Adapting ASOIAF For the Screen...

[puckthecat]

The shows we should be looking at for models are Rome, The Wire, and maybe Heroes. These shows have high production values, full season (and multiple season) plot arcs, and big casts.

The Wire and Rome both manage to put entire societies on screen - a remarkable feat that we would have to try to duplicate in our production. Heroes is less ambitious in that respect, but it has a ton of characters and multiple storylines of differing prominence.

All three of these shows follow a limited number of characters for their main "POVs," but they aren't strict about it. They use whatever characters or shots tell the story. All of them make some effort to give their episodes individual structure, but the overarching storyline takes definite preference. The Wire, for example, frequently ends episodes by choosing a minor character, having something depressing happen to them, and rolling the credits. But you can only do that when your audience is already along for the ride. You have to develop some hook for the first episode. Bran's fall would be a great way to end E1.

Dany and the Wall present a different challenge. Both of these introduce plotlines that don't come to fruition for hundreds of chapters. I see no reason why they can't be introduced at their own pace. I would conflate the Prologue and Benjen's expedition sometime around episode three or four. Ben marches out with a few men. Sometime next episode we see him and his men, far north of the wall. They are attacked, Prologue style. As happens at the end of the Prologue, we are left with them impression that everyone is dead.

Of course, this approach depends on what exactly happened to Ben's party - another place where the adaptation depends on what happens in the coming books. But I think it's pretty likely that we could show what's described above regardless of what eventually happened to Ben's party. This approach would fully introduce the Others and the threat early in the series, but would avoid introducing too much all at once.

Dany is a bigger problem. I have difficulty imagining how a weekly TV show can devote a few minutes every couple of epidodes to a slowly developing character that has no direct impact on the main plotline for seasons. Heroes has done something similar for the first 10 episodes, and it has started to wear on the audience already. 30-40 episodes like that is bad television. I would suggest introducing Dany as the "twist" at the beginning of the second season. Then you could devote big chunks of the second season to covering the ground covered in the Dany chapters of the first two books. Perhaps even a few episodes entirely devoted to Dany and her story.

The prologue with tapesty and voice over seems like a decent idea to me - a bit like Disney's Beauty and the Beast, where it worked pretty well.

[Ghlade]

I would suggest introducing Dany as the "twist" at the beginning of the second season.

The problem with that approach is that Dany gets a fair amount of attention in Westeros during GoT. Robert's assassination attempt on Dany is one of the main reasons that he and Ned have their falling out, which would be one of the key plot points of the first season. If the viewers have not seen Dany, won't they wonder what all the fuss is about?

[puckthecat]

That doesn't seem like a big problem to me. A king wanting to kill the remaining heirs of a previous dynasty isn't a tough concept.

[Tysha]

Dany and the Wall present a different challenge. Both of these introduce plotlines that don't come to fruition for hundreds of chapters. I see no reason why they can't be introduced at their own pace. I would conflate the Prologue and Benjen's expedition sometime around episode three or four. Ben marches out with a few men. Sometime next episode we see him and his men, far north of the wall. They are attacked, Prologue style. As happens at the end of the Prologue, we are left with them impression that everyone is dead.

I'd definitely be up for doing this. I was all up for cutting the prologue at first but no-one agreed with me!

The NW are a part of the first episode with Ben at the feast and Jon expressing his desire to join, we don't need to show too much of them. And I think it would be more effective anyway to show them through Jon's eyes anyway, seeing as he is the character who we are going to follow through the fight against the Others.

Dany is a bigger problem. I have difficulty imagining how a weekly TV show can devote a few minutes every couple of epidodes to a slowly developing character that has no direct impact on the main plotline for seasons. Heroes has done something similar for the first 10 episodes, and it has started to wear on the audience already. 30-40 episodes like that is bad television. I would suggest introducing Dany as the "twist" at the beginning of the second season. Then you could devote big chunks of the second season to covering the ground covered in the Dany chapters of the first two books. Perhaps even a few episodes entirely devoted to Dany and her story.

Not so sure about this. Not only because, as Ghlade says, Dany's storyline is referenced in Westeros, but because season one absolutely has to end with Dany walking into the funeral pyre with the eggs and emerging from the ashes with three baby dragons. That is such a killer ending, it has to be in there!

