[Book & TV Spoilers] Insightful interview with writer Bryan Cogman

[protar]

So which changes are so incredibly radical that they ruin the story?

Well fortunately they have hit the mark on the major stories like KL, and Winterfell so that the overall story is not ruined. However Jon's story after catching Ygritte for example, or Robb's story after meeting Talisa are both pretty terrible for me. And there are a slew of issues in many of the other arcs, like the lack of character development for Arya past the first few episodes, the complete lack of internal logic in Qarth etc. etc.

So it's salvageable going into S3, but still pretty bad imo in many respects. And now it seems likely that season three is giving us invented material for KL and Theon as well. That worries me.

[Punchslap]

The fact that they have read the books does not mean they are full-on fans of them. I suppose it depends on your definition of what constitutes a fan. If your definition is just anyone who thought it was a good story then sure D+D are fans, but I think you need a bit more dedication and understanding of the books to be considered a fan.

There's a metric for defining a fan? Is there an arbitration panel for tough cases? I have visions of serious people in committees debating the matter. How do they know how many times a fan has read the books, or how dedicated they were, or how understanding? Someone must be clocking overtime.

[protar]

There's a metric for defining a fan? Is there an arbitration panel for tough cases? I have visions of serious people in committees debating the matter. How do they know how many times a fan has read the books, or how dedicated they were, or how understanding? Someone must be clocking overtime.

Very funny. But you know what's even funnier? The fact that every time the purists come up with a valid point the apologists just mock them. Gets me every time.

Yes there is a line between a fan and someone who just enjoyed the books. I don't see how that's really debatable. And even if it is it's really just arguing semantics. The bottom line of my argument is that I don't think D+D have understood the books.

[DragonAge93]

Do you honestly think that if D&D weren't fans of this series at all and didn't respect the material that they would tackle something as immense as ASOIAF? You know how many people came up to GRRM who wanted to butcher his work like a cow to the slaughter? They wanted to make a 2-3 hour PG-13 movie. I'm sure you've heard of that, as GRRM himself has stated this in many an interview. What if that had happened? It didn't. Instead we got two guys who have actually read the books and do understand most of the material. Sure, maybe they haven't studied it religiously like some us fans on here, but they get the main point of it.

And protar, your constant mentioning of Jon not having a father figure as stated by D&D was from a Inside The Episode featurette. I believe it was episode 1 of season 2. But what you don't understand is that most of the time D&D are talking about the context of the show in those features, not the books, and in the show Jon really doesn't have a father figure until Jeor starts to lead him on the path of manhood. Maybe this was a case in the books that we as a reader never got to see. Jon did learn to grow up fast, being a bastard, but he still felt neglected by everyone, even those in the Night's Watch. It's not abominable to have a father figure for Jon in the show.

And again with Jon's storyline, you do understand why they wanted Jon to have a better relationship with Ygritte than Qhorin, don't you? Qhorin's dead at the end of the season, so it's really wasted time on a character who's only gonna survive for another 2 episodes, whereas Ygritte's gonna be a huge part in Jon's season 3 and most likely 4 storyline. So, for story purposes, this makes more sense to establish the relationship with Ygritte more on screen than having to fund scenes with Qhorin that were basically condensed in the show and served the same purpose: look to be a traitor to the Night's Watch and join the Wildlings to see what they are planning. It's all about condensation. Do you think nonbook viewers want to watch Jon and Qhorin run away for 2 episodes? As a book fan, I wish they would have put it in, but this is a show for a mass audience, not just book fans. And with Arya's development being postponed, it makes more sense if she killed someone important in the show, because in the book, even when she kills a nameless guard, we as the readers get to see her internal conflict and how she feels like she has changed, whereas we can't get inside her head in the show. So instead we should make her revelation of her killing be someone she truly hates, so a viewer can think "Wow, she hated him, and now she's tipped over the edge and killed him herself".

