problems with the show and focus on our "over-reaction" but your ignorance won't turn a bad story into a good one. No amount visual effects, good music and talented actors (the presence of each of these I am happy to acknowledge) will save a bad story at the end. It is just an empty eye-candy. I am not watching this show because it 'looks nice', I want a good story with engaging caraters. So far I got it from the story of G.R.R.M but it seems severly lacking from the new season.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Channel4s-JonSnow said:

Voting a 1 to almost anything is nothing more than a massive over-reaction. There are very few tv shows or movies I can honestly say deserve a 1.Even the ones I've thought were awful in so many ways would gain a couple of points for reasonable acting or being visually appealling, or being entertaining enough that I didnt want to be sick. I could say that something like American Horror Story or Revenge are absolutely awful tv shows and I hate them.. but even them I couldnt give them a 1 because on some level they show some sort of expertise and have some entertainment value.

Which why voting a 1 to GoT is such an obvious attention grabbing move, and everyone can see through it. Its the equivilent of a child throwing his toys out of the pram. Even if you hated the storyline, the changes, the writing (which you are entitiled to do, though I'd say that was up for debate) .. on some basic level the show at the very least.. 'looks nice', it has good music, and a lot of very talented actors. To give it a 1 would be to willfully ignore everything decent about the show. 

So go ahead, do that, doesn't bother anyone, but we all know whats really going on. 

It's too bad there is an exception to your voting rules when it comes to all the 10 votes, implying that the show is absolutely perfect, without a flaw. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, watcher of the night said:

First of all I do not care about other shows. I watched GoT because of GoT and so far I loved it: the music, the actors, the storyline everything. That is why the sharp drop of quality in storywriting is so obvious and frustrating.

Second, you can call it childish or attention grabbing, but no amount of name calling and belittleing analogies will change the fact that there are a lot of people disapponted with the story and with the dialoges.

Third, feel free to ignore the problems with the show and focus on our "over-reaction" but your ignorance won't turn a bad story into a good one. No amount visual effects, good music and talented actors (the presence of each of these I am happy to acknowledge) will save a bad story at the end. It is just an empty eye-candy. I am not watching this show because it 'looks nice', I want a good story with engaging caraters. So far I got it from the story of G.R.R.M but it seems severly lacking from the new season.

Thats fine. But at least admit what it is you are doing, which is not objectively watching the show, but comparing it to the books. Also simply ignoring many of the aspects of the show which you suggest are simply 'eye candy', when they are entirely as relevant to its quality as anything else is petty. For sure you can sit and complain if you don't like the writing, and maybe give the writing a 1 if you like (i'd disagree as even that is a massive overreaction) but objectively there hasn't been a single episode of the show that could possibly be given a 1 rating. Even the very worst last season I'd possibly give a 3-4 , and even then it had many great aspects in the same episode. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2.5.2016 at 0:15 PM, Channel4s-JonSnow said:

Voting a 1 to almost anything is nothing more than a massive over-reaction. There are very few tv shows or movies I can honestly say deserve a 1.Even the ones I've thought were awful in so many ways would gain a couple of points for reasonable acting or being visually appealling, or being entertaining enough that I didnt want to be sick. I could say that something like American Horror Story or Revenge are absolutely awful tv shows and I hate them.. but even them I couldnt give them a 1 because on some level they show some sort of expertise and have some entertainment value.

Which why voting a 1 to GoT is such an obvious attention grabbing move, and everyone can see through it. Its the equivilent of a child throwing his toys out of the pram. Even if you hated the storyline, the changes, the writing (which you are entitiled to do, though I'd say that was up for debate) .. on some basic level the show at the very least.. 'looks nice', it has good music, and a lot of very talented actors. To give it a 1 would be to willfully ignore everything decent about the show. 

So go ahead, do that, doesn't bother anyone, but we all know whats really going on. 

Why are taking it for granted that the rating should be made in comparison to other TV shows ? If that is your approach, fine, but don't assume everyone has to go about it that way.
I agree, that with your approach, GoT would in no case justify a rating of 1, simply because the qualitiy of acting, set design, special effects are too good. Even if Peter Dinklage would read the phonebook backwards to Drogon for 45 minutes, it would deserve at least a 3 or 4 compared to Jersey Shore.

But this is not a forum that discusses and compares TV shows in general but one specifically dedicated to ASoIaF/GoT.

And if people are extremely disappointed by an episode, thinking that it is pretty much as bad as they can imagine it to get, given the quality of the source material, the actors and the budget. Then well, it's valid to rate it 1. If it weren't, why even have it on the scale ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Rhollo said:

Why are taking it for granted that the rating should be made in comparison to other TV shows ? If that is your approach, fine, but don't assume everyone has to go about it that way.
I agree, that with your approach, GoT would in no case justify a rating of 1, simply because the qualitiy of acting, set design, special effects are too good. Even if Peter Dinklage would read the phonebook backwards to Drogon for 45 minutes, it would deserve at least a 3 or 4 compared to Jersey Shore.