I haven't seen Heroes so I don't know what's going on with that, but the thing with Dany is that even though her storyline is separate, she does still have her own storyline which is interesting in its own right. From, say, episode three or four I would see no problem with not having Dany in every episode.

Arse, I have more I want to say but I have to go to work...

But quickly - does anyone other that Maester Y not want to end episode one with Bran's fall? Or can we move on from this argument now? (not that your opinion doesn't count MY, just that it looks like you're outnumbered! )

[Michael Jon Snow]

This is why I was going to step aside.

I am not convinced that the chapter structure that the books follow should be abandoned, and since you all have moved past this discussion, I am stepping to the sidelines. While I don’t think that every chapter has to be maintained exactly as it is in the books, and that perhaps some chaps could be reorganized, I just think that the multiple POV structure should be preserved as close as possible.

I think each segment should start as each chapter does, where we join a Chr in the middle of some scene. Each segment should open with only the title chr in frame and then expand to establish setting with a little action. Then the flashback sequence that brings the audience up to date with what has happened since the last segment for this POV. These flash back segments would be done in muted colors to distinguish them from “live†scenes. Flash backs to older events would be even more muted than the “current†flashbacks, with a progression so that the older the flashback, the less colored the scene. Story’s about the age of heroes might be in a sepia tone.

Like flipping through an old photo album. You have a sense of the age of the pictures based on the format of the photo.

This would allow the show to have the same flavor as the books. Readers are able to follow along with the back story being revealed over several chapters and even over several books. I think an audience would follow along too.

Remember that this production is being done at a time where 90% of people who have HBO also have TiVo and will watch the chapters over and over. And hit shows like this make the DVD of the season available just before the next season to allow viewers to “catch-upâ€.

As to the episode resolution, there are more and more shows that are getting away from that model; 24 being the biggest example out there. Sopranos, Rome (both on HBO) LOST all have very little resolution for each episode. And soap operas have been leaving plots unresolved for 20 years. Each episode needs to have satisfaction, not resolution.

And the season ending cliffhangers have been done so often, we risk being seen as a copycat rather than being seen as unique. X-Files, ST:TNG, ST:DS9 & ST:VOY used this nearly every summer. One season built up to the first half of a two episode story that wasn’t resolved until the first episode of the next season.

BTW I agree with Maester Y that Bran’s fall should be the conclusion of Episode 1.

[Maester Yobjascz]

MSJ, before you step aside, realize that none of this is set in stone... I was originally leaning towards the structure you're describing, where we follow the PoV structure more closely... there are clear advantages to doing it that way. I could also see the other side, where we have a more traditional, fluid, organization. In the end, there's no *right* answer... just a matter of preference. I'm still on the fence on this one, so there's no need to hide in the shadows... we're adults here, and more than capable of tracking two options.

Second, with the chronological 'aging' of flashbacks, I was thinking along the same lines before we went down the 'no flashbacks' path. Ideally, I'd like to stick a little closer to the books... but a lot of the character thoughts would need to be brought out one way or another. And I think a lot would depend on who's PoV it is... some characters are in their own heads a lot (like Tyrion), and might best be done with voice-over narration. Others, like Sansa, are constantly in their own dream-world... and could be done with animated 'dream' sequences, showing her fantasies as she would like reality to be. Cersei's slip into insanity might be supported in her PoV's if she constantly muttered her thoughts aloud for the audience, but under her breath... audible enough that she draws looks from those around her (and become more frequent as time passes). Eddard, haunted by history, would have lots of flashbacks to actual events, shot in film (as opposed to animation), and 'aged' to show some idea of date.

BTW I agree with Maester Y that Bran’s fall should be the conclusion of Episode 1.

??? I'm confused... I *don't* think that episode 1 should conclude with Bran's fall... I think Episode 1 should conclude with the King's arrival at Winterfell, with Bran's fall forming the core of Episode 2...

[Tysha]

While I don’t think that every chapter has to be maintained exactly as it is in the books, and that perhaps some chaps could be reorganized, I just think that the multiple POV structure should be preserved as close as possible.

