Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Ran

How Would You Rate Episode 109?

  

416 members have voted

  1. 1. What's your rating from 1-10, with 10 being the highest/best

    • 1
      2
    • 2
      4
    • 3
      2
    • 4
      4
    • 5
      11
    • 6
      14
    • 7
      20
    • 8
      49
    • 9
      101
    • 10
      209


Recommended Posts

I was just using it as an example. It's similar...

Criticism: I didn't like the tourney scene because it seemed small and they only showed one joust

Answer: it probably would have been better with more extras but that's the way they filmed it so best to ignore it and move on

Criticism: I don't like the Roz scenes

Answer: it probably would have been better without those Roz scenes, but that is what the writers chose to do and they filmed it so best to ignore it and move on

I understand that there is an inherent limit to what a production can do on television. But if done correctly, people shouldn't notice the budget constraints. When I watched Spartacus or the Wire or even Rome I didn't give much consideration to the budget because it wasn't drawn to my attention. Here it is. That is the problem.

Maybe A Song of Ice and Fire simply can't fit within a television budget, but that doesn't mean everyone should ignore it. If the actors were only pretending to ride imaginary horses ala Monty Python and Holy Grail, people should (correctly) criticize it. You can't just ignore any budget or lack of scale criticisms or consider them invalid just because this is on television.

Look, if you're gonna just twist and interpret my words your way, go ahead. I won't reply, and you can just put words in my mouth and then respond.

As for Rome, guess why it got cancelled...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Look, if you're gonna just twist and interpret my words your way, go ahead. I won't reply, and you can just put words in my mouth and then respond.

As for Rome, guess why it got cancelled...

Sorry man, didn't mean it like that. I was trying to show how it's not really possible to separate or ignore budget constraints when watching a show or movie.

And true about Rome! But even there, my point was that despite Rome not showing major battles or massive numbers of extras, the budget of the show didn't really cross my mind as I watched; in GoT, it does.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, English isn't my first language either, so it's a tie :grouphug:

My previous post wasn't really directed at anyone in particular, it's just that I am having a much better time reading the responses, and generally participating in discussions with viewers that haven't read the books.

Their comments are... how to phrase it... more honest in a way? They watch the series and judge it on its own merits. They like what they like and don't like what they don't like (well, this sounds dumb :blushing: ).

The whole "book this, book that" mentality is ultimately self-defeating and just plain boring.

I started reading the book before the series began, it helped a lot in sorting out the characters, places, families. I did stop reading for a while and found it more exciting and surprising to watch without knowing what was going to happen. But, whenever I wanted to discuss the series or looked up anything about the series, I'd accidentally run to spoilers. I decided I would rather read the books than try to be careful all the time about spoilers. I guess I could stay off the boards and not look anything up, but I love to hear what others have to say.

It is very difficult though, not to say anything about a part in the book you wanted to see and wasn't depicted in the series. I totally understand when book lovers do this, so it doesn't bother me. I like hearing both sides. I would also like to know, even if you haven't read the book, wouldn't you want to see how Jaime got captured? He was so cocky about his ability to fight in the beginning of the series. Wouldn't you have wanted to at least see that?

I do like this show and can't wait for the next episode. Sometimes I watch them again because I have them DVRd. This thread is about rating this episode, so isn't it right, that you rate it, and then mention why?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The context is the story itself. The show isn't changing the basic story... it's not eliminating the battles or tourney from the plot, it's just altering how they are shown to fit the budget.

If someone made a tv adaptation of a scifi novel like Pandora's Star or some other book with lots of space battles, but rather than showing any scenes in space merely had long dialogues between people talking about the battles, people would quite rightfully point out that there must have been severe budget constraints. The same holds true here. There is an expensive tourney with all the greatest knights in the land in attendance, and there are only a few dozen onlookers. There is an army of 18,000 that you never actually see nor get a hint of. There are grand populous cities that seem to fit within a couple sound stages.

I'm not saying the series is utter rubbish because of it, but only that it is abundantly clear that certain elements are left out because there is a lack of money to create them. You don't need a comparison to other television shows to see it. Is this a limitation of tv in general? Perhaps. Maybe this is the best that could ever be done on television. That's fine, but still doesn't change the fact that given the source material, the budget forced the producers to cut certain corners.

