[Book spoilers] RW: Season 3 or 4? part 2

[DaveSumm]

"The number of book pages per season" is the worst criteria they can follow.

Well like it or not, Season 1 corresponded to a set number of pages. So did Season 2. Sure, there was added stuff, but ultimately every chapter in the books either or did not get included. Season 3 will take us up to a certain point in aSoS, which will correspond to a particular chapter for each character. So it doesn't really make sense to say it's the worst criteria: it's the only criteria. It's an adaption of the books, end of.

[oierem]

Season 1 corresponed to a series of story-arcs, which were roughly the story-arcs of the first book. Same with season 2. The number of book pages is irrelevant. Season 3 should include a good story-arc, which (for the first time) won't entirely correspond to the storylines in book 3. But thinking about how many pages from Storm will be included is wrong.

For example: the RW happens after several hundred pages, but if those pages don't contain important material for Robb and Cat's storyline, those pages should be trimmed. Ultimately, the only reason not to place the RW in season 3 is that it happens late in the book, not that there is enough material for Robb and Cat before that.

It doesn't matter if we go slightly out-of-sync (according to the book-pages) with Jon's storyline, or Dany's storyline, or Bran's storyline.

[kg1982]

I think that RW and PW have to happen in the same season... I think that killing of the three "usurpers" in one season makes sense; also the RW is such an emotionally devastating passage that there needs to be some reprieve. I expect to pop a bottle of champagne if we get to see Joffrey's death at the hands of women in the season finale.

[A song away]

RW in 3 for me and PW in 4.

They can do a heavy Stark-season first, so it would be a shocker. I'd prefer to see it in the final too; it will give lots of :stunned: all around (not just amongst fans) and hype everything up even more. It would also be good to have Tyrion in the background for a bit. Not sure if they will do that though, even when necessary, since he's clearly the star of the show (especially amongst non-book fans too).

Then PW in 4, near the beginning, and have Tyrion and King's Landing come forward again. Think they will have some of the Feast-scenes of the Ironborn in here too, to give some breathing space to season 5.

Apart from the Sansa-Margaery-QoT things; we'll probably see Joffrey missbehaving in front of the Tyrells for another added scene or two. They can do some of that in season 3 as a lead in-connection to 4.

[Winter In My Heart]

I think that RW and PW have to happen in the same season... I think that killing of the three "usurpers" in one season makes sense; also the RW is such an emotionally devastating passage that there needs to be some reprieve. I expect to pop a bottle of champagne if we get to see Joffrey's death at the hands of women in the season finale.

I agree with this. I don't understand why people obviously want Joffrey to live so much longer than Robb. Considering most fans, correct me if I'm wrong, hate the Lannisters aside from Tyrion. Doesn't anyone think that among non book readers there might be a slight chance they get so pissed off over more Stark devastation and STILL nothing bad happening to the Lannisters. I know most loyal show or book fans will continue to watch it but I don't think it's a good call to keep having all the bad things happening to the Starks without a little reprieve and showing that some bad things can happen to the lions as well. It really does just give non book readers the impression that 'nothing good will ever happen'. I get some might feel it's rushed if they do three weddings in one season but there's not much plot wise to do in KL in season three and would be a rather slow season. And essentially, like others have said, most of those characters will end right where they began. Tyrion marrying Sansa isn't exactly a climactic thing and unless they change it they would need to do this early on since Robb and Catelyn hear about it before the RW. So if there's no PW there is pretty much no cliff hanger or climactic moment there for the rest of the season as far as KL. I think they'd have more than enough material for season four with doing the PW at the end of season three. Tyrion being arrested, his trial, Tywin's death, Sansa escaping Kings Landing and going to the Vale.

Not only that but the RW only ends the story arc of one character. The PW ends many more and leaves a much bigger cliff hanger as to what will happen to everyone. (Especially Sansa if they haven't had her escape KL before the end of the season.) Yes RW is climactic but the PW just leaves things so much more wide open and affects so many more characters who are directly in KL.

[HouseLark]

I think that RW and PW have to happen in the same season... I think that killing of the three "usurpers" in one season makes sense; also the RW is such an emotionally devastating passage that there needs to be some reprieve. I expect to pop a bottle of champagne if we get to see Joffrey's death at the hands of women in the season finale.

I agree entirely. Ned's beheading really put viewers on the back foot in season one; the Red Wedding could actually sink the show if it's not followed by the PW since the first three seasons have just been a relentless buggering of the Starks who are the putative heroes. And you're right, structurally, the three pretenders to Stannis' throne need to die in the same season. It also gives us Sansa's escape which is good for viewers who will want a bit of a Stark "win" for once.

We should keep in mind that so much of what is happening takes place at the same time in different locations in the books so the writers can play with the order in which they show events in some storylines - I'm thinking in particular of Jon and Dany, even Jaime since all we need from him is to arrive at KL after Joffrey's death which can be delayed to season four.

