Jump to content

[BOOK SPOILERS] Battles


Corvinus85

Recommended Posts

In the book Roose atacks but retreat in an ordely fashion quite soon and before his troops rout. Yet he only atacked in the first place because he still had a chance since he was only outnumbered 2 to 1, which isnt such a big disavantage if you control other variables (morale, army disposition, landscape, weather etc).

I don't believe Roose ever had a chance. Personally i feel that Roose attacking the way he did was the first step in his betrayal of Robb and his attempt to seize the north. It's stated several times that Robb has little chance against Tywin with his full force and Tywin lannister wont be caught by suprise. So Roose attacking at all rather than menacing Tywin seems foolhardy. To do so after a night march when it's almost a certainty that Tywin wont be outmanouvered that way only served to tire his men. That it was the other Northern houses and their lords that suffered most from this battle, while the dreadfort men seemed unscathed further adds to my conspiracy theory. I'm not claiming that the whole Red wedding and duskendale scenario was fully formed at that point just that Roose was faithless from the start.

Admittedly that has little to do with your point it's just that i don't agree that the green Fork was a viable battle in the books either. I think, like with the book, the ruse works better without contact being made and to actually attack Tywin rather than menace and distract, is folly.

Edit: btw, to those who said the objective for Roose was to give battle. It wasn't. This is never mentioned once in the book. He is only supposed to give the impression of being Robb's full force. Attacking is actually counter to that as it reveals the truth. I'll admit it never explicitly says he wasn't to give battle either but the dialogue before the split suggests that doing so was not the intention.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bolton had about 16.000 men, where Tywin had 30.000. Those are good odds at winning, unlike 2.000 to 30.000. If Bolton didnt had any chance he wouldnt had atacked. Also, the only way he could atack and reach them that way was if he killed some of Tywin´s scouts, which I think he did, at least in the book.

No, that's definitely not good odds at winning at all. It's good odds of surviving more than one battle but with no horse, against an army twice as large and much better composed (and not unlikely to be better equipped), the outcome of them losing was obvious. And it still could have gone worse if Tyrion and the tribesmen hadn't foiled Tywin's little strategy.

Bolton's mission was never to beat Tywin, it was to occupy him for quite a while and that was why Bolton was chosen. The Greatjon would have made a bigger dent right away but since the footmen didn't have any chance of winning they needed someone to drag it out instead of attacking with bravado. But as said, in the show Tywin's host is in a completely different place so the whole scenario takes place in a different time frame, and with different urgency.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't believe Roose ever had a chance. Personally i feel that Roose attacking the way he did was the first step in his betrayal of Robb and his attempt to seize the north. It's stated several times that Robb has little chance against Tywin with his full force and Tywin lannister wont be caught by suprise. So Roose attacking at all rather than menacing Tywin seems foolhardy. To do so after a night march when it's almost a certainty that Tywin wont be outmanouvered that way only served to tire his men. That it was the other Northern houses and their lords that suffered most from this battle, while the dreadfort men seemed unscathed further adds to my conspiracy theory. I'm not claiming that the whole Red wedding and duskendale scenario was fully formed at that point just that Roose was faithless from the start.

Admittedly that has little to do with your point it's just that i don't agree that the green Fork was a viable battle in the books either. I think, like with the book, the ruse works better without contact being made and to actually attack Tywin rather than menace and distract, is folly.

Edit: btw, to those who said the objective for Roose was to give battle. It wasn't. This is never mentioned once in the book. He is only supposed to give the impression of being Robb's full force. Attacking is actually counter to that as it reveals the truth. I'll admit it never explicitly says he wasn't to give battle either but the dialogue before the split suggests that doing so was not the intention.

No, the strategy was to lure Tywin Lannister north to engage their main force.

"When Lord Tywin gets word that we've come south, he'll march north to engage our main hose, leaving our riders free to hurry down the west bank to Riverrun."

and then Robb comments...

