Adapting ASOIAF For the Screen...

[Maester Yobjascz]

Zulo: the concern you seem to have is with the placement of the Prologue sequence... and not with the ToJ insertion... is that right? Because the shift to Gared would confuse people. I think that Excal's suggestion of the long fade to signify a PoV shift would likely work in most cases. However, the concern that the flashback would be taken to mean that Eddard is hearing the story from Gared is a reasonable one... and if this holds up, then we think that Eddard is ignoring the threat to the north and executing the man regardless.

That said, I dont' know if that's a bad thing. First, Eddard did hear something from Gared... because we know he tells Catelyn that the man was beyond reach with fear... and that he basically babbled and talked nonsense. Moreover, we know that Eddard doesn't believe any of the stories of Others and wights, considering them no more than fairy tales. What would work, I think, is to emphasize this... have Eddard comment to Jory afterwards that the man was talking nonsense... coupled with his comments to Bran and Catelyn, it should show the audience that Eddard didn't believe what Gared said...

Another option would be to have Gared talking as it fades back to the Eddard PoV... telling Eddard about walking dead and all manner of (accurate) outlandish tales. We'd catch the tail end of the story as it faded back to present time... just enough to grasp that the story as Eddard hears it sounds ridiculous. Coupled with his comment to Bran that Oathbreakers are dangerous because they have nothing to lose, and I don't think that Eddard loses sympathy... in fact, I think he'd gain some pity points... he's doing what's right, even though the audience knows he's wrong...

The current model we're looking at calls for ~22 episodes... which allows ending the first episode with the King's arrival and the crypt sequence... which I think works great. However, if we're limited to only 12 episodes... then things get a bit more convoluted, as we've got to start cramming more chapters into each hour, roughly doubling the content. If that's the case, we might want to consider a significant jump at that point, leaving Eddard on the horns of the decision to accept the handship, and leave for Pentos and Daenerys I and II... that brings us to 6 chapters for the episode, a number that brings us to 72 of the magic 73 chapters in AGoT over 12 episodes.

For the time being, I'd plan on 22 episodes... then, if we're still interested, it's easier to decide what material to cut in order to bring the episode chapter down, rather than figure out what and how to add...

That said, it's looking pretty darned good at this point.

[Tysha]

For the time being, I'd plan on 22 episodes... then, if we're still interested, it's easier to decide what material to cut in order to bring the episode chapter down, rather than figure out what and how to add...

If the entirety of Lord of the Rings can be filmed in nine hours then I think the entirety of A Game of Thrones can be done in 12 hours! And with those extra three hours to play with, there wouldn't even have to be that many cuts!

A 22 episode season on HBO is unlikely anyway. I reckon it's more likely to be 12.

On Gared ... I don't think it's necessary to imply that Gared is telling anyone what happened when we see him remember it. If it goes from a really tight close-up of Gared's eyes to the woods, it will be obvious we are going into his memory. And especially if he is shown with his head on the block before the close-up, I don't think anyone will assume the execution was delayed for him to tell a story.

[Maester Yobjascz]

If the entirety of Lord of the Rings can be filmed in nine hours then I think the entirety of A Game of Thrones can be done in 12 hours!

Tysha... I wasn't suggesting that it *couldn't* be done... rather that we try to peel it back in stages. First design around 22 episodes... get something that works. And then cull further to bring it down to 12. Going straight to 12 is going to cause *lots* of arguments, because there's a lot that would need to be cut.

[Zulofritter]

Zulo: the concern you seem to have is with the placement of the Prologue sequence... and not with the ToJ insertion... is that right?

That's right. As a flashback, you could go hog wild. At the beginning of the first episode, the audience will assume that it's gospel (and might feel misled if, say, a screaming baby is omitted).

I think that Excal's suggestion of the long fade to signify a PoV shift would likely work in most cases.

Maybe when shifting to Pentos or The Wall, but this could be annoying when most of the POV characters are in Winterfell, or in a battle at Kings Landing.

The current model we're looking at calls for ~22 episodes... which allows ending the first episode with the King's arrival and the crypt sequence... which I think works great. However, if we're limited to only 12 episodes... then things get a bit more convoluted, as we've got to start cramming more chapters into each hour, roughly doubling the content. If that's the case, we might want to consider a significant jump at that point, leaving Eddard on the horns of the decision to accept the handship, and leave for Pentos and Daenerys I and II... that brings us to 6 chapters for the episode, a number that brings us to 72 of the magic 73 chapters in AGoT over 12 episodes.

