Production and conspiracies

[Vuron]

***Disclaimer***

Let me start by saying that I'm just curious about this topic and not looking for answers so that I can track someone down for spoiler information. I know next to nothing about TV or film production and have always been curious about this.

***End Disclaimer***

Do the producers/directors/writers need to know the answers to all the conspiracy theories that are discussed on these boards? Do they need to know the outcome of the books? I guess the most obvious would be the R+L=J topic. When discussing theories, one of the reasons against is normally that there aren't enough clues and that GRRM wouldn't just drop a bombshell out of the blue because it's poor writing. If the good folks making this show aren't aware of the facts, how will they know what to include and what is fluff or misdirection in the books?

Luckily, they've got a few completed books and are able to look ahead, but can you image Ned revealing his findings to Cersei without us having seen his research and investigation? That would have been poor television and well below the standars of most of the posters on this site.

I appreciate movies like the 6th Sense and The Usual Suspects where you can look back at the end of the movie and see all the subtle clues that were placed throughout. Who wants to watch an entire show and be dumbfounded at the end and wondering why the end was pulled out of the blue with no backup data.

Just curious.. Thanks.

[Ninepenny]

TV has plenty of plot-twists which aren't properly foreshadowed so it shouldn't be to outrageous, and the books should stay ahead of the show so they can add foreshadowing in even if it is slightly later than in the books. However, it'd still be good if GRRM gave them directions on bits which can't be left out or changed (like Rowling did for the Harry Potter films). In many shows they don't even know exactly how a season will end when they start and haven't planned much beyond the current season, so they'll already be way ahead of many shows for GoT.

[Brude]

The filmmakers doing the Harry Potter movies didn't know all the secrets about what was going to happen in future books. For that reason, JK Rowling had a certain amount of script approval - they worked with her to make sure important details that would impact the later story weren't left out of the films.

On TV, sometimes the creators don't even know where the story is ultimately going, at least not entirely. Other times they do.

So, is it totally necessary? No. Would it help? Probably.

[Wastrel]

I'm sure that if they try to cut out a character who turns out in the last book to be the Great Other in disguise, GRRM will let them know. That doesn't mean he has to tell them what happens - just 'you know, you really might want to keep that guy, he's mentioned more later on'.

[Rockroi]

A similar question would be properly informing actors of why certain events, names, places, etc are important to the character they are portraying, so as to make their performances realistic and true to the story. In that light, I wonder if Martin will inform Bean that "Okay, the reason you are acting all quiet and strange regarding Lyanna and Robert is ..."

Also, the actor may ask, "So, why is it that Ned sort of clams up when it comes to Jon?" We have all heard the short-speak for actors trying to understand why they are doing something in a scene; they say "What's my motivation?" Well, for characters like Ned, that seems very important, especially as the character becomes more and more desperate.

Also, there is a divide the writers are going to be curious about: at least one character seems to thing Lyanna was "kidnapped and raped" (Robert); at least one other character believes that Rhaegar fought and died for the woman he loved (Viserys). It seems unlikely that they are both right. Eventually, a writer may ask "So... what's up with that?" And at that point answers may be necessary.

[Padraig]

Also, the actor may ask, "So, why is it that Ned sort of clams up when it comes to Jon?" We have all heard the short-speak for actors trying to understand why they are doing something in a scene; they say "What's my motivation?" Well, for characters like Ned, that seems very important, especially as the character becomes more and more desperate.

In those sort of instances, perhaps all Bean needs to know is that he is keeping a secret wrt to Jon? I'm not sure he has to know what that secret is. Is an actor going to behave that differently if mother is X rather than Y?

There are instances where some secrets may need to be revealed. If they decided to drop a character from the series who turns out to play a huge role in the finale (for example). Chances are though, those sort of instance are few and far between.

[Ser Greguh]

I don't think there's any need whatsoever for the cast/crew - hell, even the writers - to have access to any inside information. The cast, certainly not. I mean, suppose Kit Harrington was told the full story as to Jon Snow's parentage, but then was told, "OK, now act like you don't know." How does that help the process?

As to the writers/creators, their focus must be on turning each season into a living, breathing dramatic entity that stands on its own, and apart from major faux pas like killing off characters that don't die in the books or failing completely to introduce characters that arrive on later seasons with complex backstories, they shouldn't really have to worry too much about setting things up from a character perspective from season to season. The most I would expect from Martin would be something along the lines of "Oh, by the way, Jalabhar Xho should probably at least get a mention somewhere in Season 1, he'll wind up being important later." Rather than "Oh, by the way Jalabhar Xho is actually Azor Ahai reborn, make sure you cast the best actor you can find in that role."

I think people overestimate the amount of specific premeditation that goes into this sort of thing, even from a writing perspective. I hate to harp on a sensitive point (and I'm not harping, honest), but would book 5 have taken Martin so long to write if he had known exactly where he was going when he started? In the process of writing ASOIAF he's already abandoned a 5-year gap and split a book into two because it was growing out of control. He's admitted that there have been characters (I believe Bronn is a specific example) that have grown far beyond their initial scope. I'm sure he has an idea of where he wants to end up, but equally sure that there's a whole ton of stuff to be filled in the remaining voids, so I doubt even GRRM would be qualified to say "Oh by the way, make sure that character X will be in location Y during event Z, because it provides the linchpin for everything that happens alone plotline Q in book W."