Is There Anything On The Show That You Think Is Better Than The Books?

[Cron]

27 minutes ago, MakeWesterosGreatAgain said:

Yeah, I admittedly read the books as Dorne developed in the show so my POV is different. The dorne plotline in the books is really good IMHO and it's one of my favorites so I hated seeing it cut. 

I think show-Dorne had a lot of problems but Bronn/Jaime and the first fight scene where he blocks the sword with his golden hand were great.

That's a great moment,, too, when Jaime catches the sword with his gilded hand.

It would be interesting to know what show watchers who have never read the books think of the Dorne scenes, and other scenes that are in the show but not the books.

I'm guessing that most people who hang around on these boards though have probably read the books.

[NutBurz]

Honestly, I like Dorne in the series because I believe that´s not far from what´s going to happen in the books.

I stay away from spoilers including from the books, so I haven´t read the last chapter to see which direction things are blowing; but I´ve never expected Doran´s rule to last much longer, nor have I ever considered it a very "feminist" message to use a girl child as figurehead for your bid at a powerstruggle, even if such manipulation comes from the hands of women (a point I´ve seen often complained, how much more "shallow and less feminist" the Dorne plot line is in the show). Using children for political gain = not ok. Strong female characters don´t have an irrevocable "feminism approved" stamp on them, not any further from the fact that both men and women can be good and bad people all the same.

[Dragon in the North]

2 hours ago, MakeWesterosGreatAgain said:

In addition, the Book's Dorne plotline is so awesome and Doran's fire and blood impact is much better. He, Trystane, and Myrcella and Areo all dying really sour it for me.

Dorne's plotline was my least favorite in the show, but I didn't really like it any better in the books, and Doran's fire and blood speech was a big reason why. The fire and blood speech was really good and would have been impactful if his plan didn't literally go up in flames in the next book.

[braveniler58]

The reason I didn't like Dorne in the show: The horrible fight scene and the lack of Arianne. I was looking forward to the Queensmaker plot, but it didn't happen. The sand snakes themselves weren't too bad, but their introduction sucked. Too cheesy/C-movie quality. I actually liked the interactions between them and Bronn (bad pussy didn't bother me as much as it did the others, but it was pretty lol). I also hated how D&D decided to just write off that entire plotline by killing Areo and Doran off just like that. They could have found a way to fix it instead. I'm sure Doran and etc would have died in the books as well, but doesn't excuse D&D's terrible plot choice-making decisions.

But really, mostly it was the lack of Arianne.

[Cron]

12 hours ago, NutBurz said:

Honestly, I like Dorne in the series because I believe that´s not far from what´s going to happen in the books.

Great point, I've wondered about something similar quite a few times.

In the show, Jaime goes to Dorne before the Riverlands.  In the books, Jaime goes to the Riverlands without going to Dorne, but that does not mean he's never going to Dorne, or that nothing we saw on the show in Season 5 in Dorne will ever happen in the books.  I've wondered if they just reversed the order of his travels, and if now, in the books, he may go to Dorne to try to rescue Myrcella, et cetera.

[Masha]

18 hours ago, Anton Martell said:

Cersei better in the show? I actually think there is some nuance to her in the books, because we learn what drives her: the fact she hates being a woman, which is central in her character and is absent of the show mainly. I disagree with most of your points anyway, especially the Sansa stuff, but I agree about the great acting of Tywin and Margeary.

 

Cersei is definitely better in the show. She is not horribly one-sided female villain from the beginning and doesn't just suddenly looses her marbles after death of her father as in the fifth book.

In the show she is shown as a real person, who loves her children and whatever she does is for them and whatever she becomes without them is understandable. . She just doesn't go around aborting her husbands babies just because he is not Jaime. She is basically shown to become who she is. She doesn't hate Margaery for no good reason, since in the books she basically hates her "because of prophecy". It actually shows that she has pretty good reasons to do what she does in terms of Margaery and others. So if in the next season she will go crazy, it will be expected because of what happened before

[Cron]

12 hours ago, braveniler58 said:

The reason I didn't like Dorne in the show: The horrible fight scene and the lack of Arianne. I was looking forward to the Queensmaker plot, but it didn't happen. The sand snakes themselves weren't too bad, but their introduction sucked. Too cheesy/C-movie quality. I actually liked the interactions between them and Bronn (bad pussy didn't bother me as much as it did the others, but it was pretty lol). I also hated how D&D decided to just write off that entire plotline by killing Areo and Doran off just like that. They could have found a way to fix it instead. I'm sure Doran and etc would have died in the books as well, but doesn't excuse D&D's terrible plot choice-making decisions.