For the time being, I'd plan on 22 episodes... then, if we're still interested, it's easier to decide what material to cut in order to bring the episode chapter down, rather than figure out what and how to add...

That said, it's looking pretty darned good at this point.

From what I've read on http://www.georgerrmartin.com/news.html each season will get about 12 hours. I'd gladly take 22 hours, but since I heard the news I'm more interested in predicting what the final product will look like.

BTW, good call ending ep. 3 with Bran waking up. I'd include the dream sequence just before it, it makes the ending so much sadder.

[Tysha]

Tysha... I wasn't suggesting that it *couldn't* be done... rather that we try to peel it back in stages. First design around 22 episodes... get something that works. And then cull further to bring it down to 12. Going straight to 12 is going to cause *lots* of arguments, because there's a lot that would need to be cut.

But that's just it ... there isn't a lot that's going to have to be cut! 12 hours is ample time to do a faithful adaptation. If anything I think 22 hours would be too long. It'd all have to be dragged out slowly ... the first episode might even have to end with Robert's arrival

Besides, expecting a 22 episode season on HBO is just setting yourself up for disappointment.

[SergioCQH]

There won't be any cuts made for lack of space. I guarantee it. Cuts that are made for other purposes will be more than enough. Expository dialogue will need to be added.

[Maester Yobjascz]

My suggestion to prep 22 episodes was based on ease of making decisions... if you want to go straight to 12 episodes, we can do that too...

In which case, as I suggested before, I would start with Excalibur's first episode, ending with the Winterfell crypt scene, and then cut to Pentos for Daenerys I and II...

[Antacid]

Jesus, I've been waiting for a thread like this.

I actually wanted to be a screenwriter for about 4 years, and did a lot of reading scripts for film and TV, etc. Well, turns out writing original stories is really hard. But adaptations are easier, and (here’s the important part) MUCH more fun to bullshit over. All of what follows relates to the likely TV format of ASOIAF.

Maester Yobjascz: I hate to be a complete asshat, but the approach you are suggesting is just not how ASOIAF will be adapted. You can’t ‘plan’ an adaptation by starting out at 22 hours and then editing, you have to write episodes to fit a specific format – they need to have Acts like a play, tell a small handful of plots which build to a resolution and are hopefully interrelated (a huge problem for ASOIAF). That means you have to know exactly where you’re going with every scene, but that the place you end up has to be defined by what will work within an episode of a TV show. Literally every second matters, and has to provide either essential exposition or drama.

The other thing: the first thing that will go from any adaptation is the POV system, which has no on-screen equivalent. Think about it. If we see a group of characters on TV, how do we know (still less care) whose POV we are in? We just don’t. It’s also limiting, because ASOIAF has so many epic events there's no reason to retain the limited POVs. What if it helps the story to show a scene with (e.g.) Littlefinger alone reacting to the news of Catelyn’s death? The huge advantage of visual storytelling is you can cut to anything as long as it make emotional sense - the one-shot POVs in AFFC would make perfect sense in a TV show. In a book first-person POV means you ‘hear’ the characters thoughts – and that’s to be avoided whereever possible on TV, because it would require voiceover. How many shows use V.O. more for anything other than essential narration?

I actually wrote an outline for the first episode of Game of Thrones as I would write it. Amongst other changes, I left the Direwolf until after the King's arrival so that the significance of the antler would be more apparent, and left Dany entirely for the second episode, so her scenes could come after the main locale of Westeros had been established. I started with the Book’s prologue and ended with Catelyn surviving the assassination attempt on Bran’s life and setting off for KL by boat. Yes, that's a lot to get through, but ending the first episode with the Lyanna crypt means NOTHING has happened. Thoughts?

EDIT: a useful guide for writing scripts is that 1 page = 1 minute of screen time. Catelyn leaves for KL on page 138 of my paperback of AGOT. Losing Dany's chapters takes out 20 pages = 118 pages, or two hours. So you could open with a feature length double episode to get things going, and then go with hour-long episodes from there.