I think each segment should start as each chapter does, where we join a Chr in the middle of some scene. Each segment should open with only the title chr in frame and then expand to establish setting with a little action. Then the flashback sequence that brings the audience up to date with what has happened since the last segment for this POV. These flash back segments would be done in muted colors to distinguish them from “live†scenes. Flash backs to older events would be even more muted than the “current†flashbacks, with a progression so that the older the flashback, the less colored the scene. Story’s about the age of heroes might be in a sepia tone.

I can see why you want to do this, because it's close to the structure of the books. But remember we are talking about adapting the books and adaptation, by its very nature, requires change. While the structure works brilliantly on paper, on screen I just think it would be so muddled and messy and unnecessarily confusing to do it like this. And with all the flashbacks it would also mean the story would never seem to move forwards so it would seem slow and sluggish all the time.

The POV characters in the book are just the main characters. And because they're the main characters they will naturally dominate the scenes they are in. So there's just no need to resort to devices like this which just draw attention to themselves and detract from the story. It would be a case of style over substance.

Also, there is a thread on this board called 'Which chapters do you skip?' - if we break the episodes up into chapter-like segments by character then people are going to be skipping Dany episodes left, right and centre! Which means lower ratings, which means there might not be a second season.*

As to the episode resolution, there are more and more shows that are getting away from that model; 24 being the biggest example out there. Sopranos, Rome (both on HBO) LOST all have very little resolution for each episode. And soap operas have been leaving plots unresolved for 20 years. Each episode needs to have satisfaction, not resolution.

Okay, satisfaction is probably a better way of putting it than resolution, but this is basically what I've been saying! Given the nature of the story it would be impossible for each episode to be tied up in a neat little bow but each episode still has to have a definite, logical ending and not just trail off. There has to be a reason each week for the audience to come back.

And the season ending cliffhangers have been done so often, we risk being seen as a copycat rather than being seen as unique. X-Files, ST:TNG, ST:DS9 & ST:VOY used this nearly every summer. One season built up to the first half of a two episode story that wasn’t resolved until the first episode of the next season.

Season ending cliffhangers are expected. In fact, I'm having a hard time thinking of a TV show I've seen recently whcih didn't have at least some kind of cliffhanger or teaser at the end of the season. Also, Dany and the dragons is how the book ends so we'd hardly be stretching to end the season the same way. And I'm not sure where else it could end and not be on a cliffhanger because just about every chapter ends on a cliffhanger! By the end of AGoT, Ned - the arguable hero - is dead, Arya is on the run, Sansa is being held hostage, Robb has been proclaimed King in the North, Jaime has been captured, Tyrion is on his way to King's Landing to act as Hand, Jon is about to go beyond the Wall and the entire realm has just fallen over the brink into all-out civil war. There is literally no way to end it without having some kind of cliffhanger, so why not go for that incredible image of the girl rising from the ashes with the dragons?

BTW I agree with Maester Y that Bran’s fall should be the conclusion of Episode 1.

Do you mean you agree with everyone but Maester Y that Bran's fall should end the episode or that you agree with Maester Y that it shouldn't?

*Because this is, of course, all real ...

[Maester Yobjascz]

Just a quick response... skipping chapters would only be available on DVD releases... I don't think there's any episode (barring my suggested layout for Episode 3) in which Dany is the only PoV. In most episodes, watched live, there'd be no way to 'skip' the viewing, unless it was pre-recorded on TiVo and watched later... and it would still count as being watched for rating purposes.

Of course, this is all relatively pointless argument. The core issue is how close to the structure of the books do we want to follow. An adaptation doesn't necessitate full on structural changes simply because it's an adaptation. It can, but it's not necessarily true. I agree that there are sequences that would get too slow and too muddled to do a 1:1 port. However, keeping much of the structure would make the show unique, and this is important. Moreover, I don't think it would inhibit watchability nearly as much as you suggest.

