[BOOK SPOILERS] Changes you wouldn't mind.

[Venardhi]

Aging up characters, appearances not quite lining up, early or late deaths of characters of little or great import. Changes are likely and even necessary at times when adapting prose to television or movie screens. Even the great George R R Martin has mentioned at times how he wishes he did things differently along the way, in particular having the children be older which is one of the most notable changes for the show.

So now, throw in your thoughts on the matter. Do you want four legged dragons? Can you think of a reason why Davos can't be Asian or Melisandre a blond? Should the giants be excluded to save on effects budget or even large swathes of storytelling excluded to save time?

Your voice matters. Not really, but we can pretend. Thus is the joy of arguing on the internet.

- Vin

[julandro]

Good topic.

As I said in another topic, I do not like the idea that killing a character. I have not seen the results, but I am very skeptical. I understand they have to cut some stories. Anyway, moving the imaginary world of George RR Martin to the screen, it is very difficult.

Small changes do not bother me.

Killing a character who does not touch him. if it is a bad start!

<_<

[smegma]

I know that GRRM intends them to be, and I know "scientifically" it makes more sense, but I don't like two legged dragons aesthetically! Just the visual. But I know they are going with the two legs - and that's fine by me.

I had mentioned that I would be okay if they let Viserys live longer (but still killed him in the end). I don't think that's the case though, based on the title of certain episodes.

Unlike a lot of people, I think a lot of the dialogue could be adjusted - there are very few scenes that I want to see exactly as they happened in the book. I mean, I didn't DISLIKE the dialogue, but it didn't resonate as strongly with me as it does it many. So for the purpose of exposition or for better tv or brevity or any of it, I'm fine with tweaks or wholly replaced dialogue.

I am glad they made Lysa thin instead of fat. To me that makes more sense with the character.

I'd be fine if Mel didn't have red eyes or was asian or any of it.

The removal of a bunch of minor characters - some of the bannermen, bwb, etc. Even Blackfish unless he's more important later (which may very well be the case). I know he appeals to a lot of fans, but for the sake of the show it may be necessary and he doesn't add a whole lot in the books - but again, he may be set up for a lot more, which is fine, keep him in that case.

I don't envy the cutting list they'll need to do for next season.

[guyminuslife]

I'd like Tyrion to be 6'1". I think his character would be improved if everyone thought he was a dwarf, but he really wasn't, and the joke was on them. Also, I wish Sam was skinny; it would make the moniker "Ser Piggy" more ironic.

I wish Joffrey had survived his assassination. He was my favorite character (to read about, and I identified with him strongly). If not him, then Aerys.

On the other hand, I wish that Theon really had put Bran and Rickon's heads on spikes. And I was hoping Janos Slynt would get to be Lord Commander of the Night's Watch, so that he could execute Jon for the deserter he so clearly had always been.

And I think the story will be improved if turns out Gregor Clegane is Azor Ahai. Who better to fight back the forces of darkness than the biggest, baddest motherfucker around?

I'm not really a fan of dragons in the first place. Instead, they could be giant, fire-breathing bunnies. They could even fly, by flapping their enormously floppy ears furiously in the wind. It would be way more original, and avoid re-hashing a common fantasy trope.

[Tywin's bastard]

I'm quite sure they aren't going to have Tyrion do some freakish acrobatics in his scene with Jon and that's a change that's an improvement from the book.

[Valonquar]

I wouldn't mind if Viserys had more redeeming qualities than he does in the book. Paranoid, delusional and acting schizophrenic with his sister sure, but for me it doesn't really make sense that Viserys, who from a very young age has pretty much had complete responsibility for his own life, is portrayed as cowardly, and certainly not that he is completely ignorant of Doothraki culture and looks down on anything not Westerosi. Granted he has some few memories of childhood in KL, but he spent most of his life in the culturally diverse Free Cities. You'd think he'd be pretty familiar with other cultures.

[Dragonfish]

I'm quite sure they aren't going to have Tyrion do some freakish acrobatics in his scene with Jon and that's a change that's an improvement from the book.

Along those same lines, I wouldn't mind if they left out the part where Robert wants to give Jaime the Warden of the East title. Not only does it not come up again later, but it also doesn't match up with what we're told later about the Kingsguard not being able to inherit.

