Show Changes to the Story That You Liked

[csuszka1948]

1 hour ago, SeanBeanedMeUp said:

They could've at least asked GRRM the general endings of said plotlines. Or at least come up with something adequate. D&D really had no idea what made this story great and were obsessed with doing stupid mental gymnastics. Besides, it would've provided good content for viewers instead of coming up with pointless stuff (gosh I hate how Dorne was handled!).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I am pretty sure GRRM told them.

My personal opinion is that they have replaced most of the role of bookEuron and bookAegon with Dany in S7 and S8.

 

Perhaps the strongest evidence is this answer from 2000, after finishing ASOS:

"NG: Three more volumes of A Song of Ice and Fire wait to be written. What shape do you expect them to take, and are their titles finalized as yet?

GRRM: Yes, three more volumes remain. The series could almost be considered as two linked trilogies, although I tend to think of it more as one long story. The next book, A Dance With Dragons, will focus on the return of Daenerys Targaryen to Westeros, and the conflicts that creates. After that comes The Winds of Winter. I have been calling the final volume A Time For Wolves, but I am not happy with that title and will probably change it if I can come up with one that I like better."

GRRM wanted Dany to invade at the end of ADWD. However, after scrapping the 5-year gap, Dany stayed in Meereen and Aegon has mostly taken Dany's place as the 'foreign invading warlord', since he arrived at the end of ADWD.

From his original outline it looks like GRRM originally wanted to tell the series in 3 books, each centered around a threat to the peace of the Seven Kingdoms: first a Stark-Lannister civil war, then a foreign invasion led by Dany, and finally the invasion of the Others. It seems to be that he still kept this 3-act story structure (just in more books), because they are reflected in the House of Undying visions: Dany, the 'daughter of death' first takes up Viserys' legacy by becoming queen regnant, then (in the second act, initially invasion of Westeros) Rhaego's legacy by becoming the Stallion Who Mounts the world and finally (in the last act) Rhaegar's legacy by leading the fight against the Others.

Similarly, it's in the first act (first 3 books) where she rides her first mount and first 'bride of fire' (Drogo) to bed, her treason for blood (Mirri Maz Duur) occurs, Stannis - the first person trying to 'steal his destiny' by claiming to be Azor Ahai, the first vision amongst the 'slayer of lies' - appears here, and she light her 'fire for life' that causes dragons to return to the world.

 

He expanded the civil war into 3 books and more participants, and it seems to me that he initially also expanded Dany's invasion into 2 books, but after scrapping the 5-year gap he realized that he has no way of getting her there in time, even with expanding the 2nd act into 3 books. Thus, he replaced her role as an invader with Aegon (rightful monarch returning to retake his/her birthright with vengeance aspect, sellswords&Martell alliance given to her) and Euron (magic, destructive dragonrider aspects).

I think originally the Dothraki meant to sack King's Landing at the end of Winds ('milk men in their stone tents will fear his name') and Dany light her 'fire for death' by igniting the wildfire her father planted below the capital. However, now it will be Volantis which the Dothraki will sack and Dany will probably light her 'fire for death' by burning the Old Blood (and their servants) inside the Black Walls, creating a second Harrenhal.

Instead, it will be Aegon whose soldiers will repeat the first Sack of King's Landing and Euron who takes advantage of the infighting between Aegon and Cersei, flies across the continent (from Oldtown to the capital), burn KL and Aegon - while Dany is too far away to save him because she went to seek out the House with the Red Door - and take the Throne at the end of Winds. At least this seems to have some strong foreshadowing:

"Smiling, he seized his dragon [Euron on Rhaegal], flew it across the board [Westeros]. “I hope Your Grace will pardon me. Your king is trapped. Death in four.”

The prince stared at the playing board. “My dragon [Dany]—”

“—is too far away to save you. You should have moved her to the center of the battle.”

“But you said—”

“I lied. Trust no one. And keep your dragon close.”

"The dreams were even worse the second time. He saw the longships of the Ironborn adrift and burning on a boiling blood-red sea. He saw his brother on the Iron Throne again, but Euron was no longer human. He seemed more squid than man, a monster fathered by a kraken of the deep, his face a mass of writhing tentacles. Beside him stood a shadow in woman’s form, long and tall and terrible, her hands alive with pale white fire. Dwarves capered for their amusement, male [Aegon] and female [Cersei], naked and misshapen, locked in carnal embrace, biting and tearing at each other as Euron and his mate laughed and laughed and laughed …" (the feuding kings were already portrayed as dwarves in the House of Undying)

Dany will first want to take revenge on Euron, but she will arrive to the Iron Throne after the capital has already burned down and eventually decide to turn North to fight the Others instead of fighting for the Throne, just like her vision in the House of Undying in season 2 (which almost certainly came from GRRM) indicated.

