Adapting ASOIAF For the Screen...

[Maester Yobjascz]

I guess that part of my point regarding the pacing and whether an episode is 'boring' is that ASOIAF isn't like most television series. Most shows have a focal plot for an episode: a crime to solve, or a difficulty to overcome. ASOIAF, while based on a chapter structure, isn't episodic like that.

Shows that are centered on long storylines, like LOST, bounce in and out of time in order to tell a particular character's story... or there will be some sub-plot that can take the focus of the episode and be started, explored, and resolved, all in one hour. ASOIAF has to push this envelope a bit. Some stories, like Tyrion in the Vale, can be told in one episode: from the Sky cells, to his admissions of guilt, to his trial by combat. But that's it...

For other episodes, we'll have a more daring screenplay, one that expects a bit more of the audience... they've got to be willing to watch things develop. Besides, if we can't get the audience to be patient in AGoT, how are we possibly going to survive AFfC? Even if it's interlaced with ADwD chronologically, the first half (season 4, encompassing the first half of AFfC and ADwD) will still be slow development... likely slower paced than AGoT. There's little combat, and no battles (only ones I remember are the siege of Riverrun and the Ironborn assault on the Reach... and these take place at the end of AFfC). All we've got to work with are a bunch of people picking up the pieces.

[caldis]

No we don't. Or if we do, once again we have the worst kind of exposition - dialogue between two characters who already know everything.

In your original post you said we didn't need to know of the Kingslaying yet. How can he have the whispered title of Kingslayer if the circumstances of that aren't explained?

They dont need to be explained, as I said it adds mystique. Martin let the title drop early in the book but never explained it till much much later.

As to dialogue for expostion that probably makes this a much better place to bring in some flashbacks of what happened in the past as opposed to an unconnected sequence at the beginning with characters we havent even met and have no connection to. Several things are revealed when Ned and Robert talk in the crypts, things that the ToJ montage hinted at. That would be too many flashbacks too quickly imho and really a waste of precious time. I also believe you need the prologue with the others beyond the wall for Jon's story arc and I dont see how it fits with the ToJ montage, you cant cut to it after the montage and then cut back to Winterfell without making it feel jerky.

And I think we may be envisaging the scene differently because in my head the ToJ montage wouldn't actually give anything away. It would convey necessary information and offer enticing little snippets which will be expanded on later.

How can it not give anything away and still convey necessary information? As for it having enticing snippets, the payoffs for most of them are too far in the future to be worthwhile. They will be long forgotten by the time the events they pertain to are of importance, Jaime killing king Aerys isnt really a big deal until the second or third book.

I think Excalibur wrote an excellent piece, good job. However I dont think it really works except as a commercial. Here's a link to the post containing the montage http://asoiaf.westeros.org/index.php?showt...123&st=140#

Really read it and consider, does it relay any of the information you feel is vital to someone who doesnt know who any of these characters are? Can you really tell from it who's fighting and why? Will you recognize the characters when they flash 15 years into the future?

Do the scenes have any emotional impact without knowing who the characters are? Does the scene accomplish anything or is it just a waste of time?

[Zulofritter]

However, I will comment on this.

First, the episode breakdowns, in general, are dictated by the timing. We've got 73 chapters in AGoT, and we're apparently working on a 12 episode season. 73 divided by 12 yields 6 chapters per episode, with one left over. Thus, if we average 6 chapters per episode, and have one episode with 7, we hit our mark.

If some chapters contain more material than others, then we move things around, so that we hit roughly the same time period per episode... I've tried to do that the best I can, but it'll take a bit more fine-tuning.

I did my measurements by pages instead of chapters, but I'm probably not as reluctant to split the chapters. And you're right, it's not an exact science.