[Areo]

I really wouldn't mind cutting out mammoths and giants, although some form of legendary creatures should accompany the wildlings just so that the NW sees that they really exist (and for additional fantasy elements later on). Including giants (and other things) may be both expensive and not-so-good looking in the end. But, given that magic is by default scarce in Westeros removing too much of the "unicorns"(e.g. leaving just the Others, dragons and one special crow) will probably kill the feeling that once this world was full of wierd animals and races turned into myth. But, if it's only for a feel of the world and not the plot - off with their heads ;) I'm not gonna miss them.

Aging up the kids is the right decision. Even GRRM says so, so no point in arguing here. Let's hope they reach enough seasons to start concerning about children getting too old.

I wouldn't mind toning down the sex and gore. In the books these are abundant, but yet they are not the focus of attention. As this is TV such scenes are more graphic and going for the same proportion as in the books may lead to disproportionately high amounts of sex and violence in the show (perceived). I'm not going to shy away from it but for new viewers there should be a careful balance there.

[TheEvilKing]

I hope they get rid of the whole "Aerys was gonna burn the city down so I killed him" sob story that Jaime gives Brienne. I'm still hoping the whole thing turns out to be a big lie in the books.

I disagree with Areo - there should be more sex, and it looks like that's the way HBO are going. Yay! :cheers:

[Tywin's bastard]

I hope they get rid of the whole "Aerys was gonna burn the city down so I killed him" sob story that Jaime gives Brienne. I'm still hoping the whole thing turns out to be a big lie in the books.

I disagree with Areo - there should be more sex, and it looks like that's the way HBO are going. Yay! :cheers:

They haven't gotten rid of that part of Jaime, they've actually embraced and made it part of his character in the first season as we see him as he is in the show and not just through the POV of Stark family members. There was a preview where he tells Ned that he remembered Ned's father being burnt alive when he killed Aerys and that it felt like justice.

I don't see how you can get rid of that part of Jaime either. He's not at all a stereotypical villain and as soon as he becomes a POV we see that his entire character hangs on that he actually is pretty honorable/decent deep down inside but rarely connects with that part since no one sees him as honorable anyway after he killed Aerys, despite that he thinks he did the right thing (sparing thousands of lives, making the king pay for his crimes etc being more important than an oath).

[Thelonious]

I think the weepy Qartheen would come across a bit silly on screen. I imagine they'll ditch that aspect of their culture.

[Catsclaw]

I don't see how you can get rid of that part of Jaime either. He's not at all a stereotypical villain and as soon as he becomes a POV we see that his entire character hangs on that he actually is pretty honorable/decent deep down inside but rarely connects with that part since no one sees him as honorable anyway after he killed Aerys, despite that he thinks he did the right thing (sparing thousands of lives, making the king pay for his crimes etc being more important than an oath).

Quite right. That's what makes Jaime fascinating. He's this idealistic young knight who joined the Kingsguard, discovered just how flawed and mortal all the other members were, and grew bitter and disillusioned. He was unable to prevent all these horrors during his service to Aerys (in fact, he was honor-bound to protect the King). And his finest moment, when he finally summons the courage to do the right thing and kill the King, will forever be seen by everyone else as a moment of weakness, not strength.

It's his willingness to throw away his reputation and his honor and do the right thing that makes him heroic.

[TheEvilKing]

Right, but I felt that worked well without the whole "Aerys gonna set everyone on fire dudes!" retcon. Jaime killing the king he's sworn to pretend because the king is an insane, murderous, evil tyrant is morally complex enough. The fact that he's gonna burn down King's Landing just makes it The Right Thing To Do, no question about it.

They haven't gotten rid of that part of Jaime, they've actually embraced and made it part of his character in the first season as we see him as he is in the show and not just through the POV of Stark family members. There was a preview where he tells Ned that he remembered Ned's father being burnt alive when he killed Aerys and that it felt like justice.I don't see how you can get rid of that part of Jaime either. He's not at all a stereotypical villain and as soon as he becomes a POV we see that his entire character hangs on that he actually is pretty honorable/decent deep down inside but rarely connects with that part since no one sees him as honorable anyway after he killed Aerys, despite that he thinks he did the right thing (sparing thousands of lives, making the king pay for his crimes etc being more important than an oath).

I feel like you're missing my point. Aerys killing Ned's dad makes sense to me. Yes, the King killed him for a pretty crap reason, but does that (plus the other issues) justify breaking the Kingsguard oath? Very nice, very morally gray stuff. But then the mass genocide revelation comes along and just makes it too easy a decision for Jaime.

[neutronicus]

I would have liked to see the Prologue go. It's kind of odd to start a show about power struggles by showing us some creepy zombies that we won't see again for an entire season.