 

Now obviously I might be wrong, that's just my interpretation, but imagine if that's what GRRM told D&D, that Dany - a main character built up to take back the Iron Throne from the very beginning of the story - will barely even fight for the Throne, she will instead fight against slavery (and seek out the 'house with the red door') while two new characters introduced in the 4th and 5th books take her place, what would be their reaction? I don't think they would be amused or willing to adapt it, especially because most of the fighting hasn't even taken place, Euron and Aegon have barely been introduced and built up as characters. The fight against the Others have always been a secondary concern to them IMO, but that doesn't change the fact that they probably only had the barebones of a plan told by GRRM to adapt.

That's why they have instead introduced the Night King and taken the crux of the storylines of Aegon&Euron and gave it to Dany in S7 (fighting Cersei who is allied to Randyll Tarly while Aegon/Dany has Martells and perhaps eventually Tyrells on his side, Dany/Euron's actions cause the fall of the Wall) and S8 (Euron/Dany causes the burning of KL). 

1 hour ago, SeanBeanedMeUp said:

Also, they could've done something similar to the Tywin/Arya scenes where Jaime talks to Ilyn in private about his private thoughts. Then, the internal struggles can be shown on screen. 

 

 

 

 

Yes, that could have worked, but there is still no payoff for the Lady Stoneheart storyline.

Edited August 8, 2023 by csuszka1948

[csuszka1948]

17 minutes ago, SeanF said:

Although Martin’s portrayal of the Dothraki is pretty superficial (they’re really the Tharks of Barsoom, and bear little relation to Mongols, Alans, or Plains Indians), I take an important point of the books to be this:

The nobles of Westeros are (in the main) not much different, despite their veneer of civilisation.  What was done, at Mirri’s village was done by Hoster Tully at Lord Godbrook’s, and by all the parties to The War of the Five Kings at scores of villages, throughout the Seven Kingdoms.  The only difference being that in most cases, enslavement was replaced by massacre.

That was a sociological point that either D & D did not understand, or they did not wish to understand. 

 

 

 

Honestly, I think the Dothraki are probably worse than most armies of the Seven Kingdoms, but not worse than Tywin's, and Dany - with her status as the 'Stallion Who Mounts the World' - has a chance to restrain them to an extent (stop enslavement, claim women for herself instead of raping).

Still, in the books there is no evidence that Dany is treated as a foreign invader (she is a Targaryen born in Dragonstone) and the Dothraki are simply hated foreign barbarians. In fact, Robert is afraid of the invasion exactly because he fears Targaryen loyalists would join them, while Tywin employs Dothraki (and even worse) sellswords and nobody bats an eye.

Edited August 8, 2023 by csuszka1948

[SeanBeanedMeUp]

10 minutes ago, csuszka1948 said:

I am pretty sure GRRM told them.

My personal opinion is that they have replaced most of the role of bookEuron and bookAegon with Dany in S7 and S8.

 

Perhaps the strongest evidence is this answer from 2000, after finishing ASOS:

"NG: Three more volumes of A Song of Ice and Fire wait to be written. What shape do you expect them to take, and are their titles finalized as yet?

GRRM: Yes, three more volumes remain. The series could almost be considered as two linked trilogies, although I tend to think of it more as one long story. The next book, A Dance With Dragons, will focus on the return of Daenerys Targaryen to Westeros, and the conflicts that creates. After that comes The Winds of Winter. I have been calling the final volume A Time For Wolves, but I am not happy with that title and will probably change it if I can come up with one that I like better."

GRRM wanted Dany to invade at the end of ADWD. However, after scrapping the 5-year gap, Dany stayed in Meereen and Aegon has mostly taken Dany's place as the 'foreign invading warlord' and he arrived at the end of ADWD.

From his original outline it looks like GRRM originally wanted to tell the series in 3 books, each centered around a threat to the peace of the Seven Kingdoms: first a Stark-Lannister civil war, then a foreign invasion led by Dany, and finally the invasion of the Others. It seems to be that he still kept this 3-act story structure (just in more books), because they are reflected in the House of Undying visions: Dany, the 'daughter of death' first takes up Viserys' legacy by becoming queen regnant, then (in the second act, initially invasion of Westeros) Rhaego's legacy by becoming the Stallion Who Mounts the world and finally (in the last act) Rhaegar's legacy by leading the fight against the Others.

Similarly, it's in the first act (first 3 books) where she rides her first mount and first 'bride of fire' (Drogo) to bed, her treason for blood (Mirri Maz Duur) occurs, Stannis - the first person trying to 'steal his destiny' by claiming to be Azor Ahai, the first vision amongst the 'slayer of lies' - appears here, and she light her 'fire for life' that causes dragons to return to the world.

 

He expanded the civil war into 3 books and more participants, and it seems to me that he initially also expanded Dany's invasion into 2 books, but after scrapping the 5-year gap he realized that he has no way of getting her there in time, even with expanding the 2nd act into 3 books. Thus, he replaced her role as an invader with Aegon (rightful monarch returning to retake his/her birthright with vengeance aspect, sellswords&Martell alliance given to her) and Euron (magic, destructive dragonrider aspects).