As far as season-ending cliffhangers, ending with Dany's dragons isn't a cliffhanger in the traditional sense, so I think you're arguing at cross-purposes here. The traditional, stock, cliffhanger is when you don't have resolution of some crisis at the end of the season... you're left wondering: will he die or not? (or something along those lines). With Dany, to make a traditional cliffhanger, you'd have Dany walk into the fire, you'd hear the three loud cracks, and then it would cut to black... and you'd have to wait the summer to find out what the hell happened. But that's not what we have. We've got her bloodriders walking up after the fire goes out, to find Dany amongst the ashes, with three dragons at her side. We end with resolution of the crisis, not in the middle of the crisis itself. None the ending chapters in AGoT are true cliffhangers... they're resolutions of the immediate crises, looking forward to the next era in each of the stories.

I'll just end by saying that ending with Bran's fall is a traditional, stock cliffhanger... you're in the middle of the crisis, wondering how it ends. There's a time and a place for that, but I think the series should revolve more around the characters and their development than the 'action'... the important things to me here are how the characters react, and how the group dynamics shift while trying to keep the peace, and how it all falls apart, leaving the individuals all trying to pick up the pieces. Bran's fall almost pushes things over the edge, and I'm fascinated by how the characters react... that's the cliffhanger. Everyone pulls themselves together and get set in their ways... and we know that they're all teetering on the edge. And moreover, they're all headed south together... and something is going to give. That's what holds people to the next time we see them all.

Hmmm... not nearly as short a response as I planned...

[Tysha]

skipping chapters would only be available on DVD releases... I don't think there's any episode (barring my suggested layout for Episode 3) in which Dany is the only PoV. In most episodes, watched live, there'd be no way to 'skip' the viewing, unless it was pre-recorded on TiVo and watched later... and it would still count as being watched for rating purposes.

No, I meant if they knew ahead of time that an episode was Dany (or whoever they don't like) dominated episode they wouldn't bother to watch it.

The core issue is how close to the structure of the books do we want to follow. An adaptation doesn't necessitate full on structural changes simply because it's an adaptation. It can, but it's not necessarily true. I agree that there are sequences that would get too slow and too muddled to do a 1:1 port. However, keeping much of the structure would make the show unique, and this is important. Moreover, I don't think it would inhibit watchability nearly as much as you suggest.

Unique, sure, but not in a good way! The structure of the books really isn't that unique. It's basically just multiple-narrator, third-person POV. God only knows how many books do the same thing. And just looking at my bookshelf I can even see two more which do the same 'character name as chapter heading' thing, and I'm sure I've read dozens more. In fact, one of those books was even made into a film which most definitely didn't bother with keeping the structure - and that screenplay was written by the novelist!

Because the story is spread out so far geographically, there's generally one POV for each location or, where there's more than one (eg Tyrion and Sansa at KL) they show very different sides of the same place. The structure is a useful tool in the book for telling a very big story but I really think trying to so closely recreate the book on the screen would be seriously detrimental.

The characters are key. Nothing about them or their stories is going to be lost by not dividing the story up into segments or following the book to the absolute letter. They will remain the focus - in fact, I think the focus would be even more on them if they were allowed to play out the story without being constrained by showy, unnecessary tricks.

I'll just end by saying that ending with Bran's fall is a traditional, stock cliffhanger... you're in the middle of the crisis, wondering how it ends. There's a time and a place for that, but I think the series should revolve more around the characters and their development than the 'action'...

If Bran slipped and fell that would be an action based cliffhanger. But he is pushed out of a window by a man he has just seen having sex with his twin sister. That is a character based cliffhanger with the added bonus of a bit of action.

[Maester Yobjascz]

Tysha -

I think people will watch the episodes if they like the story, and won't if they don't... just like any other show. And while there's a vocal minority that hates Dany, the same goes for any other character... if you've noticed, there's also a thread dedicated to trying to find a character that no one hates... and the best they could come up with was Balon Swann...

I think you took our designation of 'unique' a little too literally. Obviously it's not *unique*, but it's a relatively fresh approach. It's also not well suited for a film, which is a relatively short piece, and has to condense material quite a bit for length. Contrast with a TV series, which is episodic in nature. Episodic 'chapters' aren't contrary or detrimental to the format. Moreover, *because* the novels are set so far apart in time and geography, the episodic approach with PoV's helps keep the audience situated. It fixes them in a particular time and place for a spell, as opposed to constantly moving them around in time and space.

