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

[Cron]

2 hours ago, Dragon in the North said:

What you're suggesting is more in line with my idea. Writing scripts for the show isn't the only responsibility of a showrunner. A showrunner is in charge of the entire television production. That's why D&D are present at each filming site. It's their job to oversee everything. I think GRRM as a creative consultant may have worked to a certain extent, but being completely faithful to the books became impossible the moment Martin wrote AFFC/ADWD. The plot simply doesn't progress enough in those books to justify a word for word adaptation. Going off another point you made, D&D don't stray from the source material because "they have gotten the idea they can tell the story better than GRRM." They stray because the requirements of the medium demand them to stray. Adaptation does mean "change" after all. 

I think we're splitting definitional hairs.

You seem to have a definition of "showrunner" which is highly specific, including no more and no less.

To me, "showrunner" means he runs the show.  Period.  He's the boss, what he says goes.

"Creative consultant" doesn't go far enough for me.  Sounds like they're just floating ideas past him, saying "Hey, what do you think?" and then doing whatever they want in the end (maybe they adapt some of his ideas, maybe they don't)

To me, "showrunner" equals "GRRM runs the show."

And all the minutiae and fine details are done by the people who are already doing them, including D&D.

By the way, I don't envision GRRM as some kind of dictator.   If it were me setting it up, there would be a collaborative effort, a group bouncing ideas around.  This group would include GRRM, D&D and probably some of the directors.  (GRRM can't write all the scripts, that's too much, and if GRRM has all that responsibility we WON'T get 10 episodes a year.  GRRM has to plot out the big picture, in outline or short version form, then others help him fill in the details, even in the script.

There are many examples of GRRM doing similar things in the books.  GRRM, in the books, OFTEN tells stories within the story.  For example, Meera tells Bran the story of the Knight of the Laughing Tree.  Okay, that's a few pages from the book, but constitutes a broad plot outline that GRRM and others then fill in the details on.  Or the story of the Blackfyre Rebellion in "The Sworn Knight."  Again, several pages of text that constitutes a broad, general outline that multiple people could then collaborate on to fill in the details , (I'm not saying KotLT or Blackfyre Rebellion should necessarily be made into actual episodes, although they could be.  What I'm saying is that these stories from GRRM's books are excellent examples of GRRM writing a few pages of story as outlines that could be expanded dramatically with the help of others.)

But in the end, what GRRM says goes, what we get on the screen is all canon-GRRM.  I believe this last part would actually be beneficial to HBO, cuz they don't have to deal with upset book fans (a category of people that I believe is steadily growing) and people claiming D&D are butchering the story.  They can just say "It's all canon-GRRM, go talk to him."

[Dragon in the North]

7 hours ago, Cron said:

I think we're splitting definitional hairs.

You seem to have a definition of "showrunner" which is highly specific, including no more and no less.

To me, "showrunner" means he runs the show.  Period.  He's the boss, what he says goes.

"Creative consultant" doesn't go far enough for me.  Sounds like they're just floating ideas past him, saying "Hey, what do you think?" and then doing whatever they want in the end (maybe they adapt some of his ideas, maybe they don't)

To me, "showrunner" equals "GRRM runs the show."

And all the minutiae and fine details are done by the people who are already doing them, including D&D.

There is only one definition of a showrunner. A showrunner is someone who has total creative control and management responsibility of a television program. You can't have it both ways. It's either Martin is in charge of everything, or he's not. I already gave my reasons why Martin being in charge would be a bad idea.

 

7 hours ago, Cron said:

By the way, I don't envision GRRM as some kind of dictator.   If it were me setting it up, there would be a collaborative effort, a group bouncing ideas around.  This group would include GRRM, D&D and probably some of the directors.  (GRRM can't write all the scripts, that's too much, and if GRRM has all that responsibility we WON'T get 10 episodes a year.  GRRM has to plot out the big picture, in outline or short version form, then others help him fill in the details, even in the script.

There are many examples of GRRM doing similar things in the books.  GRRM, in the books, OFTEN tells stories within the story.  For example, Meera tells Bran the story of the Knight of the Laughing Tree.  Okay, that's a few pages from the book, but constitutes a broad plot outline that GRRM and others then fill in the details on.  Or the story of the Blackfyre Rebellion in "The Sworn Knight."  Again, several pages of text that constitutes a broad, general outline that multiple people could then collaborate on to fill in the details , (I'm not saying KotLT or Blackfyre Rebellion should necessarily be made into actual episodes, although they could be.  What I'm saying is that these stories from GRRM's books are excellent examples of GRRM writing a few pages of story as outlines that could be expanded dramatically with the help of others.)

