Our Early Impressions

[Westeros]

As we’ve noted, HBO very kindly sent us the six episode screeners that critics received earlier last week, and we’ve rather devoured them all. Linda and I have spent a good deal of time considering and discussing them, and we’ve written an article sharing—in a non-spoiler way—our first impressions. It’s very long, so for those who haven’t the time, here’s our final paragraph that sums things up:

From the point of view of extremely invested fans such as ourselves, the things that we wish were there that aren't give us a pang, but there's so much to be joyful about, the gracenotes to the acting to the visuals, the direction and the writing [or, to put it more clearly, Linda and I loved it even while feeling that some things had to be sacrificed that we're sorry about]. But we need to emphasize that we don't believe that viewers unfamiliar with the books will have the same concern. There's enough meat in the show, there's enough depth, that those who are entirely new to it will find something to enjoy. It is really well done fantasy, unlike anything ever produced for television. It is a quality drama, a rewarding one, and we think those who stick through the dizzying number of characters, plotlines, and locations in the first two episodes will be appropriately hooked. If you want the full depth and complexity of the world, all the nuances and subtleties, there's always the books to turn to.

If you want more, read out first impressions.

Visit the Site!

[julandro]

Have you seen the first 6 episodes of the series? That is well for you. I have healthy envy. :blush:

[Ranmyaku]

I haven't time immediately to read through the first impressions, and don't wish to jump head first into them just yet. However having digested that summarizing paragraph, I've come to the conclusion you're sure non-readers will loveto it, but think those of us who enjoyed the dizzying plethora of detail in the stories from heraldy and feasting to background and scenary may not think too highly of it?

I guess what I really want to know is, as the die-hard fans you guys are...Did you /enjoy/ it?

[Whitebeard]

I got the feeling that you were underwhelmed. This is weird, because WIC said it was awesome. I wonder why they disparity in opinions from two long time uber fans.

[Ran]

Not our intention! We aren't at all underwhelmed. We just notice things, perhaps, that Halfhand didn't (he only watched one episode so far, after all), and there are things we feel are thematically important that don't get their way through, and other things which are changes we're not keen on. We didn't want to just sound like there was absolutely nothing that we could criticize, because that'd be untrue, it'd be unrealistic, and it'd be obvious fanboyism.

But if you look at all the positives we note -- telling people to focus on how much is right, for example -- I think we did try to convey that we in fact loved it, deviations and choices we're not sure we follow aside.

If we were to grade it, Linda would be at about a B+, me an A-. And if the 5th and 6th episodes are a sign of what's to come with the final four, that all may move up a notch. The 6th episode is really something.

[sxeraserhead]

What I want to know is do you think cutting out the backstory was a necessity to keep the narrative moving at a steady pace, or could it have been easily interwoven without sacrificing anything?

[Whitebeard]

lol people all over are having a panic attack that westeros didn't like it. I figured you were just being fair and not trying to sound like a fanboy, though it did sound a bit like you were underwhelmed, but i'm glad you cleared that up.

Also, can you give some insight on how you would think someone who has not read the books would react? Someone who can't notice what was changed, etc. What do you think on that front?

[Linda]

In many cases, it was probably necessary. With 12 episodes, we might have had some more of it.

I do think its possible that there also was an element of avoiding things that risked coming off as...less realistic. Not that they are downplaying that it is fantasy, it is definitely fantasy, but maybe they felt that some of the high fantasy elements are what tend to make fantasy shows (and most fantasy movies) either cheesy or ponderous.

[Ran]

I have edited that last paragraph to just be clearer about it, since others feel that we're somehow disappointed about the whole thing. We love most all of it. This is a good thing. :)

[Linda]

Whitebeard,

Yeah, underwhelmed definitely isn't a word to use. We were giddy on several occasions when watching and it was hard not to watch all 6 in one go.

It is very hard to say what non-readers will think, but overall I think it will go over very well. My greatest concern was always that it would feel like every other fantasy show out there; I am a huge genre fan, but I don't have any fantasy shows on TV I really like...unless one counts the old Robin of Sherwood. But this is definitely an excellent fantasy show.

[sxeraserhead]

Something else I want to know: How is the cinematography? In all the previews, the camerawork and framing looks very "TV". No cinematic, sweeping shots, not a single helicopter shot, etc. So despite the elaborate costumes and sets, the previews don't have that "epic" feel I'm looking for. I'm also curious about the fight scenes, whether they're properly convincing, and whether they've done justice to GRRM's descriptions (the Eyrie duel is the one I'm thinking of)

[Humble Asskicker]

I had a different perception of the books. I always felt that the books were a deliberate subversion of the good ol' days mythos. It represented the common event where people romanticize the past, when really, the past was just as dark and unimpressive as the now. I think Jaime's experiences in the Kingsguard destroy a lot of the illusion of the Kingsguard and the realm at that period. The Kingsguard, however they perceive themselves and however they've been romanticized by legend, haven't actually changed or degraded. They've all been people. As all the characters are. Some notable, some not; some famous and some infamous (deservedly or not); some worthy, some unworthy; but all just people, regardless of the time. Which is fitting, because Song of Ice and Fire is a story about people that just happens to take place in a rather grand and fantastical setting.

