BlackLightning Posted June 20, 2019 Share Posted June 20, 2019 On 6/13/2019 at 11:24 PM, CrypticWeirwood said: It's not just another one. It's one whose claim outranks hers. It's one whom the people love and rally around. This shows Dany that her whole life had no purpose. It was all built on self-delusion. She didn't matter. That's enough to break anyone. Actually, it is said that Rhaegar was disinherited by Aerys II and Viserys was named heir. Viserys was then crowned on Dragonstone by his mother, Queen Rhaella. Rhaella, who arguably has a strong claim to the Iron Throne in her own right, then announced Daenerys as Viserys' heir. If this is true, then Daenerys has the better claim than Aegon. On 6/11/2019 at 11:25 PM, Mama Jo said: It will be the Long Night in the books then the throne, otherwise it wouldn't make sense to name the books "The Winds of Winter" And THEN "A Dream of Spring." Also at some point there were no books to adapt. GRRM is 5yrs overdue on the 6th book and probably 20 years behind on the 7th. If you really think the Long Night is going to end before the series ends, you've got another thing coming. You're probably completely new to the forum and the series so I'm not going to trash you too bad. But that's an idiotic statement. You think GRRM is going to spend the 7th book completely talking about the aftermath of the Others while completely rushing through the Others in the 6th book? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rose of Red Lake Posted June 20, 2019 Share Posted June 20, 2019 I don't think the two plots will be switched. I see this argument from Dany fans who want her to be a savior. Jon would have to trust this stranger, let alone fall in love with her, after she kills millions of people. The Long Night is also the fantasy equivalent of the fight with Sauron. We all know the LOTR didn't end with the big battle against good vs. evil, and the author says he's not interested in writing that. I think it's just there for genre requirements. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Br16 Posted June 20, 2019 Share Posted June 20, 2019 On 6/15/2019 at 2:21 AM, John Meta said: Fan fiction means the writer doesn't own the rights to the source material; subsequently making it illegal to profit from the work. Adaption means that the rights to the source material have been acquired and thus anything in the source material can be used in a work in any way desired. Fan fiction isn't a question of, who likes the story it's a question of, who owns the rights. Legally, you're correct, but we prefer to use the term as a prejorative. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sigella Posted June 20, 2019 Share Posted June 20, 2019 On 6/4/2019 at 11:29 PM, Ser Hedge said: Sandra Snark the Smartest Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YoungGriff89 Posted June 21, 2019 Share Posted June 21, 2019 On 6/10/2019 at 12:39 PM, RYShh said: I doubt, If fAegon ends up on the Iron Throne, then R+L=J will not be effective on the series, or that marriage annulment between Rhaegar and Ellia will not play a role in the books and Jon will be a Targaryen bastard still. Or fAegon is actually not fake and annulment will be revealed by multiple people and that will suddenly make fAegon a bastard and Jon as a true heir. There are many paths Grrm can choose. Oh my, wouldn't that be a kick in the pants? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Meta Posted June 21, 2019 Share Posted June 21, 2019 On 6/20/2019 at 11:29 AM, Br16 said: Legally, you're correct, but we prefer to use the term as a prejorative. I agree that you're intending a pejorative use of a term; but you're not using the term, you're misusing the term. You'll find this is common among "critics" in that they lack a basic understanding of the words being employed in the criticism. Words like fan-fiction, plot hole, Mary Sue, deus ex machina, character assassination, etc. are all being misused in an attempt to create the illusion of an objective technical criticism where there is only irrational emotional rhetoric with no basis in objectivity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Br16 Posted June 22, 2019 Share Posted June 22, 2019 11 hours ago, John Meta said: I agree that you're intending a pejorative use of a term; but you're not using the term, you're misusing the term. You'll find this is common among "critics" in that they lack a basic understanding of the words being employed in the criticism. Words like fan-fiction, plot hole, Mary Sue, deus ex machina, character assassination, etc. are all being misused in an attempt to create the illusion of an objective technical criticism where there is only irrational emotional rhetoric with no basis in objectivity. John, I think you are on to something very important. No doubt many people will dismiss you as a pedant, but I feel you bring up an important point. A lot of times, I've seen people come up with something sincere ( be it a carefully researched project, an evidenced backed opinion, or more commonly a hard wrought work of art) only to have it trashed by "critics" who've never delivered anything of equal significance in their lives, but nevertheless feel entitled to slap labels onto the work of others. They don't look deeply or offer fair and careful reasoning. They do not understand the costs, compromises and sacrifices that always oppress those who deliver. They simply follow their emotion, their arrogance or anger, and belt out one word criticisms based on pure subjective opinion. They are often incorrect and miss