When you made your HOTU and Weasel soup scene, you said you came up with it in a minute. D&D probably came up with something similar to that, but in the end, time constraints and budget come into play, which you seem to always dodge around and just lay the blame solely on D&D, as if their life goal is to ruin the writings of GRRM. GRRM has no problem at all with the adaption so far (mainly because it's lining his pockets with money :P) but he also understands that his books cannot be translated to the screen perfectly, and he seems to have no trouble with any of the so-called "major changes". He may quibble how a character is a little different than his, but he still knows the limitations of the medium, as he himself has worked in it and knows the trouble D&D are in everyday. GRRM said they wanted the chain in "Blackwater", but they had to cut it out. The author of this beloved series understands the changes, so why can't us as fans just finally accept it and move on? Yes, forums can be a place for debates, but dragging a debate on this long is pointless. It's just quibbling back and forth with no revelations at a sight. I can see debating for a week or two over a change, but it's done and over with, we have to accept we can;t change Jon's story in season 2 to be exactly like ACoK, we can't have the HOTU have the visions now, because season 2 is over and now focus is on ASoS/season 3. Why not move on to there and discuss changes you don't want to see, or scenes you want/don't want to see adapted? Forgive and forget, in this case. There's nothing we can do about the changes. Complaining on this forum isn't going to accomplsh anything. So maybe some of us are "apologists" as you put it because we are reasonable and understand the limitations of an adaption. Just because we are "apologists" doesn't make us any less of purists in our own way.

[Punchslap]

Yes there is a line between a fan and someone who just enjoyed the books. I don't see how that's really debatable. And even if it is it's really just arguing semantics. The bottom line of my argument is that I don't think D+D have understood the books.

That's a separate issue (they don't understand the book) from separating all readers into "purist" and "non-purist" camps. You've created a dichotomy where the person who agrees with you = purist, and the person who doesn't agree with you = non-purist. What is that meant to achieve? Why all the hyperbole? Why the didacticism? How is your approach going to generate interesting dialogue?

[Khal Porno]

"Apologist" indicates that it's plainly bad and people who like the show are excusing it's poor quality. That's not the case - those of us who are fans of both the books and the show like them both for what they are. I actually like the changes they've made for the most part (although I think Quorin's direction to Jon could have been a bit more clear, but it wasn't a dealbreaker), I'm not excusing bad writing. I think Talisa is vastly superior to Jeyne Westerling. That doesn't make me an "apologist," it just means I like the show.

And the examples you mentioned, Protar - you realize you basically just listed almost all the things that are different, which wasn't really my question. What exactly was it that ruins it or is so horrible? Jon Snow's meet up with Ygritte and Robb falling in love with Talisa - how much screentime is that? Like 15 minutes of a 10 hour season? And it ruined it for you? Not to mention the fact that in the books, we don't even SEE Robb fall in love with Jeyne. If it had been a pity-fuck like Robb said it was in the books, I think viewers would have been like "whaaaaat?" and it would have made both characters look bad. But ultimately the characters are where they need to be - Jon's captured by the wildlings and on his way to meet Mance Rayder, and Robb's pissed off the Freys by marrying someone else.

Same with Dany and Arya - something actually happens with Dany in Quarth instead of her just riding around in Xaro's coach a lot, but by the end she's on her way out of town and will presumably meet up with Barristan Selmy. And Arya; they left out Weasel soup - that's too bad, but how would they have fit it in? And is it really necessary to the overall story? No. So she doesn't kill anyone as she escapes - so? She'll probably kill someone in season three and it will have the same effect that killing that guard in the books did. Ultimately Arya left Harrenhal with Gendry and Hot Pie, and Jaqen gave her the coin to get into the Faceless Men's hangout.

[DragonAge93]

Ultimately Arya left Harrenhal with Gendry and Hot Pie, and Jaqen gave her the coin to get into the Faceless Men's hangout.

Exactly! You hit it right on the head. That's the point I'm always trying to make: they still got the basic plot point for each character down: Jon joined the Wildlings, Arya escaped Harrenhal, Dany's leaving Qarth, Jaime's on his way to King's Landing with Brienne, Tyrion's in a shit position now. Why does it matter if a few details were changed along the way? We still got the main story for each character, and where they are suppose to be at prior to ASoS. It's not like they drastically changed the characters' stories where Jon and Qhorin killed all the Wildlings and are headed back for the Wall, Dany is going to become queen of Qarth now, Jaime's not going to King's Landing and is instead going to stay with Robb. But with all the overreacting some fans make it seem like that's what it came down to.

