Game of Thrones/Borgias Throwdown

[Ran]

Ah, Lacobs has now come forward as one of the critics who had the first two episodes of GoT screened a few weeks ago. Calls it "fantastic" , and says the whole cast is great and that the kids are remarkable. He read AGoT before hand, I believe, and has since powered through ASoS, so it's clear he's now a book fan.

Sepinwall is probably the critic I'm most curious to see a review from, as he's one of the major TV critics who has not read the books, so far as I know (an amazing number of them have, which is really cool, but obviously this means their expectations will be colored by that knowledge).

[Urquhart]

Ah, Lacobs has now come forward as one of the critics who had the first two episodes of GoT screened a few weeks ago. Calls it "fantastic" , and says the whole cast is great and that the kids are remarkable. He read AGoT before hand, I believe, and has since powered through ASoS, so it's clear he's now a book fan.

Sepinwall is probably the critic I'm most curious to see a review from, as he's one of the major TV critics who has not read the books, so far as I know (an amazing number of them have, which is really cool, but obviously this means their expectations will be colored by that knowledge).

I wouldn't be too worried. "Game of Thrones" is destined to succeed what with its cast, its directors, its set and costumes design. I think it will please critics and viewers alike. Personally, the only person in the cast I think is lacking is Michelle Fairley. I didn't know the character from the book to compare, but she looks like Sean Bean's mother, no offense to the actress, and from the footage available I am disappointed in her performance. But that doesn't mean I can't change my mind upon further viewing.

[Maltaran]

I have to disagree with you on Fairley - true, she looks older than she is, but not nearly old enough to be the mother of a man who's past 50.

[Ran]

There's really nothing offensive about it, since being so patently wrong-headed, it defies taking it seriously. But a fact check: Sean Bean's mother would be in her mid to late 70's, I expect (I do not know if Mrs. Bean is still with us -- his family seems very private), and this is how a woman of that age might look, a woman who has aged well but has not put much stock in cosmetic surgery (yay, Dame Judi!), not like this.

Fairley looks her age, which is that of a woman in her mid-late 40's with no apparent face lifts or other obvious surgical interventions.

[Urquhart]

There's really nothing offensive about it, since being so patently wrong-headed, it defies taking it seriously. But a fact check: Sean Bean's mother would be in her mid to late 70's, I expect (I do not know if Mrs. Bean is still with us -- his family seems very private), and this is how a woman of that age might look, a woman who has aged well but has not put much stock in cosmetic surgery (yay, Dame Judi!), not like this.

Fairley looks her age, which is that of a woman in her mid-late 40's with no apparent face lifts or other obvious surgical interventions.

Guys, I meant it as a matter of speech. This debate over what Sean Bean's mother would be like is totally unnecessary. I merely expressed an opinion, targeted more at her acting, which I tend to consider lackluster, judging only by the few previews.

[Ran]

Precision in speech is always of use. If you didn't mean to insult the actress, don't insult the actress, would be what we're getting at.

[Steve the Pirate]

Bean and Fairley look the same age. No, actually, she looks a little younger than he does. The reaction to Fairley is exactly why the majority of actresses these days wind up getting plastic surgery.

[Blackfish Blues]

Bean and Fairley look the same age. No, actually, she looks a little younger than he does. The reaction to Fairley is exactly why the majority of actresses these days wind up getting plastic surgery.

YES. A man can be full of wrinkles and still be hot (cough*Irons*cough) but a woman, oh no, look, from this particular angle she looks older, from now on let's confine her to grandmother roles, no matter how LOVELY she is (as Ms. Fairley is).

We need a cultural/anthropological change. Unfortunately it will take generations. This reaction to Fairley may be an ancestral and excusable reaction from the mostly-male ruling class of entertainment, but we're not Cro-Magnons anymore. We don't need to judge a likeable person in terms of fertility. Were it so, most flabby boring tycoons would not make the grade.

Were I a lesbian, I'd totally hit Catelyn. Since I'm not, I hope Fairley is hugely successful and gains hordes of passionate male fans at least 20 ys younger than she is.

[Urquhart]

YES. A man can be full of wrinkles and still be hot (cough*Irons*cough) but a woman, oh no, look, from this particular angle she looks older, from now on let's confine her to grandmother roles, no matter how LOVELY she is (as Ms. Fairley is).

We need a cultural/anthropological change. Unfortunately it will take generations. This reaction to Fairley may be an ancestral and excusable reaction from the mostly-male ruling class of entertainment, but we're not Cro-Magnons anymore. We don't need to judge a likeable person in terms of fertility. Were it so, most flabby boring tycoons would not make the grade.

Were I a lesbian, I'd totally hit Catelyn. Since I'm not, I hope Fairley is hugely successful and gains hordes of passionate male fans at least 20 ys younger than she is.

You 've taken a single comment (which was not intended to provoke such a storm of criticism, nor did I write it to offense the actress herself, rather the casting of her) and you 've turned it into a socio-anthropologico-cultural debate about ageism in entertainment.

Also, my displeasure at her casting stemmed from the fact that she replaced the lovely (in every aspect) and far superior (in my humble opinion, which I am entitled to, unless some of you disagree) Jennifer Ehle when the latter dropped out. Nevertheless, I 'll have to take the high road here and end the conversation before any more comments about the "hotness" of Jeremy Irons are tossed around as arguments(whom, for your information I don't find "hot", and I am one of his greatest fans, and certainly I don't admire him because he is hot, but rather because he is a spectacularly good thespian).