That said, I expect those who are clamoring to go all the way through Bran's fall or the assassination attempt in the first episode to try and map out the rest of the season. If you manage to get past 8 episodes before you finish all the chapters, I'll be impressed. You simply can't pack that much into the first episode, and then expect to maintain that pace all the way through... AGoT isn't that long. ASoS will manage that pace quite easily... but it's got an extra 9 chapters. If my breakdowns don't hit an hour, then the scenes will have to be expanded to make length. Longer shots, added dialogue, whatever. That, or accept a shorter season.

I did this a few pages back. However, your efforts have been much more impressive, and you've pulled out some good connecting themes that I hadn't considered. Keep it up!

As to my first episode being 'boring', you're focusing on Ned's decision as the focal point of the episode... well, that doesn't happen 'till the last scene. The episode is an introduction to the Starks of Winterfell, and Eddard in particular. There's also the wolves, and the symbolism of the wolf and stag. There's the intro to the Old Gods and the ways of the North, the godswood and the heart trees that need explanation. This all takes time, and is part of getting the audience to know and love the Starks. I'm sorry if this doesn't create the fast-paced action drama that you're expecting, but I don't think it's necessary nor proper this early in the series.

Well, the decision to become Hand is pretty important; it ends up killing him, plenty of other characters, and his family is scattered to the winds. There's some good dialogue here, and many dramas are sustained by dialogue alone. And even if you cut the prologue and Bran's fall, there's still an execution, and the commercials will probably indicate that there's more action down the line.

[Tysha]

They dont need to be explained, as I said it adds mystique. Martin let the title drop early in the book but never explained it till much much later.

When have I said anything about the game of thrones?! I'm talking about letting the audience know about the rebellion. This is information that Martin gives us before it is even mentioned that Robert is coming to visit.

As to dialogue for expostion that probably makes this a much better place to bring in some flashbacks of what happened in the past as opposed to an unconnected sequence at the beginning with characters we havent even met and have no connection to.

So you agree that flashbacks are better than dialogue to convey the exposition? Okay, but ten minutes into the episode the narrative really needs to be moving forwards, not halting or going backwards. Putting the flashbacks first and then getting on with the story is better than starting the story at a point where the audience don't have a clue what's going on and then stopping the action for a quick history lesson.

Several things are revealed when Ned and Robert talk in the crypts, things that the ToJ montage hinted at.

Indeed they are. I think this is a good thing. If we've already seen bits of what they're talking about the audience already have a slight advantage and we don't have to spoon feed them the information. We can make the dialogue between Robert and Ned ten times more natural sounding because the audience know what they're talking about.

I also believe you need the prologue with the others beyond the wall for Jon's story arc and I dont see how it fits with the ToJ montage, you cant cut to it after the montage and then cut back to Winterfell without making it feel jerky.

Hence I think it should cut from the montage to Ned and the boys riding to the execution, and then, as the boys wonder what happened to make him desert, have a close-up on Gared's eyes, quickly show the prologue, then smash cut back to the execution. Everything in relation to everything else.

How can it not give anything away and still convey necessary information?

I don't think everything Excalibur wrote should be in there - I don't think anything about Lyanna should be given away.

As for it having enticing snippets, the payoffs for most of them are too far in the future to be worthwhile. They will be long forgotten by the time the events they pertain to are of importance, Jaime killing king Aerys isnt really a big deal until the second or third book.

Again, this is why we can refine what we show in the montage. And Jaime killing Aerys is a very big deal! The audience start to feel sympathy for his actions in the middle of ACoK but his being the Kingslayer pretty much defines him right from the start.

Maester Y -

I guess that part of my point regarding the pacing and whether an episode is 'boring' is that ASOIAF isn't like most television series. Most shows have a focal plot for an episode: a crime to solve, or a difficulty to overcome. ASOIAF, while based on a chapter structure, isn't episodic like that.

No, it's not episodic in the sense of many TV shows. However, that doesn't mean we can have episodes in which nothing happens, which is what you're suggesting! All you have is set-up and introduction. Not to mention that there is no way you have an hour's worth of screen time there.