I think originally the Dothraki meant to sack King's Landing at the end of Winds ('milk men in their stone tents will fear his name') and Dany light her 'fire for death' by igniting the wildfire her father planted below the capital. However, now it will be Volantis which the Dothraki will sack and Dany will probably light her 'fire for death' by burning the Old Blood (and their servants) inside the Black Walls, creating a second Harrenhal.

Instead, it will be Aegon whose soldiers will repeat the first Sack of King's Landing and Euron who takes advantage of the infighting between Aegon and Cersei, flies across the continent (from Oldtown to the capital), burn KL and Aegon - while Dany is too far away to save him because she went to seek out the House with the Red Door - and take the Throne at the end of Winds. At least this seems to have some strong foreshadowing:

"Smiling, he seized his dragon [Euron on Rhaegal], flew it across the board [Westeros]. “I hope Your Grace will pardon me. Your king is trapped. Death in four.”

The prince stared at the playing board. “My dragon [Dany]—”

“—is too far away to save you. You should have moved her to the center of the battle.”

“But you said—”

“I lied. Trust no one. And keep your dragon close.”

"The dreams were even worse the second time. He saw the longships of the Ironborn adrift and burning on a boiling blood-red sea. He saw his brother on the Iron Throne again, but Euron was no longer human. He seemed more squid than man, a monster fathered by a kraken of the deep, his face a mass of writhing tentacles. Beside him stood a shadow in woman’s form, long and tall and terrible, her hands alive with pale white fire. Dwarves capered for their amusement, male [Aegon] and female [Cersei], naked and misshapen, locked in carnal embrace, biting and tearing at each other as Euron and his mate laughed and laughed and laughed …" (the feuding kings were already portrayed as dwarves in the House of Undying)

Dany will first want to take revenge on Euron, but she will arrive to the Iron Throne after the capital has already burned down and eventually decide to turn North to fight the Others instead of fighting for the Throne, just like her vision in the House of Undying in season 2 (which almost certainly came from GRRM) indicated.

 

Now obviously I might be wrong, that's just my interpretation, but imagine if that's what GRRM told D&D, that Dany - a main character built up to take back the Iron Throne from the very beginning of the story - will barely even fight for the Throne, she will instead fight against slavery (and seek out the 'house with the red door') while two new characters introduced in the 4th and 5th books take her place, what would be their reaction? I don't think they would be amused or willing to adapt it, especially because most of the fighting hasn't even taken place, Euron and Aegon have barely been introduced and built up as characters. The fight against the Others have always been a secondary concern to them IMO, but that doesn't change the fact that they probably only had the barebones of a plan told by GRRM to adapt.

That's why they have instead introduced the Night King and taken the crux of the storylines of Aegon&Euron and gave it to Dany in S7 (fighting Cersei who is allied to Randyll Tarly while Aegon/Dany has Martells and perhaps eventually Tyrells on his side, Dany/Euron's actions cause the fall of the Wall) and S8 (Euron/Dany causes the burning of KL). 

Yes, that could have worked, but there is still no payoff for the Lady Stoneheart storyline.

Had D&D simply kept the actual storylines in the books, they could've given themselves time to come up with something at least "meh" to tie them in. And it would've given the audience justice by giving them good things to watch.

I have my theories for Lady Stoneheart but I'd be going off topic.

[csuszka1948]

5 minutes ago, SeanBeanedMeUp said:

Had D&D simply kept the actual storylines in the books, they could've given themselves time to come up with something at least "meh" to tie them in. And it would've given the audience justice by giving them good things to watch.

 

 

 

GRRM has been thinking of how to close these storylines for 12 years, and you expect the showrunners to come up with an idea within 1-2 years? I am sorry, but these expectations - that FeastDance should have been adapted and D&D should have come up with proper conclusions - are delusional ones.

It would have required the doubling of an already huge cast (one of the biggest ones) without payoff and with many of the main characters not appearing in most of the episodes. 

5 minutes ago, SeanBeanedMeUp said:

I have my theories for Lady Stoneheart but I'd be going off topic.

 

 

 

Lady Stoneheart is interesting, because she is the one character GRRM really wanted them to adapt (much more than Aegon) and the showrunners specifically refused him. I think he meant to play some important role, but I am not sure what.

Edited August 8, 2023 by csuszka1948

[SeanBeanedMeUp]

1 hour ago, csuszka1948 said:

GRRM has been thinking of how to close these storylines for 12 years, and you expect the showrunners to come up with an idea within 1-2 years? I am sorry, but these expectations - that FeastDance should have been adapted and D&D should have come up with proper conclusions - are delusional ones.

It would have required the doubling of an already huge cast (one of the biggest ones) without payoff and with many of the main characters not appearing in most of the episodes. 

Lady Stoneheart is interesting, because she is the one character GRRM really wanted them to adapt (much more than Aegon) and the showrunners specifically refused him. I think he meant to play some important role, but I am not sure what.

I mean sure eventually D&D wouldn't have come up with something good in the end. But at least a little more time is better than none at all.