Anyway, I don't want to ruin the good atmosphere in this thread so I will continue with my countdown to the premiere: 22 days to go!

[Lord Godric]

From the reaction I have seen on these forums, a lot fans were disappointed when Fairley replaced Ehle as well. However since we have actually seen Fairley in costume and in action the reaction seems to have changed. Personally, I think she looks the part perfectly and from what we have seen she is doing a fantastic job at playing the part.

[Blackfish Blues]

You 've taken a single comment (which was not intended to provoke such a storm of criticism, nor did I write it to offense the actress herself, rather the casting of her) and you 've turned it into a socio-anthropologico-cultural debate about ageism in entertainment.

Yes. Because you were in the line of fire. :P

No really, it was not directed at you personally. It was an answer to Steve the Pirate's comment, which resonated with particular intensity in my mind. I do have a socio-anthropologico-cultural chip on my shoulder about it, but you're right, this is not the time and place.

Thanks for your countdown. :)

[Urquhart]

Yes. Because you were in the line of fire. :P

No really, it was not directed at you personally. It was an answer to Steve the Pirate's comment, which resonated with particular intensity in my mind. I do have a socio-anthropologico-cultural chip on my shoulder about it, but you're right, this is not the time and place.

Thanks for your countdown. :)

I consider it friendly fire anyway. :P

This countdown is getting painful. I know this is not the place to ask but will the extended 15-min sneak peek next Sunday be another preview/featurette or will it be the actual first 15 minutes of the first episode? Thanks in advance.

[Lord Godric]

From what I have heard it is the first full 15 minutes of Episode 1.

[Urquhart]

From what I have heard it is the first full 15 minutes of Episode 1.

Great! Seeing them will make waiting for the actual episode even more strenuous but I don't think I 'll be able to resist.

[Whatever]

Great! Seeing them will make waiting for the actual episode even more strenuous but I don't think I 'll be able to resist.

I won't even try :D (-7/-21)

[Urquhart]

Very interesting and humorous article on the CamelotVsGameofThronesVsTheBorgias matter:

http://insidetv.ew.com/2011/03/27/camelot-vs-game-of-thrones/

[howland_reed]

Another critic, Jace Lacobs (writes for The Daily Beast and his own blog) weighs in, not "particularly taken" with either Camelot or The Borgias. I'm guessing the latter will prove to be better than the former, though.

ETA: And just for keeping track of things, Daniel Fienberg at HitFix says that what he saw of Camelot is "definitely skippable", while Alyssa Rosenberg at the Atlantic says that it's "AGONIZINGLY BAD". Oops. I think Camelot is just going to be a bit of brain candy, at best. But you know, the first few episodes of Spartacus were really rough (well, the pilot was really rough, and the rest were somewhat rough) and it straightened out. So, who knows.

The fact that Spartacus improved by leaps and bounds by Episode 4 or 5 is the only lifeline that gives Camelot any semblance of hope. Otherwise, after seeing the pilot, I wouldn't waste my time. In fact, I stopped watching Spartacus after its dreadful, over-the-top pilot, but after the full season aired, friends of mine couldn't stop talking of the finale and how good the show was that I decided to give it another shot.

On the other hand, Spartacus was saved by great performances by John Hannah and Lucy Lawless, and a solid lead in Andy Whitfield. I don't see the acting or script lifting Camelot from its early grave. Not to mention it has a lot more competition than Spartacus did when it aired, in a similar genre.

[Blackfish Blues]

I consider it friendly fire anyway. :P

Thanks! On my part it's always friendly, sometimes my mouth gets ahead of my brain, but it's always about stuff I care about. In this case, I think we all agree, the hope of seeing outstanding actors of every age in our favourite series and roles. Then, if we apply this to real life, for me it goes the same, but this would be a discussion for the General Chatter subforum and I never go there for the above-mentioned reason. :D

[Abaddon]

Very interesting and humorous article on the CamelotVsGameofThronesVsTheBorgias matter:

http://insidetv.ew.com/2011/03/27/camelot-vs-game-of-thrones/

Very funny! It takes a few small liberties but it's worth a look. Funniest GoT line: "Sex: Tons. Incest sex, reluctant sex, little person sex, sapphic grinding, party guest sex." Most impressive comparison: "Spectacle Level: High. Shot on location in Northern Ireland and Malta, looks like it cost a fortune." The other two got "Medium" for this one.

[Urquhart]

Very funny! It takes a few small liberties but it's worth a look. Funniest GoT line: "Sex: Tons. Incest sex, reluctant sex, little person sex, sapphic grinding, party guest sex." Most impressive comparison: "Spectacle Level: High. Shot on location in Northern Ireland and Malta, looks like it cost a fortune." The other two got "Medium" for this one.

It is a very good presentation of all the shows' strengths and weaknesses. Although I suspect that "The Borgias" and "Camelot" were deemed "Medium" in the spectacle area in comparison to "Game of Thrones" (which looks absolutely, mind-blowingly fine in that department), it is still unfair to give the same grade to a series with virtually no style, "Camelot", and a series with a very distinct look, "The Borgias" (which has atmosphere and sticks to a colour palette of gold and blood-red, etc).