[Maester Yobjascz]

Antacid -

Some of the points you make are fair... but others are a wee bit wide of the mark... not by intent, but by failure to understand what I was arguing. That may be my fault, for not being clear enough from the outset.

On the 'planning for 22 episodes'... my suggestion wasn't that the proper way to plan a 12-episode series would be to plan a 22-episode series and then cut it down... rather, that in planning a 22-episode series, you would identify which scenes are important, which scenes are tied together, and get a feel for how the stories and characters are intertwined. Once that's done, it becomes easier to isolate the *really* important segments from those that can be left out. I meant it as a tool to get a feel for culling material, before we attempt the really hard part of cutting or condensing sequences that boarders here may be attached to.

As for PoV structure in film and TV, I'd argue that it *is* possible and that is *has* been done. 'LOST', for example, often has segments that are tied to a particular character... it's their flashbacks, their story, and the scenes all include them. They do bounce from perspective to perspective in an episode... but we're looking at doing the same. As for voice-overs... I agree that they're generally not done well, and I'd avoid them whenever possible... but that doesn't mean that the content couldn't be brought out in other ways. And in some cases, like the Catelyn PoV's, I think a 'Desperate Housewives' style voice over could be quite effective.

Going all the way through the assassination attempt on Bran is quite a rush... it also takes you 1/5 of the way through AGoT in one episode... what's left??? On a 12 episode scale, we'd end with Dany's wedding in Pentos. So we've seen the Starks and their direwolves, the Prologue north of the Wall, the arrival of the King's party and the offer of the Handship... coupled with the intro to Dany and Viserys, the meeting with Mormont, their status as beggars, the betrothal to Drogo, and the wedding itself. That's not an insignificant chunk of material. Yes, it's mostly intro... but it starts off the story of Eddard heading south, introduces tensions within the royal family, the ties between Eddard and Robert, the threat beyond the Wall, and the threat on the Eastern Continent (Dany). A lot happens there.

Finally, while I've heard the same reference (1 page script = 1 minute screen time), I'd imagine that this correlates to dialogue... i.e. spoken word. Most of the pages in the novel, however, are *not* spoken... and even if much of it is brought out through dialogue, I'd think that it would be condensed by *at least* half, and likely much more...

[Antacid]

Like I said, it’s enjoyable for me just talking about this.

First, the page-per-minute rule is just a rough guide, but it is surprisingly accurate over an entire, properly formatted script, taking into account the balance of action (which takes up little page space but a lot of screen time) v.s. dialogue (which takes up lots of space but little time). It’s accurate enough that it’s the guide that is used in professional screenwriting. And funnily enough, at 807 pages my copy of AGOT corresponds to about 12 episodes with the first being double-length, which sounds right to me.

Please understand that I’m talking about reordering events, not taking them out. I’m with everyone in this thread who has talked about how little overall story editing AGOT needs – but there’s no reason to let POV limit the way the story is told. HBO won't be making the series for people who’ve already read the books – and why should anyone who hasn’t even care that scene X was originally written from Tyrion’s POV? I’m all for flashbacks and V.O. where it helps – Eddard, Dany and Bran’s visions, which all have plot relevance, demand them. But the techniques have to be used because they’re plot-relevant, not just because they reflect the book.

My issue with simply dividing the book up into chunks and shooting it chapter by chapter is, you can’t just show the setup part of a story if you want to make a viable TV episode. Especially at the start - the only reason to spend time setting up characters is so the audience feels an emotional payoff when something happens to them. So spending a whole hour JUST on setup would leave no proper dramatic climax.

Consider how shooting the books in order would work once you have 8 POVs in different locations. This is one of the challenges with ASOIAF – almost all TV shows spend at least some time each episode with every character in the cast. But if you tried to do that with 8 characters all in different places, you only get SEVEN minutes per character per episode. That's two short scenes at the most - barely enough time to catch up with where they are and what they're doing.

Re. Dany – everything in Dany’s story is important because a) she’s the true heir to the Iron throne, and everything that happens to her in AGOT directly impacts the circumstances of her eventual arrival in Westeros. But why should an audience care about that until we’ve met the Usurper and understand that he’s a bad King? In the novel, GRRM can tell us who she is and make us like her via her memories, but onscreen the situation is just: pretty girl has to marry Conan. We need to understand emotionally why the marriage matters to the main story or the series will come across as a string of unrelated yarns in the same time period randomly spliced together, like Rome.