[Dragon greyscale]

And what's more if they stuck closer to the books, then the multiple interpretations would remain, meaning they could continue with their deluded fanfic, whereas we can likewise interpret things as we see fit.

"Sticking closer to the book" is an interpretative term to begin with. If someone suggests that it means a "word for word" adaptation, many people here are up in arms saying that they never meant to say that. Similarly, if someone says it's about hitting plot points, other people will say they (D&D) disregard characterization. At the bottom line, it's about drawing the line between exact words and hidden meanings. Using the term misinterpretation is just a way of saying it's not your interpretation. It's not fact.

I personally don't find the no-father figure a stretch. When you don't know your actual father, you look for someone who can fill that role. First it was Ned but after he joined the NW he had to find another person. Is it really that difficult for you to ubderstand how they got to this line of reasoning?

[Chaircat Meow]

"Sticking closer to the book" is an interpretative term to begin with. If someone suggests that it means a "word for word" adaptation, many people here are up in arms saying that they never meant to say that. Similarly, if someone says it's about hitting plot points, other people will say they (D&D) disregard characterization. At the bottom line, it's about drawing the line between exact words and hidden meanings. Using the term misinterpretation is just a way of saying it's not your interpretation. It's not fact.

I personally don't find the no-father figure a stretch. When you don't know your actual father, you look for someone who can fill that role. First it was Ned but after he joined the NW he had to find another person. Is it really that difficult for you to ubderstand how they got to this line of reasoning?

You do realize Jon does actually know who his 'actual' father is (or thinks he does) right?

I am a bit surprised everyone is up in arms about the search for a father figure thing though. After all, Jon did want Benjen to stick around with him at the start and (if IIRC) there was some mention of Jon being a kind of surrogate son for Benjen. I don't really see how it affects characterization that much either.

[Chaircat Meow]

"Apologist" indicates that it's plainly bad and people who like the show are excusing it's poor quality. That's not the case - those of us who are fans of both the books and the show like them both for what they are. I actually like the changes they've made for the most part (although I think Quorin's direction to Jon could have been a bit more clear, but it wasn't a dealbreaker), I'm not excusing bad writing. I think Talisa is vastly superior to Jeyne Westerling. That doesn't make me an "apologist," it just means I like the show.

And the examples you mentioned, Protar - you realize you basically just listed almost all the things that are different, which wasn't really my question. What exactly was it that ruins it or is so horrible? Jon Snow's meet up with Ygritte and Robb falling in love with Talisa - how much screentime is that? Like 15 minutes of a 10 hour season? And it ruined it for you? Not to mention the fact that in the books, we don't even SEE Robb fall in love with Jeyne. If it had been a pity-fuck like Robb said it was in the books, I think viewers would have been like "whaaaaat?" and it would have made both characters look bad. But ultimately the characters are where they need to be - Jon's captured by the wildlings and on his way to meet Mance Rayder, and Robb's pissed off the Freys by marrying someone else.

Did you even watch their scenes. How do they not look bad as is?

[DragonAge93]

I think the reason Robb married Talisa/Jeyne is still the same in a way. Sure, he married Jeyne because of honor, but he wouldn't have slept with her in the first place if he hadn't had feelings for her, even if he was just "sad" at the time. Maybe they bonded together offpage, we never got a Robb POV. Just like why Robb sleeps with Talisa: all these things happening around him and she was the only one who brought any joy to him at that moment, so he slept with her, and married her because he loved her. Sure, it may not have been out of honor, but we're still at the same point as Robb from the book: marrying a girl other than one of Walder's daughters.

[Dragon greyscale]

You do realize Jon does actually know who his 'actual' father is (or thinks he does) right?

Your right of course. I was a bit tired when I wrote that. But I still understand their view because Jon's official non-belonging to the Stark family is emphasized a lot. Bastard's aren't regarded as true children in westeros. No matter how hard Ned tries to be the good guy, there's always Cat reminding Jon he'a not a real Stark. Or the fact that he shouldnt sit at the table during the feast. That's still emotional rejection and I can imagine he'd go search for figures that accept him completely, no strings attached...a father figure.