Okay, in an attempt to move things on, because this is just getting ridiculous ... the idea of a two-hour premiere was a popular one. So how about we plan for a two hour episode to start off with - we can have both Daenerys I and II in there, as well as some stuff with Jon and Tyrion at the Wall. We can not only introduce each plot strand but start to delve into them a little bit. Can everyone agree that we can fit all these pages into two hours?

[Zulofritter]

This is a very good point - but I think what you're talking about is a clever structural trick. Generally in shows like that, there will be some main set of problems the characters have which will be partly solved during the episode, providing a resolution. Then, after the episode resolution, a cliffhanger situation will suddenly show itself - but in reality it's not the end of that episode; it's the beginning of the next. That kind of cliffhanger is invariably shown again at the very start of the next episode in the "Previously on..." bit and allows it to start at full speed.

But there has to be enough drama for the cliffhanging-episode to work with or without the device for it to be acceptable IMHO. So ending with Bran's fall, you still have the problem that little has happened in the episode.

That is good to keep in mind. I don't think that it's necessary to have this series fit the conventions of most TV shows, but it is good if the audience feels like they're getting somewhere. Like I said before, I think my tolerance for delayed plots is high, but I do think that most of the HBO audience has similar patience.

I feel the story is substantial and the ending fits, and these are gut feelings that have little to do with logic. However, I like to see how other people assemble the pieces.

Anyway, after Catelyn survives the assassination attempt on Bran ( Yob) there is a kind of cliffhanger. It's "Will Catelyn reach KL in time to warn her husband about the Lannisters?"

Okay. I was stuck a little more on trying to wring a cliffhanger out of the assassination, but our stabber is too much of a goober. (Best I could do was ending the scene on a long shot of guards running to the burning tower, then a figure steps into frame and produces the knife.)

With the scene after that, I thought the overriding question was 'Who tried to kill Bran?'. And if you just saw Jamie push Bran from the window, well that's a real no-branner.

A version of the dream in Bran III where he sees shots of everyone going in different directions - his mum on a ship and his father on the Kingsroad, and Jon heading north, i.e. the seperation of his family - from his coma via clairvoyance. Then via the miracle of special FX he looks north as on page 163 of the book, zooming rapidly over the forests past the wall to the far north and seeing a pair of huge blue Other eyes staring back at him, thereby linking the end of the episode to the prologue at the beginning and defining the main threat of the whole series in a single shot. THE END.

Good scene. And it pains me to point this out, but it also destroys the suspense on whether Bran will wake up or not.

Okay, in an attempt to move things on, because this is just getting ridiculous ... the idea of a two-hour premiere was a popular one. So how about we plan for a two hour episode to start off with - we can have both Daenerys I and II in there, as well as some stuff with Jon and Tyrion at the Wall. We can not only introduce each plot strand but start to delve into them a little bit. Can everyone agree that we can fit all these pages into two hours?

We're to agree on something? What is this, the casting thread?

I can agree to the two hour premiere, but in my version this just means smashing two episodes together. So Bran is still going down at the halfway mark.

I'm very late with this comment, but...about the Mycah/Hound scene:

Insane. Imagine it: the Hound comes riding and meets Mycah. For a while they just stare at each other, then Mycah turns and runs for his life. The Hound turns his horse, waits for the boy to get some distance between them - because it's all about the hunt, right? - and then goes after him. Maybe seen from the front, the boy's POV, and then cutting the scene just as the Hound reaches him? (That way you get to keep some uncertainty on whether or not Mycah was actually killed or just captured, leaves for a bigger emotional impact when Ned meets them later.) A chilling scene if I ever saw one. And more importantly, this scene will be mirrored when he comes after Arya at the Red Wedding. The viewers will freak out! OMG, Arya is about to get murdered!

Just IMO. Now I'll quietly back out and keep my mouth shut. Keep on the good work, people - this is interesting reading!