[Maester Yobjascz]

But the techniques have to be used because they’re plot-relevant, not just because they reflect the book.

I don't think anyone was suggesting otherwise... were they?

My issue with simply dividing the book up into chunks and shooting it chapter by chapter is this: you can’t just show the setup part of a story if you want what you shoot to work as an episode of TV.

My understanding of TV series with long story arcs (be it LOST, Farscape, X-Files, etc.) is that the initial episodes are introductory. There's some sort of conflict in the episode itself, which *can* be resolved, but often isn't. Given that ASOIAF is a series of interconnecting long story arcs, I'd imagine that this would have to be similar. The first episode, as Excalibur describes it, has four conflicts, three of which are resolved in some way, and only one of which is left open. We've got the encounter with the Others (resolved in combat and a beheading), the dispute over the direwolves (resolved by keeping them as pets, although the stag/wolf parallel is a lead-in to later conflicts), the offer of handship (unresolved), and Dany's fear of marriage to Drogo (resolved with marriage, as enforced by Viserys). I think that's pretty good.

I agree that it will get more challenging with ACoK, and especially with ASoS, where there's more PoV's and more chapters than any of the other books.

As for Dany... the audience will care about Dany, because she's a poor girl with a vicious brother, who's being married off to a stranger. The Prologue as Excalibur described it, coupled with bringing out Dany's past in Dany I, will combine to explain her story and Viserys' motivation for returning to Westeros. I don't think we need to know that Robert is a bad king... if it were clear-cut, the story'd be less interesting. Good girl to reclaim throne from bad king? So what? But good girl trying to return to throne governed by not-so-bad king? Morally and ethically questionable... and much more interesting. Besides, with Dany soon to learn (from Barristan Selmy) the truth of the Rebellion in ADwD (I assume... it's hinted at at the end of ASoS), she'll be facing that moral quandary herself. Why protect the audience from it?

[Antacid]

I agree about initial episodes being introductory. The problem here is that to carry an episode a conflict has to build over more than one scene to a climax and resolution. IIRC from the one episode of Lost I've seen, the focal character would get multiple flashbacks (each one or more scenes) showing a story from their past, intercut with a stories on the island - and that the events from their past would somehow relate to their ability to solve the problems in the present.

We've got the encounter with the Others (resolved in combat and a beheading), the dispute over the direwolves (resolved by keeping them as pets, although the stag/wolf parallel is a lead-in to later conflicts), the offer of handship (unresolved), and Dany's fear of marriage to Drogo (resolved with marriage, as enforced by Viserys). I think that's pretty good.

The Others is a single extended scene with characters who all die - that's a hook, not a resolution. It's showing us the NW and that the Others are badass sumbitches. It's merely the start of a plot which is continued with Jon heading for the Wall.

The direwolf scene sets up conflict between Baratheon and Stark (the main story), and the direwolves themselves, which are important in the storylines of their owners. But the conflict over whether or not the wolves will be killed is resolved quickly, and (let's be honest) isn't exactly tense.

The offer of Handship is, as you say, left unresolved if you stop at Dany's marriage.

With Dany I more than agree with you: her, her brother, Drogo and her marriage to him are all crucial and demand time, because they all develop in important ways later. I think it would require a whole episode starting with her and ending with her marriage, intercut with events in Westeros.

As for Dany... the audience will care about Dany, because she's a poor girl with a vicious brother, who's being married off to a stranger.

I'm saying that's not enough. They need to understand her dramatic significance to the characters in Westeros, and vice-versa. That's much more artfully done by delaying her appearance until around when we discover Robert wants her killed to prevent her having a son - and it would instantly get her much, much more sympathy than if she's merely an exiled noble who is bullied by her brother. It also creates another reason for the audience to worry about her getting married.

BTW by 'bad' King Robert - I merely mean insecure, rash, and willing to have Dany murdered, all the things he is in the book, not evil. Sorry about the miscommunication.

[Tysha]

Yes, that's a lot to get through, but ending the first episode with the Lyanna crypt means NOTHING has happened. Thoughts?

Have you read the rest of this thread?