Again, this sounds more like Martin acting as a creative consultant, though you seem to want it so D&D can't veto Martin's ideas, even if Martin wants to include something from his books that wouldn't be a right fit for the television medium. I don't like this idea very much, because I trust D&D to handle the show, as they've been doing for 6 seasons. It's my favorite television show based off my favorite books series, but whereas the books have declined in quality with the last two books, the show continues to go strong. Just my opinion.

 

7 hours ago, Cron said:

But in the end, what GRRM says goes, what we get on the screen is all canon-GRRM.  I believe this last part would actually be beneficial to HBO, cuz they don't have to deal with upset book fans (a category of people that I believe is steadily growing) and people claiming D&D are butchering the story.  They can just say "It's all canon-GRRM, go talk to him."

HBO only cares about ratings, not the opinions of a random group of people on the internet, especially if the group is in the vocal minority. 

[Meera of Tarth]

10 minutes ago, Dragon in the North said:

There is only one definition of a showrunner. A showrunner is someone who has total creative control and management responsibility of a television program. You can't have it both ways. It's either Martin is in charge of everything, or he's not. I already gave my reasons why Martin being in charge would be a bad idea.

 

Again, this sounds more like Martin acting as a creative consultant, though you seem to want it so D&D can't veto Martin's ideas, even if Martin wants to include something from his books that wouldn't be a right fit for the television medium. I don't like this idea very much, because I trust D&D to handle the show, as they've been doing for 6 seasons. It's my favorite television show based off my favorite books series, but whereas the books have declined in quality with the last two books, the show continues to go strong. Just my opinion.

 

HBO only cares about ratings, not the opinions of a random group of people on the internet, especially if the group is in the vocal minority. 

Martin should be in charge of the writing process and showrunners do the rest. If it was done this way the last two seasins would have been better. But that is completely impossible to happen.

But actually what Cron proposed about the writing process is not what you mention but a realistic idea of how to improve the show and could be done. After all, Martin is an executive producer and there are also directors that put some of their personal view.

furthermore the show was better before when there were more writers writing the scripts. The proposal of the showrunners doing absolutely everything and not consulting the writer as well as not hiring more writers is only ok for those who enjoy less quality of an story.

[Dragon in the North]

9 minutes ago, Meera of Tarth said:

Martin should be in charge of the writing process and showrunners do the rest. If it was done this way the last two seasins would have been better. But that is completely impossible to happen.

furthermore the show was better before when there were more writers writing the scripts. The proposal of the showrunners doing absolutely everything and not consulting the writer as well as not hiring more writers is only ok for those who enjoy less quality of an story.

I disagree. Season 6 was my second favorite season, after season 4. It's the books that are suffering from a less quality story, imo, and hopefully Martin will be able to improve things with Winds of Winter.

 

12 minutes ago, Meera of Tarth said:

But actually what Cron proposed about the writing process is not what you mention but a realistic idea of how to improve the show and could be done. After all, Martin is an executive producer and there are also directors that put some of their personal view.

I'm not against Martin working with the showrunners and giving them his ideas on how to improve the show. What I am against is that Martin has full creative control and is in charge of the entire production.

[Meera of Tarth]

58 minutes ago, Dragon in the North said:

I disagree. Season 6 was my second favorite season, after season 4. It's the books that are suffering from a less quality story, imo, and hopefully Martin will be able to improve things with Winds of Winter.

 

 

I  liked some things of S6 and if I had to rate the seasons it would be the 5th in terms of liking.

I don't agree that the last two books are of less quality of others such as aCoK or even aGoT. I personally don't have them as my favourites, but I understand it's the middle of the story and there were some storylines that to some readers might have caused the impression that the whole book is worse, but it's not. Of course, everyone has their own opinion on this. However, in S6 there were multiple storylines that were actually adaptations of these two books and IMO were in general, the best of the season.: Riverrun, Mercy in the theatre, Kingsmoot, Sam's trip, Bran's growing powers; and in S5 the best scenes also included parts from these books: Kingslanding (Cersei vs Margaery, The walk of Shame), Sam and Aemon, some parts of Castle Black. I have multiple complaints towards S5 and even to certain details of what I consider to be the best storylines (for instance, Kingsmoot was fine until Euron said certain things) but these things could be corrected with different storytelling. In other words, a different approach to the creative process.