Only if the hound cries the whole time and asks the gods for a redemption arc just after the kill. :cry:

[Zulofritter]

Then we have gotten a lot closer. I would think 10 minutes segments for each character (some shorter, some longer) would be about right. Enough time to get the feel of the character, have some dialogue, have some action, get to a crux moment and then move to the next chr.

I can think of some scenes that should only last a few seconds. Whenever a chapter has a character doing some task that takes hours (Arya's needlework), or there's a short flashback to an earlier event (Tyrion giving Mord some loot).

[Zulofritter]

I guess that part of my point regarding the pacing and whether an episode is 'boring' is that ASOIAF isn't like most television series. Most shows have a focal plot for an episode: a crime to solve, or a difficulty to overcome. ASOIAF, while based on a chapter structure, isn't episodic like that.

Shows that are centered on long storylines, like LOST, bounce in and out of time in order to tell a particular character's story... or there will be some sub-plot that can take the focus of the episode and be started, explored, and resolved, all in one hour. ASOIAF has to push this envelope a bit. Some stories, like Tyrion in the Vale, can be told in one episode: from the Sky cells, to his admissions of guilt, to his trial by combat. But that's it...

For other episodes, we'll have a more daring screenplay, one that expects a bit more of the audience... they've got to be willing to watch things develop. Besides, if we can't get the audience to be patient in AGoT, how are we possibly going to survive AFfC? Even if it's interlaced with ADwD chronologically, the first half (season 4, encompassing the first half of AFfC and ADwD) will still be slow development... likely slower paced than AGoT. There's little combat, and no battles (only ones I remember are the siege of Riverrun and the Ironborn assault on the Reach... and these take place at the end of AFfC). All we've got to work with are a bunch of people picking up the pieces.

I'm quoting this because it's a good post, but it also got me wondering what the series would look like if we used the LOST format. Each episode focuses on one character, and the only thoughts, dreams and flashbacks we get are of that character. I don't think it could be done, but there are several times where one character just seems to take over the whole story.

[Michael Jon Snow]

I can think of some scenes that should only last a few seconds. Whenever a chapter has a character doing some task that takes hours (Arya's needlework), or there's a short flashback to an earlier event (Tyrion giving Mord some loot).

Yes, the scene might only take a few seconds. But I would only do that as part of a 10 minute segment about the character. If you have a 10 second Arya clip amd then a 30 second Tyrion clip, then a 2 minute Jon clip and then a 45 second Ned clip, the show is going to feel like a Soap opera.

That would work really well. I think this is something that could really be done with locations because you could take advantage of things like pathetic fallacy. However, I think if the same thing was applied to perception of people it would be far less subtle. And if we take Joffrey as an example - if Sansa always sees him as golden and lovely, and Arya always sees him as slimy and wormy-lipped, it would be far less powerful when Sansa finally sees, after Ned's death, that Joffrey isn't the handsome prince she thought he was.

I think that that would, without dialoge, demonstrate the change in Sansa. I think it would make it all the more powerful as it would demonstrate her changed perspective.

Do you remember the "2-face" Sienfeld episode. I am not suggesting that the difference be as striking and obvious as was done for that show (a cheep sitcom) but more subtle.

[Michael Jon Snow]

Episodes in a serial drama do not need resolution. The audience needs satisfaction, not resolution. The audience needs to feel:

Entertained, not bored

Enlightened, that they understand something they didn’t before. This could be chr development, plot development, a piece of the puzzle or mystery, or a piece of the back story.

Accomplishment, one of the protagonists needs to do something.

Anticipation, they need to wonder what is going to happen next. Will Bran die? Will Cat survive the assassination attempt? How will Ned get out of the Black Cells?

[Antacid]

My definition of resolution = a conflict partly resolved, revealing a new set of conflicts to be met. This is why I think Bran's fall can't practically be an ending - we have no idea whether Bran is even alive, or what the immediate effects of his fall will be. But...