The other thing: the first thing that will go from any adaptation is the POV system, which has no on-screen equivalent.

QFT...

I actually wrote an outline for the first episode of Game of Thrones as I would write it. Amongst other changes, I left the Direwolf until after the King's arrival so that the significance of the antler would be more apparent, and left Dany entirely for the second episode, so her scenes could come after the main locale of Westeros had been established. I started with the Book’s prologue and ended with Catelyn surviving the assassination attempt on Bran’s life and setting off for KL by boat.

Interesting! How did you handle the sequence of events? Because I really like the idea of the direwolves being discovered after the Baratheon party has arrived but I'm not sure how the logistics of that would work - did you have the feast without the wolves or postpone the feast? 'Cause Tyrion has to meet Ghost at the feast!

Where I disagree with you is that I think Dany should be in the first episode. I've said right from the off that this should start with a dramatisation of the rebellion (thank you Excalibur, for succeeding where I failed!) to make it all exciting right from the off and to avoid clunky expository dialogue later ("Now as you know, Ned, fourteen years ago you and I led a rebellion against the king..."). So if we show, in the opening moments, a blond, violet-eyed kid called Viserys escaping with a heavily pregnant woman from a burning city, and then later see a blond, violet-eyed adult called Viserys with a teenage girl, the audience will make the connection between the bump and the girl. It's a bit of a stretch to ask them to wait a week to do that. Even better if we go from Robert bitching in the crypt about Rhaegar and the Targaryens to seeing what Rhaegar's surviving siblings are getting up to.

Using your idea about the direwolves, it could go: Robert's arrival, in the crypts, bitching about the Targaryens -> Viserys and Daenerys, oooh, mean boy, the Targaryens are up to something ->discovering the direwolves -> the feast.

IMO, it would be extremely jarring and frustrating for the audience if the second episode was devoted so entirely to this new character and this new locale when actually they just wanted to know what was happening with the characters they got to know and care about last week. I think it would be entirely possible to show up to Dany's wedding in episode 1 if the episode ends with Bran being pushed out of the window by Jaime.

[Zulofritter]

The other thing: the first thing that will go from any adaptation is the POV system, which has no on-screen equivalent. Think about it. If we see a group of characters on TV, how do we know (still less care) whose POV we are in? We just don’t.

I totally disagree, and I can demonstrate. Turn on any show. Assign one POV to the character with the most scenes; there's where your main character usually is. Give another POV to every character that appears alone in a scene. If you can identify another character with a compelling story, and they appear in scenes without the previous characters, give them a POV. That usually covers everyone.

Now, I can't get you to care which POV you're following; that's up to the writers, directors and actors. POV is necessary to for an audience to identify with a character. If you care equally about two characters in a scene, that just means you're following two POVs.

It’s also limiting, because ASOIAF has so many epic events there's no reason to retain the limited POVs. What if it helps the story to show a scene with (e.g.) Littlefinger alone reacting to the news of Catelyn’s death?

Good point, but it also helps the story if the audience doesn't see that. What if Littlefinger doesn't care at all about Catelyn? Show a scene of him crying into his bags of money, and that possibility is lost.

The huge advantage of visual storytelling is you can cut to anything as long as it make emotional sense - the one-shot POVs in AFFC would make perfect sense in a TV show. In a book first-person POV means you ‘hear’ the characters thoughts – and that’s to be avoided whereever possible on TV, because it would require voiceover. How many shows use V.O. more for anything other than essential narration?

Yeah, we surely don't need narration. Particularly the Dune variation, where you hear the thoughts of various characters. If you need to know about Catelyn's preoccupation with big hips, go back to the books.

EDIT: a useful guide for writing scripts is that 1 page = 1 minute of screen time. Catelyn leaves for KL on page 138 of my paperback of AGOT. Losing Dany's chapters takes out 20 pages = 118 pages, or two hours. So you could open with a feature length double episode to get things going, and then go with hour-long episodes from there.

Well, the page rule is for a screenplay page, and even that's rough. My obsessively nerdy math involved taking the total pages (Dany's last page in Thrones is 807) and dividing by 12, giving us about 67.25 pages for each episode. Bran falls on page 85, so the first episode will be slightly long if it ends there. Fortunately, you can run shows long on HBO.