So the use of storylines from the books and its success proves that they can't have low quality. They might be boring or worse than others, but the change in quality is not as high as sometimes is constantly said. Otherwise, then the last two seasons can't be as good as it is said.

Of course, there were some inventions that worked on screen such as Hardhome (I'm not  a fan of this but I try to think of it in an objective way and I consider it to be good and worked); but the vast vajority of inventions were nonsensical and had a bad effect on the plot and the characterisation of characters.

IMHO Season 6 could have been one of the best seasons if they had had more writers (that would have been pivotal to improve the story) and  to some extent followed Martin's future Winds arc.

Quote

I'm not against Martin working with the showrunners and giving them his ideas on how to improve the show. What I am against is that Martin has full creative control and is in charge of the entire production.

I agree with the bolded. I'm not saying Martin having full creative control, as he sold his story and he has never had this kind of control in the previous seasons and IMO were remarkably better than the last ones (especially S5). I also agree that in terms of production the showrunners are exceptional in their job. I don't recall anything bad about this, in fact I think it's impressive.

But I have multiple reasons to disagree on the showrunners having been done a good job in writing, and this is linked to the fact that S6 could have been much better. These are related to the storytelling:

-Characterisation of the characters: inconsistencies in character's motivations and personalities. Examples such as Jaime, Sansa, Arya (her finales are only about sadism while she is another person during the season)...

-Very bad quality of dialogue. There are multiple examples but the main one would be the insistence in cocks jokes by Tyrion during these last two seasons, that IMO destroyed the sarcasm of the character, that had been done well in the first seasons (sometimes better than others, but much more better).

-Use of shocking moments to move the plot. "Red Wedding effect". The plot, instead of moving in a logical way, uses shocking moments that are restrained in the retina of the viewer and the majority are gratuitous and related to death with no consequences or violence, and are usually used in a disproportional way in the finales, to the point the show seems only about that:  Arya's frey Pies, Sansa's rape, lady Crane's death, Stannis arc (from the loving father to the slayer of his daughter), Jon's death to return being the same, Dany's immunity to fire 2.0, Dany killing people without a trial in S5,...

The shocking moments are like spices, use them in moderation or you'll create the opposite reaction. We all know that the show has to be sold and it requires violence and sex (I don't complain about these in the previous seasons, although I don't like certaint things) but I don't see the point in exagerating it, or worse, making it the normal thing (don't use rape in a main character if you are only going to focus in her consequences only a few episodes).

-Inconsistency in the invented plot.

-etc

I believe that a fluid communication with the writer and a great variety of writers (maybe hiring a couple more) would avoid some of these aspects, because sometimes it seems that they have not re-read what they have written. More minds would have probably noticed this; and of course, writers need to be critical with oneselves and it would be easier if there were more and different people in charge.

[Dragon in the North]

14 hours ago, Meera of Tarth said:

I don't agree that the last two books are of less quality of others such as aCoK or even aGoT. I personally don't have them as my favourites, but I understand it's the middle of the story and there were some storylines that to some readers might have caused the impression that the whole book is worse, but it's not. Of course, everyone has their own opinion on this. However, in S6 there were multiple storylines that were actually adaptations of these two books and IMO were in general, the best of the season.: Riverrun, Mercy in the theatre, Kingsmoot, Sam's trip, Bran's growing powers; and in S5 the best scenes also included parts from these books: Kingslanding (Cersei vs Margaery, The walk of Shame), Sam and Aemon, some parts of Castle Black. I have multiple complaints towards S5 and even to certain details of what I consider to be the best storylines (for instance, Kingsmoot was fine until Euron said certain things) but these things could be corrected with different storytelling. In other words, a different approach to the creative process.

I guess you and I like different things, then. For me, the best part of season 5 was easily Stannis's arc, followed by Jon's, and then Cersei's. While certain elements were taken from the books, much of the storylines consisted of original material. For season 6, they didn't adapt much from the books. Riverrun, of course, was the main one, which I thought was brilliant in the show, and was one of the few storylines from AFFC that I actually enjoyed. The Kingsmoot and Tower of Joy were two other scenes adapted from the books, but these didn't have as much of an impact on me, and I certainly don't consider them the best of the season. For me, the best of season 6 was Balon and Yara's argument, Cersei's "trial," Battle of the Bastards, Hold the Door, the Hound's return, King in the North, Dany's departure, etc. None of these scenes came from the books, at least not yet. 