[SeanF]

On 8/7/2023 at 8:24 PM, csuszka1948 said:

Yes, that's because of two reasons.

1) According to their own admission - they tried to adapt scenes, not themes and the show was about power:

Did you really sit down and try to boil the elements of the books down? Did you really try to understand it’s major elements.

D&D: No. We didn’t. The scope was too big. It was about the scenes we were trying to depict and the show was about power.

The show was about the 'game of thrones', about power, and 'the man who doesn't want power but is elected by others to lead (showJon) killing the woman who wants power and admiration (showDany)" was supposed to be their statement about power and their Walter White moment.

2) They also let the actors 'redefine' the roles:

Dan is saying that he let the actors redefined the roles, esp Maisie and they began writing for the actors, it is like the actor moved into the “house” and redecorated. He said he learned about the characters from the actors.

In practice, that meant that they choose the behaviour/face that (in their opinion) has fit the given actor the best (or was the 'coolest') and tried to have him/her repeat it as many times as possible, making them into caricatures.

That's how Dany turned into the ice-cold faced 'tyrant', Tyrion became Barney Stinson reborn, "I am an iconic TV character Tyrion Lannister, the audience will buy everything I say and it's always funny", Arya became not like other girls, Jon Snow became Ned Stark 2.0 which as far as they're concerned means a dumb fuck who always does the right thing and pays the hard price for it, and Bran has a better story by virtue of having none at all. They explicitly explain it for Dany, it was her reaction to Viserys' death that sealed the deal for her:

DAN WEISS (showrunner): We didn’t know the details until after the third season, but Dany’s trajectory was implicit in the first season. You’re so rooting for her because she’s in this horrible position. But there are a million different ways Emilia could have played watching her brother die, and she played it with a stone-cold-killer-like lack of affect. She has dark currents running through her.

In my opinion (but I might be wrong), D&D - and probably even much of the audiance - doesn't understand why are GRRM's plot twists working and why are they 'subversive'.

For example, most of the fans have found the idea that Aegon will turn out to be the perfect prince loved by the masses and Dany the foreign invader with dragons and barbarians who 'loses it' when she doesn't get the love she feels she deserves as subversive, when it's literally playing the 'mad queen', 'hidden prince returns to take his Throne' and the 'evil barbarian' tropes straight.

The death of Ned and Robb worked because in traditional fantasy narratives they are the heroes who win, but the twist of GRRM wasn't that he made them 'evil', but that they have lost. The death of Oberyn worked because the audiance expected that the 'righteous underdog wins' plays out straight or in the worst case he will simply lose, not that he could win but his desire to bring righteousness will bring his end.

On the notion that it was about Power, I'd call it the Child's Guide to Macchiavelli's Prince.

The two D's view was tha clever people trust no one, and betray everyone, and that's how you got ahead in medieval societies.  But, of course, that's not at all how real medieval leaders got ahead.  In a society based upon close personal relationships, between kings and their vassals, and vassals and their tenants, all the way down the line, breaking your word had consequences.  Blasphemy had consequences.  To be known as an enemy of God was a damaging slur for any medieval leader, which is why excommunication was a such a powerful political and spiritual weapon.  Kinslaying had consequences.

There ought to have been massive blowback to Cersei blowing up the Great Sept and murdering the Realm's religious leaders, in a world where 99% of the population think the Gods are real, and would take swift vengeance on the Realm, for such an act.  No one should have followed Ramsay after he murdered his father, or Ellaria after she murdered Doran, indeed, there would be people seeking revenge.  

Sansa and Bran won because they became faithless and manipulative.  Whereas, in reality, Sansa would face consequences for her deceits, and nobody would be remotely interested in Bran becoming King, when he has not the slightest claim to the throne.

 

[Walda]

On 8/7/2023 at 8:11 PM, Nevets said:

It makes Robb's actions in incomprehensible and even dishonorable.

I think the show leaned heavily into the idea that an extremely attractive, driven, capable, intelligent, passionate woman his own age, as familiar as himself with the battlefield and the realities of war, was a soulmate, and young love being what it was,they would marry heedless of the plans their parents have made for them.

The show did a really good job of presenting the Frey women Robb would have chosen to marry as very ordinary girls, and each in her own way a vastly less compatible and appropriate choice for Robb's queen. Even Roslin was just a very pretty Frey. She didn't have Talisa's privileged Old Blood of Volantis upbringing, or her familiarity with battlefields and the logistics of war (especially Robbs war).

I don't want to debate the relative attractiveness of Oona Chaplin and Alexandra Dowling - they are both extremely attractive - but Oona's facial features are more striking and strong while Alexandra's are softer and more ethereal, the way they are made up and lit in the show. 

Roslin is the only Frey woman portrayed as attractive on the show. The rest are drab, too old, too young, too pregnant etc. All the Frey girls are presented as living locked up in the Frey family bubble, under the thumb of their pater familias, with downcast eyes, sullen lighting and costume, pallid plain makeup. Roslin is only slighly excepted, with her beauty and her smiles, but even she has the timidity and slightness of a Frey girl.