I disagree that there's the dying age sort of vibe that Lord of the Rings had; or rather, I think in GRRM's work it is presented as an illusion.

As long as the human tale is told effectively, that's all that matters to me.

Anyway that was a great review, and I think it gives an idea of how good the show is going to be. If even the most hardcore of hardcore fans can only list a few complaints but otherwise express enjoyment of the show, the 99.9% of fans who do not focus on every conceivable detail will probably be jumping up and down with glee. On top of that, it seems non-readers are being won over...I haven't seen a single bad review of this show yet.

[I YIELD!]

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO! *slits wrists*...

[Ran]

There are no helicopter shots that I can recall seeing, I admit. David Benioff even mentioned them in one of his interviews, I believe, how he loved them in LotR and wished they could afford them. Maybe they'll have some in the final four, I don't know.

Episode 6, directed by Dan Minahan, was the one that felt the most like film to me in terms of cinematography; it's also our favorite (Tyrion-Mord and Jorah-Viserys were wonderful, wonderful scenes). But maybe after they do all their color-grading and ADR and so on, it will be as polished as the rest. Right now it looks a little grainer, grungier, more handheld camera work, and some GORGEOUS lighting in this Joffrey and Sansa scene they have.

In no way is it really typical TV, though. There's a number of grand establishing shots of the Wall, of King's Landing, and so on. But ... don't expect LotR. They just can't afford it.

The duel between Bronn and Vardis plays out differently in some ways, but not as much as we had expected from what we had been told of it. Obviously, the big difference is Vardis is a much younger man in the TV show than he is in the books, so they have to maybe overdo the heavy-plate-and-shield thing, but ... no, it was good. Ends really well, although there were some very temporary VFX at the end.

HA,

I acknowledge that George subverts that, but I think it's quite wrong to deny that that image of the past is extremely central to how Ned, Robert, and Jaime (for starters) comprehend the present.

Notice that even Jaime never once criticizes his Sworn Brothers. He still idolizes Ser Arthur Dayne, despite everything. It's not as simple as the ideal being shattered by the reality. See the quote from GRRM that we link -- it's the struggle between the real and the ideal.

[Ser_not_appearing_yet]

I had a different perception of the books. I always felt that the books were a deliberate subversion of the good ol' days mythos. It represented the common event where people romanticize the past, when really, the past was just as dark and unimpressive as the now. I think Jaime's experiences in the Kingsguard destroy a lot of the illusion of the Kingsguard and the realm at that period. The Kingsguard, however they perceive themselves and however they've been romanticized by legend, haven't actually changed or degraded. They've all been people. As all the characters are. Some notable, some not; some famous and some infamous (deservedly or not); some worthy, some unworthy; but all just people, regardless of the time. Which is fitting, because Song of Ice and Fire is a story about people that just happens to take place in a rather grand and fantastical setting.

I disagree that there's the dying age sort of vibe that Lord of the Rings had; or rather, I think in GRRM's work it is presented as an illusion.

As long as the human tale is told effectively, that's all that matters to me.

Anyway that was a great review, and I think it gives an idea of how good the show is going to be. If even the most hardcore of hardcore fans can only list a few complaints but otherwise express enjoyment of the show, the 99.9% of fans who do not focus on every conceivable detail will probably be jumping up and down with glee. On top of that, it seems non-readers are being won over...I haven't seen a single bad review of this show yet.

I agree on the romanticism front, I always saw it as something similar to our own world. We always romanticise the past, but our own reality tends to reveal the truth of the matter, which is the case in ASOIAF. At least that's how I saw it.

[Linda]

I had a different perception of the books. I always felt that the books were a deliberate subversion of the good ol' days mythos. It represented the common event where people romanticize the past, when really, the past was just as dark and unimpressive as the now. I think Jaime's experiences in the Kingsguard destroy a lot of the illusion of the Kingsguard and the realm at that period. The Kingsguard, however they perceive themselves and however they've been romanticized by legend, haven't actually changed or degraded. They've all been people. As all the characters are. Some notable, some not; some famous and some infamous (deservedly or not); some worthy, some unworthy; but all just people, regardless of the time. Which is fitting, because Song of Ice and Fire is a story about people that just happens to take place in a rather grand and fantastical setting.