I can agree to the two hour premiere, but in my version this just means smashing two episodes together. So Bran is still going down at the halfway mark.

This is EXACTLY my model of the double-episode. OMG another two people agree on something!

[Michael Jon Snow]

Bran's fall would make the perfect ending to an episode. The audience is left wondering if he will live or die. If he dies, does Jamie get blamed for it? If he lives, how is he rescued? Does this affect Ned going to KL? Are all of the things that were resolved completely undone? Talk about a reason to come back for the next episode.

ETA: There is the resolution of Ned deciding to go to KL. This is one of the "new" conflicts.

[caldis]

When have I said anything about the game of thrones?! I'm talking about letting the audience know about the rebellion. This is information that Martin gives us before it is even mentioned that Robert is coming to visit.

We were talking about Jaime Lannister's title of Kingslayer. George Martin lets it slip in Jon I then lets it slide till Eddard and Robert talk on their ride. Which again has a beautiful scene (that will likely be a flashback) showing Ned riding into Kings Landing and finding Jaime on the throne. We see the blood and the dead body, that's enough to realize why he has the title of Kingslayer and they still dont actually show him killing Aerys, that's not for a long time.

So you agree that flashbacks are better than dialogue to convey the exposition? Okay, but ten minutes into the episode the narrative really needs to be moving forwards, not halting or going backwards. Putting the flashbacks first and then getting on with the story is better than starting the story at a point where the audience don't have a clue what's going on and then stopping the action for a quick history lesson.

But it's information we need to know and the ToJ montage doesnt let us know it. It gives hints, it shows characters fighting at different locations but it never shows who they are or why. In the story itself we learn who these characters are, we find out why these scenes are important and what meaning they had for the characters. We cant simply skip all that if you have the ToJ montage. You will have to show all these things again and viewers may connect them to the opening bit or they may miss the connections we were hoping for. Either way it seems like wasted screen time, we have to give out the information again when it comes up and show how it's relevant to the current situation. Does the initial clips of the characters really bring us anything then? I feel not ymmv.

The only way I could see doing the montage and having it make sense is to extend it to at least 15 or 20 minutes and do a complete flashback showing the rebellion starting with Rickon and Brandon's trial, Jon Arryn refusing to hand over his wards, Robert's battle on the trident, Ned marrying and going to war, lifting the siege at Storm's end and then the hint of what happened at the ToJ. This precludes the need to revisit these scenes later, when they do become relevant to current events. Leaves some big problems on how far you can expect to get in the first episode though.

Indeed they are. I think this is a good thing. If we've already seen bits of what they're talking about the audience already have a slight advantage and we don't have to spoon feed them the information. We can make the dialogue between Robert and Ned ten times more natural sounding because the audience know what they're talking about.

But they dont really. With the quick cuts of the proposed ToJ montage the audience wont know what they are talking about. All Ned says is "I looked for you on the trident" to some mysterious figures in white and then we get scene's of battle. We dont know who the figures were and what the battle was about. Same for the rest of his comments. How do we get from Ned and Robert talking about his sister back to those images? I cant see it working without another flashback. The ToJ montage is too light to impart the information you are expecting it to.

[Myrddin]

Maester Yobjascz, I really liked your general break down except for one point: having the entire last episode Dany centered.

I know there are countless opinions being thrown around here, but having the final episode centered solely on one character breaks the episode breakdowns up to this point. After going to great lengths to get viewers used to multiple "POVs" (so to speak), having the last ep = one POV would be jarring. As a viewer, I'd be expecting some sort of progress on the other POVs, even though they're already wrapped up for the season.

It's kind of like how most of us were with Feast. "Where's Jon/Tyrion/Dany?" You come expecting something that's not delivered. While there was a real reason for this in feast, not so with regulating much of Dany's story to the last episode (and excluding everyone else).

Just another opinon.

