Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

The Anti-Targ

Do they call the Others "Others"?

Recommended Posts

This was raised in the David and Dan thread over in casting, but I thought it would be interesting to see what people think.

[quote name='Padraig' post='1610023' date='Dec 5 2008, 23.35'][quote name='WightMeWorry' post='1609672' date='Dec 5 2008, 13.20']
Will the "Others" still be called "Others", or has this usage in other series (LOST) made a name change necessary?[/quote]
Huh. Good question.
[/quote]

Another use of "Others" in film is from the Night Watch and Day Watch movies. where all the supernatural beings call themselves "Others". These movies weren't all that popular, and certainly not as popular as 'Lost'.

So do you think they should still call them Others, If not what is an alternative?

The Rising Damp?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote name='The Anti-Targ' post='1611516' date='Dec 7 2008, 01.10']This was raided in the David and Dan thread over in casting, but I thought it would be interesting to see what people think.


Huh. Good question.


Another use of "Others" in film is from the Night Watch and Day Watch movies. where all the supernatural beings call themselves "Others". These movies weren't all that popular, and certainly not as popular as 'Lost'.

So do you think they should still call them Others. If not what is an alternative?

The Rising Damp?[/quote]

Maybe The White Walkers? I always liked that when it was used in the books.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Why not call them the Others, again? Because other films have used such name? Is this question a joke?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote name='ThanatosAngel' post='1611548' date='Dec 7 2008, 01.29']It's not like "Lost" copyrighted the term or anything. Besides, the books have been using it well before "Lost" hit the air.[/quote]

I think the idea isn't so much the term "The Others" is copyrighted, but rather it's been a main plot focus on a popular show (Lost) and people would often associate the term with said show.

I personally don't think the name would be an issue. But then one thread brought up the idea of making The Others a mystery throughout the series, which I think would be more of a problem as that was exactly what happened with "Lost". I think it is in HBO's best interest to introduce The Others ASAP as they had been in the books. This would keep people from saying, "They stole that from Lost."

Certain similarities to other shows/films give people that "been there, saw that" feel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think as long as they don't constantly go on about the others it will be fine, which aside from Jon/Sam is the case.
It would probably be wise not to cast Michael emerson as one of the others though!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote name='ThanatosAngel' post='1611548' date='Dec 7 2008, 20.29']It's not like "Lost" copyrighted the term or anything. Besides, the books have been using it well before "Lost" hit the air.[/quote]
What's copyright got to do with it? The question is has 'Lost' owned the name by popular recognition, not by legal right. That it was in the books well before Lost came on TV is irrelevant for the TV audience. They will either see it as derivative of Lost or they won't.

If it is seen as derivative then it will somewhat detract from the series for that part of the TV audience not familiar with the books. As suggested by Joshua their early introduction as a tangible menace rather than a mysterious fear will help to distance the two. And probably that they are an ancient well known legend among the people will further reduce the chances of any association, even more so should this element be introduced early. Having another well known name as the White Walkers probably does render the point moot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote name='The Anti-Targ' post='1611576' date='Dec 7 2008, 04.26']What's copyright got to do with it? The question is has 'Lost' owned the name by popular recognition, not by legal right. That it was in the books well before Lost came on TV is irrelevant for the TV audience. They will either see it as derivative of Lost or they won't.

If it is seen as derivative then it will somewhat detract from the series for that part of the TV audience not familiar with the books. As suggested by Joshua their early introduction as a tangible menace rather than a mysterious fear will help to distance the two. And probably that they are an ancient well known legend among the people will further reduce the chances of any association, even more so should this element be introduced early. Having another well known name as the White Walkers probably does render the point moot.[/quote]

I agree with you. "The Others" is too strongly connected with LOST, although the two types of Others have nothing in common (yet. LOST isn't over. Maybe the Others are actually undead, like is ASOFAI).

Its not really an issue for AGoT so the writers won't have to worry about it for a while. I'm wondering how much freedom the writers actually have. too much, and they might change GRRM's vision, too little and it may become another one of the countless terrible book-to-film adaptions. Can't wait to see the pilot, hurry up already!!!! :tantrum:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
well not everyone watches Lost.

you really can't use wight walker cause tends to take the mystery out of what they are. Others, you really don't have any kind of discription, its just really freaking thinking of this thing that hasn't been seen in thousands of years, beings so horrible they can't even be named.

i've never watched lost so i'm not sure how the name is used in that show but the jist i'm getting is that its a name for something unestablished where as here it is. changes to cater to other shows is something that would really piss me off.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Are you also suggesting they should avoid having characters use the term 'hero' as well in case the audience thinks they mean people with superpowers? ;)

Seriously, I don't see it as an issue since the term is so generic. If ASOIAF had an organisation called the Dharma Knighthood or something then it might be more of an issue but I'd prefer the program makers to treat the audience with enough respect that they don't assume the audience will have difficulty understanding that different programs may mean different things by the term 'Others'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yeah I really don't see any reason for them [i]not[/i] to call them Others. It's not like they have a lot in common, or anything.

Unless season 5 of LOST is as weird as they say.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It's just a name. I'm not familiar with "Lost," but I don't think it should matter. I mean, I've seen the term in other (hoho) fantasy books as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There's no reason not to use the term "Others." That one word invokes a sense of mystery and unspoken dread. There's an unspoken power in something so fearful it doesn't have a real name.

THus the popularity of "Others" in other fiction.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think they should call the the Others, because that is what George Martin called them. He used the term long before anyone heard of Lost. I've never been a fan of Lost, I think it is a little too implausible, but I've seen a few episodes here and there. In Lost, the "Others" are simply other people on the island. In ASOIAF, the "Others" are not human. They are different, and they are terrifying. The term Others suits them well. In Lost, it comes off as kind of lame.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
As somebody already pointed out, it´s not a question of who used the name first, or who owns it. It´s the fact that any person watching/reading ASOIAF for the first time and having watched LOST will inmediately think... "wow, this is not at all original, it has been used before". They will know nothing of the books and their dates of publishing, they´ll just stick to the feeling that the series is not only fantasy, but not-original fantasy. Which is dangerous.

I liked LOST well before I read ASOIAF, and saw the Night Watch (even worse, that´s 2 names that are identical) / Day Watch movies as well. My first thought at finding an Other in the book was that I was a little tired of all this Otherness. Comparing dates of release never crossed my mind, but than again, neither did the possibility of not reading the book because of something so trivial.

White Walker seems OK. Other is OK as well. Whatever they choose.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wight Walkers just seems odd to me. It doesn't have the aura of mystery and it doesn't cause the fear that Others does.

I say stick to the original and use the name Others. Just because it was used in LOST doesn't mean it can never be used in television again. I don't think it will matter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote name='mashiara' post='1613300' date='Dec 8 2008, 23.32']Wight Walkers just seems odd to me. It doesn't have the aura of mystery and it doesn't cause the fear that Others does.

I say stick to the original and use the name Others. Just because it was used in LOST doesn't mean it can never be used in television again. I don't think it will matter.[/quote]

I think "White Walkers" is terrifying and spooky in its own way, especially since we saw them in the opening scene: inhuman silent murderers. But it doesn't really feel like a name, either. It's more of a description.

Maybe the British accents will help with make GRRM's Others different from those on Lost. :idea:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×