Talisa attends the wedding and her direct eye contact, conversation (she talks! She initiates her own conversations!) and general manners showcase her independence, her queenly demenor, the strength of her character. No wonder Robb fell in love with her, and preferred to honour their love over the selfish and petty ambitions of Lord Frey.

Also, she went to the Red Wedding pregnant, for maximum emotional impact.

The show's plotting is not as nuanced or thought through as the novels. There are fewer characters, fewer subplots, and very often the backstory and believability of a character or subplot is left to costume and makeup.

I think they did a very good job in this instance. Robb isn't presented in the show as having the high, unyeilding honour of Eddard Stark.

In the book, the Lannisters question Robb's honor

Quote

“I am surprised,” Tyrion had to confess. “I thought Robb Stark had better sense.”

“He is a boy of sixteen,” said Lord Tywin. “At that age, sense weighs for little, against lust and love and honor.”

“He forswore himself, shamed an ally, betrayed a solemn promise. Where is the honor in that?”

Ser Kevan answered. “He chose the girl’s honor over his own. Once he had deflowered her, he had no other course.”

“It would have been kinder to leave her with a bastard in her belly,” said Tyrion bluntly. The Westerlings stood to lose everything here; their lands, their castle, their very lives. A Lannister always pays his debts.

(ASoS, Ch Tyrion)

In the end, Tywin settles that Robb is his father's son, but the doubt that what he did was truly honourable remains.

In the show it was simpler - Robb fell in love, preferred his own choice of wife to Lord Frey's, and figured they could bring Walder around to renewing his Northern alliance with a show of humility and the marriage of Edmure to Roslin. 

Prefering his own will to diplomacy, and failing to see the optics when he executes Karstark for dishonouring him, but breaks his vow to Lord Walder just because he fell in love, are characteristics of book-Robb too.

One look at the characters invoved in the show, and Robb's reason for chosing his own bride were perfectly believable. 

Having him chose to take pregnant Talisa with him to the Red Wedding was another senseless "What were you thinking, Robb?" moment on the show.

A FAFO response in the face of an ultimatum is pretty common in real life politics and diplomacy too, so for people who had not read the books, it was a familiar and credible situation. 

And Robb certainly found out.

[csuszka1948]

On 8/9/2023 at 10:22 AM, SeanF said:

On the notion that it was about Power, I'd call it the Child's Guide to Macchiavelli's Prince.

The two D's view was tha clever people trust no one, and betray everyone, and that's how you got ahead in medieval societies.  But, of course, that's not at all how real medieval leaders got ahead.  In a society based upon close personal relationships, between kings and their vassals, and vassals and their tenants, all the way down the line, breaking your word had consequences.  Blasphemy had consequences.  To be known as an enemy of God was a damaging slur for any medieval leader, which is why excommunication was a such a powerful political and spiritual weapon.  Kinslaying had consequences.

 

Yes, I agree.

To be honest, I think even GRRM's portrayal is more grimdark and cynic than the real medieval world (but he at least keeps to his own rules*). At least, I don't believe that an action like drowning the Castameres would have gone unpunished&without negative consequences for a real-life medieval king.

 

*while for D&D it's fine if Tywin does the violence because he is a 'native', but showing tenth as much violence for Dany is intolerable, because she is a 'foreign invader'

[SeanF]

3 hours ago, csuszka1948 said:

Yes, I agree.

To be honest, I think even GRRM's portrayal is more grimdark and cynic than the real medieval world (but he at least keeps to his own rules*). At least, I don't believe that an action like drowning the Castameres would have gone unpunished&without negative consequences for a real-life medieval king.

 

*while for D&D it's fine if Tywin does the violence because he is a 'native', but showing tenth as much violence for Dany is intolerable, because she is a 'foreign invader'

Not understanding that nationalism, as we understand it, did not exist in the medieval world.

A historian in Westeros’ 19th century might see the fight between Cersei and Dany in nationalistic terms, but no contemporary would.

[StarkTullies]

There are very few things I like more about the show than the books, but there are a few things:

In general, I think it is good that Dany and the Stark children were aged up, but only those children.  Not Missandei: I like that she is a child prodigy and under Dany's "mentorship", and I hate her "romance" with Grey Worm and her "best friend" status with Dany that was told to us but never believably demonstrated.  I hated that they aged Tommen up too.  He should have remained a young child under the rule of a regent, not a king in his own right.

I liked mass gatherings on the show that are confined to a single point of view in the books.  I really liked King Robert's banquet at Winterfell in the very first episode of the show.  I also thought that Joffrey and Maegary's wedding was far better in the show than the books (except for the fact that Jaime and Brienne were present at the wedding, since they shouldn't have been).