 

14 hours ago, Meera of Tarth said:

-Characterisation of the characters: inconsistencies in character's motivations and personalities. Examples such as Jaime, Sansa, Arya (her finales are only about sadism while she is another person during the season)...

Arya's finales in the last two seasons are about revenge, which is a big part of her identity. It's a good way to end a season where a cult's been attempting to brainwash her into forgetting who she is.

 

14 hours ago, Meera of Tarth said:

-Very bad quality of dialogue. There are multiple examples but the main one would be the insistence in cocks jokes by Tyrion during these last two seasons, that IMO destroyed the sarcasm of the character, that had been done well in the first seasons (sometimes better than others, but much more better).

I do believe that having Martin as a creative consultant will help the writing for Tyrion's character the most. He's had his moments in the last two seasons, but he's a shell of the character he was during the first four. I agree that sometimes the dialogue is bad, but from what I've seen, every show has moments of bad dialogue. I don't really care all that much so long that the rest of the dialogue is good enough to wash out the bad, and, to me, GOT definitely accomplishes that. Tyrion's cock jokes in season 6, of which I believe there were two, are such a small blip in the grand scheme of things that they hardly matter to me at all. I mean, I probably would have completely forgotten about "bad pussy" by now if people would stop bringing it up every five seconds.

 

14 hours ago, Meera of Tarth said:

-Use of shocking moments to move the plot. "Red Wedding effect". The plot, instead of moving in a logical way, uses shocking moments that are restrained in the retina of the viewer and the majority are gratuitous and related to death with no consequences or violence, and are usually used in a disproportional way in the finales, to the point the show seems only about that:  Arya's frey Pies, Sansa's rape, lady Crane's death, Stannis arc (from the loving father to the slayer of his daughter), Jon's death to return being the same, Dany's immunity to fire 2.0, Dany killing people without a trial in S5,...

The shocking moments are like spices, use them in moderation or you'll create the opposite reaction. We all know that the show has to be sold and it requires violence and sex (I don't complain about these in the previous seasons, although I don't like certaint things) but I don't see the point in exagerating it, or worse, making it the normal thing (don't use rape in a main character if you are only going to focus in her consequences only a few episodes).

If I recall, this isn't the first conversation you and I have had about the shock factor in GOT. To me, as long as the moment is built up to and/or foreshadowed beforehand, I don't consider it shock factor, Scenes like Sansa's rape, Dany being immune to fire and Shireen's burning weren't shocking to me, because the show slowly built up to moment throughout the season. Arya's frey pies was more fan service than shocking, and Lady Crane is a minor character, so I wasn't too surprised she was killed. 

 

14 hours ago, Meera of Tarth said:

I believe that a fluid communication with the writer and a great variety of writers (maybe hiring a couple more) would avoid some of these aspects, because sometimes it seems that they have not re-read what they have written. More minds would have probably noticed this; and of course, writers need to be critical with oneselves and it would be easier if there were more and different people in charge.

Maybe more writers would help the show. If nothing else, it would ease D&D's burden. I just don't think it's too critical. GOT is my favorite show currently on television and continues to maintain high quality.

[Cron]

On 10/24/2016 at 10:46 AM, Dragon in the North said:

There is only one definition of a showrunner. A showrunner is someone who has total creative control and management responsibility of a television program. You can't have it both ways. It's either Martin is in charge of everything, or he's not. I already gave my reasons why Martin being in charge would be a bad idea.

i respectfully disagree that there is only one definition of a showrunner.  It is off the charts unlikely to me that every "showrunner" for every show on t.v. which has a "showrunner" does exactly the same things as every other showrunner, no more and no less.

Indeed, please flip open a dictionary, and I predict you will quickly see that VERY few words in general have only one definition (in fact, it's common for a single word to have many definitions)

And I don't WANT to have it both ways.  I want GRRM in charge, cuz I trust him to tell this story better than anyone else.  Should he listen to other voices and ideas?  YES, sure, that's smart.  But in the end, I'll take GRRM's storyline decisions, and I'll take my chances.

On 10/24/2016 at 10:46 AM, Dragon in the North said:

 

Again, this sounds more like Martin acting as a creative consultant, though you seem to want it so D&D can't veto Martin's ideas, even if Martin wants to include something from his books that wouldn't be a right fit for the television medium. I don't like this idea very much, because I trust D&D to handle the show, as they've been doing for 6 seasons. It's my favorite television show based off my favorite books series, but whereas the books have declined in quality with the last two books, the show continues to go strong. Just my opinion.

