cerankoman Posted January 22, 2009 Share Posted January 22, 2009 This would be so insanely cool if the pilot were the story of Roberts rebellion. That is a finished Story and could be conceivably be done in a two to four hour special. I like the Story of Roberts rebellion much more. GRRM Rocks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G'Kar Posted January 22, 2009 Share Posted January 22, 2009 I agree. Like how Fellowship of the Ring opened with this huge, epic battle to get you into the movie. There will probably be a flashback of the rebellion, but I would actually prefer if they opened with it. Tower of Joy could be a dream-like flashback, but the battle on the trident should be first, before the events past the Wall. It would b a good way for HBO to keep an audience early. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lady Blackfish Posted January 22, 2009 Share Posted January 22, 2009 Part of the fun for me was/is getting the backstory in bits and pieces. While you could probably make a great movie out of Robert's Rebellion, I also enjoy how we've gotten it, as a product of people's perspectives through the romanticizing effects of time. I think it adds to the main timeline to have that interspersed throughout. It does come off as the stuff of legend though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
General_Lee Posted January 22, 2009 Share Posted January 22, 2009 I think they should make it like Lost. Just a couple of flashbacks that are like small pieces for the great puzzles. Would be more exciting that way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G'Kar Posted January 22, 2009 Share Posted January 22, 2009 I think opening with the events past the Wall is a mistake, even if it is true to the book. It introduces a plot element that is irrelevant for quite some time and could turn off people from the show who haven't read the books. One friend I convinced to read the book stopped reading after the first chapter as he thought the book was going to have ice zombies and I had to convince him that the series wasn't really about that at all. Have the Other introduced if you must but start on a high note to attract fans. Viewers expecting a show with violence and intrigue in a medieval setting would probably prefer the show open with the battle on the trident, rather then with some ice zombies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank Stark Posted January 22, 2009 Share Posted January 22, 2009 You can't explore the Rebellion too much. Part of the series' allure is learning about the bits and pieces of different prospectives, misunderstandings and points-of-view. It's Martin's storytelling genius (and, as others pointed out above, probably why I like Lost so much). I think small bits of flashback to the Trident, Harrenhal tourney, and the Tower of Joy could/should be shown, but only where appropriate. Maybe a 1 hour episode told entirely from Robert's POV would work, but even then, I'm not sure it's a great idea. Ice and Fire is about the fallout of the Rebellion, not the battlefield action from 15 years past. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank Stark Posted January 22, 2009 Share Posted January 22, 2009 [quote name='G'Kar' post='1658537' date='Jan 22 2009, 15.28']I think opening with the events past the Wall is a mistake, even if it is true to the book. It introduces a plot element that is irrelevant for quite some time and could turn off people from the show who haven't read the books. One friend I convinced to read the book stopped reading after the first chapter as he thought the book was going to have ice zombies and I had to convince him that the series wasn't really about that at all. Have the Other introduced if you must but start on a high note to attract fans. Viewers expecting a show with violence and intrigue in a medieval setting would probably prefer the show open with the battle on the trident, rather then with some ice zombies.[/quote] A fair point. Opening showing just the battle on the Trident, or even just Robert v. Rhaegar with random action in the background... I can see that. Starting with a multi-hour expose on the Rebellion? No. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paxter Posted January 23, 2009 Share Posted January 23, 2009 [quote name='G'Kar' post='1658537' date='Jan 23 2009, 05.28']I think opening with the events past the Wall is a mistake, even if it is true to the book. It introduces a plot element that is irrelevant for quite some time and could turn off people from the show who haven't read the books. One friend I convinced to read the book stopped reading after the first chapter as he thought the book was going to have ice zombies and I had to convince him that the series wasn't really about that at all. Have the Other introduced if you must but start on a high note to attract fans. Viewers expecting a show with violence and intrigue in a medieval setting would probably prefer the show open with the battle on the trident, rather then with some ice zombies.[/quote] The problem with leaving the Others out of the early episodes entirely is that, by the time the Others do become important to the story (e.g. the wights attacking Jeor, the attack by the Others at the Fist of the First Men, Sam the Slayer etc.), we would have absolutely no idea who or what the Others are. They would just come out of the blue and the viewer would be completely taken aback by their sudden appearance. But by introducing the Others in the prologue, the viewer gets "broken in" and accustomed to the threat of the Others straight away, and it will remain in the back of her/his mind as s/he watches the remainder of the series. Also, leaving the Others out of the opening scenes means that the Gared beheading scene and the subsequent direwolf discovery scene would have to be changed significantly. And BTW, it's probably a little misleading to tell people that "the series wasn't really about them [the Others] at all". Sure, the Lannister/Stark conflict, the Battle of the Five Kings etc. do dominate the early books, but the Others will still play a very important part in the series (after all, this is the song of ice and fire), and have already been important during Jon and Sam chapters. It is quite possible (although admittedly not certain) that they will end up being the main antagonists in the series. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soporta Posted January 25, 2009 Share Posted January 25, 2009 Plus, showing the others immediately lets people know that this is a fantasy series, so when more fantastical elements show up later, the audience won't feel that it's come out of nowhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oorag Posted January 27, 2009 Share Posted January 27, 2009 Well, the prologue does lay foundations for a number of things: 1. It emphatically provides the "Ice" in the "Ice and Fire" name. 2. It establishes the fantasy setting as already mentioned. 3. It establishes a lurking threat to the realm, which sets the stakes of the political infighting. If SOMEONE doesn't get the kingdom in order to face the threat, bad things will happen. 4. It introduces the Night's Watch, and gives weight to Jon's decision to join up. 5. It clearly sets up the class conflict between lords and smallfolk. 6. It first establishes the themes of broken vows and Stark honor. Gared seems like a decent guy, and we see that he had a good reason to run for the hills, but the "good guys" still execute him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eärendil Posted January 28, 2009 Share Posted January 28, 2009 I'm against a prologue that does not stay true to the opening of the book. The foundation of the series is built upon a human flaw or aberrant failure to overcome interpersonal conflicts, greed, and sworn pacts unless it is united by fear or a greater threat than itself. A brotherhood without banners, if you will -- only realized by those who know either we set aside our differences or die. The Others represent more than just ice zombies. Of course, they really aren't ice zombies anyway, are they? That would be the wights they make out of their victims. We don't yet know what the Others are or what is the source of which their icy blue evil originates. But it seems as if they are the reminder of what is inhuman or incompassionate. They are the Borg for this tale or the demonic race from the arctic, whatever the characterization, they must be established right from the get-go to make the real magic of this story work. While we get caught up in all the family dramas of a feudalistic society, or "the Sopranos of the Middle--ages," we know something terrifying lurks, marinating in the background of the story. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Kreb Posted January 28, 2009 Share Posted January 28, 2009 Part of the reason Robert's Rebellion is so iconic is that we never get to see it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Naknakkus Posted January 28, 2009 Share Posted January 28, 2009 I'd find it fascinating if different flashbacks were shot for different characters on each side of the conflict. Imagine seeing Rhaegar as imagined by Dany juxtaposed with the villain that Robert saw. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The.Hound Posted January 28, 2009 Share Posted January 28, 2009 I think that if the series is picked up and has good ratings, they should make a 2hrs TV movie of Robert's rebellion and air it between season 1 and 2. The pilot would stay faithful to the books and it would make us all happy to see the rebellion on screen :D. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank Stark Posted January 28, 2009 Share Posted January 28, 2009 [quote name='The.Hound' post='1665383' date='Jan 28 2009, 09.52']it would make us all happy to see the rebellion on screen :D.[/quote] I'm still not sure that all of us want to see it. See The Kreb's note above. A TV movie about the rebellion without its juiciest parts would be just a series of medieval looking battles and rah-rah dialogue from Robert. And you have to leave out the juiciest parts (what Ned's promise is, why Jaime is a kingslayer, what really happened between Rhaegar and Lyanna), don't you? Like I said earlier, I think flashbacks to certain scenes, where appropriate in the story, is more likely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Merrett Frey Posted January 28, 2009 Share Posted January 28, 2009 [quote name='The.Hound' post='1665383' date='Jan 28 2009, 09.52']I think that if the series is picked up and has good ratings, they should make a 2hrs TV movie of Robert's rebellion and air it between season 1 and 2. The pilot would stay faithful to the books and it would make us all happy to see the rebellion on screen :D.[/quote] I'm all for a 2 hr movie of the Rebellion, but I don't think we have enough information by the end of the first book (or even now) for it to be aired after the first season. It would be great to see it after the series ends, if the ratings are good enough to take us through the entire story. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Venardhi Posted January 28, 2009 Share Posted January 28, 2009 If they run out of books to film at some point, I'd be all for filming the rebellion as a filler miniseries/'season' between, say, 6 and 7. It does, after all, take the better part of a year plus whatever build-up they add. That should fill 6 hour-long episodes pretty easily. Edit: Plus, most of the mysteries about what happened should be cleared up by then, I can't imagine GRRM will drag out the secrets of the rebellion to the end of the last book. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Valyrian Heir Posted January 28, 2009 Share Posted January 28, 2009 I really wanted to see the rebellion as well but now I am hesitant on wanting to see it full out in one episode for done in flashbacks staying true to the books. It would be more intense to just see a few scences every episode each week. When the show is over it will be just as easy to buy the dvd and skip to the scenes of rebellion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The.Hound Posted January 28, 2009 Share Posted January 28, 2009 Hmm that makes sense. For the movie to be complete it would have to air later (between 5 and 6 or 6 and 7 I guess). Anyways, it would still be awesome to watch. I dont see why they would have to leave Jaime's kingslaying out though, its not exactly a secret. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank Stark Posted January 29, 2009 Share Posted January 29, 2009 [quote name='The.Hound' post='1666124' date='Jan 28 2009, 18.21']I dont see why they would have to leave Jaime's kingslaying out though, its not exactly a secret.[/quote] I said they'd have to leave out WHY he is a kingslayer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.