[DaveSumm]

I still don't see why anyone thinks Joffrey's death somehow 'pays' for the RW. Robb will be just as dead after the PW, the Starks will be in exactly the same predicament. It's not like the show has no other protagonists.

[HouseLark]

It doesn't really "pay" for the RW but it gives the viewer a degree of satisfaction. The PW is also the first time that the Lannisters, who have been set up as "the bad guys", really suffer a significant loss. If you have the RW in S3 and the PW in S4 the first three seasons of GoT will have seen the Starks (who most see as the decent, heroes of the story - I'm not arguing that point here, it's been done to death but that's how it is on the show) suffer grievous losses in each season (Ned in S1, Winterfell in S2, Robb and Cat in S3) while the Lannister have barely been scratched.

This is really just about considering it from the POV of TV viewers; it's asking a lot for people to come back and watch a show in which many people's favourite characters are relentlessly shit on. I think that this could have been offset if the writers had handled Dany and Jon a lot better but on the show, their storylines haven't been engrossing. The same is true of Stannis and Davos but they were also underwritten in S2. Like it or not, the first two seasons of GoT have set up a Stark-Lannister war and that's what non-book readers have invested their time in.

[Liabe Brave]

What you propose would be dramatic enough for the midseason, but not for the finale. Each season should end with a one-two game changer. ...S3 cannot end on just a collection of dramatic events.

I can't empathize with this position. Demanding that a story must follow a particular structure seems needlessly reductive to me. This is how Hollywood films fall into boring, predictable rhythms. It's how Lost turned into an endlessly spiraling cycle of complications. Game of Thrones is given tons of money and freedom, and has a richly-complected source material to draw from. I would much rather see it capture the historical syncopation and evolving personalities of Martin's work, than concentrate on increasing the action-movie intensity.

[oierem]

But Martin's books also tend to follow a particular structure. ASOS does have a beginning, middle and ending, with storylines evolving and building up towards a climax an a good dramatic resolution.

[protar]

I can't empathize with this position. Demanding that a story must follow a particular structure seems needlessly reductive to me. This is how Hollywood films fall into boring, predictable rhythms. It's how Lost turned into an endlessly spiraling cycle of complications. Game of Thrones is given tons of money and freedom, and has a richly-complected source material to draw from. I would much rather see it capture the historical syncopation and evolving personalities of Martin's work, than concentrate on increasing the action-movie intensity.

Obviously things should not be strictly formulaic. But the climax needs to be something big, above the usual level of drama. It's worked for the last couple of thousand years afterall.

[gogorath]

"The number of book pages per season" is the worst criteria they can follow.

Most of the non-readers feel that the series is slow-moving, not rushed (each episode is packed with many storylines, which can feel like too much, but the progression of each storyline is slow).

How can you say that Jon's storyline in season 2 has been rushed? Or Dany's? Or Robb's? (most non-readers were expecting that he would die). Or Joffrey's? (all non-readers were convinced that he would die by the end of the season).

I've seen this stated before, but I've seen no real backup for it. My non-book reading friends feel it is generally rushed in terms of spending time with characters. They mention how other shows will show us the characters in their downtime, and we don't get that much. When we do, it's a lot of people's favorite scenes (a good example: Jon and Sam discussing women or Tyrion and Bronn). I don't presume to know if my friends apply to the rest of the watching community, but that is consistent with almost every critical review I've read.

I do think very little happened in some storylines, like Jon's and Dany's and we revisited them just to check in. Perhaps if there's one lesson to learn from Season 2, it's to let light storylines be light. Just because Jon and Dany are favorites doesn't mean we need to see them if they have nothing to say. But my complaint -- and most of what I've read there -- comes from book readers, not TV-only folks.

D&D will be introducing another 10-20 characters. The Tullys, Astapor, Ramsay, the Reeds, the rest of Stannis' family, Mance & Co. It's as many as last year, but the good news is that there aren't new storylines. We need to introduce Mance, but Jon is there. Stannis, Renly (who really needed to be re-introduced), Mel, Davos, etc., were all new and not with anyone. So they needed to carve out a lot of time to introduce everyone. With the newer characters, it will hopefully be smoother as existing characters can introduce them without carving out as much time.

Still, it's a lot to introduce and set-up. So it's a very fine balance between too fast and too slow. And there's absolutely NO universal sweet spot. Your too slow is likely faster than my too fast point -- meaning there probably isn't a pace that would make up both very happy. Which is one of many reasons it's not all that useful for them to listen to feedback.

[gogorath]

Obviously things should not be strictly formulaic. But the climax needs to be something big, above the usual level of drama. It's worked for the last couple of thousand years afterall.

