[NO SPOILERS] General Opinions on the TV Show

[Arya The Assassin]

I just saw the second episode of the HBO TV series. As a fan of the books, I'm very glad to see that the series has finally been turned into a TV show. After I read the books many years ago (I started reading the first book shortly after it was published), it struck me how visually oriented the prose was, and I felt that the books would be suitable for a movie adaptation.

At the same time I felt that a single movie wouldn't do the books justice. Several movies would have to be made, just like they did with The Lord of The Rings (which, in my opinion, is a highly overrated movie trilogy). But at that time a movie adaptation was nowhere in sight, and as the years passed I lost hope that the series would ever show up on the big screen. I was positively surprised to learn a while ago that the books would be turned into a TV series by HBO. Given their more "liberal" approach to onscreen depiction of sex and violence, I felt confident that they wouldn't undermine the essence of the books by trying to make the TV series too "family friendly".

Anyway, here are some of my general views on the series so far, using the books as a primary basis for comparison. But please keep in mind that it's been a while since I read the books, and my recollection might be a bit vague in some places.

Opening montage:

I really liked the stylized CG montage. I found it visually interesting to watch, in contrast to many other opening credits sequences which tend to look rather boring (you're just waiting for the show to start...). I'm sure one could pick out a lot of symbolism and other details after repeated viewings.

The score:

At first I wasn't overwhelmed by the music. But the main theme is good, and at least they haven't made the mistake of overscoring the show. The music is used in an effective manner.

The cast:

It's crucial to get things right when it comes to casting. But in my opinion the producers/casting directors have done a wonderful job. I particularly like the main cast: Sean Bean, Michelle Fairley and the young actors playing the Stark children (children can be particularly difficult to cast, for various reasons). And it doesn't hurt that the young actors not only look attractive, but more importantly, their personalities seem to match their counterparts from the books. I particularly like Maisie Williams, who plays Arya. She's cute and has an interesting look, and her portrayal of Arya seems to be spot on.

My only gripe here is that some of the actors seem a bit older than the characters from the books. For example, I seem to recall that Daenerys and her brother (in particular) were younger in the books, although I realize that there are obvious reasons why they had to pick an older actress to play Dany. I must admit that Emilia Clarke appears a bit "passive" and subdued in her role, but that may be intentional, because Dany wasn't that confident to begin with. She eventually became stronger and more self-confident, and I hope Emilia will reflect that character development in her acting. Viserys is also played by an actor (Harry Lloyd) that looks much older than I'd expected. I also thinks he lacks the temperamental attitude of the character in the books (he could get really angry and intimidating).

The direwolfs are cool, BTW: They look very similar to my sister's Malamutes.

The plot:

I won't go into much detail here, but suffice to say that I think they've managed to extract many of the most important elements from the books. There will always be some loss of information or distortion of the plot when a series of books are being made into a movie or even a TV show. Certain plot elements will have to be changed or cut out altogether. Some characters will also be left out or combined into one character for the sake of simplification. However, I'm satisfied with the way they've handled the series so far, because they've preserved the essence of the books. And it doesn't seem to me that they've made any major, unnecessary changes.

The tone of the series is also right, in my opinion: They've taken a serious approach and the series is aimed primarily at adults. One of the worst things HBO could've done would be to cut out all the "bad" language, and tone down the sex scenes and violence (but like I mentioned earlier, I never feared they would do that).

Production values:

A TV show can't spend the same kind of money as a big-budget Hollywood-movie. Thus, it would be unfair to expect a TV series to achieve the same level of CG-photorealism and production values as a $200 M budget movie.

With this in mind, I still feel that they've done a good job of recreating the period and setting of the ASoIaF-series. Ultimately, it's the characters and plot that drive the story forward in a longer series like this, and although one could always wish for more spectacular visuals, it's not that big of a loss. It'll be interesting to see how they will deal with the more "fantastical" elements from the books. Those who've read the books probably know what I'm talking about (hint: flying creatures). The challenge here will be to create photorealistic creatures with a limited TV-show budget. That doesn't necessarily mean these creatures will have to look photorealistic, as long as they don't look ridiculous or too stylized.

Overall:

The first two episodes have lived up to my expectations and I look forward to the rest of season one. Some people might perhaps feel that things are moving too slowly plot-wise, but I think it's important that the characters are properly "introduced", especially for those who haven't read the novels. And based on what's happened so far, we know that things are starting to heat up, so to speak. I should also mention that I think it's wonderful to see the TV show in glorious HD and with impactful, atmospheric surround sound.

I've read that the producers intend to do another season, although I don't think anything is official yet. If the rest of the season is as good as the first two episodes, then it deserves a renewal, I think. I very rarely bother to watch TV shows (I find them boring in general), but I hope this TV show becomes a success, because it would be very disappointing if one of the few TV shows that I really like would end after only one season :)

EDIT #2: HBO has in fact confirmed (on April 19th) that they will renew the series for a second season.