[Tywin's bastard]

Right, but I felt that worked well without the whole "Aerys gonna set everyone on fire dudes!" retcon. Jaime killing the king he's sworn to pretend because the king is an insane, murderous, evil tyrant is morally complex enough. The fact that he's gonna burn down King's Landing just makes it The Right Thing To Do, no question about it.

I feel like you're missing my point. Aerys killing Ned's dad makes sense to me. Yes, the King killed him for a pretty crap reason, but does that (plus the other issues) justify breaking the Kingsguard oath? Very nice, very morally gray stuff. But then the mass genocide revelation comes along and just makes it too easy a decision for Jaime.

Yes, I first took it as that you disliked the entire notion that he did something very dishonorable out of honorable intentions.

But I don't think Aerys killing a couple of Starks is motivation enough for him to kill the king. Sure, it's a horrible deed but to me that alone is far from something that would resonate so strongly with Jaime that he would break his oath. In order for Jaime to kill the king for a couple of terrible executions it would pretty much have to have been his own father and brother (or sister) for it to make any sense.

Personally I like the fact that he went so far as to break a sacred vow to do the right thing and in return he got no thanks, everyone saw him as a dishonorable oathbreaker, which over time shaped him to only embrace his arrogance and ruthlessness because that was what everyone expected anyway. It brings a nice little tragedy but still the seeds for who he became must have been there from the start as well.

[Xenophon]

I think the weepy Qartheen would come across a bit silly on screen. I imagine they'll ditch that aspect of their culture.

Agreed. In fact, I wouldn't mind if they made some revisions to all the eastern societies to make them a bit more realistic. They always felt cartoonish to me in the books, and I think seeing them on screen will only make things feel even more like a cheesy orientalist painting.

Unfortunately, given what we've seen of the Dothraki so far, it seems like they've gone in the opposite direction, making them into even more of a stereotypical noble savage culture. But perhaps that will change as the season goes on.

[TheEvilKing]

Yes, I first took it as that you disliked the entire notion that he did something very dishonorable out of honorable intentions.

But I don't think Aerys killing a couple of Starks is motivation enough for him to kill the king. Sure, it's a horrible deed but to me that alone is far from something that would resonate so strongly with Jaime that he would break his oath. In order for Jaime to kill the king for a couple of terrible executions it would pretty much have to have been his own father and brother (or sister) for it to make any sense.

Personally I like the fact that he went so far as to break a sacred vow to do the right thing and in return he got no thanks, everyone saw him as a dishonorable oathbreaker, which over time shaped him to only embrace his arrogance and ruthlessness because that was what everyone expected anyway. It brings a nice little tragedy but still the seeds for who he became must have been there from the start as well.

Oh, I don't think that was the only motivation. He had to put up with listening to Aerys rape his wife. Aerys treated him like shit. And Jaime's own dad was in the process of betraying the King.

The other problem I have with it is that nobody else seems to know. Ned and co seem to think he killed Aerys just to further the Lannister cause. Didn't Jaime tell anyone what Aerys was planning? Why wouldn't he tell anyone? Now everyone thinks he's a traitor rather than a hero.

[guyminuslife]

Oh, I don't think that was the only motivation. He had to put up with listening to Aerys rape his wife. Aerys treated him like shit. And Jaime's own dad was in the process of betraying the King.

The other problem I have with it is that nobody else seems to know. Ned and co seem to think he killed Aerys just to further the Lannister cause. Didn't Jaime tell anyone what Aerys was planning? Why wouldn't he tell anyone? Now everyone thinks he's a traitor rather than a hero.

Probably he figured it wouldn't matter. He was the Kingslayer. He broke his oath. And it does sound like a flimsy story, even if it was true.

Also, recall that he doesn't like Ned, and could give a fuck what Ned thinks about him.

[Asha—Not Yara!]

As I said in the previous thread about this topic, I hope they'll tone down Renly's Rainbow Guard, or do away with the concept altogether. We know they are going to be showing us that Renly and Loras are romantically involved, so we hardly need Renly's exuberant love of colors as a hint. The rainbow is a symbol commonly used for gay right organizations, so I don't think it'd translate well on screen, and viewers would probably feel like they're being hit over the head with a sledgehammer the fact that Renly is gay.

[Athelstane]

Yeah the rainbow guard can go. I always thought that was too blunt. And JH and Biter should be made more realistic when we first meet them.