And you keep relegating some of the suggestions as 'unnecessary tricks' or 'showy'... but they don't have to be. Flashbacks *can* be done subtly and well. Voice-overs can be done unobtrusively. I'm not suggesting that every sequence has a flashback, but I don't think they should be taboo either. They are tools, and should be used when useful.

If Bran slipped and fell that would be an action based cliffhanger. But he is pushed out of a window by a man he has just seen having sex with his twin sister. That is a character based cliffhanger with the added bonus of a bit of action.

I think you're missing my point here. I was saying that ending with Bran's fall is a classic cliffhanger... revolving around action and result. Bran fell... will he survive? See next week, on AGoT! It doesn't matter if he was thrown or if he slipped. What the cliffhanger leaves you with is the question of whether he survived the fall. It doesn't become a 'character' cliffhanger because he was thrown... a character was involved either way... either 'Jaime' threw Bran (character = Jaime), or 'Bran' slipped and fell (character = Bran). What we end on, either way, is the *fall*.

By not ending there, we restore the focus to the characters... Eddard's headed south with the King and the Lannisters. Will he confront the Queen? Will someone discover what happened? Will the kettle boil over into conflict? What will the *characters* do?

[Tysha]

I'm only using Dany as an example because she's the one I don't like!

I think you took our designation of 'unique' a little too literally. Obviously it's not *unique*, but it's a relatively fresh approach. It's also not well suited for a film, which is a relatively short piece, and has to condense material quite a bit for length. Contrast with a TV series, which is episodic in nature. Episodic 'chapters' aren't contrary or detrimental to the format. Moreover, *because* the novels are set so far apart in time and geography, the episodic approach with PoV's helps keep the audience situated. It fixes them in a particular time and place for a spell, as opposed to constantly moving them around in time and space.

I think we might be getting a bit muddled here. I'm well aware the story is episodic in nature, what I'm arguing against is presenting it all as 'chapters' with title cards or music cues or whatever to signal the arrival of a new chapter. It's too ... bookish. We're talking about how to take a story that has thus far been told as a book and tell it instead via television. The 'chapter' approach is too slavish to the novel whereas I think we should embrace the medium we're trying to think about.

And you keep relegating some of the suggestions as 'unnecessary tricks' or 'showy'... but they don't have to be. Flashbacks *can* be done subtly and well. Voice-overs can be done unobtrusively. I'm not suggesting that every sequence has a flashback, but I don't think they should be taboo either. They are tools, and should be used when useful.

I'm a big advocate of well done and appropriately placed flashbacks! But what MJS suggested was:

I think each segment should start as each chapter does, where we join a Chr in the middle of some scene. Each segment should open with only the title chr in frame and then expand to establish setting with a little action. Then the flashback sequence that brings the audience up to date with what has happened since the last segment for this POV. These flash back segments would be done in muted colors to distinguish them from “live†scenes. Flash backs to older events would be even more muted than the “current†flashbacks, with a progression so that the older the flashback, the less colored the scene. Story’s about the age of heroes might be in a sepia tone.

That would pretty much require a flashback in every segment. It would mean telling the entire story in a non-linear fashion. That would be unnecessary, obtrusive, slow down the progression of the story and just generally be detrimental, IMO. That's what I'm arguing against, not the use of the occasional flashback. Though I still think voiceovers are very hard to do without sounding silly

I think you're missing my point here. I was saying that ending with Bran's fall is a classic cliffhanger... revolving around action and result. Bran fell... will he survive? See next week, on AGoT! It doesn't matter if he was thrown or if he slipped. What the cliffhanger leaves you with is the question of whether he survived the fall. It doesn't become a 'character' cliffhanger because he was thrown... a character was involved either way... either 'Jaime' threw Bran (character = Jaime), or 'Bran' slipped and fell (character = Bran). What we end on, either way, is the *fall*.

I think we're misunderstanding each other. What I'm arguing is that Bran's fall is a character driven moment. It's not just 'Oops, the kid slipped,' it's 'Damn, that guy's evil!' We've seen the tension between the Starks and the Lannisters, we've seen that there's something ominous about Jaime and Cersei and then, in the closing moments, there's the money shot. There's the pay-off for the previous hour's viewing - the twincest. Oh. My. God. And then as if that's not enough ... holy shit, he pushed the kid out the window! Yes there's action there but it's not completely action. It's character-driven action, if you like! It's character-driven and it's exciting and it's shocking. Those are all good things to end an episode with. Robert's arrival is neither exciting nor shocking.

