[Book spoiler] Aren't you bothered?

[Dragon greyscale]

while i did not remember that in the book that marcella didn't cry, i do find it irritating that they changed it.

So the westeros board changed your mind? Your annoyance is pretty much proof of not judging the show as a show. If you didn't remember it being in the books on your first viewing, what's the difference? I'm asking this because I also didn't notice it. I only realized it because I read it here. I thought about it after and realized that if it didn't annoy me sunday, it doesn't really change anything for me one way or the other.

[irishtemper]

So the westeros board changed your mind? Your annoyance is pretty much proof of not judging the show as a show. If you didn't remember it being in the books on your first viewing, what's the difference? I'm asking this because I also didn't notice it. I only realized it because I read it here. I thought about it after and realized that if it didn't annoy me sunday, it doesn't really change anything for me one way or the other.

But it did change it just for the sake of change, that is what annoys me for most of the changes.

[Hyper]

But it did change it just for the sake of change, that is what annoys me for most of the changes.

No, no, and no. It is not change "for the sake of change". Several good reasons for the change have been pointed out. Apparently they have been missed or ignored. You may not agree with the arguments, but at least have the decency to admit they exist!

I very much doubt that *any* change has been changed for "the sake of change". I'm sure that there is *plenty* of discussion in the writer conferences and internal script reviews.

And I echo the surprise at the amount of people unaware that a detail is changed (and apparently fine with it), come to Westeros.org, find out that it was a change, and THEN get outraged.

[Ran]

What's wrong with that? They thought the show was being true to the characters from the book... and then discover that the show hasn't been. They were happy when the show was being, in their mind, faithful and now thy're unhappy because the show wasn't. Simple, really, so I'm confused at your confusion.

Perhaps ignorance truly is bliss for some.

[Raja]

Wow some of the abuse on here is quite unreal , firstly though for those holding out on giving a verdict due to the season not reaching it's climax . I don't think that's a good argument mostly because each episode should be able to be judged by itself , independently . It cannot all be set up , take Mad Men for example. The Robb story does not bother me one bit , it would be quite impossible having him just show up with a bride with no set up at all . I don't think that would work on television . There is alot of stuff which works on paper and does not work on screen . For example the house of the undying works fine on paper but showing that visually would be kind of gimmky. Which is why I think having the Oona Chaplin/ Lady Talissa scenes are necessary.

As long as the added scenes stay in the essence of the book, scenes like Cersei and Robert's conversation about their marriage and Selmy/ Robert/ Jamie talking about their first kill , I don't think one should be that critical

[Hyper]

Ran,

Nothing wrong with it per se. I like reading many reviews (yours included), and it is interesting to find persuasive arguments and weigh them against ones own opinions. But I'm sure you've noticed how many see your reviews as authoritative on the subject, and this can potentially lead to a certain lemming effect. Is that what is happening here? Maybe, maybe not. As long as people have done some thinking about the pros/cons instead of claiming "change for changes sake", I don't mind.

[Dragon greyscale]

What's wrong with that? They thought the show was being true to the characters from the book... and then discover that the show hasn't been. They were happy when the show was being, in their mind, faithful and now thy're unhappy because the show wasn't. Simple, really, so I'm confused at your confusion.

Perhaps ignorance truly is bliss for some.

Ran, earlier you put forward a reasonable idea about judging GoT according to two axes; faithfulness and stand-alone merit (don't know if it was this thread or somewhere else). I agree with that assessment and it seems to me that making a 180 purely based on faithfulness disregards the other axis: the stand-alone merit of the show. If Myrcella's tears make sense within the logic of the television show, it can't be as terrible a change as some people make it out to be. It's not faithful, but that's only one part of the equation.

[JW.]

I dont mind tweaking and or changing certain characters, but i'd like to see some improvement then. It seems the writers want to put their own touch on it, and to be quite honest... it's often just not working. It's just disapointing is all, season 1 was so spot on in almost every way.. and you'd think they would follow that route when it came to season 2.

And that's my major problem with the writers, they proved they could do it season 1. I'll be honest, i'm not at all impressed with the writing on the show ( I'll bet now that George's Blackwater episode will be of significant higher quality then the others).

[Mr Fixit]

I dont mind tweaking and or changing certain characters, but i'd like to see some improvement then. It seems the writers want to put their own touch on it, and to be quite honest... it's often just not working. It's just disapointing is all, season 1 was so spot on in almost every way.. and you'd think they would follow that route when it came to season 2.