In the first few seasons, there were some really good scenes that could have happened in the books, but didn't because no POV characters were present.  I particularly liked some of the scenes with King Robert and the rest of the royal family.  I sort of liked Varys and Petyr's banter... but I sort of hated it too, because I think they are both terrible villains and I don't know if they would be "playful" with each other in private when no one else is watching.

I liked some scenes that were exactly the same in the books and show, but the show enhanced it because of the acting.  Tyrion's "I wish I could poison you all" speech at his trial (paraphrased) comes to mind.  It was very emotional in the show, and kind of dry in the books.

I liked Dany's takeover of Astapor in the show much more in the show.  In the books, it was almost anticlimactic: it fast-forwards to the end of the chapter with the city defeated, like GRRM didn't want to invest in it.  I loved Show Dany's character in that moment (which is the only time in the show that I actually did like her).

I liked the attention the show paid to minor characters in the early seasons.  Maester Luwin, for example.  But I don't think there is a single character who is better portrayed in the show than the books, except for minor characters who were enhanced.  I think Jorah should be portrayed as a creepy pedophile creep.  I liked that Shae was only after Tyrion for his gold and never truly loved him.  And I absolutely hated Margaery's portrayal on the show: "incredibly clever people" don't blow their schemes by constantly smirking about how clever they are.

Season 4 was a relatively small portion of ASOS, and most of it was filler waiting for "the big events".  Most of the filler I could do without, but I enjoyed the Arya/Sandor filler.  They only got 1.5 chapters together after the Red Wedding, and I liked most of their interactions in the show.

There is not a single thing in Seasons 5-8 that were better than the books.

Edited August 13, 2023 by StarkTullies

[csuszka1948]

On 8/13/2023 at 1:14 PM, StarkTullies said:

There is not a single thing in Seasons 5-8 that were better than the books.

 

 

 

I think Theon's arc was very well done (even with the Jeyne Poole/Sansa switch), he was really the only important character who was layered and had consistent characterization in the last seasons.

Meanwhile, Dany turned into the stone-cold faced tyrant, Tyrion became Barney Stinson reborn, "I am an iconic TV character Tyrion Lannister, the audience will buy everything I say and it's always funny", Arya became not like other girls, Jon Snow became Ned Stark 2.0 which as far as D&D are concerned means a dumb fuck who always does the right thing and pays the hard price for it, and Bran has a better story by virtue of having none at all.

Edited August 15, 2023 by csuszka1948

[StarkTullies]

9 hours ago, csuszka1948 said:

I think Theon's arc was very well done (even with the Jeyne Poole/Sansa switch), he was really the only important character who was layered and had consistent characterization in the last seasons.

I agree, Theon is my favorite character on the show (of the characters who survived past Season 4, at least).  He is one of the few characters who remains consistent and relatively well written.  But talking about book vs show, I still like the book far better.  Theon's chapters in ADWD are my favorite in the entire series.  Regardless of the Jeyne/Sansa switch, they cut out the massive gathering at Winterfell, his confession to Barbrey, his breakdown in the godswood... almost everything I love about those chapters.  And while I like his show character, he kind of flips a switch when he spontaneously saves Sansa.  In the book, it is a gradual transition over time and you see him slowly heal a little bit each chapter and by "pretending" to be Theon, he actually becomes Theon (but new and improved).

9 hours ago, csuszka1948 said:

Meanwhile, Dany turned into the stone-cold faced tyrant, Tyrion became Barney Stinson reborn, "I am an iconic TV character Tyrion Lannister, the audience will buy everything I say and it's always funny", Arya became not like other girls, Jon Snow became Ned Stark 2.0 which as far as D&D are concerned means a dumb fuck who always does the right thing and pays the hard price for it, and Bran has a better story by virtue of having none at all.

I agree with all of that, but the 6th of the main characters was decimated as well.  They made Sansa "smart" by making everyone else stupid ("I know better than the blacksmiths that it gets COLD in winter!"), and they "developed her character" by just making her nihilistic and cold.  Sansa's book story is about becoming a better person, not a worse one.  That said, Show Sansa is still my favorite character of the "big six" on the show, simply because the others become so terrible.

[csuszka1948]

4 hours ago, StarkTullies said:

I agree, Theon is my favorite character on the show (of the characters who survived past Season 4, at least).  He is one of the few characters who remains consistent and relatively well written.  But talking about book vs show, I still like the book far better.  Theon's chapters in ADWD are my favorite in the entire series.  Regardless of the Jeyne/Sansa switch, they cut out the massive gathering at Winterfell, his confession to Barbrey, his breakdown in the godswood... almost everything I love about those chapters.  And while I like his show character, he kind of flips a switch when he spontaneously saves Sansa.  In the book, it is a gradual transition over time and you see him slowly heal a little bit each chapter and by "pretending" to be Theon, he actually becomes Theon (but new and improved).

 

 

 

Yes, it's true, Winterfell is just amazing in the Theon chapters, it feels alive and filled with danger.

To be honest, it's very difficult to portray such a gradual transition in screen, I don't blame them for leaving details out.