What you described is very poorly communicated by saying it's low budget. The term 'low budget' should be used in relation to other relevant budgets (TV), otherwise you could define every single TV budget in history as low budget, which makes no sense. It's also really funny how some people are complaining about how budget constraints must have prevented them to show the Battle of the Whispering Wood, despite that we aren't even shown that in the book (which in comparison has an infinite budget).

And you also move on to what I wrote about, that this is very obviously a limitation of TV in general since Rome had somewhere around twice the budget and still didn't show much of the battles (because quality shows can't have battle scenes of significantly lower quality as that will become disruptive). Saying that Rome is a low, or even medium budget series is crazy talk, ergo GoT is not a low budget TV series by any reasonable view. If someone disagrees with that then he is definitely comparing the show to movies (whether they realize it themselves or not) and that can only come from that not being someone to think things through properly, and it in turn means that the viewer himself is the big reason why the experience isn't as good as it could be. Nothing can ruin an experience more than unrealistic expectations and obviously some people expected this show to do things that a show twice as expensive didn't do. It's harsh but I think those deserve to be disappointed because it will be a good lesson for them.

As for one of your later posts, I'm surprised that you didn't get the same feeling with Rome. When I watched it I felt it was obvious that they didn't have the money to do the battle scenes and other grand scale things. It was that show that taught me that a story can also easily be better by removing focus from battle and putting it almost entirely on individual characters and I was quite certain GoT would be the exact same kind of show. I'm quite curious why you feel like quickly skipping past battles in one show is different from the other (and I hope it's something else than having read the book before GoT). Spartacus was entertaining for what it was but if you think that show looks better than GoT we will likely not find any common ground in our opinions (which is not necessary for this discussion though).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What you described is very poorly communicated by saying it's low budget. The term 'low budget' should be used in relation to other relevant budgets (TV), otherwise you could define every single TV budget in history as low budget, which makes no sense. It's also really funny how some people are complaining about how budget constraints must have prevented them to show the Battle of the Whispering Wood, despite that we aren't even shown that in the book (which in comparison has an infinite budget).

It's low budget for the story they are trying to tell.

As for one of your later posts, I'm surprised that you didn't get the same feeling with Rome. When I watched it I felt it was obvious that they didn't have the money to do the battle scenes and other grand scale things. It was that show that taught me that a story can also easily be better by removing focus from battle and putting it almost entirely on individual characters and I was quite certain GoT would be the exact same kind of show. I'm quite curious why you feel like quickly skipping past battles in one show is different from the other (and I hope it's something else than having read the book before GoT). Spartacus was entertaining for what it was but if you think that show looks better than GoT we will likely not find any common ground in our opinions (which is not necessary for this discussion though).

I think it's because Rome focused on a much smaller group of characters, while GoT is more epic in scope and has a lot more locations and characters to deal with. Also, as others have mentioned, the budget constraints aren't just apparent in the lack of battlescenes. The strange absence/reappearance of the direwolves and the limited number of extras make it obvious as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's low budget for the story they are trying to tell.

It's beyond me how that wasn't apparent to everyone as soon as we heard this was going to be on TV. And yet again, that's not at all the same as saying that it's a low budget series, which was the statement this discussion originated from. In a low budget series you wouldn't have this kind of workmanship on costumes, weaponry etc.

So if the initial thing had been a statement that someone thought TV wasn't enough for this story I wouldn't have thought there was anything wrong with that, just as sad that I would have thought it was apparent from the start.

I think it's because Rome focused on a much smaller group of characters, while GoT is more epic in scope and has a lot more locations and characters to deal with. Also, as others have mentioned, the budget constraints aren't just apparent in the lack of battlescenes. The strange absence/reappearance of the direwolves and the limited number of extras make it obvious as well.

I don't quite see it so I'm not sure if I understand your point. As for the direwolves absence, that has nothing to do with budget. I try to remember any shot in Rome with more than 700 extras in it (as I roughly counted in the largest GoT scene) but I can't remember one, although it's some time since I last saw it though so there certainly might be some.

And there's of course the aspect of Rome being hideously expensive so if something falls a bit short of that it hardly says much.