[protar]

Do you honestly think that if D&D weren't fans of this series at all and didn't respect the material that they would tackle something as immense as ASOIAF? You know how many people came up to GRRM who wanted to butcher his work like a cow to the slaughter? They wanted to make a 2-3 hour PG-13 movie. I'm sure you've heard of that, as GRRM himself has stated this in many an interview. What if that had happened? It didn't. Instead we got two guys who have actually read the books and do understand most of the material. Sure, maybe they haven't studied it religiously like some us fans on here, but they get the main point of it.

I'm not saying they don't respect the source material, I'm just saying that they don't understand it (or atleast don't understand a lot of it.) and that they aren't fans of the series on the same level we are. It shows all throughout the show in the big details like massively altered characters, and the small details like the Jaime not calling Brienne wench, or there not being a peach at Renly's parlay. They're little things but they're memes within our fandom, things any true fan of the series would be sure to put in so it's telling when they're not. Just because we might have had worse that does not mean that D+D are beyond criticism. We might have got someone better.

And protar, your constant mentioning of Jon not having a father figure as stated by D&D was from a Inside The Episode featurette. I believe it was episode 1 of season 2. But what you don't understand is that most of the time D&D are talking about the context of the show in those features, not the books, and in the show Jon really doesn't have a father figure until Jeor starts to lead him on the path of manhood. Maybe this was a case in the books that we as a reader never got to see. Jon did learn to grow up fast, being a bastard, but he still felt neglected by everyone, even those in the Night's Watch. It's not abominable to have a father figure for Jon in the show.

Well firstly Jon clearly has father figures within the show. Ned, Benjen, Jeor, Aemon, he would've had Qhorin if they hadn't made a botch of that story. So their claim that Jon has no father figure doesn't even work within the context of the show imo. And even if it does, that begs the question, why is Jon's arc different from the books anyway? It doesn't cost time or money to change or retain someone's character development so why change things from the books?

And again with Jon's storyline, you do understand why they wanted Jon to have a better relationship with Ygritte than Qhorin, don't you? Qhorin's dead at the end of the season, so it's really wasted time on a character who's only gonna survive for another 2 episodes, whereas Ygritte's gonna be a huge part in Jon's season 3 and most likely 4 storyline. So, for story purposes, this makes more sense to establish the relationship with Ygritte more on screen than having to fund scenes with Qhorin that were basically condensed in the show and served the same purpose: look to be a traitor to the Night's Watch and join the Wildlings to see what they are planning. It's all about condensation. Do you think nonbook viewers want to watch Jon and Qhorin run away for 2 episodes? As a book fan, I wish they would have put it in, but this is a show for a mass audience, not just book fans.

Yes I understand that Ygritte is more important than Qhorin overall. But as you say yourself, Ygritte has all of S3 and possibly some of S4 to be developed and for her relationship with Jon to build. Qhorin on the other hand is dead by the end of the season but that doesn't mean he doesn't deserve development. What it means is that they only have a few episodes to develop him and they blew it. Now I don't know for certain whether or not the non-readers would've been excited by Jon and Qhorin fleeing the wildlings but generally people prefer epic flights through the wilderness to three identical scenes of inane boner talk. And I do know that in the TWOP forums at least, Jon's arc is widely considered one of the most boring. Coincedentally this is along side Dany's and Robb's stories which are, guess what, the three most altered stories in the show. Tells you something there.

And with Arya's development being postponed, it makes more sense if she killed someone important in the show, because in the book, even when she kills a nameless guard, we as the readers get to see her internal conflict and how she feels like she has changed, whereas we can't get inside her head in the show. So instead we should make her revelation of her killing be someone she truly hates, so a viewer can think "Wow, she hated him, and now she's tipped over the edge and killed him herself".

The guards death, and the Tickler's death (though I guess it'll be Polliver in the show.) are different. The latter is about hate yes, but the guards death is equally important because it's in cold-blood. The guard has done nothing to Arya, he's just in the way. They're two separate facets of her development and both are equally important.