"The Greatjon is always saying that we should smash Lord Tywin. I thought I'd give him the honor."

So he is to smash him by not engaging him? The main part of the host WAS ALWAYS going to have to give battle. Roose Bolton decided that instead of playing defensively he'd go on the offense. Which didn't work out all that great.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, the strategy was to lure Tywin Lannister north to engage their main force.

"When Lord Tywin gets word that we've come south, he'll march north to engage our main hose, leaving our riders free to hurry down the west bank to Riverrun."

and then Robb comments...

"The Greatjon is always saying that we should smash Lord Tywin. I thought I'd give him the honor."

So he is to smash him by not engaging him? The main part of the host WAS ALWAYS going to have to give battle. Roose Bolton decided that instead of playing defensively he'd go on the offense. Which didn't work out all that great.

"He has more men than i do and a lot more armoured horse... Tywin Lannister wont be so easily suprised" Does he really sound like he thinks the Greatjon will smash him?

Also your first quote relates to Tywin's actions, not to the northmen's.

He also goes on to comment "the eastern force will be all that stands between lord Tywin and Winterfell" does that sound like he wants them to engage and be, what he already admitted would happen, defeated.

If you were going to choose a quote the end of Catelyn's next chapter "...to confront Tywin lannister" is a much better one although i still don't believe it meant engage him in battle as it's a complete misstep and pointless. Further we know from tyrion's chapters the effect Roose's army has on Tywin. That only underlines the pointlessness of an attack.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is another funny or not so funny consequence of these events in the series:

- No one did speak about losses fighting Jaime. If nothing else will be said about it, we are made to believe that Robb trully must be a great commander and his force must be a powerfull one.

- No Robb frees Riverrun and for sure gets reinforcements from the Tully´s.

- Also it was not discussed how much of Robb´s victory was due to the situation and Jaime being taken by surprise.

- Considerng how good Robb already did and how strong a force he has.....he should now be close to Tywin in numbers.

Why the hell does he does nothing big with a force with which he could finish Tywin once and for all????

What will they make up to justify Robbs troubles and fears when ridding around Riverrun and West?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, that's definitely not good odds at winning at all. It's good odds of surviving more than one battle but with no horse, against an army twice as large and much better composed (and not unlikely to be better equipped), the outcome of them losing was obvious. And it still could have gone worse if Tyrion and the tribesmen hadn't foiled Tywin's little strategy.

Bolton's mission was never to beat Tywin, it was to occupy him for quite a while and that was why Bolton was chosen. The Greatjon would have made a bigger dent right away but since the footmen didn't have any chance of winning they needed someone to drag it out instead of attacking with bravado. But as said, in the show Tywin's host is in a completely different place so the whole scenario takes place in a different time frame, and with different urgency.

Disagree. If you read The Art of War you will see that having a 2 to 1 disavantage is not that bad and you can actually win. If Tywin superiority was due to horse Roose Bolton would have to use some strategy to hinder their advanged null. COnsidering he atacked and tried to get the Lannisters off guard maybe he could have acomplish that if his plans worked. If he were to atack Tywin camp before it had a chance to prepare the outcome would be very diferent, cavalry or number advantage or not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Disagree. If you read The Art of War you will see that having a 2 to 1 disavantage is not that bad and you can actually win. If Tywin superiority was due to horse Roose Bolton would have to use some strategy to hinder their advanged null. COnsidering he atacked and tried to get the Lannisters off guard maybe he could have acomplish that if his plans worked. If he were to atack Tywin camp before it had a chance to prepare the outcome would be very diferent, cavalry or number advantage or not.

I agree that it is entirely possible to win in a match-up of two-to-one.

If you have better troops, better tactics, better positioning...Pretty much if everything you have is better than your opponents, except for numbers. Though a massive advantage in weaponry, training or terrain can compensate for everything else.

