Our Early Impressions

[alguien]

Can I just yet again mention I love that John Hodgman is tweeting yet again about the Game of Thrones show?

Probably my favorite celebrity geek. :thumbsup:

[Werthead]

About disillusionment. I do think things were better in the past. At least for a while under good king Egg and (presumably) his son. I think if you go further back into the past, you will find other greatly troubled periods (but at that stage, we are already entering times of legend almos)t. At the same time, the KG was better in those periods. The KG might have had its bad moments in the distant past but when a member of the KG actually kills the king then everything changes. The KG can never be the same again.

And things changed under Aerys.

I'm not sure about that. Certainly Criston Cole seems to be pretty reviled, either for betraying his king's wishes (to pass the crown to Rhaenyra) or for doing so in a manner that triggered a catastrophic civil war which nearly destroyed House Targaryen. I get the impression that before Jaime, he was considered the dodgiest member of the Kingsguard. And there's probably other ones who've failed to live up to their responsibilities that we haven't heard about (there was the one who slept with Aegon IV's mistress as well).

[Padraig]

Certainly Criston Cole seems to be pretty reviled, either for betraying his king's wishes (to pass the crown to Rhaenyra) or for doing so in a manner that triggered a catastrophic civil war which nearly destroyed House Targaryen.

That's what I meant about the KG having (ok, very) bad moments previously but I wanted to differentiate between playing the game of thrones and actually killing the king. (And of course, Jaime staying on in the KG, just to add a nice layer of the "ridiculous").

[julandro]

Ran and Linda. Can you answer me? :blush:

Important episode 6 spoiler

The death of Viserys is very graphic? Does it look like they burn your head?

[Ran]

You'll have to wait and see. I suspect people imagine it, if they imagine it at all, probably imagine it in different ways.

[julandro]

Ok. To be calm, I will not ask anything about Lancel Lannister. heheh anyway, I imagine that in six episodes there will be nothing. I will not be a nuisance. :frown5:

I do not like being called a troll :crying: :angry2:

[Ran]

And Cole died the traitor's death -- the scales were balanced, and trust in the Kingsguard could heal. Jaime's strange, uneasy continued existence as a Kingsguard greatly magnified the sense of the Kingsguard as a fallen institution.

[Trebla]

I think I can probably forgive the omission of the KG history if they, as others have suggested, use it in further seasons. Fact is Nikolaj Coster-Waldau may have very little to do in most of season 2. We perhaps could get some flashbacks of his history while he rots away in the Riverrun dungeon. If we are lucky to get to season 3, his history will need to be fleshed out.

[FilliamHMuffman]

I'm hopeful that Ran's criticism regarding the Kingsguard will become moot in the last four episodes if Barristan Selmy's dismissal is handled with the appropriate gravitas.

[Whitebeard]

I don't think you need to have Kingsguard history, it is not an inherent part of the series. While it will interest most hardcore fans like us, it might mean very little to the general audience, and truth be told the story doesn't require it in anyway shape or form. The only instanced where i can perhaps see them bringing it in, is in the tower of joy sequence, if there's any, and to flesh out Jaime's character a bit, in later seasons. Other than that, its not really a must. Those things usually come to us through exposition as memories, and are notoriously difficult to pull off in film.

[Padraig]

I don't think you need to have Kingsguard history, it is not an inherent part of the series.

That's true enough. I suppose that is why they dropped it. Its a really nice piece of backstory but all but the near essential backstory is vulnerable to being excised.

Although I haven't ruled out seeing more about the KG later given their focus on Jaime.

[Bronn Stone]

Thanks for letting us know. I am already sure I am going to really like it. And that there are gonna be Denethor-esque moments when I'll ask "why????".

Kinda sad about the Kingsguard news.

Mostly because that tells me they didn't play up the 'Bran wanting to be a knight and worshipping the ground Selmy walks on' element. I think Bran's transition from dreaming of being a Knight of the Seven to becoming what it appears he will become is one of the more interesting story arcs of the tale. Though honestly, I expect them to downplay the religious elements altogether for that fickle element of the American audience.

I only hope this becomes huge enough where HBO agrees to a 13 episode buy for ACOK. Or larger.....

/dream mode

[Ran]

I agree that the Kingsguard thing can be sacrificed, as such. But note I cited it as just one example of the trend to deromanticize the past, which will certainly give a somewhat different understanding to new viewers as compared to the book readers of the psychology of some of the central characters and also give a sense of the tone and atmosphere and themes George strives for.

It's not vital or deadly to the series. But it's something George used to give depth and complexity to his work. But there's still plenty of depth and complexity.

[Tywin's bastard]

Personally I always find that when you watch adaptations of books you've read you can (and should) fill in the gaps of such things yourself, as long as the adaptation hasn't done something that speaks right against the extra detail of history. Really good adaptations give you a lot of opportunity for this as they can create a bunch of things with reference from the books even though they don't have the time to explain it to the non-readers. A good example in the preview was how Ser Waymar looked and sounded very much like someone from a noble house, allowing us readers to instantly recognize him for the knight he is described to be in the novel.