[Zulofritter]

Here's how I'd plot out the first series. For each episode is the first scene (the teaser, if they want to play it before the credits), then the last scene. Some of these scenes have a strange symmetry, such as Sansa watching the Hand's tourney, and Eddard resigning at the end.

#1: Gared & Waymar argue about whether to search for the frozen bodies; Gared wins the argument the hard way.

Bran falls. (Think most of us agree on this one.)

#2: Tyrion has breakfast with his loving family.

Bran wakes up. "His name is Summer." he tells Rob.

#3: Catelyn, on the deck of the Storm Dancer.

Khal Drogo learns Daenerys is pregnant.

#4: Old Nan annoys Bran, then Bran is carried downstairs to meet Tyrion.

Tyrion is captured.

#5: Sansa watches the Hand's tourney.

Eddard resigns as Hand. He closes the door as the others discuss killing Dany.

#6: Just after Ned leaves the chamber, he speaks with Vayon and Littlefinger.

Bran is rescued, the deserters are killed, and Osha is captured.

#7: Tyrion is trapped in the sky cell.

Tyrion tells Bronn the story of his first wife. He then wakes up to see that they are surrounded by clansmen.

#8: Tyrion convinces the clansmen to escort him and Bronn.

Viserys earns his crown.

#9: Eddard sees Robert, who has just been mortally wounded. He writes the will.

Jon fights the wight, and the wight gets the upper hand...

#10: Jon burns the wight, and his hands.

An imprisoned Eddard pleads with Varys.

#11: Catelyn watches Robb lead his host at the Neck.

Eddard is killed, as Yoren leads Arya away.

#12: Bran watches the training exercises at Winterfell.

Dany enters the pyre.

[Michael Jon Snow]

Antacid,

I have to disagree with you about HAVING to ditch the POV aspect. I think it could be done just as effectively on screen as it is done in the book. If I were the one doing it, that would be central to how the show would be set up. Master Y and others (yourself included) have shown me how it could be done well without the POVs, but I am no where near convinced that they HAVE TO go.

As an example. I would start each POV segment on the POV Chr (the POV would be the only chr in frame) with a zoom out to set the scene. The next 5-7 minutes are all about the things that are happening in that Chr. area of influence. During that segment, the only over-the shoulder shots are over the shoulder of this character. (There are many other types of shots, so its not all done o-t-s, but no other chr gets this treatment.) The only internal monologues are from this chr (With the exception of Bran who might hear Old Nan telling stories, etc) and the flashbacks are all framed from this Chrs experience. This would all establish the POV as central to the scene. It would also allow the writers to use the unreliable narrator concept by keeping each “segment†from the perspective of one chr. (The hound kissing Sansa being one awesome example. When Sansa experiences the Hound in her room, he leans in, but pulls away before he kisses her. When Sansa thinks back about it, he kisses her, implying that Sansa wanted him to kiss her and somehow made that fantasy a part of her memory about that moment. If the POV element is dropped, that aspect of her chr development is lost.)

Lets remember that this will be broadcast in the land of TiVo. Nearly everyone with HBO has (or will have by the time this airs) some type of DVR, so they will have the opportunity to go back and check things like we do in the book. Also, with the DVD releases (just prior to the next season) like LOST & 24, the viewers have many opportunities to catch things they missed the first time. Things like establishing Arya’s relationship with Mycha by having the two of them playing/running thru the back ground of other scenes works wonderfully. A viewer might not catch it the first time through, and wonder why Arya is so upset by the death of a camp follower, but upon review you see them together several other times, you start to understand.

[Antacid]

Have you read the rest of this thread?

When I write ‘happened’, I mean ‘unfolding sequences of events affecting main characters’. The Robellion is all backstory; nothing that happened there is ever in question, and we don't need to know much about it to understand the main situation at Winterfell. Everything else is just setup until Bran’s fall - the first surprising dramatic event affecting main characters in the present tense. It can’t be the end of the first episode.

The closest thing to a TV show that starts with the backstory, BTW, is “The A-Teamâ€

Interesting! How did you handle the sequence of events?

Robert attempts to forget his grief over Lyanna by ordering Eddard to take him hunting. Robb and Jon come along, and they find the Direwolves without Bran being present. The decision to keep them is made despite Robert's misgivings. CUT TO the feast with Jon feeding Ghost under the table.