Roose Bolton didn't have that; surprise isn't everything, and aggression is utterly useless against well-trained opponents in good formation. He's not a truly skilled commander, and he has no way of knowing that the Lords under his command have a degree of competence, so he wouldn't implement an anti-cavalry strategy. And the truth is, having NO Horse in an era when Mounted Knights are essentially the medieval version of a Tank Corp (effective pike and spear formations haven't really been implemented in Westeros) during the Napoleonic Era, is a death sentence if you want to fight a long pitched battle.

If Tywin had caught Roose, Robb's campaign might have ended. That's why he was chosen; Roose is NOT an idiot, but he's also not a hero.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Everywhere I've read, I've seen people defend the absence of the battles, no matter how poorly or haphazardly it was done. Even over what they did choose to show, they didn't show well, such as Tyrion getting knocked out before it even began, and the rather confusing treatment of the Whispering Wood.

It is worthy to approach this matter in more critical detail than for your average show, because GRRM's story is set entirely within and revolves around a war. So you have to expect, that before even the first actor was cast, or the first location scouted, that someone gave this a lot of thought. And obviously, they came up lacking in how to pull it off.

There are three major arguments made in defense of how the battles were done:

1) They didn't have enough time.

2) They didn't have enough money.

3) They didn't want to upstage Ned's death.

To this I would respond:

1) This is an editing and a pacing issue. By this time in the story, there have been eight hours devoted to exposition and even several different scenes best described as 'sexposition' (Loras/Renly, Petyr, Dany's brother and maid, etc). We probably could have done without ten minutes of Tyrion playing Truth or Dare with Shae, this one episode, no matter how much they liked the actress. I thought the initial scene with her was perfectly sufficient as a starting introduction.

2) In my opinion, and after some reflection, the comparison to Rome is unfair, as Rome did have a bigger budget. But I am given to understand that Game of Thrones actually has a substantially larger budget to shows such as The Tudors or Borgias, and both of those latter shows managed to pull off a fairly convincing display of a setpiece battle. Or at least the drama and the immensity surrounding such forces and hosts colliding, revealing war as an extension of politics.

3) Part of the drama in Ned's death is the sense of scale and everything that is at risk. Not just in the present, where his son is waging war with the Lannisters, but what the future might hold, now that he is no longer going to be there to shepherd them through it, but also the past. That's why I would have given a hundred of Petyr's creepy, pandering, ill-written sexposition scenes, for a single Tower of Joy. Ned was in many ways a heroic and noble character, and he met his end in a capricious and cruelly unjust fashion. That should be enough drama for anyone.

Although this shouldn't have been a surprise to anyone. They have generally been unable to pull off war on even a small scale. The fighting choreography has been clunky and unimpressive all season long. There is never a convincing moment of viciousness and brutality - and are in fact, some of the cheapest and laziest looking sword fights since, well...ever. I'm not expecting something on the level of Spartacus, or even the vicious and visceral quick action of Rome, which really, Game of Thrones should have tried harder to emulate. Both the Tudors and the Borgias had better sword fighting choreography by an order of magnitude. Bronn's duel, Jorah fighting off Drogo's blood rider, Ned vs Jaime...All remarkably boring and slow affairs, a journeyman effort where a real pro should have brought in to polish it.

Perhaps it was unfortunate for GoT that it came out at the same time as the Borgias. Because we have evidence of a show with a smaller budget, but a somewhat similar story, showing us a vastly greater scale, and with much more beautiful pageantry and set design. The intrigue, the violence, and frankly even the ridiculous sex is way better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Both the Tudors and the Borgias had better sword fighting choreography by an order of magnitude. Bronn's duel, Jorah fighting off Drogo's blood rider, Ned vs Jaime...All remarkably boring and slow affairs, a journeyman effort where a real pro should have brought in to polish it.