I trust GRRM more than I trust anyone else, including D&D.  Period.

The show is my favorite show, too, but I still like the books better.

Just different opinions, I suppose.

Maybe there's some middle ground we can agree on.  Maybe they should have a tri-archy of showrunners.  HARR!!!  Let's say D&D and GRRM are all co-equal on the story, and 2 votes out of 3 wins (not that they would be voting on stuff every day, just on big plot/storyline issues, the "big picture" direction of the product)

On 10/24/2016 at 10:46 AM, Dragon in the North said:

 

HBO only cares about ratings, not the opinions of a random group of people on the internet, especially if the group is in the vocal minority. 

Uh, the opinions of people are what translate into ratings.  How can HBO care about one and not the other?

And, are you saying you consider book readers a "random group of people"??  If so:  Hardly.   This "random" group of people is what made the show popular in the first place, in fact they made it possible for the show to be MADE in the first place (by buying books and making the books NY Times bestsellers, thus raising the profile of the series and making iet far more likely the show would be made), and even though I'm sure there are a lot of people who watch the show but never read the books, I've got to believe that book readers are still the core fan base (even if they only started reading the books after seeing some of the show first)

[Larger than Average Finger]

On 10/24/2016 at 7:54 AM, Meera of Tarth said:

Martin should be in charge of the writing process and showrunners do the rest. If it was done this way the last two seasins would have been better. But that is completely impossible to happen.

But actually what Cron proposed about the writing process is not what you mention but a realistic idea of how to improve the show and could be done. After all, Martin is an executive producer and there are also directors that put some of their personal view.

furthermore the show was better before when there were more writers writing the scripts. The proposal of the showrunners doing absolutely everything and not consulting the writer as well as not hiring more writers is only ok for those who enjoy less quality of an story.

If we were waiting for Martin to progress the show, we would be mid season 3 right now.

[Meera of Tarth]

37 minutes ago, Larger than Average Finger said:

If we were waiting for Martin to progress the show, we would be mid season 3 right now.

Consulting the writer to reveal more plot points should not be that difficult. That was my point.

[JonSnow4President]

1 hour ago, Meera of Tarth said:

Consulting the writer to reveal more plot points should not be that difficult. That was my point.

I think the real failing in D&D is how they connect the plot points, not necessarily the plot points they come up with.  I don't think Martin's involvement at that high a level would fix anything.  

[Meera of Tarth]

38 minutes ago, JonSnow4President said:

I think the real failing in D&D is how they connect the plot points, not necessarily the plot points they come up with.  I don't think Martin's involvement at that high a level would fix anything.  

I think it might fix some things. However I listed the different aspects the show lacks of and I really think it could improve with different writers who would also notice some failures (if they had the power to be critical of course).

[Farerb]

14 hours ago, JonSnow4President said:

I think the real failing in D&D is how they connect the plot points, not necessarily the plot points they come up with.  I don't think Martin's involvement at that high a level would fix anything.  

Yeah, it feels like every plot point happens with no context.

I agree that Martin's involvement can't fix anything at this point, with the exception of dialogues.

[Dragon in the North]

On October 25, 2016 at 2:37 PM, Cron said:

And I don't WANT to have it both ways.  I want GRRM in charge, cuz I trust him to tell this story better than anyone else.  Should he listen to other voices and ideas?  YES, sure, that's smart.  But in the end, I'll take GRRM's storyline decisions, and I'll take my chances.

I trust GRRM more than I trust anyone else, including D&D.  Period.

The show is my favorite show, too, but I still like the books better.

 My main concern would be the difference between the mediums. When adapting a book to screen, one must know what to leave out and what to leave in. Martin would probably have a problem with cutting his material to fit it into a tv format. Your opinion on AFFC/ADWD may be different, but I feel that those two books should have been heavily edited. 

 

On October 25, 2016 at 2:37 PM, Cron said:

Uh, the opinions of people are what translate into ratings.  How can HBO care about one and not the other?

People, on this board especially, criticize the show on a regular basis, and yet their negative opinions haven't made a dent in the show's ratings. In fact, the ratings have been stronger than ever.

 

On October 25, 2016 at 2:37 PM, Cron said:

And, are you saying you consider book readers a "random group of people"??  If so:  Hardly.   This "random" group of people is what made the show popular in the first place, in fact they made it possible for the show to be MADE in the first place (by buying books and making the books NY Times bestsellers, thus raising the profile of the series and making iet far more likely the show would be made), and even though I'm sure there are a lot of people who watch the show but never read the books, I've got to believe that book readers are still the core fan base (even if they only started reading the books after seeing some of the show first)

But it's not book readers in general, it's a very small group of book readers. Their opinions don't reflect the opinions of all the book readers who watch the show. 