Thank you -- the idea that story structure should be abandoned is a recipe for disaster. What people consider the most original narratives almost always follow the traditional three-act arc in one way or another -- it's small tweaks. Abandoning the idea of story structure is what makes something just awful.

[oierem]

I've seen this stated before, but I've seen no real backup for it. My non-book reading friends feel it is generally rushed in terms of spending time with characters. They mention how other shows will show us the characters in their downtime, and we don't get that much. When we do, it's a lot of people's favorite scenes (a good example: Jon and Sam discussing women or Tyrion and Bronn). I don't presume to know if my friends apply to the rest of the watching community, but that is consistent with almost every critical review I've read.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but your friends weren't complaining about the plot-progression being rushed, they were complaining about the episodes feeling packed, with lots of different storylines, and therefore, we not spending enough time with each of the characters.

They're right of course, but that's the nature of this show. Other shows don't have 8 different storylines (completely separated for the most part) in the same season, and therefore, are able to spend more "down-time" with each character, which is good.

But your friends probably don't want a slower plot progression. Would they want a 20-episode season to tell the exact same story, only with more "downtime" scenes?Would they want to wait more episodes to see Robb marrying Talissa, Dany going to tHotU, Jon actually doing something, Arya leaving Harrenhall, Stannis attacking KL....

My point is that they don't really want a slower season 3 (with less plot progression). They'd probably want a story with less storylines, more interaction between main characters and more scenes with each character in the same episode.

[gogorath]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but your friends weren't complaining about the plot-progression being rushed, they were complaining about the episodes feeling packed, with lots of different storylines, and therefore, we not spending enough time with each of the characters.

They're right of course, but that's the nature of this show. Other shows don't have 8 different storylines (completely separated for the most part) in the same season, and therefore, are able to spend more "down-time" with each character, which is good.

But your friends probably don't want a slower plot progression. Would they want a 20-episode season to tell the exact same story, only with more "downtime" scenes?Would they want to wait more episodes to see Robb marrying Talissa, Dany going to tHotU, Jon actually doing something, Arya leaving Harrenhall, Stannis attacking KL....

My point is that they don't really want a slower season 3 (with less plot progression). They'd probably want a story with less storylines, more interaction between main characters and more scenes with each character in the same episode.

Well, I think you're right and also not quite what they'd say. They almost uniformly do want more downtime scenes. In that sense, they would like more downtime scenes and I don't think any would have minded extending the season to do so (though 10 more episodes would have likely been too much). Clash has a weird set of plot points -- it's actually not all that plot driven -- at least from visually pleasing plot points. Whereas the danger with Storm is that there's just a massive amount of really big plot points. I actually haven't heard a single request to cut storylines -- unlike the books, my TV watcher friends don't seem to hate characters/storylines, and I think it'd be a huge mistake. The scope is something that is inherent to the story. As a book reader, I'd miss it. As for the tv watchers, I'm not sure it's a question they can even answer.

That said, I think they definitely could have done certain storylines better in Season 2. Like in my previous post, I think we can walk from storylines that have less to offer. And similarly, I don't think we need to force everything to episode 9/10 and have a climax there. I wouldn't leave character after episode 5, but perhaps episode 8?

Either way, for Storm, I think it will work better with 20 episodes. There's probably 15+ episodes worth of plot at GoT speeds. It's got a ton of big scenes that you could spend a lot of time on. I'd rather they do that than hand wave or cut stuff. Add in some character scenes, which they are excellent at, and let it flow. I don't think it will be too slow paced, except if they force every storyline to climax in the same episode -- I think that's where there's trouble.

One way to pace this (I don't think they will, but I might) is Robb and Arya's climax in Episode 7, Dany's climax in episode 8, Jon's climax in Episode 9 and general denouement in Episode 10. Jon has plenty to do that season. Dany doesn't stall too much before her big scene. KL still has plenty -- Dontos, Tyrion's wedding, the intro of the Red Viper (maybe -- and you could put the PW in Episode 10 if you please, though I'd wait until Season 4, Episode 1). There's plenty for Brienne and Jaime. Bran's a problem no matter what.

It would keep the plot pace up -- 4 episodes bam, bam, bam and the finale can always have some good stuff (Jorah's betrayal revealed? Coldhands?) that doesn't need to be big. It would be more reminiscient of Season 1, which had a great scene to end every episode: Bran out the window, Lady's Death, Arya's first dancing lesson (these last two were done well if not really great enders on their own), Tyrion's capture, Ned being stabbed, The Crowning, Ned's arrest, Sansa begging for her father (again, less endy but done well), Chop, Dragons.