To me, the resonate way to leave this season is the chanting of "King of the North"

[Maester Yobjascz]

Myrddin - Yeah I admitted in that post that I needed to rework things... first, because the last episode can't be all Dany, all the time. Second, because I've got the King in the North scene *before* Eddard gets the chop, which doesn't work. So at some point, I'll do some re-working.

Zulo - It took me a bit of searching, but I found your episode breakdown here. Let me know if I've got the wrong one. My comments here are that you're not giving us the full description of each chapter that goes into the episode. I think it's a bit easier to pull the opening and closing scenes... trying to figure out what happens in the balance of the episode causes more problems, as I discovered when I tried laying it all out.

Moreover, because you're focused on the bookends, the internal consistency is a bit off, even though you otherwise got some nice symmetries. For example, your episode 7 begins with Tyrion V (sky cells), and closes with the first half of Tyrion VI (clansmen). If you look at what goes in the middle (assuming you run straight through, as you give no indications of any changes), you've got:

Tyrion V - (Sky cells and admission of guilt)

Eddard X - Post-injury wakeup, responsibility for Tyrion's capture

Catelyn VII - Tyrion's trial

Jon V - Jon speaks to Aemon about Sam's promotion

Tyrion VI - first half - Meeting the clansmen

The problem is that this episode bounces around too much... and there's no internal consistency of story. Eddard X could theoretically be tied in, as it includes Eddard taking responsibility for Catelyn capturing Tyrion, but is pretty attenuated. Further, the Jon scene seems completely out of place.

Finally, it's only 4.5 chapters long, but I'm assuming that you've done the length by page count, so I won't pursue this point.

I appreciate the effort you put in, Zulo, and you did a good job. However, I still think it's important to have people actually try and do an entire chapter layout of each episode. It really does get you to think about how to put these things together.

Everyone - On another note, I'm not willing to simply go with a double-length first episode just to make it easier. I doubt that HBO will take that approach, for reasons I've mentioned previously, so I'm sticking to a straight 12 1-hr episode season. That said, we do *not* need to arrive at some single conclusion. I've come up with a layout I like... and Zulo has come up with one he likes. To all the rest of you, feel free to comment and argue, but also to post your own layouts.

Bran's fall could be a good ending... I just prefer not to go that route... it's not that it's provably wrong though, so I"m not arguing with it as an ending... my only problem with it is that I don't like it as much, and I don't think it works out time-wise. If you disagree, build your own season, and show it off.

[Michael Jon Snow]

Maester Y,

You have done a great job with creating episodes that have thematic consistancy, and while I think that there needs to be some consistancy in that reguard, I don't know that "every" episode has to have that element. There could certainly be an episode or 2 each season that wrap up loose ends and prepare for the next episode without having a specific theme.

Oh and I think a better ending for season one is Ned's beheading.

[Maester Yobjascz]

MJS - I agree with you... and while I aimed for thematic consistency in the episodes, the consistency is not always the same... sometimes it's geographic, sometimes thematic, sometimes character. But I think there needs to be some theme there... subtle or otherwise.

That said, while I think it would be astonishing to see Ned's beheading as a season finale, I can't see how it would work... mostly because it lowers the importance of Dany's dragons. Also, some of the scenes can only happen after Eddard is killed... like the Sansa, Bran, and Catelyn (King in the North) scenes. I suppose it's possible to shift them to the opening of ACoK... I'll have to ponder that a bit.

[Michael Jon Snow]

Perhaps Ned's beheading is the last Westeros scene and Dany's Dragons is the actual last scene.

I would say to push those scenes back to Season 2. It fits with my desire to see the end of Season 3 be the RW. A little of Game gets bumped to season 2. A little bit of Clash gets bumped to season 3. Season 3 ends at RW. Season 4 finishes SOS & goes through Cersei offering the deal to Osney. (Leaves Sam & Co stuck in Braavos, Just before Asha’s speech at the Kingsmoot, and similar stopping points for the DWD story lines.) Season 5 resolves the rest of Feast & DWD.