I'm all for seeing the adaptation as it's own work but I still add my own knowledge whenever it's possible for my own experience.

[Ser_not_appearing_yet]

Ok, just got back from the London screening. A pretty low key affair, most of the people seemed to be actor's agents, but I DID spot Mark Addy, Joseph Mawle and the dude who plays Rast. I was having an epic geekout the whole way through simply because I was watching the show alongside some of the freaking actors. Anyway. These are my general thoughts, sprinkled with spoiler tags for people who want to go in as fresh as possible.

Overall I really enjoyed episodes 1 & 2. Without going into too much detail, the cinematography and music is awesome, some truly epic shots, my favourite of which being

the shot of the wall in episode 2 and seeing the king's arrival from Bran's pov atop of the castle

. Jaw-dropping stuff there. The first episode starts of fairly slow after the prologue, but then really picks up after a certain point. The three kids are AMAZING. I can't believe how perfect they are. Particularly Bran, actually.

There were also changes I didn't like,

I didn't like how they changed some of Tyrion's dialogue during his first meeting with Jon, nor did I like how the hound seemed underplayed during Micah's death. There's no cruel laugh here, for example. And Jaime seems distinctly different to how I imagined him, less charismatic, less instantly dislikeable. He's already being presented as more complex due to the abandonement of POV. I'm not certain whether I like this change or not, will have to wait and see. I wasn't massively impressed by what I saw of NCW I have to say, though he totally NAILS 'the things I do for love.' Note-perfect.

I loved basically everything else, there's a distinctly 'dour' feel about the North (and Starks). A real sense of gravitas about everything there. The east is exotic and fucking sexy, which is how I imagined it. They do an excellent job of juxtaposing between the two settings (which seems really hard to do given how seperate those storylines are). A great example of this

is the scene where Dany expresses how she doesn't want to marry Drogo, which is then immediately contrasted with the scene where Sansa begs her mother to convince her father to marry her and Joffrey.

I didn't mind Catelyn.

Granted I've only seen the first two episodes, and she's certainly changed from the books, but at the core she's still a mother who acts on her emotions while mantaining an air of duty. At least I thought so. I think I liked her as a character more than I did in the books, though she may be less complex.

The opening credits really are amazing btw. Truly beautiful, I can't imagine anyone disliking them. Overall, like Ran said its an entertaining watch whatever smaller things you disagree with. I'm not sure the series will be on the Sopranos level of success, but I'm 99.99% certain we're getting at least season 2, probably more.

Oh yeah, and even if people hate the premise, they will likely watch anyway because Emilia Clarke is SMOKING. As is Jason Momoa I'd imagine. :smoking:

Edit: On the whole world-building detail and aspects of the world's history being left out, I have to say it doesn't bother me. I didn't see much evidence of that, but quite clearly they have to tone down some aspects of the books so they can fill in the meat of the books, ie: the human drama. As far as Westeros, the North and Pentos goes, the places I saw in the show are now the places from the books in my head. The detail in the world itself is excellent. Have never seen anything like it from a Fantasy show on TV, its film-like.

[End of Disc One]

I'm not sure the series will be on the Sopranos level of success, but I'm 99.99% certain we're getting at least season 2, probably more.

Why do you say this? Do you know something we don't?

Thanks for the impressions btw, always appreciated.

[Ser_not_appearing_yet]

Why do you say this? Do you know something we don't?

Thanks for the impressions btw, always appreciated.

Obviously nothings certain yet, but Frank Doelger one of the producers was there, and he sounded very confident. Take from that what you will. :P

[Abaddon]

I agree that the Kingsguard thing can be sacrificed, as such. But note I cited it as just one example of the trend to deromanticize the past, which will certainly give a somewhat different understanding to new viewers as compared to the book readers of the psychology of some of the central characters and also give a sense of the tone and atmosphere and themes George strives for.

Does the show contrast with the books view of the Kingsguard, or simply omit it? In other words, as a reader, am I free to fill in the blanks myself, or are there things that will counter what I know from the books?

I don't mind the idea that the books are richer in detail and can flesh out the series (obviously there are going to be some cases where that isn't possible) but I would feel sadder if they had to actually put stuff in that counters our knowledge from the books. If that makes sense...

[Abaddon]

Personally I always find that when you watch adaptations of books you've read you can (and should) fill in the gaps of such things yourself, as long as the adaptation hasn't done something that speaks right against the extra detail of history.

Regarding my previous post; I should have just read your reply first, it's exactly what I was thinking although better written :thumbsup:

[Asha—Not Yara!]

I don't think anything in Ran's review indicated an outright contradiction in how the Kingsguard was shown from the books, but hopefully he can confirm for those who might be a bit worried.