But really, mostly it was the lack of Arianne.

Yeah, I hear you, I really wish they had included Arianne too, as well as Darkstar, Arys Oakheart and Arianne's other friends.

To this day I do not understand why they raced through the books, chopping so much out and changing so much, especially AFFC and ADWD.

[Anton Martell]

On 22 août 2016 at 0:05 AM, NutBurz said:

Honestly, I like Dorne in the series because I believe that´s not far from what´s going to happen in the books.

I stay away from spoilers including from the books, so I haven´t read the last chapter to see which direction things are blowing; but I´ve never expected Doran´s rule to last much longer, nor have I ever considered it a very "feminist" message to use a girl child as figurehead for your bid at a powerstruggle, even if such manipulation comes from the hands of women (a point I´ve seen often complained, how much more "shallow and less feminist" the Dorne plot line is in the show). Using children for political gain = not ok. Strong female characters don´t have an irrevocable "feminism approved" stamp on them, not any further from the fact that both men and women can be good and bad people all the same.

I don't think any of what was in the show will happen in the books for one main reason

 

Spoiler

Arianne and her father patched things up in the end. Ellaria is supposedly Arianne (since it's Arianne who wants revenge and not Ellaria who on the contrary wants peace). I haven't read the TWOW sample chapter but I gather they go along together pretty well, so she will not kill him. Also killing Myrcella and Trystane is just super super super moronic. Better to hold them hostage. Killing them makes no sense.

23 hours ago, Dragon in the North said:

Dorne's plotline was my least favorite in the show, but I didn't really like it any better in the books, and Doran's fire and blood speech was a big reason why. The fire and blood speech was really good and would have been impactful if his plan didn't literally go up in flames in the next book.

It's easy to say that in hindsight. But it proves Doran is developping a plan from the beginning and not just sitting on his ass (literrally). Also:

Spoiler

Quentyn died, but that doesn't mean the plot who come to fruition in some other way... I trust my man Doran!

10 hours ago, Masha said:

Cersei is definitely better in the show. She is not horribly one-sided female villain from the beginning and doesn't just suddenly looses her marbles after death of her father as in the fifth book.

In the show she is shown as a real person, who loves her children and whatever she does is for them and whatever she becomes without them is understandable. . She just doesn't go around aborting her husbands babies just because he is not Jaime. She is basically shown to become who she is. She doesn't hate Margaery for no good reason, since in the books she basically hates her "because of prophecy". It actually shows that she has pretty good reasons to do what she does in terms of Margaery and others. So if in the next season she will go crazy, it will be expected because of what happened before

That is actually what I don't like about it. The character is actually justified in its action. I can acknowledge that book Cersei is a bit caricatural at times, but she is a villain, not someone justified. It changes the whole dynamic of the show. Plus the final twist at the end with her being a complete maniac makes less sense than before. It seems out of character. 

 

Also Book Cersei loves her children, no one can deny that. 

[Dragon in the North]

26 minutes ago, Anton Martell said:

It's easy to say that in hindsight. But it proves Doran is developping a plan from the beginning and not just sitting on his ass (literrally). Also:

Doran's plan hinged on Quentyn marrying Dany. It was a weak plan that failed. Something else might happen and Doran may still get his vengeance on the Lannisters some other way, but it will be due to luck, not to his scheming. 

[Anton Martell]

17 minutes ago, Dragon in the North said:

Doran's plan hinged on Quentyn marrying Dany. It was a weak plan that failed. Something else might happen and Doran may still get his vengeance on the Lannisters some other way, but it will be due to luck, not to his scheming. 

We don't know much about his plan. Nor if he made any contingency plan. And the plan in itself wasn't stupid. Doran just did not know the shit show Meereen would be. With the elements he had, his plan is alright I think. 

[Cron]

8 minutes ago, Anton Martell said:

We don't know much about his plan. Nor if he made any contingency plan. And the plan in itself wasn't stupid. Doran just did not know the shit show Meereen would be. With the elements he had, his plan is alright I think. 