I'd have been happy to forgive the relatively clumsiness of the sword fighting if they had replaced the current vogue for flashy spinny moves with a more realistic and visceral approach. Y'know if they'd replaced trying to be visually appealing (and imo failing) with efficiency and deadliness. Not that doing so is visually unappealing but the primary concern is one of atmosphere and i think it would be very well suited to the ASOIaF world (at least the one of the books). There's quite a few examples on you tube, mostly from re-enactors so the skills are out there but the best example from popular media is the Macduff v Macbeth fight from Roman Polanski's Macbeth.

Bronn's duel, although relatively well choreographed imo is a big bugbear for me. It's fought as if Vardis Egan is wearing head to toe plate and the actors seem to move like he is but what we get is a sort of leather/cloth/breastplate combo that seems barely more cumbersome than Bronn's leathers.

What dissapoints me about the battles and generally about the way the series has been shot is that i remember how hopeful i was before the series about the possibilities. Films like Centurion (which i admit isn't a great film) managed to pull off excellent battle scenes and set pieces on a budget that, per minute, is smaller than GoT. Ironclad as well was supposed to have been pretty low budget and managed to be spectacular. I re-watched the devil's Whore recently and it for a British production from a smaller channel managed to throw in some decent scale and scope with no part of it feeling as cheap and shoddy as the Dothraki scenes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does someone have a link to these better swordfights in the Borgias and Tudors?

Oh, and to add on the issue of time constraints:

Remember that this is a premium channel, so episodes aren't a fixed length. There's already been a few Thrones episodes which are over an hour.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Disagree. If you read The Art of War you will see that having a 2 to 1 disavantage is not that bad and you can actually win. If Tywin superiority was due to horse Roose Bolton would have to use some strategy to hinder their advanged null. COnsidering he atacked and tried to get the Lannisters off guard maybe he could have acomplish that if his plans worked. If he were to atack Tywin camp before it had a chance to prepare the outcome would be very diferent, cavalry or number advantage or not.

You don't have to read the Art of War to know that. Sun Tzu isn't the only one in history that has known a bit about warfare. My point was clear, that Roose Bolton had no advantage whatsoever. Tywin wasn't interested in hunting them down, he had chosen his field of battle and had no reason to rush it. He had twice their numbers, plus that he had a better army composition and not unlikely a better equipped one. Bolton had a worse army in pretty much every possible way, even including leadership. You don't win that, nor was it the point.

If Bolton had a chance to attack them unaware there's of course a big difference but the chance of that happening was extremely low. With smaller forces perhaps but not with 16 000 men which will be heard and seen quite easily and there should be quite a deal of scouts closer to the camp (that they got past, or killed, the more ranged scouts is one thing). He had no weather to hide by either, only the night, and it's apparent that Tywin has time to set up his army exactly how he wants it before the northeners arrive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does someone have a link to these better swordfights in the Borgias and Tudors?

Oh, and to add on the issue of time constraints:

Remember that this is a premium channel, so episodes aren't a fixed length. There's already been a few Thrones episodes which are over an hour.

Tudors is pointless unless you want to see torture. And pretty hardcore torture at that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does someone have a link to these better swordfights in the Borgias and Tudors?

Oh, and to add on the issue of time constraints:

Remember that this is a premium channel, so episodes aren't a fixed length. There's already been a few Thrones episodes which are over an hour.

Borgias: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xRcZLZFc-Pw& (from 4:30 onwards)

Tudors:

Both these are/were Showtime shows that have lower per episode budgets then GoT has. Borgias just recently finished its 1st season and has been renewed for a 2nd. It had about 2-3 episodes with scenes like that. So it is possible to achieve decent enough large scale shots on a cable TV budget.

GoT obviously put a lot of its budget into the setting though which means hopefully with sets and costumes for the most part done now they have more money to play with next season with less sets to build.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Borgias: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xRcZLZFc-Pw& (from 4:30 onwards)

Tudors:

Both these are/were Showtime shows that have lower per episode budgets then GoT has. Borgias just recently finished its 1st season and has been renewed for a 2nd. It had about 2-3 episodes with scenes like that. So it is possible to achieve decent enough large scale shots on a cable TV budget.