When you made your HOTU and Weasel soup scene, you said you came up with it in a minute. D&D probably came up with something similar to that, but in the end, time constraints and budget come into play, which you seem to always dodge around and just lay the blame on D&D sorely.

I dodge around the budgetry issues? You do realise that the Weasel Soup/HOTU solution I proposed was specifically designed with budget in mind, the idea being that whenever one of the scenes became too budget heavy, you switched over to the other while it was going through a less expensive part. Now I don't have the numbers in front of me of course, but neither do you. So instead we use logic to aproximate what will and won't be affordable. I can't think of a logical reason why that wouldn't be affordable but if you can, by all means tell me.

GRRM has no problem at all with the adaption so far (mainly because it's lining his pockets with money :P) but he also understands that his books cannot be translated to the screen perfectly, and he seems to have no trouble with any of the so-called "major changes". He may quibble how a character is a little different than his, but he still knows the limitations of the medium, as he himself has worked in it and knows the trouble D&D are in everyday. GRRM said they wanted the chain in "Blackwater", but they had to cut it out. The author of this beloved series understands the changes, so why can't us as fans just finally accept it and move on?

How do you know he's happy with the adaptation? Have you spoken to him personally? Because unless you have, you can't know what he's feeling, we're only seeing his public persona. If he's unhappy with the changes he's not going to rage about it in interviews, that'll only create a rift between him and D+D. No he's going to resolve it quietly and amiably. Now I'm not trying to put words in his mouth but if he is unhappy we're unlikely to know about it unless things get really bad. And let's be honest he's a book purist himself, I've seen him complain about such things in interviews. And btw, I completely understood the cutting of the chain, along with virtually every book purist on this forum. It's the nonsensical changes that anger me, were the book story could've been told in exactly the same amount of time and money.

Yes, forums can be a place for debates, but dragging a debate on this long is pointless. It's just quibbling back and forth with no revelations at a sight. I can see debating for a week or two over a change, but it's done and over with, we have to accept we can;t change Jon's story in season 2 to be exactly like ACoK, we can't have the HOTU have the visions now, because season 2 is over and now focus is on ASoS/season 3. Why not move on to there and discuss changes you don't want to see, or scenes you want/don't want to see adapted? Forgive and forget, in this case. There's nothing we can do about the changes. Complaining on this forum isn't going to accomplsh anything. So maybe some of us are "apologists" as you put it because we are reasonable and understand the limitations of an adaption. Just because we are "apologists" doesn't make us any less of purists in our own way.

Complaining about it might not change things in season 2, but if we just lie down and let D+D do whatever they want it's only going to get worse. I'm willing to give them a second chance with S3, but I'm still going to gripe about the changes to S2. Besides which it's fun.

[protar]

"Apologist" indicates that it's plainly bad and people who like the show are excusing it's poor quality. That's not the case - those of us who are fans of both the books and the show like them both for what they are. I actually like the changes they've made for the most part (although I think Quorin's direction to Jon could have been a bit more clear, but it wasn't a dealbreaker), I'm not excusing bad writing. I think Talisa is vastly superior to Jeyne Westerling. That doesn't make me an "apologist," it just means I like the show.

Fine, adaptationist then. When it comes down to it they're just words to describe people who want the show closer to the books and people who are happy with it as is (despite it being bad :P ). You can just swap out apologist for adaptationist and my arguments remain exactly the same.

And the examples you mentioned, Protar - you realize you basically just listed almost all the things that are different, which wasn't really my question. What exactly was it that ruins it or is so horrible? Jon Snow's meet up with Ygritte and Robb falling in love with Talisa - how much screentime is that? Like 15 minutes of a 10 hour season? And it ruined it for you? Not to mention the fact that in the books, we don't even SEE Robb fall in love with Jeyne. If it had been a pity-fuck like Robb said it was in the books, I think viewers would have been like "whaaaaat?" and it would have made both characters look bad. But ultimately the characters are where they need to be - Jon's captured by the wildlings and on his way to meet Mance Rayder, and Robb's pissed off the Freys by marrying someone else.