Edited by Tywin's bastard

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

why do people keep saying things like "if you want to see an epic $500 million dollar movie with massive battles go watch lotr, braveheart, or troy." i haven't seen anyone, who is complaining about lack of battles, say they want a battle scene of lotr caliber. most of us realize that is unrealistic but it shouldn't be unrealistic to see an actual fight take place after so much build up.

my main disappointment is they WAY the green fork and whispering woods were set up. it would have been nice to see tywin setting in the reserve with his commanders and giving orders. then when the fighting is about to start he says something like "where is the young wolf?". then we cut to robb in front of his men and EXPLAINING where he is and what is about to happen. that would have taken about 5-6 minutes and it would help non-readers from scrathing their heads so much. then we cut to tyrion waking up and go from there. that would have been just fine imo.

overall, i was disappointed with the green fork but i didn't mind missing it as much as missing the whispering wood. now, my reason for this is not to see some swords clashing around, but to see jaime kicking some ass. i don't think it's been said enough how much of a badass jaime really is. my non-reader friends get that he's a lannister, a knight, and a warrior. but they don't know how good jaime really is and i think that is a huge flaw on hbo's point. seeing jaime in combat is as important to his character as tyrion's exposition. i'm serious when i say this. if people actually see him fight and think to themselves,"wow..he really is a badass" then it will mean so much more

when his hand is cut off

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

why do people keep saying things like "if you want to see an epic $500 million dollar movie with massive battles go watch lotr, braveheart, or troy." i haven't seen anyone, who is complaining about lack of battles, say they want a battle scene of lotr caliber. most of us realize that is unrealistic but it shouldn't be unrealistic to see an actual fight take place after so much build up.

If you are asking why the discussion above your post has been as it is, just read what's been posted. That discussion has been around that some people have found the show to be a "low budget show".

As for your explanation of the scene, you're not explaining what happened in the show. In the show Robb has attacked Jaime at the same time as Tywin was attacked and from the looks of it they won by the time Tywin had won. Funnily enough I've only seen readers scratch their heads at that. All the non-readers I know drew their own conclusions easily. Not that that's any statistical evidence but I think that readers often get confused when they don't realize how things have been changed and try to fit in what they've read. As for showing the Whispering Wood, I didn't expect them to show larger scale battles that wasn't even shown in the book as they are saving money by not even showing most of what the book actually describes.

Edited by Tywin's bastard

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(..) just read what's been posted. That discussion has been around that some people have found the show to be a "low budget show".

You nailed it. The show isn't the kind of low budget that our unfulfilled wishes weren't possible to realize. Forgive quoting myself:

I repeatedly got the impression of a low budget series, which it really isn't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you are asking why the discussion above your post has been as it is, just read what's been posted. That discussion has been around that some people have found the show to be a "low budget show".

i've read what's been posted and i get that people found it to be low budget, but i haven't seen anyone say they were expecting lotr style battles.

As for your explanation of the scene, you're not explaining what happened in the show. In the show Robb has attacked Jaime at the same time as Tywin was attacked and from the looks of it they won by the time Tywin had won.

maybe i'm misreading this or i didn't explain myself very well, but i said they could show tywin ask "where is the young wolf?" when the battle was about to begin. then show robb at the whispering wood before his battle also began. then it could cut to tyrion waking up and everything would be back the same as it was. to me that would have added to the build up and cleared things up a little better. not to mention demonstrate robb's strategy more clearly.

Edited by So1ar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think when the episode vote totals have been as overwhelmingly high as they are, the complainers can be safely ignored.

... and thus, preventing any improvements for season 2, that might come off of them being heard, is that what you want to say?

I rated very high, but I still find room for some complaints from time to time. Feel free to ignore them the feedback as you wish.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you are asking why the discussion above your post has been as it is, just read what's been posted. That discussion has been around that some people have found the show to be a "low budget show".

As for your explanation of the scene, you're not explaining what happened in the show. In the show Robb has attacked Jaime at the same time as Tywin was attacked and from the looks of it they won by the time Tywin had won. Funnily enough I've only seen readers scratch their heads at that. All the non-readers I know drew their own conclusions easily. Not that that's any statistical evidence but I think that readers often get confused when they don't realize how things have been changed and try to fit in what they've read. As for showing the Whispering Wood, I didn't expect them to show larger scale battles that wasn't even shown in the book as they are saving money by not even showing most of what the book actually describes.