Your idea about cutting from the crypt to Dany is extremely smart – that’s a proper, justified cut. I just don’t think that IMHO there’s enough space because of the amount that needs to be set up in Westeros.

Think of it like this: the scene with Rob in the crypt actually IS the start of the Targ plotline. It's all about how Robert is the Usurper. Just because Dany isn’t present doesn’t mean she and Viserys can’t be mentioned and (maybe) shown in a flashback. Then if the next episode starts with Dany, we can be rapidly reminded who she is with the scene on the road were Robert explains the significance of the marriage to Eddard and says he wants her murdered. If the audience understands the relevance of the Targs to the characters they already care about, it shouldn’t be jarring. The second episode could still have just as much Stark as Targ.

I totally disagree, and I can demonstrate. Turn on any show. Assign one POV to the character with the most scenes; there's where your main character usually is. Give another POV to every character that appears alone in a scene.

An example of taking the book POVs waaay too far is Excalibur’s suggestion of ending each POV with a FADE OUT. Except that FADE OUTS mean something very, very specific on-screen – not a POV change.

What you're talking about is a directorial choice of how to frame shots, that a screenwriter doesn't get a say in. Script POV doesn’t mean ‘alone in the scene’ – it’s where what the audience learns is limited to what a POV character knows or discovers in the course of the story. Short POV shifts to secondary characters are extremely common in all movies and TV shows – there’s the CUT TO the villain (where we find out his diabolical plan); the CUT TO the psychopath waiting behind a door the main character may be about to step through, etc. The novels are prevented from doing any of that, because they’re strictly limited POV where we see everything through the character’s eyes - but there's no reason why a TV series shouldn't.

[Michael Jon Snow]

Just because quick cuts are common does not mean they are mandatory. Not using them would make this work stand out. And the drama can be done without losing the POV feel. Your example of the psycho behind the door can still be done within the POV structure. As the chr approaches the door, the camera moves to the room they are about to enter. You can still hear the dialogue from the POV (muted somewhat) and now you see the danger behind the door. The door begins to open and the POV steps into the doorway. Perhaps lingers a bit to finish a conversation with someone behind them, while the danger is looming…

BTW I am not saying that they have to stick to the exact same chapter segments as the book, just the same style of staying with a specific POV for a longer segment and then transitioning to a new POV for a segment. Making the POV transitions definite (I agree that a fade out wouldn’t be right. Personally a half second of black screen would be adequately clear of the change) would give the viewer the same feel as the reader has from the books.

ETA:

Yes, it is as much in how the scene is directed as in how the scene is written, but the writers are also the producers, so they do have some say in how the scenes will be shot. (Also to say that a writer has no control of how the scene is shot is a bit simplistic. While the final decision falls to the director, a writer can suggest framing and other aspects of how the scene is shot both in the text of the script and through discussion with the director.) Using a POV structure like is in the books would require coordination between Writer and director. Neither can do it alone. A director can’t do it if it is not written that way and a writer can’t do it if the director doesn’t shoot it that way.

[Antacid]

No, what you're talking about with the camera moving through the door is a clear POV shift. It doesn't matter whether we hear muffled dialogue - we're being given information the main POV character doesn't know about. That never happens in the books.

Making the POV transitions definite (I agree that a fade out wouldn’t be right. Personally a half second of black screen would be adequately clear of the change) would give the viewer the same feel as the reader has from the books.

I understand were you're coming from, but it's a false preconception. Getting the feel of the books actually means changing the structure to fit the pros and cons of a visual medium. A visual POV change is accomplished instantaneously by cutting to an establishing shot of a different character. Extra direction, that's only there because it helps reflect the written version, may 'stick out' and detract from the story.

[Tysha]

When I write ‘happened’, I mean ‘unfolding sequences of events affecting main characters’. The Robellion is all backstory; nothing that happened there is ever in question, and we don't need to know much about it to understand the main situation at Winterfell. Everything else is just setup until Bran’s fall - the first surprising dramatic event affecting main characters in the present tense. It can’t be the end of the first episode.