By ending the episode with Robert's arrival it means there's not enough material to fill an hour and it means that nothing actually happens in the episode so there's no reason for anyone to come back next week. Bran's fall gives them a reason.

However, I think the majority verdict is that Bran's fall is the place to end the first episode so let's just stop now because we're just going round in circles.

[HellaGood]

Just a few thoughts.

If voiceovers were going to be used then we would have to use the PoV format, otherwise the disembodied voice talking to use would keep changing. Granted, we would be able to see the character on the screen but I don't think it would work well to sporadically change voice from scene to scene, without some very clear indication as to who our new PoV is.

The problem with this is that the episodes would become disjointed because everytime we switched PoV we would have to make a clear point as to what we're doing. Even if it was just colour and lighting, that still means that the colours, lighting and also voiceover voice keep on varying all the way though the episode which would become distracting and even a little farsical. It wouldn't be so bad if switch only happened every 20 or 30 minutes but, if we want to keep any sort of tension and interest, some of them are going to be as short as 2 or 3 minutes apart.

What I'm trying to say is that as a permanent feature, PoV and voiceovers just wouldn't work.

[PhoenixFlame]

No title cards! It's not that hard to make it clear that a segment is rooted more around a certain character. People aren't that stupid. It's great how in the books the character's thinking something totally different than what is true, but in film that does not have to be shown in voiceovers and internal dialogue. Some of the witty internal lines could easily be put into dialogue.

I really like the idea about aged flashbacks. The flashbacks should not happen to often but when they do, using duller colors can easily show it happened in the past. Or, if you wanted a more artistic approach, the colors in flashbacks could be more vibrant at critical moments. I.E, snippets of Robert's Rebellion are done with more muted colors but when he kills the Targ the image could become much more vivid. A technique similar to this was used in Millenium Actress. Most of the movie is an actress recounting her life. But only the "important parts" are in vibrant color. More unimportant parts are duller.

Dany can be worked in fairly easily, imo. Show her fleetingly at first but gradually increase how long she's in episodes (she does not have to be in every one). The main reason is to show her personal change. It can quickly be expressed that she wants her birthright back. It's not so quick to show her going from a meek girl to a resolved young woman. Her quarrels with Viserys are -great- moments to show her development. The moment she first hauls off and smacks her brother should be "Wth...YEAH!" Set up a red herring as well. The Stallion Who Mounts the World? Make it seem like she's just a sweet walking uterus for this baby of badassery who's going to go Attila the Hun on Westeros. But no! He dies stillborn and instead it's the sweet-faced teenager who's going to do things. Drogo's death should really bring home the point that she's rebuilt from the girl that first married him. And all that power and resolution of her plot arc could climax in the dragon birth. For Dany, it's quality over quantity. She needs moments that pack developmental punch over large portions of the episode.

[Michael Jon Snow]

The news of the HBO deal makes this discussion seem timely.

I hope that this gets seen by the actual producers, even if just to give them some ideas to think about.

[Maester Yobjascz]

Yeah, my wife is recommending that I track down the producers and send them links to the board here, with this thread and the casting thread in particular... Easier said than done though...

Ok... to any new readers to this thread who skipped to the most recent comment to post their brilliant ideas... *please* skim the previous pages first to get an idea of what's been discussed already, and what things we've been talking about. Thanks!

[Ned Sand]

Check out Wikipedia List of SciFi Series for a list of episode lengths and counts on several shows that are useful models or countermodels.

If you had to compare ASOIAF to a television series (past or current), what would it be? . . .

- Survivor

- LOST

- West Wing

- Sopranos

- Roots

- Days of Our Lives

- CSI

- X-Files

- House

(emphasis added)

The shows we should be looking at for models are Rome, The Wire, and maybe Heroes. These shows have high production values, full season (and multiple season) plot arcs, and big casts. . . .