I think, as I believe George also says in the link Ran gives in the article, that its a lot about the contrast between the romanticism and the realism and not just about subverting the former. I also feel, and I think George very much expresses this in his wonderful little speech on what fantasy is, that fantasy very much is about everything being richer and larger-than-life. That doesn't mean the characters become purely archetypes without human flaws and failings, but they aren't your neighbours either. The legends may not tell the whole truth, that is absolutely true, but I don't feel that they exaggerate greatness of those characters either.

[I YIELD!]

Wait, so the sound, music and SFX aren't even finalized yet in the 6 episodes they sent out? That's some freaking good news since it garnered some pretty positive reviews even though it's an unpolished product.

[Ran]

What happens with a screener is that temp VFX and such actually gets noted -- a little text shows up. But in the early episodes, when temp VFX showed up, to our eye it looked complete -- it must be a last color pass or something. On the other hand, in ep 5 and 6, when it said temp VFX, they really meant it. They had little place holder effects in place, almost animatics.

There was no 'temp music', so I guess there's never any place where the music is not Djawadi's, or where the music is not fully complete when it's used. BUT, there's lots of places where there's no music, where maybe there might be in the end, and they just don't note 'music to come'.

There was also some clear sound issues in the later episodes, but you know, critics are very used to these things, they filter it out, so I wouldn't necessarily put too much weight on the roughness of it.

[Humble Asskicker]

Notice that even Jaime never once criticizes his Sworn Brothers. He still idolizes Ser Arthur Dayne, despite everything. It's not as simple as the ideal being shattered by the reality. See the quote from GRRM that we link -- it's the struggle between the real and the ideal.

I do recall when Jaime was speaking of the execution of Eddard's father and brother, and how the noble Kingsguard did their duty and simply...watched, not judged.

One can do grand deeds, and be a better fighter than many others, and engage in daring events of larger-than-life deeds, but the idea that there was ever any moral clarity to any of this, I think, is spurious. There's never a point, for anyone, when the struggle over right and wrong is easy, or when they don't sometimes lose the battle. Even for legends of the past, and legends of the future.

The dichotomy of the real and ideal is best represented, in my mind by the tournaments in book 1 and book 2. Robert sets up a grand tournament that is extremely exciting and reminded me of the pageantry of Le Morte D'Arthur. It was huge and thrilling and seemed to be everything that Sansa dreamed of. Then you have Joffery's tournament, which is a far sight less impressive, less grand. Hardly any knight of merit participates. The romanticism is noticeably different. There's a feel that something has passed, that a change has been made.

But then there's the reality. Robert's tourney cost a fortune, and was just another step in Robert's reckless mismanagement of the realm's finance. It gave some entertainment to the common people, but imagine how much better off they would have been if Robert had used the money in an more economically perspicacious manner. And of course, with Joffery's tournament, there's a war going on, the realms are divided and there's a whole slew of problems for everyone to deal with. It's not feasible. But there have been lavish tournaments before Robert (as we saw in the Hedge Knight) and there will be lavish tournaments after. Robert's tournament will probably fit in a legend of its own some day in the future. In fact, this current time already has ample material for legends to grow, to be told and embellished later on. Perhaps in the future the Kingsguard of Joffery's time will be considered the ideal, far degraded from what they are now a hundred years in the future (if the Kingsguard still exists).

I think, as I believe George also says in the link Ran gives in the article, that its a lot about the contrast between the romanticism and the realism and not just about subverting the former. I also feel, and I think George very much expresses this in his wonderful little speech on what fantasy is, that fantasy very much is about everything being richer and larger-than-life. That doesn't mean the characters become purely archetypes without human flaws and failings, but they aren't your neighbours either. The legends may not tell the whole truth, that is absolutely true, but I don't feel that they exaggerate greatness of those characters either.

I certainly agree, but I don't think that applies to a single period of time, but rather time changes the perception (sort of Robert Jordan-ish there). I hope the explanation above this quote clarifies my thoughts, as I do think we are in accord on this.

My thoughts - and I couldn't say whether I will retain them or not, as I haven't yet seen the show, as you guys have - is that the legends stem from the human element, so as long as the human element is proficient covered, the legends will speak for themselves. And I think the vast potential of interrelationships and conflict promised in future seasons, and the visual degradation of the times - the pageantry of the first season versus the wars of the following seasons - could manage to lend that sorrow of loss in a different but very palpable way. And there's plenty of loss that's awaits the characters.

[El Duderino]

Guess I'm in the minority that I don't find positive reactions/impressions boring in the least, esp compared to nitpicks