EDIT: Sub-topic added by Ran

[Arya The Assassin]

BTW, I found this interesting "making of" featurette on the official "A Game of Thrones" channel on YouTube:

Making Game Of Thrones (HBO)

It gives you a glimpse on what's to come later in season one (but there are no spoilers). I believe the show will get even better as the intrigue and drama starts to pile up.

[craster's whore]

the acting has put me off, it reminds me of Xena or Hercules. I guess i have high expectations since im such a huge fan of the books.

But everything else seems to be done well from the production to the casting(exception King Robert). So far 3/5 stars.

[Kaitscralt]

So far, so good. :thumbsup:

[Jack Sparrow]

I didn't like the casting, but I loved the acting. Overall 9/5.

[Kaitscralt]

I didn't like the casting, but I loved the acting. Overall 9/5.

Any of the casting? :uhoh:

[Slick Mongoose]

9/5? Wow, that's a good mark!

[Maia]

9/5? Wow, that's a good mark!

I like everything except for costumes. Am I alone in disliking the costuming of the main characters? Why all the drab colors, ubiquitous leather and the same clothing for day-to-day living and royal feasts? Where are the silks and the velvets, where is the clear visual difference between the nobles and the commoners (which yes, even Starks displayed)?

Why do the Starks wear so much black and very dark brown, instead of gray and white of their House? Why is nobody obviously wearing their sigils? Incidentally, it would have made it easier for the non-reader audience to keep the characters apart in their minds, too.

IMHO, "The Borgias" are doing it much better - it is instantly obvious who is a noble and who is a stable-hand and they do change their wardrobes when occasion requires it.

[Lady Blackfish]

I am not so big on a lot of the costuming either, though it isn't a dealbreaker for me. I think they're overdoing the hardy rustic feel to, I suppose, keep things looking gritty and authentic and serious so it doesn't come off so colorful and fantastical and silly. I think there could've been a middle ground there though.

[Arya The Assassin]

the acting has put me off, it reminds me of Xena or Hercules.

Well, I think the acting in general is a lot better than Xena or Hercules.

Some of the actors do not impress that much (such as Mark Addy who plays the King, and Lena Headey as Cersei), but I don't think any of the characters are really wooden or really bad (I can't same the same thing about Xena...).

How we assess the portrayal of a character is also related to casting: For example, Mark is hardly a bad actor per se, but perhaps someone else would've added more "gravitas" to Robert's character? Besides, some actors tend to grow with their role after some time, so who knows, maybe I'll "warm up" to Lena Headey's Cersei later in season one?

The only slight letdown so far (acting wise) is Harry Lloyd, who I mentioned briefly in my first post. I wouldn't say he's a bad actor, but he does seem a bit "lightweight" and superficial in my eyes. I'd expected a more sinister, calculating and temperamental character.

But as I've mentioned before, I think Ned and the rest of the main characters have been well cast. They do not only fit their characters, but I like their performances as well. Other actors worth mentioning in this regard is Kit Harington in his role as the bastard Jon Snow. Peter Dinklage also delivers a nice performance as the dry but sharp-witted Tyrion. His "to hell with it"-attitude reminds me of the character from the book.

[Spanky]

I only one complaint for whole shabang, and that's probably because he's my favorite character so I'm hard to please. :3

The Hound.

Looks-wise, I think he's great. I don't care too much about the amount of scarring. And the actor totally looks like what I imagined him to look like. My problem is the performance and direction. Not what I imagined. The guy is supposed to be full of anger at the world. Where's the rage? I imagined more of a sneer and rasp whenever he talked, with a louder voice. Rory (that's his name, right?) plays it more stoic, silent, and brooding. Also, there was never a good, close-up establishing shot of his face. So far he's had like two super fast lines that whiz by. The non-reader I'm watching it with doesn't even know anything about him. I also heard that his role is diminished later on in the series, which isn't good at all. His drunken scene with Sansa better still happen.

My two cents. =D

[Arya The Assassin]

I like everything except for costumes. Am I alone in disliking the costuming of the main characters? Why all the drab colors, ubiquitous leather and the same clothing for day-to-day living and royal feasts? Where are the silks and the velvets, where is the clear visual difference between the nobles and the commoners (which yes, even Starks displayed)?

I actually think they've done a very good job in this department. I think the difference between nobles and commoners in the north is mostly evident in the quality of their clothing (especially when the occasions call for it), and not necessarily in the use of colors. It seems to me that there are practical reasons for this, due to the climate. I'm glad they didn't try to "overdo" it and make it flashy, like they did in movies such as FIRST KNIGHT. I'm no expert, but to me the costuming appears realistic and practical, and it adds to the gritty feel of the north.