Same with Dany and Arya - something actually happens with Dany in Quarth instead of her just riding around in Xaro's coach a lot, but by the end she's on her way out of town and will presumably meet up with Barristan Selmy. And Arya; they left out Weasel soup - that's too bad, but how would they have fit it in? And is it really necessary to the overall story? No. So she doesn't kill anyone as she escapes - so? She'll probably kill someone in season three and it will have the same effect that killing that guard in the books did. Ultimately Arya left Harrenhal with Gendry and Hot Pie, and Jaqen gave her the coin to get into the Faceless Men's hangout.

Fine, I will explain why I think all of these changes were awful:

The Jon and Ygritte scenes in episode 7 were three virtually identical scenes in which Ygritte talks about boners. It was only mildly funny the first time and just cringeworthy after that. It was like GOT was suddenly a medieval romcom. Not to mention how stupid the whole arc makes Jon look.

Talisa is incredibly cliched and boring, I literally cringe every time I see her on screen. Jeyne may be a bit flat but at least she fits into the world of Westeros whereas Talisa does not. And it's not as if Talisa is a three dimensional character anyway. You seem to have mistaken spunky and in-your-face for developed. And the way it happens in the show makes Robb look incredibly unsympathetic, sleeping with her and marrying her out of lust and spitting on the Freys to fulfill his own selfish needs. In the books he is conflicted and sacrifices his honour for Jeyne's, which not only makes him more sympathetic, but also is much more interesting a original.

I agree that something needed to happen in Qarth, but it was handled awfully. The politics of Qarth just fall apart with the dragon-knapping scenario and Xaro proclaiming himself king. There are dozens of threads on the matter if you want an in-depth explanation.

I explained the importance of Arya killing the guard in my last post for reference.

[Khal Porno]

I absolutely don't agree with you at all. First of all the "purist" versus "apologist/adaptionist (???)" is ridiculous...there's no way you can be a "purist" and watch ANY adaptation of the books. "Pure" meaning "undiluted," indicates you want every word on screen. Ain't gonna happen in an ADAPTATION. And you clearly have no freaking clue how lucky you are that they are making a multi-season HBO series instead of a trilogy (best case scenario) of PG-13 films with almost everything cut out.

And you can't say it's unilaterally bad, because there are MANY people who like it. More people watch and enjoy the show than have read the books. Many many more people started reading the books after watching the show than had been reading it before. If it were bad, that wouldn't happen. You just don't like it.

Your complaint about Jon Snow's arc is three scenes late in the season? Kudos to you for remembering it was three scenes, I sure wasn't counting. Have you perhaps been watching it more than once? Once again, your opinion. I loved Ygritte's stuff where she was giving Jon a hard time. And I liked seeing him go from a position where he was the biggest and baddest (skill-wise) of the new Night's Watch brothers to a position of vulnerability, where he's out of his depth. It gives him room to grow as a character, and we'll see him become the man he grows into in the books. If I remember correctly he was a bit of a crybaby to begin with in the books.

Talisa is not a cliche. Clearly you have been reading other people here make that argument (which they then couldn't back up). Unless you believe any woman who challenges a man to be a cliche. And I don't find her boring at all, I really like Talisa. If anyone is boring it's Jeyne Westerling, who was a big nobody in the books. I like Talisa's background, I liked her job as a nurse, and I liked the way she gave Robb an alternate point of view and played hard to get. This is the kind of woman I could see Robb falling in love with, which I'm sure is what the producers were thinking as well. I've really enjoyed Robb's arc in the show because his arc in the books was my biggest disappointment. You may not feel that way but hey - that's why people have different opinions. And as far as her not fitting into the world of Westeros - guess what? She's not FROM Westeros! She's from VOLANTIS!

I don't understand why the politics fell apart in Qarth...did you need endless senate hearings like they had in Phantom Menace? Xaro and Pyat killed the council and took over. Presumably they had to do more than that, but we don't need to see that - Dany's story is what's important. Who gives a crap what political stuff Xaro had to go through to solidify his power? Dany doesn't know, so why do we need to know?

And Arya is going to kill someone in a similar way that she killed the guard, probably to avoid detection or preserve her secret identity, and it will have the same effect as killing the random dude as she was escaping. That's such an pivotal moment for her, why would you assume they completely excised it just because she didn't do it as she left Harrenhal? The producers even said that they wanted to save the beginning of Arya's descent into darkness for season three, and I think that was prudent since they'll have more time to explore it's ramifications in more detail.