It's been about 5 years since I read the book, my memory is a little fuzzy on his plan.

What was it, just to send Quentyn to try to marry Dany and join her power to Dorne's, the end?  Or was there more to it?

[A spoon of knife and fork]

6 hours ago, Anton Martell said:

We don't know much about his plan. Nor if he made any contingency plan. And the plan in itself wasn't stupid. Doran just did not know the shit show Meereen would be. With the elements he had, his plan is alright I think. 

I'm sorry, but Doran's so-called plan for vengeance was so weak that if the SS and Ellaria were the same (evil, power hungry) characters as in the show, they would have shanked him just the same whether they knew about his plan or not.  

Quentyn brought literally nothing of use to Daenerys.  Doran might as well have sent a raven offering alliance with Dorne as his useless son with no army or ships.  He expected Dany to be some damsel in distress I suppose, desperate for any help.  It didn't have to do with Mereen being a shit show.  Quentyn failed because going with him, Dany would lose all of her own forces.  She would be giving up her own sovereignty and putting herself entirely at the mercy of a lord she didn't know anything about, and his army.  Dany had already made the choice NOT to do such a thing when she decided to get an army in SB rather than going to Illyrio.  

A Doran with a simple plan to keep Dorne out of war is a stronger and more defensible character, IMO.  Book Doran is an ineffectual schemer out for vengeance.  And he's so bad at it that his plan entirely fails, including a Coup attempt by his own daughter because he completely failed to understand the political climate of his own country - or even family.  And in the end, Book!Doran is entirely willing to kill Tommen if necessary to get his son (or before that, daughter) on the Iron Throne and complete his vengeance for Elia and her kids.  I think he'd even be willing to have Myrcella killed if it was demanded by whichever Targaryen he backs (and remember, in the beginning he backed Viserys, who definitely would have demanded a scorched earth policy on every living Lannister, Stark, and Baratheon)  

[A spoon of knife and fork]

6 hours ago, Cron said:

It's been about 5 years since I read the book, my memory is a little fuzzy on his plan.

What was it, just to send Quentyn to try to marry Dany and join her power to Dorne's, the end?  Or was there more to it?

Quentyn was supposed to convince Daenerys to come to Westeros immediately.  Doran sent Quentyn with a ten-year-old document showing there was a marriage pact between Viserys and Arianne Martell, hoping by some transitive property that it would now apply to Daenerys and Quentyn.   Furthermore, Doran only sent Quentyn (or any help whatsoever) after hearing that Dany had hatched dragons, demonstrating he only cared enough to bother about the lives of the Targaryen children when he saw they could be of use. And despite this, he didn't even give Quentyn a plan for a way to get the dragons back to Westeros...

Personally, I think that George shot himself in the foot with the Dorne plot - he didn't think through the consequences of the "Vengeance, Justice, Fire and Blood" speech (a major problem with his whole "gardening approach" IMO).  He sets us up with an idea that Doran is a mastermind and that Quentyn will be the answer to getting Dany to westeros.  But then once again, eh realizes he's not ready for Dany to come to Westeros, so Quentyn has to fail.   In order for Quentyn to fail and Dany not to be an idiot for rejecting him (which she's not, given she'd essentially be giving herself up as a hostage, INCLUDING her dragons), Doran must be an idiot.  Oh but then another Targaryen will fall into his lap and he'll support him instead.  Demonstrating he's not just an idiot but a two-faced idiot.  

[EwanStark]

Stannis leading his troops in the Battle of the Blackwater.

[Not a kneeler]

Actually, I think that making Cersei a more dimensional character made the transition to the split between her and Jaime too abrupt. In the books he was having doubts about her much sooner, so I do not think that I would name that as a strength in the show. I think the omission of the Quentyn storyline and the Faegon storyline were strengths. I loved the Hound and Arya travelogue and I liked show Brienne much more than Brienne in the books. In the show she was much more human. 

The show's decision to send Jon to Hardhome made great cinema and I think gave us some more insight into Jon's character. The addition of Ollie was interesting and the tragedy involved with that leaves me on the fence. I really don't know if he was more annoying or more tragic. The consequences for Jon were greater with his addition so I suppose his addition was a plus.