But you see, season 1 wasn't spot on. They made Ned a renowned warrior, obviously making a large deviation from his book character. Since Ned is arguably the main character of AGoT, I posit that Season 1 is a travesty.

I kid, of course. I'm just saying that anything can be construed in such a way to make a character seem bereft of his core.

[Floredaï]

I was waiting for the peach too. But imagine this : they're filming. First take. Renly has a peach (it's been hard to find as it's not quite the season, especially in Ireland) , as per the faithful script, but doesn't find in his costume a pocket where it won't be squashed (in fact he tries but soils a costume. Costumers are not happy. Acessorists neither, that peaches cost a bit!). He has to keep it in hand, but he feels stupid, and he can't ride so well with only one hand. Second take. They've added a pouch on his saddle to put the peach. But in mounting the horse the peach is squashed. Third take. The peach is okay, but it feels awkward to search for it while delivering his lines. Fourth take. Renly smoothly produces the peach, but when biting it, dribbles juice on his chin and costume, and can't speak his next line.The costumers are not happy. Fifth take. The peach has been replaced by an apple, Renly manages to play around the apple. But it feels like everybody in the scene is looking at the damn apple. On watching the rushes at the end of the day someone asks if the apple has some secret meaning. It looks that way. The apple is stealing all the meaning of the scene. Then they remember that the peach was supposed to symbolize the summer knights and their lighthearted attitude. The apple doesn't work, it's not a summer fruit. Someone suggests cherries, but thay have their own symbolism which is quite different, especially in that episode.

The day after, they shoot the scene again, but the fruits stay in their basket. All is well.

[turdle]

So the westeros board changed your mind? Your annoyance is pretty much proof of not judging the show as a show. If you didn't remember it being in the books on your first viewing, what's the difference? I'm asking this because I also didn't notice it. I only realized it because I read it here. I thought about it after and realized that if it didn't annoy me sunday, it doesn't really change anything for me one way or the other.

well first of all, it is hard to simply just judge the show on it's own and separate book knowledge. but no, marcella crying doesn't ruin the show for me, it doesn't bother me. what does bother me is that they make changes that i do not understand the reasoning. prime example is crow to raven. that one definitely bothers me. and no it doesn't ruin the show, the show will continue on with the tv audience oblivious to this change, quite content. but why change this?

[Call me Odie]

I'm disappointed. The whole episode was a mehh and a big yawn except a few highlights like the Hound, and Ygritte.

[Ran]

Dragon greyscale,

If Myrcella's tears make sense within the logic of the television show

The logic of the TV show is poor, in that case. It was a defining detail of the character, and now it's gone for no genuinely useful reason. It's not good television to have a girl crying in an expected context, because, well, that's what the lowest common denominator expects. What GRRM did was quite different, and quite superior, and it literally would have cost them nothing to stick by it.

And if it's a thing that's inserted just to pull at heart strings, that sappily maudlin attitude is something to be excoriated, not praised. That's what brings us The Notebook's of the world.

Let me add that I hardly dwelt on the detail in our analysis of the episode -- it's a minor detail. But the episode featured a particular intensity of tonal divergence, cheap thrills, and so on, and this is part and parcel with it, hence why people are talking about it as just a symptomatic example of things the show is doing that feels wrong to them.

Floredaï,

I can say that the peach was never a factor in the filming of the scene. It was not part of the final shooting script at all. And I doubt anyone can say that they anticipated the hypothetical details you have imagined and dropped it for that reason. Pretty sure whoever broke down that section of the story forgot about it or it just didn't stick in their mind as being an important character moment (important for both Renly and Stannis).

Renly doesn't exactly "ride" in that scene, does he? Everyone's horses are standing still, in any case.

Of course, the peach scene was also a Taylor episode... so I'm thinking both this and Myrcella's tears could be taken as evidence of her just not approaching the material in the same way as the other writers in so far as minor nuances and grace notes seem to pass her by. Then again, D&D sign off on everything, so... who knows.

[Mr Fixit]

It was a defining detail of the character, and now it's gone for no genuinely useful reason.

We'll have to agree to disagree I guess. If such inconsequential deviations bother you, all right. You're entitled to it. I'm sorry you deny yourself the pleasure of enjoying the show on its own merits, but hey, that's how you want it.

Just wanted to say it's hardly a defining detail of the character, seeing as she has no character. She's a painting on the wall, and that's if a reader is feeling generous.