As to the episode resolution, there are more and more shows that are getting away from that model; 24 being the biggest example out there. . . . And the season ending cliffhangers have been done so often, we risk being seen as a copycat rather than being seen as unique. X-Files, ST:TNG, ST:DS9 & ST:VOY used this nearly every summer.

I'd add Babylon 5 (1993) to our list. B5 had a start state and lots of prophecies foreshadowing a planned end state, but was formatted in 44-minute episodes.

We should also consider the sad history of V (1983).

Dany is a bigger problem. I have difficulty imagining how a weekly TV show can devote a few minutes every couple of epidodes to a slowly developing character that has no direct impact on the main plotline for seasons. Heroes has done something similar for the first 10 episodes, and it has started to wear on the audience already. 30-40 episodes like that is bad television. I would suggest introducing Dany as the "twist" at the beginning of the second season. Then you could devote big chunks of the second season to covering the ground covered in the Dany chapters of the first two books. Perhaps even a few episodes entirely devoted to Dany and her story.

I'm going to have to disagree on this one. If season 1 is no-Dany and season 2 is almost all-Dany, it'll seem like two different TV shows. Plus, the clips of Varys discussing sources and Robert ordering assassinations really should be shown near clips of Jorah Mormont.

AGoT - 73 chapters

ACoK - 70 chapters

ASoS - 80 chapters

AFfC - 43 chapters

A TV season is about 22 episodes (44 min screen time -- a one-hour slot), divided into two runs of 11. One could also throw in the occasional TV-movie (~90 min screen time -- a two-hour slot). Seven books would be seven seasons, which is plenty ambitious. We must fit at least one book into each season.

However, there's no law saying that the aFfC / aDwD split must be maintained. Contemporaneous material from both books could be combined. Further, the beginning of each book tends to overlap the end of the last in time, so there is freedom to blur the lines there as well.

[Maester Yobjascz]

Although there seems to be two main approaches described here, I want to preface this post by stating that we're always open to hearing new ideas... so if you've read the thread and disagree, or want to contribute, please do.

At this point, there seems to be two main approaches that we've been quibbling over.

One approach is to hold to the GRRM's PoV structure where possible. Given the chapter breakdowns, this would mean fitting anywhere from 3-4 chapters per episode, on average. According to this model, some episodes, like the first, might have more chapters (5 - from the Prologue to the King's arrival at Winterfell), while others, like the second, might have fewer (2 - only Dany I and II). Following to the PoV model would also break the episode into more discrete chunks... switching PoV's only when the chapter ends. There are variations in how this would work, how closely the chapters would be followed, and how to deal with the internal exposition (brought out in dialogue, monologue, flashback, etc.).

The other current approach is to use the novels as more of a guideline, aiming for a faster-paced and more fluid adaptation. Chapters may be intercut, scenes removed, dialogue cut, and chapters rearranged to gain more of an emotional impact. The current model may cut the Prologue sequence, and run 8 chapters from Bran I to Bran II.

Going forward, then, since the question of film/TV has been resolved (Yay!), the next issue is of approach. How would we, ideally, want the books represented? Some favor a more action-focused approach (focused on events and actions). I personally favor a more dramatic approach (focused on the characters themselves, and how they react/develop to the events around them). I think that the PoV approach is better suited to the 'Character' model, while the fluid approach is better suited the 'Action' model.

It may be that there is no consensus here (there hasn't been yet), and that we need to track both approaches. I'd prefer to work on the Character model, while I know Tysha would prefer to see the Action model in development. If this is the case, we can either split threads (and generate a second), or discuss both here and try to be civil about it. I'd prefer the latter, as cross-pollination is always a good thing.

[Tysha]

The other current approach is to use the novels as more of a guideline, aiming for a faster-paced and more fluid adaptation. Chapters may be intercut, scenes removed, dialogue cut, and chapters rearranged to gain more of an emotional impact. The current model may cut the Prologue sequence, and run 8 chapters from Bran I to Bran II.

The novels are a bit more than just a 'guideline' in this approach! But you have to remember that we are discussing - and HBO are hopefully going to produce - an adaption. You're setting yourself up for disappointment if you think the book is going to be copied and pasted on to the screen.