[Masha]

13 hours ago, Anton Martell said:

 

That is actually what I don't like about it. The character is actually justified in its action. I can acknowledge that book Cersei is a bit caricatural at times, but she is a villain, not someone justified. It changes the whole dynamic of the show. Plus the final twist at the end with her being a complete maniac makes less sense than before. It seems out of character.

Also Book Cersei loves her children, no one can deny that.

That's one of the good points of the show for me. Even villains in the show could be justified in their actions and other than Joffrey, Ramsey and I am guessing Euron, there were no one-dimensional evil characters on the show.

Final Twist in the end actual makes a completely perfect sense to me since basically episode or two before HS with help of Margaery and unwitten Tommen literally backed her in a corner and made it death or life decision for her with no other choices remaining. And with the death of her last child, it could be explained that she will become completely unhinged next season, unlike in AFFC where it came out of nowhere.

What doesn't make sense for me in the books is Cersei's crazy prophecy-based fixation on Margaery who is far less defined character in the books and who manipulation skills are not that as clearly shown as in the show.

 

1 hour ago, Not a kneeler said:

Actually, I think that making Cersei a more dimensional character made the transition to the split between her and Jaime too abrupt. In the books he was having doubts about her much sooner, so I do not think that I would name that as a strength in the show. I think the omission of the Quentyn storyline and the Faegon storyline were strengths. I loved the Hound and Arya travelogue and I liked show Brienne much more than Brienne in the books. In the show she was much more human.

The show's decision to send Jon to Hardhome made great cinema and I think gave us some more insight into Jon's character. The addition of Ollie was interesting and the tragedy involved with that leaves me on the fence. I really don't know if he was more annoying or more tragic. The consequences for Jon were greater with his addition so I suppose his addition was a plus.

I agree about omissions of Quentyn and Faegon storyline, in the books they seem like a bit of filler to spent time, so that that the main characters would have more time to catch up to main storyline and also to make sure that South/Western forces are just as decimated as Riverlands/Northern forces to put them all on equal standing

[A spoon of knife and fork]

2 hours ago, Not a kneeler said:

Actually, I think that making Cersei a more dimensional character made the transition to the split between her and Jaime too abrupt. In the books he was having doubts about her much sooner, so I do not think that I would name that as a strength in the show.

I think that Jaime's and Cersei's behavior make perfect sense, unless you come in with Book knowledge and expectations for who should be doing what and when.  

Cersei is veeery careful with Jaime in season 6.  In equivalent book parts (like in affc) she is constantly belittling him, calling him a fool and a weakling, yelling at him.  Meanwhile she's been sleeping around on him left and right.  And then she expected him to come running when she called.  

Because Cersei is actually, you know, kind to Jaime, and apparently repentant about what happened, he kind of has to accept her and try to rebuild their relationship - if he wants to consider himself a good person and if we are meant to.  I believe quite strongly that Book Jaime would have done the same, if Cersei had been clever enough to do this (she was not only selfish and cruel, but also consistently stupid in the book). 

I don't really believe that Cersei "loves her children" more in the show than in the books, or that she is less cruel or evil in the show.  I'm not sure where people get this, to be honest.  It was pretty clear to me that while of course she was upset about Myrcella, that she was still intending to destroy her enemies and was thinking of how to do it from Day 1.  Maybe it's just Lena's awesome acting that pulls people in and garners sympathy?  We don't see Cersei's facial expressions in the book, obviously, so we don't have that kind of connection to her, perhaps? 

2 hours ago, Not a kneeler said:

I think the omission of the Quentyn storyline and the Faegon storyline were strengths. I loved the Hound and Arya travelogue and I liked show Brienne much more than Brienne in the books. In the show she was much more human. 