[Cron]

29 minutes ago, Dragon in the North said:

 My main concern would be the difference between the mediums. When adapting a book to screen, one must know what to leave out and what to leave in. Martin would probably have a problem with cutting his material to fit it into a tv format. Your opinion on AFFC/ADWD may be different, but I feel that those two books should have been heavily edited. 

I understand that different people have different tastes.  I think a lot of people (not necessarily you, cuz I don't know your view on this) didn't like AFFC and ADWD as much as the first three books for two major reasons.  

(1)  The first three books are a trilogy that culminates in ASOS in many highly climactic ways. After that, AFFC and ADWD go back to setting things up (which seems like a letdown compared to the action of ASOS) for TWOW, which will be another climactic "third act" or third book of a trilogy.  To me, ASOS is my favorite book, but AFFC and ADWD were just as good as AGOT and ACOK.

(2)  In books 4 and 5, GRRM drifted away somewhat from the main characters that made his first three books so popular.  The first time I read AFFC and ADWD, I was anxious for the story to return to the characters I knew and loved so much, anxious to find out what happens to THEM.   But when I read books 4 and 5 a second time, I was more relaxed about that (cuz I already knew what happens to the main characters), and thus I was able to relax and enjoy the ride with new characters, and/or secondary characters who gor more "stage time."

It's personal tastes, and personal views. I think some people are so heavily invested in Starks and Lannisters that they really don't care about Arianne Martell, or Quentyn Martell, or Darkstar, or Brienne, or Hotah, or Griff, or Young Griff, but I DID.  I enjoyed reading about them, and if I had been in charge of the show I would have followed the books much more closely. 

29 minutes ago, Dragon in the North said:

 

People, on this board especially, criticize the show on a regular basis, and yet their negative opinions haven't made a dent in the show's ratings. In fact, the ratings have been stronger than ever.

You're right that the ratings are strong, and I'm very glad that's true.  As I've said, the show is my favorite show (thus, I'm NOT rooting against it, and there ARE a lot of great things I love), but the books are some of the best books I've ever read (and believe me, I've read a LOT of books), and the books are still better than the show to me.

I hear what you're saying, but I believe book readers still form the core fan base (including book readers who read before they watched, AND people who first watched and then read the books), and I do believe D&D damage the product when they veer too far from the source material. (There are many examples, but the most extreme might be shoehorning Sansa, a major character, into the storyline of Jeyne Poole, a very minor character.  Many people were appalled by this and some people stopped watching altogether b/c of it.)

And believe me, it's not just book readers who are starting to notice that some things just really don't make very much sense.  You don't have to be a book reader to know that Jon's survival of the Battle of Bastards was off the charts improbable.  "Luck"?  How about "miracle after miracle after miracle after miracle"??  Or Arya surviving those stab wounds, then running through the streets and beating the Waif in combat (with or without candlelight)??  Wow.  I am still hoping we are going to learn Lady Crane had magic, cuz if not, there is just NO WAY Arya could have done those things, even in the Westeros "universe." (Someone on these boards recently ran down a list of people who had died in Westeros from gut wounds or similar injuries, and it was actually pretty extensive.  Not Arya, though.  She was fine. She not only survived it, she had a foot race through the streets, fought and defeated the Waif, then strolled into the House of Black and White, confronted Jaqen bold as you please with her sword pointed right at him then defied him again, and strolled out just fine as though nothing had happened and as if she never had any injuries at all.   Again, wow.)

But hey, I'm not a show basher.  Best show ever.  But not better than the books, and as long as I hold that view, it will continue to be my opinion that the show would be better left in the hands of the guy who created it all, GRRM.  (Indeed, I've often wondered why it is that, if D&D think they can tell stories like this better than GRRM, why don't THEY just create their OWN universes in their own books.   Then they can have 5, soon to be 6, NY Times bestsellers (just like GRRM), make around $25 million/year (just like GRRM), and have their stories made into one of the most popular t.v. shows out there (just like GRRM), and then they could show GRRM and all of us how it's REALLY done. 

 

29 minutes ago, Dragon in the North said:

 

But it's not book readers in general, it's a very small group of book readers. Their opinions don't reflect the opinions of all the book readers who watch the show. 