This does several things.

1) Ends a season with the most dramatic plot twist in the books

2) Blends the book split back together

3) Fixes the “SOS will never fit into one season†problem

4) Allows the writers some flexibility in season ending cliff hangers

[Maester Yobjascz]

That could work... though we'd be looking at more than a 7 season series. My only problem with this, is that ending with the Red Wedding leaves little to work with in the rest of the season...

I haven't done a page count analysis of ASoS (just finished this for AGoT), but the Red Wedding is roughly halfway through ASoS... so you'd only have roughly 40 some odd chapters in the whole season. While ASoS is longer than the other books, it's not *that* much longer. Moreover, having a major twist in the *middle* of a season throws the audience for a loop, and allows some real meaty episodes to follow.

If we end with the Red Wedding, I'm concerned that, one, season three will be pretty sparse, and two, that there won't be *any* resolution to anything in that season... just a build up and climax.

Concerns aside, I like the way you're thinking... I'll have to do some more work and think about this...

[Zulofritter]

Perhaps Ned's beheading is the last Westeros scene and Dany's Dragons is the actual last scene.

I would say to push those scenes back to Season 2. It fits with my desire to see the end of Season 3 be the RW. A little of Game gets bumped to season 2. A little bit of Clash gets bumped to season 3. Season 3 ends at RW. Season 4 finishes SOS & goes through Cersei offering the deal to Osney. (Leaves Sam & Co stuck in Braavos, Just before Asha’s speech at the Kingsmoot, and similar stopping points for the DWD story lines.) Season 5 resolves the rest of Feast & DWD.

This does several things.

1) Ends a season with the most dramatic plot twist in the books

2) Blends the book split back together

3) Fixes the “SOS will never fit into one season†problem

4) Allows the writers some flexibility in season ending cliff hangers

I think that people don't like cliffhangers at the end of seasons as much as they do end of episodes. And these endings are pretty traumatic. The audience needs to see the other characters absorb it, and they might want confirmation that they actually happen. Remember, if you stick with Arya's perspective, she hears Ned die, but she doesn't see it. It would be strange to end the series on an offscreen event. You could show the execution from Sansa or even Ned's POV, but for me, Arya's view has more to it, mostly because of Yoren.

Having said that, I don't have a great problem with shifting around the series endings.

Yes, the scene might only take a few seconds. But I would only do that as part of a 10 minute segment about the character. If you have a 10 second Arya clip amd then a 30 second Tyrion clip, then a 2 minute Jon clip and then a 45 second Ned clip, the show is going to feel like a Soap opera.

That's interesting, because most shows I see allow for these small scenes. The only one I can think of that would stick to one character for several minutes at a time is Oz, which was definitely a soap opera.

[Maester Yobjascz]

To be fair, it's an interesting idea to consider ending the series (or at least an episode) with an offscreen death. If for no other reason, then it leaves the audience wondering (and likely hoping) that what's suggested (Ned's death) isn't what *actually* happened.

I don't think it's the right way to end a season... but as an episode finale, it could work quite well.

-------------------

On another note, I've done an analysis of the chapter lengths. Assuming that the approximation of 1pg/minute is accurate, and that we run off the USPB edition, the full length is roughly 675pgs. This yields 12-56 minute episodes, if divided completely evenly.

It also tells me that my original chapter breakout for episode 1 leaves me with only 35 minutes, and that's *after* adding two pages of 'Castle Black' material to the prologue and including all the expository material in the Catelyn and Bran chapters. If the assumptions are valid, then I'm adding more material to the first episode... however, I still don't like ending on Bran's fall... I think we need some sort of resolution afterwards (which is why my second episode didn't end with Bran's fall either).

I'm in the middle of revamping my lineup... I'll post it when I'm done...