That's interesting.  Some people absolutely hate show Brienne.  I like both versions.  Show Brienne is older and more world-weary, battle hardened, and confident.  Book Brienne is very naive, innocent, and insecure.  Yet both of them have the same nobility driving them, and the thirst to be accepted and prove themselves as knights.  I think that like with many characters, these changes make sense in light of the fact that many of the actors and characters are 5-10 years older.  It's like how Dany's romance with Daario was handled in the show.  It would have been really obnoxious if 20 year old Dany had acted like in the book (even though it makes sense for 14 year old Dany to act that way) 

[Cron]

6 hours ago, A spoon of knife and fork said:

Quentyn was supposed to convince Daenerys to come to Westeros immediately.  Doran sent Quentyn with a ten-year-old document showing there was a marriage pact between Viserys and Arianne Martell, hoping by some transitive property that it would now apply to Daenerys and Quentyn.   Furthermore, Doran only sent Quentyn (or any help whatsoever) after hearing that Dany had hatched dragons, demonstrating he only cared enough to bother about the lives of the Targaryen children when he saw they could be of use. And despite this, he didn't even give Quentyn a plan for a way to get the dragons back to Westeros...

Personally, I think that George shot himself in the foot with the Dorne plot - he didn't think through the consequences of the "Vengeance, Justice, Fire and Blood" speech (a major problem with his whole "gardening approach" IMO).  He sets us up with an idea that Doran is a mastermind and that Quentyn will be the answer to getting Dany to westeros.  But then once again, eh realizes he's not ready for Dany to come to Westeros, so Quentyn has to fail.   In order for Quentyn to fail and Dany not to be an idiot for rejecting him (which she's not, given she'd essentially be giving herself up as a hostage, INCLUDING her dragons), Doran must be an idiot.  Oh but then another Targaryen will fall into his lap and he'll support him instead.  Demonstrating he's not just an idiot but a two-faced idiot.  

Great stuff, thanks for the refresher, seriously, it's been 5 years since I read the books.

Regarding the Quentyn sub-plot being something of a red herring in terms of importance, well, I certainly hear you, but I guess if GRRM is going to write stuff where it's believable that anyone can die, this is part of the price we pay.  Sometimes GRRM is going to devote a lot of pages  to someone who just fizzles out.

Consider Robb Stark.  We spent a lot of pages following his story from Ned's and Cat's POVs, but in the end...dead end.  Despite the many, many pages where he appeared "on stage," and despite the fact that he rose so high that he was at one point one of only about 5 people in main contention for power, his story fizzled out, and basically went nowhere.  In fact, for a while I thought Robb's "story" would be continued through his child, but NOPE.  In the books, Jeyne and the child have been non-factors for a LONG time, and in the show it's even worse, Talisa and the child are both dead.

[MakeWesterosGreatAgain]

3 hours ago, Not a kneeler said:

Actually, I think that making Cersei a more dimensional character made the transition to the split between her and Jaime too abrupt. In the books he was having doubts about her much sooner, so I do not think that I would name that as a strength in the show. I think the omission of the Quentyn storyline and the Faegon storyline were strengths. I loved the Hound and Arya travelogue and I liked show Brienne much more than Brienne in the books. In the show she was much more human. 

The show's decision to send Jon to Hardhome made great cinema and I think gave us some more insight into Jon's character. The addition of Ollie was interesting and the tragedy involved with that leaves me on the fence. I really don't know if he was more annoying or more tragic. The consequences for Jon were greater with his addition so I suppose his addition was a plus.

I think the issues with Jaime in the show are purely with his writing. I don't think show Cersei is any more redeeming than her book counterpart, but Jaime's return to her still doesn't make sense. I WISH WISH WISH WISH WISH WISH that Bronn had dropped a "she f****d Lancel" while they were in the Riverlands.

[Ashes Of Westeros]

13 hours ago, Cron said:

Consider Robb Stark.  We spent a lot of pages following his story from Ned's and Cat's POVs, but in the end...dead end.

Robb's story is continued through Lady Stoneheart. Besides that the whole Riverland's line is strongly connected to Robb and is still not over.

On 8/23/2016 at 7:24 AM, Anton Martell said:

I can acknowledge that book Cersei is a bit caricatural at times, but she is a villain, not someone justified. It changes the whole dynamic of the show. Plus the final twist at the end with her being a complete maniac makes less sense than before. It seems out of character. 

There are few real villains in the series who aren't justified at some point: Ramsay, Joffrey, the Mountain, they do bad things and make peeople suffer just for fun. All other villains have their reasons: Tywin is cruel but he's action have their logic, the same with Roose and Walder Frey, they see Robb's losing and they know what Tywin do to their enemies, the same with Cersei. But I totally agree that her transformation into a disney-sque villain is out of character.