[Jamie Lannister]

I'm assuming they just felt the princess riding away from her family without so much as a sniffle would come off as flat on TV. But eh.

[Thunderfist]

The Freys don't give a damn, as long as Robb doesn't marry anyone else, he can have lovers and they wouldn't care. After all Lord Frey is someone who has plenty of bastards and flaunts them in front of his wives, and in general male nobles cheating on their wives and betrothed is no big deal in Westeros, especially when they are away on war. And nobody would expect Robb to marry someone who's supposedly not even a noble when he's already engaged as a part of important political deal, it's just completely against the societal norms in Westeros.

I guess that we will have to agree to disagree.

I don´t find it credible that Robb would deliberately risk offending and alienating his most powerful bannermen. Especially not when the "falling-in-love"-process that´s shown in the series seems to take place over several weeks/months and is done out in the open for everyone to see. The Freys are prickly about their honor and the Frey women already have a reputation for being far from attractive, when Robb is flirting with another, far more attractive girl in front of everyone, it invites jokes/gests and what not about the girl he is supposed to marry and about Frey women in general. I understand that the writers have added these changes to get the stereotypical and classic love-story into the show but I think that the writing is poor and done without regard for or understanding about the source material.

And how will this fit with the Red Wedding?

TV-wiever: "So, why did they just kill Robb and all his men?"

Book-reader: "Well they got upset that he married another woman and broke the pact with the Freys"

TV-wiever: "But we saw that coming half-way through season 2, why didn´t anyone react earlier to prevent that marriage"

Book-reader: "Hmm .... "

[Vandalism]

I did not dislike Rodrik Cassel's death, although I think it may have been better had they not changed it. I know, I know; they have only so many actors to use, but Rodrik defeated the Ironborn at Torrhen's Square and they were being led by Dagmer. In the episode, Dagmer is in Winterfell.

Dagmer being defeated by Cassel was a blow to Theon since it reduced his strength and thus made his forces thinner and his situation even more unstable.

On a side note, I loved Osha in this episode. I loved her in every episode, and I really enjoy her development as an elder sister/friend to Bran and Rickon. Also, she is hot. No saggy boobs, yahoo!

[Raksha the Demon]

Ran, earlier you put forward a reasonable idea about judging GoT according to two axes; faithfulness and stand-alone merit (don't know if it was this thread or somewhere else). I agree with that assessment and it seems to me that making a 180 purely based on faithfulness disregards the other axis: the stand-alone merit of the show. If Myrcella's tears make sense within the logic of the television show, it can't be as terrible a change as some people make it out to be. It's not faithful, but that's only one part of the equation.

I wasn't thrilled by Myrcella's tears, when GRRM took pains to mention that she was composed and self-confident as she set out for Dorne. But I can see why they wrote the scene that way - to add emphasis to Cersei's bitterness/sorrow as she tells Tyrion that she hopes that he will love someone/something someday so she can take it away from him. The camera cut to weepy Myrcella before or after Cersei's little speech to Tyrion; I guess the writers thought that having a calm, brave Myrcella waving bye-bye from the boat would undercut the Cersei/Tyrion drama. They could have managed it better, by cutting some of that dreadful and awkward Robb/Talisa banter and shown Myrcella crying on the dock, making her farewells, then wiping her eyes bravely and smiling as she sets off for her new life.

But it's not the worst of the many changes they've made. And the episode was Ros-Free!!!! :laugh:

[Sword of the Morning Wood]

What's wrong with that? They thought the show was being true to the characters from the book... and then discover that the show hasn't been. They were happy when the show was being, in their mind, faithful and now thy're unhappy because the show wasn't. Simple, really, so I'm confused at your confusion. Perhaps ignorance truly is bliss for some.

I think it's proof that some people will criticize any deviation from the simply because it's a deviation from the book and no other reason. Of course, it's their right to think that way and voice their opinions. But for others, myself included, it's annoying when all people seem able to do is come on and criticise the show for any change from the books.

I think there are some changes which were a poor decision and I'm happy to judge each change on it's merits. These threads do just seem to be a precession of people ranting about changes however minor.

[Thunderfist]

I think it's proof that some people will criticize any deviation from the simply because it's a deviation from the book and no other reason. Of course, it's their right to think that way and voice their opinions. But for others, myself included, it's annoying when all people seem able to do is come on and criticise the show for any change from the books.

I think there are some changes which were a poor decision and I'm happy to judge each change on it's merits. These threads do just seem to be a precession of people ranting about changes however minor.

So why do you read and post in them?