the deeper meaning, but because of their over-confident tone, they appear authoritative and are difficult to argue against. Because they ignore the need to evaluate truthfully, or to think profoundly and objectively, words cost nothing to them, and so they can afford to use terms cheaply and harshly. Nevertheless, I feel some allowance ought to be given to the term "fan fiction". It is often a snuggly suitable term to describe when the story causes you to cringe. It's similar to the term "obscene" in that you'll know it when you see it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackLightning Posted June 23, 2019 Share Posted June 23, 2019 On 6/21/2019 at 1:04 PM, YoungGriff89 said: Oh my, wouldn't that be a kick in the pants? It would. I've been telling people that the big reveal about Jon's parentage is going to do 10x more damage to Aegon's cause than it will damage Daenerys' cause. As a matter of fact, Dany probably won't be that bothered by it. For one, she might already be married to Jon at that point... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YoungGriff89 Posted June 24, 2019 Share Posted June 24, 2019 On 6/21/2019 at 1:14 PM, John Meta said: I agree that you're intending a pejorative use of a term; but you're not using the term, you're misusing the term. You'll find this is common among "critics" in that they lack a basic understanding of the words being employed in the criticism. Words like fan-fiction, plot hole, Mary Sue, deus ex machina, character assassination, etc. are all being misused in an attempt to create the illusion of an objective technical criticism where there is only irrational emotional rhetoric with no basis in objectivity. The comment that spurred this detour was using fan fiction to describe the quality and consistency of the writing, it wasn’t a jab at the legitimacy of the adaptation. I get why it's tempting to nuance troll, but the quality of the story is comparable to something you'd find in a fan fiction story. On 6/1/2019 at 9:09 PM, Theralion said: I also believe that at some point the writers stopped adapting the books and started doing their own fan fiction. Quite frankly, unless an adaptation is a word for word and detail for detail recreation of something, then the difference between an adaptation and fan fiction really is just semantics. Game of Thrones was endorsed by George R.R. Martin and legally done through the proper channels so it could be shared and profited from, but calling the story elements and directions that were created by D&D fan fiction, is honest and accurate. Seasons four and onward, less and less of the books became the basis for what they were producing, the gaps between what they had produced and where they needed to take the story in order to get to George's ending were filled in by D&D’s own creative interpretation. I call that fan fiction. The Expanded Universe in Star Wars is also just fan fiction George Lucas thought it was okay for people to profit off of. On 6/22/2019 at 12:49 AM, Br16 said: John, I think you are on to something very important. No doubt many people will dismiss you as a pedant, but I feel you bring up an important point. A lot of times, I've seen people come up with something sincere ( be it a carefully researched project, an evidenced backed opinion, or more commonly a hard wrought work of art) only to have it trashed by "critics" who've never delivered anything of equal significance in their lives, but nevertheless feel entitled to slap labels onto the work of others. They don't look deeply or offer fair and careful reasoning. They do not understand the costs, compromises and sacrifices that always oppress those who deliver. They simply follow their emotion, their arrogance or anger, and belt out one word criticisms based on pure subjective opinion. They are often incorrect and miss the deeper meaning, but because of their over-confident tone, they appear authoritative and are difficult to argue against. Because they ignore the need to evaluate truthfully, or to think profoundly and objectively, words cost nothing to them, and so they can afford to use terms cheaply and harshly. Nevertheless, I feel some allowance ought to be given to the term "fan fiction". It is often a snuggly suitable term to describe when the story causes you to cringe. It's similar to the term "obscene" in that you'll know it when you see it. Who are you referring to in bold here? This board? I think this board is comprised of anything but people ignoring a need to evaluate truthfully or think objectively. We read the same books D&D did, and now that the show is over and we've seen essentially how George is going to end it, we know what they had to work with in the writing department. I have seen no evidence people on this board are under the impression you just shit out the biggest show on television and there aren't costs, sacrifices, and compromises along the way due to things like budget, schedule, actor contracts, shooting on different continents, etc. Sure there was a longer gap between seasons seven and eight than any other gap between seasons. Surely not all of this time was devoted to making season eight, I don't know if the pre-production, principle photography, or post-production of season eight was actually longer than any other season. Maybe it was, maybe it wasn't but it is definitely a valid and objective criticism to say there was a lot of time between season seven and eight and season eight still feels rushed, because that's a criticism of the writing, something that can be narrowed down to two