GoT obviously put a lot of its budget into the setting though which means hopefully with sets and costumes for the most part done now they have more money to play with next season with less sets to build.

Well this settles it, the budget excuse is no longer acceptable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

People complain about the fight choreography, and then point to Spartacus as an example? Really?

Spartacus battles are fucking amazing:

Images are better than words:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XjPhKSlvYeY&playnext=1&list=PL3C4E12D39FD428B1

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4JAtrwhoROM&feature=related

Even Titus Pullo fight in Rome, made by HBO, was better than the stuff in GoT

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xcECeLjwNlk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well this settles it, the budget excuse is no longer acceptable.

It never should have been. Boardwalk Empire spends more money on its show than Game of Thrones. The pilot episode of Boardwalk Empire was $18 million and they seemed to have spent every penny on quality production. Not to mention that Martin Scorsese directed the pilot episode as well. Boardwalk Empire looks and feels like a show with an enormous budget. Game of Thrones clearly feels limited in scope, especially compared to the novels, due to budgetary constraints. Yet according to literally every newspaper article about HBO's financial standing the company is swimming, practically drowning, in money.

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/hbo-top-1-billion-international-176907

NEW YORK – Time Warner’s HBO expects to top $1 billion in international revenue this year, up about 50% over the figure it recorded three years ago, the Wall Street Journal reported.

In a latest sign of international success, the premium pay network’s newest show, Game of Thrones, premieres on Sunday, but has already become HBO's best-selling series abroad ever, fetching more than $2.5 million an episode, more than 50% above the international price tag for The Sopranos, the paper said.

HBO can't afford more than ten episodes per season for this show? Game of Thrones should have been 12 minimally and 20 if they wanted to impress everyone. This is an epic fantasy series and HBO isn't giving it the right treatment. And they can't afford to show any battle sequences either? George Martin said he was wondering how HBO would handle the battle sequences...well wonder no more George. The Borgias and The Tudors, shows with lower budgets per episode, lower ratings, and probably lower DVD sales, managed to have large scale battles in them. How did those shows find the money? HBO can't afford to show any direwolves either? When HBO was going to adapt Game of Thrones they must have immediately written out the wolves from the show.

And it's not like the series is going to become smaller either. How will HBO handle nearly every single of one of Dany's scenes requiring dragons in them in the future? Or the major battle coming up in King's Landing? Or the Iron Borne fleet and their raids? Will the Iron Borne use rowboats? How will HBO show The Others attacking the Night's Watch party? Or the Wildlings and Giants assaulting The Wall? The book has 40,000 Wildlings march on The Wall...will the show only have 40 total? Will Joffrey's wedding only be attended by a few dozen people?

Game of Thrones is making so much money, as is HBO, that this series could have been, should have been, $100 million per season, 20 episodes, and been a safe financial commitment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Borgias: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xRcZLZFc-Pw& (from 4:30 onwards)

Tudors:

Both these are/were Showtime shows that have lower per episode budgets then GoT has. Borgias just recently finished its 1st season and has been renewed for a 2nd. It had about 2-3 episodes with scenes like that. So it is possible to achieve decent enough large scale shots on a cable TV budget.

GoT obviously put a lot of its budget into the setting though which means hopefully with sets and costumes for the most part done now they have more money to play with next season with less sets to build.

It can certainly be done but I have to say that the CGI looks quite apparent at times in those videos even at the very low resolution of 360p. It's hard to compare to a show I've only seen in HD. I also felt it was a bit jarring to have long scenes of large visuals with armies standing near each other, only to switch to solely very close up footage when the action started happening. I'm not saying it was terrible but it shows that there are problems with all choices.

But I definitely think you are correct in one thing as I've thought the same, that the sets created for season 1 should be a significant cost saver for season 2, even though there are a good deal of new places introduced.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...