I'd prefer to work on the Character model, while I know Tysha would prefer to see the Action model in development.

No I wouldn't! I'd like to see a character-driven drama which was exciting to watch. That means getting some action in there. I haven't even suggested adding any action, just dramatising some of the more visually exciting scenes (e.g. my idea for a flashback to the Robellion as the prologue). I'm not suggestion that we sacrifice character development for the sake of action. I'm not trying to turn this into a Michael Bay film, I just don't want it to be boring!

[Ghlade]

How would we, ideally, want the books represented? Some favor a more action-focused approach (focused on events and actions). I personally favor a more dramatic approach (focused on the characters themselves, and how they react/develop to the events around them)I think that the PoV approach is better suited to the 'Character' model, while the fluid approach is better suited the 'Action' model.

I think it's a mistake to divide people into two camps of "character" vs. "action" on disagreement over a single scene. The books focus on both "action" in terms of what's happening as well as the internal mental state of the characters, and any good series will likewise mine both for any shining nugget of drama it can find. We haven't been arguing so much about what the focus of the series should be as how episodes ought to end. I think the most faithful approach to the spirit of the books is to rely on event based cliff-hangers. Look at how the (book) POVs are structured. Almost all of them end with the sort of "action based" cliff-hanger you don't seem to care for (at least in the case of Bran). Did Bran really die? Will Bron win the swordfight and save Tyrion's life? OMG! Ned has been arrested! Always, at the end of every chapter, Martin tries to leave you wondering what will happen next. He has admitted that these sorts of multiple cliff-hangers are artificial, but he's also compared it to a structured art form like a sonnet. When done well, it is a crowd pleasing way of keeping a reader (or viewer's) interest. It also happens to be one of Maritn's major stylistic choices. I think the script should honor that.

As for POV vs. fluid; well, that is a real source of contention. My inclination is to say we should opt for a more fluid approach. A twelve episode season of television will inevitably have a different structure than a novel with seventy-odd chapters. The medium likewise makes for a different experience. With a book, the reader can read as little or as much as they want. Martin's goal is, at least partly, to keep them reading. When you hear people praise popular fiction, it's often with the words: "I couldn't put it down!" With television, each episode is divided into one hour blocks. People's regular inertia usually keeps them on the same channel. Of course you want to maintain tension throughout the episode, but insofar as you're trying to keep the audience watching (tune in next time!), you want to create an organic structure that honors the events and characters while weaving together stories to make for a coherent, meaningful, and reasonably unified work of drama. I just don't think that's possible if you're simply packing an hour with consecutive mini-episodes.

[Maester Yobjascz]

Just to be clear... I apologize if my earlier post gave the wrong impression of the two views. My goal was not to describe the 'Action' approach as being a Michael Bay film... not at all. However, the 'Character' approach I described isn't about pasting the books in front of the camera, either. I think we pretty much all agree that there are some scenes and dialogue that need to be cut, rearranged, or otherwise manipulated to fit the medium. The dispute is over where and how. Further, my goal in describing two camps was only to try and frame the current debate.

That said, I don't think we're clear on the kind of cliff-hanger I'm generally opposed to, nor do I think that these action-based cliffhangers are nearly as prevalent as Ghlade seems to suggest. Certainly they exist, (Bran's fall, Ned's capture in the Throne Room, etc.), but the bulk of the cliffhangers revolve more around the characters themselves...the questions at the end of a chapter are less "did he survive?", and more "what're they going to do?". The difference is that one focuses on an event, and the other focuses on a decision. Thus, we've got Tyrion heading to King's Landing deciding to do justice, Daenerys deciding to send Jorah & Selmy into the sewers of Mereen, Bran and Rickon going their seperate ways after the fall of Winterfell.

That said, it's a minor distinction. As Ghlade pointed out, the more major issue is with the pacing of the program, and the maintenance of the PoV structure. While the fluid approach could result in keeping attention, the PoV structure could do the same. They say 'Absence makes the heart grow fonder'... and the PoV builds on that. I don't think it's as detrimental to keeping attention as you might think. Moreover, this is all predicated on the assumption that the series is done *well*. If it's done poorly, it doesn't matter what approach is used.