individuals, it's not a criticism of every aspect of production. Sure, the lighting in The Long Night got criticized pretty heavily, but that's a different story. We know HBO and George R.R. Martin wanted more seasons of this show, we know HBO was willing to give D&D however much support they needed to make more of the show, and all the evidence we can find suggests they're the ones who made the call to get it over with. Maybe they were burnt out, maybe they wanted to go ahead and get started on Star Wars, who knows for sure? People have a right to be critical of whatever they wish to be critical of, whatever they don’t like about the work is valid. That's what criticism is. It probably isn't your intention, but this just comes across as you trying to delegitimize criticism by suggesting people can’t criticize something without having their own accomplishments in the field to speak of. I’m a screen writer with a small (but growing) body of work behind me and I don't think I'll ever reach a point where I feel people can't be critical of me because I'm more accomplished than them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ras1983 Posted June 24, 2019 Share Posted June 24, 2019 I've been reading a bit about Dramatica and its theory of story telling and it has opened up my eyes to things that authors and writers take into account when writing a 'complete' story. One of these things is the 'story mind', which basically describes how a rational and logical human mind would resolve the various problems being presented by a story. I'm far from being an expert, but I have some theories on why season 8 was received so poorly. Keeping in mind we still have two books to go and there are a lot differences and unknowns... : NK and his minions had been demonstrated to be very powerful in the show, yet they only made it as far south as Winterfell, and they used illogical tactics e.g. if you're vulnerable to dragonglass, wouldn't you find and utilise some type of armour? And if you're the NK, wouldn't you want to stay far behind the lines to ensure you don't get killed (a tactic used by countless generals and commanders throughout history)? As far as the story was concerned, Jon and Dany had the emotional build up with the NK. But D&D said they "knew" from several seasons ago that "it would be right" for Arya to kill the NK... wait, what?! NK isn't even on Arya's list! Dany lost a child to the NK! Jon has been up north the whole time and has lost countless friends and family in dealing with the white walker threat. Shouldn't either Jon or Dany have done the deed re: defeating the NK? And that's not to mention the buildup between Bran and the NK... all for nothing apparently. Speaking of Bran and the NK, the NK's motive as presented in the show was... well... a let down. The NK wants to end the memory of humanity? And he wants to do it by killing Bran? Doesn't the NK realise that people remember stuff? People write stuff down? Wouldn't the Citadel and its records be a better objective for this mission? The NK's mission was woefully chosen by D&D. It would have been far more powerful if the NK had in fact been seeking revenge against the CotF for making him lose his humanity. Then you'd be conflicted as a viewer because a revelation like that would effectively justify the NK's quest. Arya and Jamie had an emotional buildup with Cersei. The Lannisters took everything from Arya, while Jamie eventually redeemed himself by effectively abandoning Cersei when he saw how crazy and selfish she was. So wouldn't it have been believable if Arya used her ninja skills to sneak her way to Cersei and finish the deed during the battle for KL, all while reciting her list under her breath? (by the way, I think Jamie should have stayed up north with Brienne - his arc was effectively resolved up north). As far as Dany burning KL, I think that's largely because some key book characters are missing from the show, such as Young Griff. Given D&D didn't tell Amelia what Dany's ending would be from early on, and given that Dany was painted as a hero on the show, it wasn't very believable that Dany would go nuts after the battle of KL, because Cersie, Euron and co didn't seem like they could cause that kind of reaction from Dany. However, a Targ imposter who has usurped Dany's self-perceived right to the throne and an adoring public who perhaps readily accepted Young Griff as their rightful ruler could believably result in Dany losing the plot. Especially if it were made clear that the KL populace viewed Griff as the hero and Dany as the villain. There is a lot more, but I think that's enough for now. TL;DR: Quote GRRM: "I’ve been planting all these clues that the butler did it, then you’re halfway through a series and suddenly thousands of people have figured out that the butler did it, and then you say the chambermaid did it? No, you can’t do that" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beardy the Wildling Posted June 24, 2019 Share Posted June 24, 2019 8 hours ago, YoungGriff89 said: People have a right to be critical of whatever they wish to be critical of, whatever they don’t like about the work is valid. That's what criticism is. It probably isn't your intention, but this just comes across as you trying to delegitimize criticism by suggesting people can’t criticize something without having their own accomplishments in the field to speak of. I think a lot of people think you need to be a carpenter to point out when a table is missing a leg. Not so, not so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.