But this is not a forum that discusses and compares TV shows in general but one specifically dedicated to ASoIaF/GoT.

And if people are extremely disappointed by an episode, thinking that it is pretty much as bad as they can imagine it to get, given the quality of the source material, the actors and the budget. Then well, it's valid to rate it 1. If it weren't, why even have it on the scale ?

Even if you don't compare the show to others, which is something I can't really understand, because a qualitive judgement is always based on comparison to other things, then a 1 vote would only make sense if every single element of the show was awful. Since, as you have admitted, that is not the case. I'm not sure how anyone can justify it other than as petulance, and they shouldn't really be taken seriously.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Rhollo said:

Why are taking it for granted that the rating should be made in comparison to other TV shows ? If that is your approach, fine, but don't assume everyone has to go about it that way.
I agree, that with your approach, GoT would in no case justify a rating of 1, simply because the qualitiy of acting, set design, special effects are too good. Even if Peter Dinklage would read the phonebook backwards to Drogon for 45 minutes, it would deserve at least a 3 or 4 compared to Jersey Shore.

But this is not a forum that discusses and compares TV shows in general but one specifically dedicated to ASoIaF/GoT.

And if people are extremely disappointed by an episode, thinking that it is pretty much as bad as they can imagine it to get, given the quality of the source material, the actors and the budget. Then well, it's valid to rate it 1. If it weren't, why even have it on the scale ?

Even if you don't compare the show to others, which is something I can't really understand, because a qualitive judgement is always based on comparison to other things, then a 1 vote would only make sense if every single element of the show was awful. Since, as you have admitted, that is not the case. I'm not sure how anyone can justify it other than as petulance, and they shouldn't really be taken seriously.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Channel4s-JonSnow said:

Even if you don't compare the show to others, which is something I can't really understand, because a qualitive judgement is always based on comparison to other things, then a 1 vote would only make sense if every single element of the show was awful. Since, as you have admitted, that is not the case. I'm not sure how anyone can justify it other than as petulance, and they shouldn't really be taken seriously.

Again, if it makes sense, depends solely on the approach you are taking.

If people start with a baseline rating of 5 (or maybe 6, 7,8 ) and add/deduct points for things they liked/disliked, that's valid, and might result in a 1 rating if they disliked a lot.
If you compare it only to the other episodes aired so far, and are of the opinion, it was the weakest episode ever, it might be a 1 on the GoT scale for you.
Some might give every episode a basic 10/10 and only lower it, when it has huge deficits (namely Dorne).
Or you don't analyze at all and just go with your gut.

All of these (and lots of other) methods are fine and valid. It's not up to you (or me, or anyone else, for that matter) to define the method by which episodes should be rated and then declare certain good/bad ratings nonsensical, based on your very own, arbitrary rules.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Channel4s-JonSnow said:

Even if you don't compare the show to others, which is something I can't really understand, because a qualitive judgement is always based on comparison to other things, then a 1 vote would only make sense if every single element of the show was awful. Since, as you have admitted, that is not the case. I'm not sure how anyone can justify it other than as petulance, and they shouldn't really be taken seriously.

Again, if it makes sense, depends solely on the approach you are taking.

If people start with a baseline rating of 5 (or maybe 6, 7,8 ) and add/deduct points for things they liked/disliked, that's valid, and might result in a 1 rating if they disliked a lot.
If you compare it only to the other episodes aired so far, and are of the opinion, it was the weakest episode ever, it might be a 1 on the GoT scale for you.
Some might give every episode a basic 10/10 and only lower it, when it has huge deficits (namely Dorne).
Or you don't analyze at all and just go with your gut.

All of these (and lots of other) methods are fine and valid. It's not up to you (or me, or anyone else, for that matter) to define the method by which episodes should be rated and then declare certain good/bad ratings nonsensical, based on your very own, arbitrary rules.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/27/2016 at 4:47 PM, JonSnow4President said:

There's not more than 3 inches of snow outside Winterfell....

Well, that could be due to shrinkage from the cold.  Winterfell swears it's at least 9 inches, though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I finally got around to watching this episode tonight. I'm giving it a 5. I watched both seasons of this really mediocre show, Extant, starring Halle Berry. At the beginning of the second season they did a complete reset of the storyline. While I watched somewhat bemused, by the end I understood what had changed between the two seasons and why the main character was in the situation she was in. Although doing a complete reset demonstrates a show is in trouble, I thought they did a good job. AGOT on the other hand, did a completely graceless reset on the Dorne storyline. I'm a little pissed they treated Alexander Siddig that way. :(

As far as what people are choosing to vote, whether everyone realizes it or not, these ratings are all subjective. If a person comes off of watching the show and feels happy and excited then they will probably give a 9 or 10. If a person comes off of the show feeling angry or disgusted they will probably give a 1 or 2. I'm giving a 5 because I'm feeling, "Meh".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×