4 hours ago, StarkTullies said:

I agree with all of that, but the 6th of the main characters was decimated as well.  They made Sansa "smart" by making everyone else stupid ("I know better than the blacksmiths that it gets COLD in winter!"), and they "developed her character" by just making her nihilistic and cold.  Sansa's book story is about becoming a better person, not a worse one.  That said, Show Sansa is still my favorite character of the "big six" on the show, simply because the others become so terrible.

 

 

 

 

 

Well, Sansa was supposedly smart because she foresaw that Dany is a tyrant when nobody else did, but at this point she was distrustful of anyone not from the North, so it came off that Sansa primarily disliked her because she is a xenophobe and Dany a foreigner. :-)

 

Generally, I feel many problems stemmed from the fact that D&D seemed to view much of the Lannister worldview as the correct one, that's why Sansa (their imagined ideal female ruler) transformed into a more palatable version of the combination of Littlefinger and Cersei.

They even said that Tywin is a "lawful neutral" character, while Sansa had said her father was dumb, consistently tried to downplay the horrific actions committed by the Lannister family and had the Lannister children try to hold together (Jaime backing Cersei, Tyrion doing everything in his power to prevent Dany from killing Cersei and freeing Jaime to help Cersei escape) even after their father's death.

Some whitewashing was reasonable (Tyrion in S2 had to be the lead protagonist after Ned's death and before Jon&Dany grew into their own, Cersei shouldn't be as dumb as in Feast), but they went way too far out of their sympathy, portraying the Lannisters the way they see themselves in their own heads and the Jaime-Cersei relationship as a true love story. In the books, the Lannisters are clearly presented as the villainous side, Tywin's worldview as toxic and their children turn against each other after his death.

 

Edited August 16, 2023 by csuszka1948

[SeanF]

7 hours ago, csuszka1948 said:

Yes, it's true, Winterfell is just amazing in the Theon chapters, it feels alive and filled with danger.

To be honest, it's very difficult to portray such a gradual transition in screen, I don't blame them for leaving details out.

Well, Sansa was supposedly smart because she foresaw that Dany is a tyrant when nobody else did, but at this point she was distrustful of anyone not from the North, so it came off that Sansa primarily disliked her because she is a xenophobe and Dany a foreigner. :-)

 

Generally, I feel many problems stemmed from the fact that D&D seemed to view much of the Lannister worldview as the correct one, that's why Sansa (their imagined ideal female ruler) transformed into a more palatable version of the combination of Littlefinger and Cersei.

They even said that Tywin is a "lawful neutral" character, while Sansa had said her father was dumb, consistently tried to downplay the horrific actions committed by the Lannister family and had the Lannister children try to hold together (Jaime backing Cersei, Tyrion doing everything in his power to prevent Dany from killing Cersei and freeing Jaime to help Cersei escape) even after their father's death.

Some whitewashing was reasonable (Tyrion in S2 had to be the lead protagonist after Ned's death and before Jon&Dany grew into their own, Cersei shouldn't be as dumb as in Feast), but they went way too far out of their sympathy, portraying the Lannisters the way they see themselves in their own heads and the Jaime-Cersei relationship as a true love story. In the books, the Lannisters are clearly presented as the villainous side, Tywin's worldview as toxic and their children turn against each other after his death.

 

Sansa’s betrayal of both Dany and Jon proved that she had learned to play “The Game.”

Jon was just a stupid sap, who could be disposed of, once he’d served his purpose.  Dany had proved her unfitness to rule, by overthrowing the status quo in the East - and we should have seen it coming.

All is well, now that lords are back in charge, laughing uproariously as the smallfolk are compared to livestock, and planning to construct new brothels - presumably staffed by starving peasants.

There’s a deeply unpleasant political message, there.

[Khloey]

On 8/15/2023 at 10:55 PM, StarkTullies said:

I agree with all of that, but the 6th of the main characters was decimated as well.  They made Sansa "smart" by making everyone else stupid ("I know better than the blacksmiths that it gets COLD in winter!"), and they "developed her character" by just making her nihilistic and cold.  Sansa's book story is about becoming a better person, not a worse one.  That said, Show Sansa is still my favorite character of the "big six" on the show, simply because the others become so terrible.

Damn, I hated Show Sansa.. she just becomes a cold arrogant entitled bi***. Kind of like Cersei. She didn't strike me as smarter at all. But then all the smarts characters on the show became really dumb. First Littlefinger in season 4, then Varys and Tyrion, Doran, Olenna... to the point that "show viewers only" think Cersei is one of the smartest characters ever

The only thing I liked better on the show were the Tywin/Arya scenes and Margaery. And Olenna was phenomenal in season 3 and 4. Oberyn was very well portrayed as well, better than his book counterpart.

Hated what they did to smart characters in general, like I said before. Also hated what they did to Loras' character, (and Renly by extensions), turning them into effeminate guys, which just strikes me as homophobic.

And I hated the fact that they've shown female developpment/empowerment (according to them) through rape (Dany, Cersei, Sansa). All 3 characters becoming somewhat the same once they come into power.