There's a VERY wide spectrum of views on these issues, that's true.

And the ratings are strong, you're right.

But I believe the grumbling is getting louder, and it's not just a tiny percentage of book readers.

Take me, for example. I love the show, strongly support it, and will continue to watch it as long as I reasonably can...but I still recognize that they have blundered on the show more than once, I still prefer the books to the show overall, and I think that's very unlikely to change.

[John Doe]

The fact that Arya meets Tywin instead of Roose.

[kg1982]

On 10/24/2016 at 10:53 AM, Meera of Tarth said:

-Use of shocking moments to move the plot. "Red Wedding effect". The plot, instead of moving in a logical way, uses shocking moments that are restrained in the retina of the viewer and the majority are gratuitous and related to death with no consequences or violence, and are usually used in a disproportional way in the finales, to the point the show seems only about that:  Arya's frey Pies, Sansa's rape, lady Crane's death, Stannis arc (from the loving father to the slayer of his daughter), Jon's death to return being the same, Dany's immunity to fire 2.0, Dany killing people without a trial in S5,...

The shocking moments are like spices, use them in moderation or you'll create the opposite reaction. We all know that the show has to be sold and it requires violence and sex (I don't complain about these in the previous seasons, although I don't like certaint things) but I don't see the point in exagerating it, or worse, making it the normal thing (don't use rape in a main character if you are only going to focus in her consequences only a few episodes).

You do know that some of the things are in the books itself - Ramsay rapes Fake Arya rather than Sansa and in a more brutal manner and Jon is going to come back from the dead, we are supposed to be concerned about Dany's motives, and Stannis is going to burn Shireen.  I do agree that some things could have been better like Arya's arc and Jon's resurrection, but don't complain about shocking moments that are in the books.  

Spoiler

Of course if Season 7 is as bad and stupid as the leaks suggest all bets are off and I won't be defending the show.

 

[John Doe]

Stannis is not going to burn Shireen. 

[Meera of Tarth]

6 hours ago, kg1982 said:

You do know that some of the things are in the books itself - Ramsay rapes Fake Arya rather than Sansa and in a more brutal manner and Jon is going to come back from the dead, we are supposed to be concerned about Dany's motives, and Stannis is going to burn Shireen.  I do agree that some things could have been better like Arya's arc and Jon's resurrection, but don't complain about shocking moments that are in the books.  

  Hide contents

Of course if Season 7 is as bad and stupid as the leaks suggest all bets are off and I won't be defending the show.

 

I think you didn't get my point about the use of shocking moments in the show.

I don't agree the book is more brutal in the books in terms of the rape. At most, it would be the same, except for the fact that we don't actually read it, only the consequences. In the show, conversely, we have to listen to it. As for the immediate consequences, both Jeyne and Sansa are incredibly traumatised, and we know how much he injured and brutally treated her, just like it is implied in the books by Jeyne's depression. And the show did it well first with this aspect, but as soon as she arrives at Winterfell she forgets about anything and becomes suddenly "empowered". I don't think it will happen this way in the books. But because of the fact Sansa was a major character and her plot was another than the one she had in Season 5, they had to forget about that too early. The consequences are not fully explored.

As for Stannis, we don't know how will happen, but I highly doubt we have 3 consecutive shocking scenes this way: Stannis being the best father in the world, Stannis burning Shireen because 2 inches of snow prevent him to fight 20 good men, and thus becoming evil, and Brienne executing him in the middle of all of that when she has not been able to plan how to save Sansa first and because bad men have to die.

As for Danny, I don't know what you are referring to because I'm talking to what happened in S5 in Meereen, and yes, I understand she is angry because of Barraistan's death (I was too) but it is inconsistent with her previous message when she kills Mossador (not my biggest shocking moment that I am concerned though).

And Jon, we don't know anything about Jon Snow yet.

I highly suspect that Arya is not going to become a sadist, just a silent assassin when it is needed in revenge as she is now until she feels it has to stop (Arya in the show is consistent except in the finales when she feels the need to use daggers and sadist playful games because shocking moments are needed!).

We won't have the shocking Dorne, as well.

Anyway, my main concern with the shocking moment is that they are used as a key plot element, to move the plot. It should be the characters and not shocking actions (like deaths or violence without logical consistencies) that move it.

[kg1982]

6 minutes ago, Meera of Tarth said:

I think you didn't get my point about the use of shocking moments in the show.