[Khal-a-bunga]

With the confirmation that D&D will be directing their first episode this season, I think we can safely assume that the Red Wedding will be in the third season. The real question, then, is if the Purple Wedding will be this season. I'm thinking not, actually. End the stories in Essos and North of the Wall on high notes ("Dracarys", and the impending battle at the Wall, respectively), then end the story in Westeros with the Lannister fanily firmly on top. I don't see the need to blow through so much of the story by having both weddings in the same season, although I've firmly joined the camp of those who actually want to see the Red Wedding in the third season, after my most recent read-through (more like a 'browse-throgh', actually) of A Storm of Swords.

[PatrickStormborn]

With the confirmation that D&D will be directing their first episode this season, I think we can safely assume that the Red Wedding will be in the third season. The real question, then, is if the Purple Wedding will be this season. I'm thinking not, actually. End the stories in Essos and North of the Wall on high notes ("Dracarys", and the impending battle at the Wall, respectively), then end the story in Westeros with the Lannister fanily firmly on top. I don't see the need to blow through so much of the story by having both weddings in the same season, although I've firmly joined the camp of those who actually want to see the Red Wedding in the third season, after my most recent read-through (more like a 'browse-throgh', actually) of A Storm of Swords.

There is no story arc in King's Landing without the Purple Wedding. On the other hand, there is a lot of stuff to cover after the Red Wedding (Tyrion's trial, Jaime's return, Joff's funeral, Tywin's death, Tommen's crowning, Marg and Tommen's wedding).

I still don't see Dany's story ending with "Dracarys". Sure, it's cool and badass, but it doesn't really tie up her story unless we see her taking control of her army and moving it "towards Westeros". Her story needs to end with her taking another city and being hailed as "Mother". I also think her story needs to end with the Arstan reveal and the reveal of Jorah's betrayal.

Jon's story should end with Ygritte's death. It would be the best ending to his character arc, and leaves a lot of story left for season 4 (the arrival of Thorne and Slynt, Jon's arrest, heading to Mance's camp, Stannis's arrival, the LC elections).

[oierem]

There is no story arc in King's Landing without the Purple Wedding. On the other hand, there is a lot of stuff to cover after the Red Wedding (Tyrion's trial, Jaime's return, Joff's funeral, Tywin's death, Tommen's crowning, Marg and Tommen's wedding).

I still don't see Dany's story ending with "Dracarys". Sure, it's cool and badass, but it doesn't really tie up her story unless we see her taking control of her army and moving it "towards Westeros". Her story needs to end with her taking another city and being hailed as "Mother". I also think her story needs to end with the Arstan reveal and the reveal of Jorah's betrayal.

Jon's story should end with Ygritte's death. It would be the best ending to his character arc, and leaves a lot of story left for season 4 (the arrival of Thorne and Slynt, Jon's arrest, heading to Mance's camp, Stannis's arrival, the LC elections).

Agreed 100% about KL and Jon. Not so sure about where to end Daenerys' story, but I agree that the reveal of Jorah's betrayal should be this season, and that we should see more progress than simply her taking another city.

[PatrickStormborn]

Agreed 100% about KL and Jon. Not so sure about where to end Daenerys' story, but I agree that the reveal of Jorah's betrayal should be this season, and that we should see more progress than simply her taking another city.

I'm not exactly sure where to leave Dany's story either... But ending it with "Dracarys" would be a fatal disaster imo. It leaves far too much ambiguity, and would serve much better as a scene in episode 6. And I really can't think of a worse story than Dany in Astapor all season...

[Liabe Brave]

But Martin's books also tend to follow a particular structure. ASOS does have a beginning, middle and ending, with storylines evolving and building up towards a climax an a good dramatic resolution.

Yes...but season 3 will not contain the entire arc of Swords. What's under discussion is whether or not to rearrange the story to provide another maximally-intense climax in the middle of the buildup.

Obviously things should not be strictly formulaic. But the climax needs to be something big, above the usual level of drama. It's worked for the last couple of thousand years afterall.

I never said big climaxes are bad. No matter how season 3 is handled, there will be plenty of huge moments in the future, and I'm looking forward to them! Instead, my point was that one of the primary qualities that draws people to Martin's work is that he explicitly avoids pat solutions to dramatic difficulties. That doesn't mean there's no drama, even melodrama...just that it ebbs and flows in irregular rhythms. Replacing that with steady climactic punctuation--no matter how compelling or exciting those highs are--would sever the show from one of its source's greatest strengths.

Thank you -- the idea that story structure should be abandoned is a recipe for disaster. What people consider the most original narratives almost always follow the traditional three-act arc in one way or another -- it's small tweaks. Abandoning the idea of story structure is what makes something just awful.

This is mostly answered to the previous posters, but please note that I never said anything even remotely akin to "Let's abandon story structure!" My own suggestions for the S03 ending earlier in this thread follow very standard dramatic arcs. I'm arguing not against climax per se, but against having the same kind of climax over and over.