The lack of subtility in general of the latter seasons really bugs me. I think GOT just became too popular for its own good.

[VisenyaTargaryen]

- Cersei's character, mostly in the earlier seasons. The scene in which she discusses Lyanna and the realm with Robert was very good, moving, and remarkable. I loved it and it's one of my favorites <3

- Tywin and Arya interacting, although I could have done without the "most girls are idiots" line. I dislike any attempt at making Tywin seem less monstruous, especially since Charles Dance already makes it much easier to like him, but overall I liked their scenes quite a bit.

- Ned being executed and Arya looking away. It was a very emotional scene, and I think the show also managed to capture the shock and tragedy of the Red Wedding quite well. Same thing with Tyrion's speech at his trial (kudos to Peter Dinklage). It's not exactly a change, but it was a very good dramatization.

- Oberyn fighting The Mountain. I had to look away at the end, because it was too gruesome, and I've never done that before. I even thought the show would make it less awful, since just reading about it was uncomfortable enough, but GOT made Oberyn's death even more brutal, imo. Ellaria/Indira Varma's reaction made it all even better.

Well, those are the only ones I can think of at the moment.

[SeanBeanedMeUp]

On 8/13/2023 at 4:14 AM, StarkTullies said:

In general, I think it is good that Dany and the Stark children were aged up, but only those children.  Not Missandei: I like that she is a child prodigy and under Dany's "mentorship", and I hate her "romance" with Grey Worm and her "best friend" status with Dany that was told to us but never believably demonstrated.  I hated that they aged Tommen up too.  He should have remained a young child under the rule of a regent, not a king in his own right.

 

Nah I felt that Missandei being an adult made her more workable as a political advisor and whatnot. But I agree with everything else too.

On 8/13/2023 at 4:14 AM, StarkTullies said:

I liked Dany's takeover of Astapor in the show much more in the show.  In the books, it was almost anticlimactic: it fast-forwards to the end of the chapter with the city defeated, like GRRM didn't want to invest in it.  I loved Show Dany's character in that moment (which is the only time in the show that I actually did like her).

I liked the attention the show paid to minor characters in the early seasons.  Maester Luwin, for example.  But I don't think there is a single character who is better portrayed in the show than the books, except for minor characters who were enhanced.  I think Jorah should be portrayed as a creepy pedophile creep.  I liked that Shae was only after Tyrion for his gold and never truly loved him.  And I absolutely hated Margaery's portrayal on the show: "incredibly clever people" don't blow their schemes by constantly smirking about how clever they are.

 

Dany's takeover of Astapor was better but I still feel like it should've been fleshed out. The show still left behind many details like choosing the new rulers.

 

Jorah and Shae were better in the show. In a story full of douchebags, having a few better people doesn't hurt. Having Shae genuinely love Tyrion actually helps because it made the betrayal hit even harder, although at the scene of her death it should've been her begging for mercy like in the books and Tyrion killing her anyways in cold blood. Jorah was also better (until season 5) since I liked the idea of a man who did something wrong genuinely trying to improve himself. Helps stand out in a story where so many people just become terrible.

[Angel Eyes]

On 8/17/2023 at 1:25 PM, Khloey said:

Damn, I hated Show Sansa.. she just becomes a cold arrogant entitled bi***. Kind of like Cersei. She didn't strike me as smarter at all. But then all the smarts characters on the show became really dumb. First Littlefinger in season 4, then Varys and Tyrion, Doran, Olenna... to the point that "show viewers only" think Cersei is one of the smartest characters ever

The only thing I liked better on the show were the Tywin/Arya scenes and Margaery. And Olenna was phenomenal in season 3 and 4. Oberyn was very well portrayed as well, better than his book counterpart.

Hated what they did to smart characters in general, like I said before. Also hated what they did to Loras' character, (and Renly by extensions), turning them into effeminate guys, which just strikes me as homophobic.

And I hated the fact that they've shown female developpment/empowerment (according to them) through rape (Dany, Cersei, Sansa). All 3 characters becoming somewhat the same once they come into power.

The lack of subtility in general of the latter seasons really bugs me. I think GOT just became too popular for its own good.

Well, Sansa's going that way in the books too. As for Doran... his plans were never great in the first place, just ask Viserys when Doran left him out to dry.

[Khloey]

On 8/23/2023 at 3:33 PM, Angel Eyes said:

Well, Sansa's going that way in the books too. As for Doran... his plans were never great in the first place, just ask Viserys when Doran left him out to dry.

I never said Doran was a genius, but still, in the show, he's really weak and dumb..

I disagree about Sansa, it does not go that way in the books at all.

[Angel Eyes]

4 hours ago, Khloey said:

I never said Doran was a genius, but still, in the show, he's really weak and dumb..

I disagree about Sansa, it does not go that way in the books at all.

He's still dumb in the books, he's just built up as this cautious schemer and what we see out of him is... quite pathetic. A bit like how informed attributes became the norm in the show.