I've never said the Robellion-prologue was drama! It's a prologue, it's exposition. It's exposition which is exciting to watch and would look incredibly cool on screen, but the reason it needs to be in there, IMO, is because it negates the need for clunky expository dialogue later on, or later expository flashbacks which would slow the narrative down. It gets the audience up to speed on who these characters are, where they are, how this guy came to be king etc, and it does it all in the first two minutes so that the rest of the episode can get on with telling the story without having to play catch-up.

As for Bran's fall being the first major dramatic event ... that's only really true if Dany’s wedding isn't in there! And I do strongly think Dany needs to be in episode one, at least a little bit. She needs to be on equal footing with the Starks and the Lannisters right from the start.

The thing is, Dany needs to be sympathetic, she needs to be someone we care about. If she is portrayed as being a threat to the usurpers – and that’s Ned as much as it is Robert – before we get the chance to meet her for ourselves, the danger that she presents to the characters we have already come to care about will colour how we see her. If we go from Robert bitching about Rhaegar and then juxtapose that with Dany all sweet and innocent and scared, that sympathy will be present right from the start. Then by the time we get to Robert thinking Dany is a threat and needs to be offed, we will already care about her and worry about her.

Bran's fall could be an end-of-act event if there was just Dany's first chapter in there and then the wedding in episode two. The first episode could go up to Catelyn surviving the attack on Bran and leaving for King's Landing if the preceding Eddard chapter and Jon and Tyrion at the Wall are also held back until episode two.

Okay, here’s a possible structure for the first episode:

Start off with the ToJ/Robellion-montage prologue as outlined by Excalibur.

Then cut to Ned and his boys, on the way to the execution. The boys wonder aloud why Gared deserted, close-up on Gared’s eyes, short flashback to the prologue of the book, quick cut back to Ice cutting through the air and taking Gared’s head off.

Ned and Bran riding back together, Ned’s line, “That is the only time a man can be brave†ends the scene.

Back at Winterfell, short scene with Ned and Cat in which we discover Jon Arryn is dead and that Robert is on his way. “Damn his royal hide†->

… that same royal hide arriving at Winterfell with his entourage.

Robert and Ned go down to the crypt, see Lyanna’s tomb, Robert bitches about Rhaegar and the Targaryens and off that we go to…

A scared looking thirteen year old girl who is being bullied by a slightly unhinged looking young man named Viserys. He is obviously the kid from the prologue all grown up, which means the girl must be the baby bump.

Cut back to the North. Ned, Robert, Joffrey (because he can make some snarky comments about the wolves), Robb, Jon, Bran, Tommen (Theon can piss off) and possibly Jaime though I’m not sure about that, are all riding through the snow when Robb and Jon find the wolves. I really think Bran needs to be here for this as he is the one who has the strongest connection to the animals.

Then it’s the feast, Jon tells Benjen he wants to join the Night’s Watch, snits off when Ben tells him he’s too young, and meets Tyrion.

Then Ned and Cat need to talk about Jon’s death and Lysa’s suspicions and we should probably have some quick stuff with Arya and Sansa in there as well, otherwise they’re going to get a bit short-changed.

Then it’s Bran’s climb, the twincest, and Jaime’s foray in child defenestration.

Fade back in to Tyrion reading, disturbed by the sound of Summer howling. He finds Joffrey, slaps him about a bit, has breakfast with Jaime and Cersei and gets suspicious about how Bran came to fall.

I think we need to see Ned leaving and we could do that at the same time as Jon saying his goodbyes, then once they’re all gone we have the attack on Bran and end with Catelyn preparing to leave for KL.

And I’m still up for cutting the stuff about the Others at this point and leaving it up to Jon to discover when he actually goes to the Wall, but I suspect I may still be alone on this point!

That takes us up to page 138 (in my UK pb) but there’s a lot which has been cut or held off until a later episode.

Regarding POV ... none of what anyone who is arguing for a POV structure is saying is actually POV in the sense that it is in the book.

On the page the POV is crucial. We see everything through that character's eyes. But unless it is a central stylistic feature of the show (like in Peep Show, for example), that cannot happen on screen. On page, everything is filtered through the character - we see what they see, hear what they think, their opinions influence our own. If they don't experience it, we don't experience it. On screen, we can see their reactions but they are not our filter to the scene. The scene plays out on its own with them at the centre of it but we use our own eyes and ears to experience it. Trying to impose a book-like POV feel onto the screen just isn't going to work!