That's interesting, but as you said it's anecdotal evidence. But what conclusions did the non-readers come to exactly? There wasn't much to draw from that scene. I think the reason why some non-readers weren't shaking their heads at some of these scenes is because they obviously haven't read the books so they don't know what is even being omitted (ie, characterization, nuance, etc.).

I agree with the bad way they've handled Jaime's character. Looking back, I think the fight scene between Ned and him was one of the worst scenes so far in the show. Here is a huge character who is known for being one of the greatest swordsman in the 7 Kingdoms but none of that has really been conveyed so far (Ned fight scene, Whispering Woods).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with the bad way they've handled Jaime's character. Looking back, I think the fight scene between Ned and him was one of the worst scenes so far in the show. Here is a huge character who is known for being one of the greatest swordsman in the 7 Kingdoms but none of that has really been conveyed so far (Ned fight scene, Whispering Woods).

thank you! i enjoyed the fight scene with ned just from a viewing standpoint, but it did annoy me that ned held his own against jaime. one could argue that the fight scenes with jaime are as important to him as a character as any sexposition/monologue we get from any other character.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i've read what's been posted and i get that people found it to be low budget, but i haven't seen anyone say they were expecting lotr style battles.

maybe i'm misreading this or i didn't explain myself very well, but i said they could show tywin ask "where is the young wolf?" when the battle was about to begin. then show robb at the whispering wood before his battle also began. then it could cut to tyrion waking up and everything would be back the same as it was. to me that would have added to the build up and cleared things up a little better. not to mention demonstrate robb's strategy more clearly.

I just said that some people seem to, perhaps unaware, compare it to movies. That doesn't have to go to the extent of LotR battle scenes. The point being that they perhaps had too high expectations going into this, which is always dangerous. The show has it's fair share of flaws, but I feel many of them were expected and a show that's been mentioned as the best looking show currently on TV by several reviewers has done pretty well, even if individual opinions will always differ.

As for your suggestion I probably misread it a bit. What you say could certainly work, although as a detail it should perhaps be Tywin noting the size of the opposing army rather than Robb himself.

That's interesting, but as you said it's anecdotal evidence. But what conclusions did the non-readers come to exactly? There wasn't much to draw from that scene. I think the reason why some non-readers weren't shaking their heads at some of these scenes is because they obviously haven't read the books so they don't know what is even being omitted (ie, characterization, nuance, etc.).

I agree with the bad way they've handled Jaime's character. Looking back, I think the fight scene between Ned and him was one of the worst scenes so far in the show. Here is a huge character who is known for being one of the greatest swordsman in the 7 Kingdoms but none of that has really been conveyed so far (Ned fight scene, Whispering Woods).

They figured they had beaten Jaime's army by taking him by surprise. That might of course be incorrect since we do not yet know if they are combining the Whispering Wood with the attack on the siege of Riverrun. We'll see. And it's just as you say, readers often take the stance of looking what they feel should be told instead of looking purely at what's being told. It's probably impossible for us to avoid that completely.

As for Jaime I'd still say that the show version of his clash with Ned was much more climactic than the book version, where Ned injures himself through bad luck and Jaime doesn't do anything. Jaime didn't dominate but I think he looked to be in control and enjoying himself against Ned, who was honed as more of a warrior in the show. As for the Whispering Wood, one man's swordsmanship can't go that far in a big battle. Still I too would have liked a little recollection to a valiant effort by Jaime, rather than Robb just acknowledging that Jaime is superior to him in one on one combat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just said that some people seem to, perhaps unaware, compare it to movies. That doesn't have to go to the extent of LotR battle scenes. The point being that they perhaps had too high expectations going into this, which is always dangerous.

agreed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yea this was a tough one to rate. I wanted to give this ep a 7 or 8, but that ending scene was so damn good... 9/10. I know that's too generous but that closing scene was wicked.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guys just be glad this show didn't turn out to be like Camelot or the Borgias. It has a larger budget than either of those shows, and $10 million was spent on the pilot alone. The only two HBO shows I can think of that had a larger budget was BoB and the pacific, and those two were miniseries.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×