[DragonAge93]

Protar, you're like a broken record... All of your posts always have that same vibe of "I'm always right in the end, you're wrong". Did you not read closely enough to my first post? GRRM has said MULTIPLE times that he knows changes have to be made, and that he understands them, because HE was in the business of television once. He KNOWS the hardships of adapting, and he accepts it. He's stated this countless times, yes, in interviews, but that doesn't mean he's lying and cowering behind a poker face. He enjoys it for what it is, and at least D&D consult with him on many things, like casting and writing. Tell me, if GRRM disliked what D&D were doing with his show, would he continue to support the hell out of it by going to Comic Con and being the panel moderator and writing an episode per season? If he hated the way D&D were doing it, he'd want nothing to do with the show, as a lot of authors do with their works turned into screen adaptions, ala Christopher Tolkien with the LOTR series. And how is constantly debating the same topic over and over again "fun"? If that's your idea of fun, you might want to redefine your definition of it.

[SecretNegative]

Protar, you're like a broken record... All of your posts always have that same vibe of "I'm always right in the end, you're wrong". Did you not read closely enough to my first post? GRRM has said MULTIPLE times that he knows changes have to be made, and that he understands them, because HE was in the business of television once. He KNOWS the hardships of adapting, and he accepts it. He's stated this countless times, yes, in interviews, but that doesn't mean he's lying and cowering behind a poker face. He enjoys it for what it is, and at least D&D consult with him on many things, like casting and writing. Tell me, if GRRM disliked what D&D were doing with his show, would he continue to support the hell out of it by going to Comic Con and being the panel moderator and writing an episode per season? If he hated the way D&D were doing it, he'd want nothing to do with the show, as a lot of authors do with their works turned into screen adaptions, ala Christopher Tolkien with the LOTR series. And how is constantly debating the same topic over and over again "fun"? If that's your idea of fun, you might want to redefine your definition of it.

Good points, especially since Mr. Martin really like to state his opinion rather strongly in interviews, if he didn't like the show, he would definetly state so in interviews. George is definetly not shy when it comes to talking about things, and he doesn't hide it when he thinks something is stupid.

[protar]

I absolutely don't agree with you at all. First of all the "purist" versus "apologist/adaptionist (???)" is ridiculous...there's no way you can be a "purist" and watch ANY adaptation of the books. "Pure" meaning "undiluted," indicates you want every word on screen. Ain't gonna happen in an ADAPTATION. And you clearly have no freaking clue how lucky you are that they are making a multi-season HBO series instead of a trilogy (best case scenario) of PG-13 films with almost everything cut out.

And you can't say it's unilaterally bad, because there are MANY people who like it. More people watch and enjoy the show than have read the books. Many many more people started reading the books after watching the show than had been reading it before. If it were bad, that wouldn't happen. You just don't like it.

Your complaint about Jon Snow's arc is three scenes late in the season? Kudos to you for remembering it was three scenes, I sure wasn't counting. Have you perhaps been watching it more than once? Once again, your opinion. I loved Ygritte's stuff where she was giving Jon a hard time. And I liked seeing him go from a position where he was the biggest and baddest (skill-wise) of the new Night's Watch brothers to a position of vulnerability, where he's out of his depth. It gives him room to grow as a character, and we'll see him become the man he grows into in the books. If I remember correctly he was a bit of a crybaby to begin with in the books.

Talisa is not a cliche. Clearly you have been reading other people here make that argument (which they then couldn't back up). Unless you believe any woman who challenges a man to be a cliche. And I don't find her boring at all, I really like Talisa. If anyone is boring it's Jeyne Westerling, who was a big nobody in the books. I like Talisa's background, I liked her job as a nurse, and I liked the way she gave Robb an alternate point of view and played hard to get. This is the kind of woman I could see Robb falling in love with, which I'm sure is what the producers were thinking as well. I've really enjoyed Robb's arc in the show because his arc in the books was my biggest disappointment. You may not feel that way but hey - that's why people have different opinions. And as far as her not fitting into the world of Westeros - guess what? She's not FROM Westeros! She's from VOLANTIS!