If you want more colors, silks and velvets, I think you'll appreciate the changes in costuming as some of plot moves to the warmer climates and King's Landing later in the season :) (as they explained in the "making of"-featurette, this is related to the fact that these settings are closer to the sea, and as a consequence there's more trade, and they have easier access to more exotic items and materials such as jewelry and silks).

[Bronn is God]

I only one complaint for whole shabang, and that's probably because he's my favorite character so I'm hard to please. :3

The Hound.

Looks-wise, I think he's great. I don't care too much about the amount of scarring. And the actor totally looks like what I imagined him to look like. My problem is the performance and direction. Not what I imagined. The guy is supposed to be full of anger at the world. Where's the rage? I imagined more of a sneer and rasp whenever he talked, with a louder voice. Rory (that's his name, right?) plays it more stoic, silent, and brooding. Also, there was never a good, close-up establishing shot of his face. So far he's had like two super fast lines that whiz by. The non-reader I'm watching it with doesn't even know anything about him. I also heard that his role is diminished later on in the series, which isn't good at all. His drunken scene with Sansa better still happen.

My two cents. =D

At the start of GoT, he was Joffrey's dog. He becomes more developed later on. Although the writing for Micah's death was badly done. It should have been more blatant.

[L’Age d’or]

At the start of GoT, he was Joffrey's dog. He becomes more developed later on. Although the writing for Micah's death was badly done. It should have been more blatant.

The boy should have been split in half and I agree with Spanky, Hound is too tamed, the viewers dont have access to the details and explanations given in the book so he has to make up for them by being more visual with his gestures and inability to hide his emotions especially his hatred for nobility.

[Arya The Assassin]

I only one complaint for whole shabang, and that's probably because he's my favorite character so I'm hard to please. :3 The Hound.

I agree, at least based upon my recollections of the character from the books. There was something fascinating about the "beauty and the beast"-friendship/relationship between him and the girl (if you've read the book you know who I'm talking about), as far as I recall.

Is it a dealbreaker for me? Not at all, but it would've been nice if his character had a bit more depth and a more prominent role in the series. We'll see how things develop.

[DemiNymph]

the acting has put me off, it reminds me of Xena or Hercules. I guess i have high expectations since im such a huge fan of the books.

But everything else seems to be done well from the production to the casting(exception King Robert). So far 3/5 stars.

I am a fan of Xena, and I could honestly see no similarities in the acting. Xena could be a little campy at times. GoT, has many nuances.

[Hooded Man]

Michelle Fairley seemed wrong in her role to me even before I knew that she was much younger in the novel. Lena Headey also seems wrong, for some reason.

The rest is from average to great.

[Green Apple Fossoway]

Michelle Fairley seemed wrong in her role to me even before I knew that she was much younger in the novel. Lena Headey also seems wrong, for some reason.

Which just goes to show how wide ranging peoples' opinions on characters can be, because I'm loving what both those actors are bringing to the screen.

[Kaitscralt]

The non-reader I'm watching it with doesn't even know anything about him. I also heard that his role is diminished later on in the series, which isn't good at all.

Where did you hear this? It does not make sense to diminish him, as he is the only other character present during many of Arra and Sansa's important scenes.

[TerraPrime]

Re: craster's whore

the acting has put me off, it reminds me of Xena or Hercules. I guess i have high expectations since im such a huge fan of the books.

But everything else seems to be done well from the production to the casting(exception King Robert). So far 3/5 stars.

Just goes to show.

I can't even think of the general acting level for Xena as the same league of GoT. I could maybe see it if you compare it to Rome or to Deadwood and say that GoT came up a bit short. Even then, you've only seen 2 episodes. Give the actors time to find their characters and more lines to do, and then make your judgment.

Re: DaenerysTargaryen

For example, Mark is hardly a bad actor per se, but perhaps someone else would've added more "gravitas" to Robert's character?

I never got the impression that Robert Baratheon had any gravitas, except for that which is generated by his ample girth. He's a playboy king, fit to fight but not to rule. We've already seen one example of what a poor ruler he is in Ep2 concerning Lady's fate.

Besides, some actors tend to grow with their role after some time, so who knows, maybe I'll "warm up" to Lena Headey's Cersei later in season one?

Hard to judge sometimes when the character is supposed to be unlikable, like Cercei is.

The only slight letdown so far (acting wise) is Harry Lloyd, who I mentioned briefly in my first post. I wouldn't say he's a bad actor, but he does seem a bit "lightweight" and superficial in my eyes. I'd expected a more sinister, calculating and temperamental character.

Opinions differ on this. I think he hit the notes quite well, and my only regret is that he doesn't come across as more unhinged at times.

Other actors worth mentioning in this regard is Kit Harington in his role as the bastard Jon Snow.

Harrington is actually one of the weakest ones in the cast, imo. Robb didn't come across too well, either, and Theon I can't judge since he had a total of maybe 4 lines so far and about a total of 1 min of screen time.

But hey, at least we agree on Bean and Dingklage. :D