I don't agree the book is more brutal in the books in terms of the rape. At most, it would be the same, except for the fact that we don't actually read it, only the consequences. In the show, conversely, we have to listen to it. As for the immediate consequences, both Jeyne and Sansa are incredibly traumatised, and we know how much he injured and brutally treated her, just like it is implied in the books by Jeyne's depression. And the show did it well first with this aspect, but as soon as she arrives at Winterfell she forgets about anything and becomes suddenly "empowered". I don't think it will happen this way in the books. But because of the fact Sansa was a major character and her plot was another than the one she had in Season 5, they had to forget about that too early. The consequences are not fully explored.

As for Stannis, we don't know how will happen, but I highly doubt we have 3 consecutive shocking scenes this way: Stannis being the best father in the world, Stannis burning Shireen because 2 inches of snow prevent him to fight 20 good men, and thus becoming evil, and Brienne executing him in the middle of all of that when she has not been able to plan how to save Sansa first and because bad men have to die.

As for Danny, I don't know what you are referring to because I'm talking to what happened in S5 in Meereen, and yes, I understand she is angry because of Barraistan's death (I was too) but it is inconsistent with her previous message when she kills Mossador (not my biggest shocking moment that I am concerned though).

And Jon, we don't know anything about Jon Snow yet.

I highly suspect that Arya is not going to become a sadist, just a silent assassin when it is needed in revenge as she is now until she feels it has to stop (Arya in the show is consistent except in the finales when she feels the need to use daggers and sadist playful games because shocking moments are needed!).

We won't have the shocking Dorne, as well.

Anyway, my main concern with the shocking moment is that they are used as a key plot element, to move the plot. It should be the characters and not shocking actions (like deaths or violence without logical consistencies) that move it.

1.  Ramsay has Theon "prepare" Jeyne for him using his mouth.  It is way worse than the Sansa rape scene in the show.  And yes, the show did have to show us the rape scene regardless of who it was (Jeyne or Sansa.)

2.  Brienne was definitely fan service but Stannis burning Shireen is in the books per the showrunners.  

3.  Dany's misrule of Meereen is even more documented in the books.  She is also a mean girl witch to Quentyn.  

4.  We know that Jon is coming back.  

5.  Arya kills a man who was part of the Night's Watch for desertion in AFFC.  Girl is on a dark path.  

6.  Dorne is just bad in general in both the books and show.

[Meera of Tarth]

20 minutes ago, kg1982 said:

1.  Ramsay has Theon "prepare" Jeyne for him using his mouth.  It is way worse than the Sansa rape scene in the show.  And yes, the show did have to show us the rape scene regardless of who it was (Jeyne or Sansa.)

2.  Brienne was definitely fan service but Stannis burning Shireen is in the books per the showrunners.  

3.  Dany's misrule of Meereen is even more documented in the books.  She is also a mean girl witch to Quentyn.  

4.  We know that Jon is coming back.  

5.  Arya kills a man who was part of the Night's Watch for desertion in AFFC.  Girl is on a dark path.  

6.  Dorne is just bad in general in both the books and show.

The rape is bad in both mediums. But more shocking and gratuitous in the show.

Theon being obligued to prepare Jeyne is rape and trauma for both characters, but as I said: in the books we didn't see how he brutally fucks her, but the show decided to show it. The screams were horrible. Because a rapist fucking someone is brutal, painful, and can even kill her or injure her a lot. If that is not shocking and gratuitous for you, I don't know what it is.

And the consequences of the books to the character of Jeyne I highly doubt will be finished.

-We don't know how Stannis (if he does it and the author doesn't change it) will do it. It won't be as shocking as it is in the show. Or do you think that the scene before that when he changes his personality and becomes a loving father was not meant to see the burning scene as more shocking? Do you think we will have that scene with the hug in the books just before? I bet no. I don't understand why you don't understand my previous sentence.

-Yes, we know Jon is coming back, and we also know what happens to people who comes back: LSH: consequences. But hey, we don't even know for certain if Jon is dead, but if he is, I bet he'll be changed in some way.

Quote

5.  Arya kills a man who was part of the Night's Watch for desertion in AFFC.  Girl is on a dark path.  

Oh yes, she does. Did I say the contrary? Do you read the content of my posts, actually? It's not who she kills in the show or in the books but HOW she does it, and especially WHEN. Key words: silent assassin vs sadist in the finales-

As for the dark path, she is not in as darker path as other characters who are men or older. I don't particularly enjoy it, but she will develop in both mediums.