I don't understand why the politics fell apart in Qarth...did you need endless senate hearings like they had in Phantom Menace? Xaro and Pyat killed the council and took over. Presumably they had to do more than that, but we don't need to see that - Dany's story is what's important. Who gives a crap what political stuff Xaro had to go through to solidify his power? Dany doesn't know, so why do we need to know?

And Arya is going to kill someone in a similar way that she killed the guard, probably to avoid detection or preserve her secret identity, and it will have the same effect as killing the random dude as she was escaping. That's such an pivotal moment for her, why would you assume they completely excised it just because she didn't do it as she left Harrenhal? The producers even said that they wanted to save the beginning of Arya's descent into darkness for season three, and I think that was prudent since they'll have more time to explore it's ramifications in more detail.

You do realise that you asked MY opinion on those changes right. On what I thought had ruined the show? No where did I claim that absolutely everyone had to agree with me. Way to demonise the book purists. And then you go and present your arguments as facts on top of that. So you're being a hypocrit as well. I'm not going to reply to each of those points because there are plenty of individual threads for each where we can take it up and I really don't have time just now to write an in depth post of why Talisa is a cliche and why Qarth makes no sense (again, threads on such matters with all the arguments laid out, and I will point out that someone did in fact compile a list in one of these threads of stories with romances similar to Robb/Talisa. A small sampling.)

Protar, you're like a broken record... All of your posts always have that same vibe of "I'm always right in the end, you're wrong". Did you not read closely enough to my first post? GRRM has said MULTIPLE times that he knows changes have to be made, and that he understands them, because HE was in the business of television once. He KNOWS the hardships of adapting, and he accepts it. He's stated this countless times, yes, in interviews, but that doesn't mean he's lying and cowering behind a poker face. He enjoys it for what it is, and at least D&D consult with him on many things, like casting and writing. Tell me, if GRRM disliked what D&D were doing with his show, would he continue to support the hell out of it by going to Comic Con and being the panel moderator and writing an episode per season? If he hated the way D&D were doing it, he'd want nothing to do with the show, as a lot of authors do with their works turned into screen adaptions, ala Christopher Tolkien with the LOTR series. And how is constantly debating the same topic over and over again "fun"? If that's your idea of fun, you might want to redefine your definition of it.

When have I said (non-jokingly.) that you are wrong and I am right? Is it my fault that you're getting a "vibe" from my posts. This is a debate, my posts certainly aren't going to end with "oh mighty dragonage93, I bow down to your superior might."

And yes Martin understands the differences between book and television. But the fact of the matter is that he is something of a purist and that the show could feasibly have been closer to the books than it was. You may like Talisa or the extra Ygritte scenes and that's an opinion you are entitled to. But to claim that Jeyne absolutely had to be changed into a sassy volantene nurse is absurd. And I will note that I've never seen Martin interviewed on some of the larger changes in season 2. I've seen him make one coy comment about Talisa on his not-a-blog (before S2 aired.) but nothing on whether he liked the change or not for instance. And considering the fact that he has gone on record saying he hates the sassy commoner back talks the king thing, I think we can safely say he's not jumping over joy about the change. So if you can find an interview where Martin says he's okay with Talisa, the changes to Jon's arc, the changes to Qarth etc. than that'll be a start.

[protar]

Also, on the matter of Talisa being a cliche:

http://tvtropes.org/...Main/UptownGirl (The Show.)

And against that the much smaller page (and not even an exact match) for what happened in the books.

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/HonorableMarriageProposal

Of course the actually important thing is how the story is written and I feel that the Talisa/Robb romance was written terribly (along with the majority of the forum and the majority of the Unsullied.). If you feel otherwise well, your opinion.

[Khal Porno]

And we all know internet forums are the majority opinion (and therefore the right one). Give me a break, dude. You can say ANY romance is a cliche then. OMG it's a girl and there's a guy and he wants her and she kind of wants him too, WHAT A CLICHE!!

I presented my arguments as my opinions, and because they are my opinions, you can't say that these things are bad. Only that you don't care for them.