Cogman Talks Inside Game of Thrones, S3

[PatrickStormborn]

Why do you think Symon is dropped because of last season? Although, i'd agree with your other suggestions.

Because he never saw Tyrion and Shae together, and it seems unlikely that he'll have the opportunity to do this now.

[Padraig]

Because he never saw Tyrion and Shae together, and it seems unlikely that he'll have the opportunity to do this now.

I don't see why not. She could easily be wandering around and spots a bard.

[PatrickStormborn]

I don't see why not. She could easily be wandering around and spots a bard.

I'm sure they could do that... But no, I doubt it. She would need to strike up a relationship with him and invite him to sing for her in a place where her and Tyrion being seen together would be incriminating.

Or they could just create new material for Tyrion and Shae. It's far easier, and cheaper too.

[Padraig]

Or they could just create new material for Tyrion and Shae. It's far easier, and cheaper too.

Well...depends on what they make up. :)

They might drop the Symon storyline but I just wanted to make sure that I hadn't forgotten something in S2 that ruled it out.

[Dragon greyscale]

That's hardly fair. We're the fans of the books, the very reason this show exists (you think it'd get made if the books were unpopular?), and this is the only adaptation that we're going to get, certainly for a long time at least. Especially as D+D have told us repeatedly how much they supposedly love and respect the source material I think we should be able to expect that they stay true to the books whenever possible.

You know what's not "fair"? To assume that a mass production will be tailored to your own views because you've read the books (I'm going to assume more times than I did). That doesn't mean that you deserve anything special from D&D or HBO.

Disagree with the changes all you want but the "we deserve better for being such big fans" schtick is really misplaced entitlement.

GoT was created because of awesome source material and people with the guts and persistence to adapt it. Popularity helps a lot, of course, but it's not "the very reason this show exists". That's some twisted logic tbh.

[protar]

You know what's not "fair"? To assume that a mass production will be tailored to your own views because you've read the books (I'm going to assume more times than I did). That doesn't mean that you deserve anything special from D&D or HBO.

Disagree with the changes all you want but the "we deserve better for being such big fans" schtick is really misplaced entitlement.

GoT was created because of awesome source material and people with the guts and persistence to adapt it. Popularity helps a lot, of course, but it's not "the very reason this show exists". That's some twisted logic tbh.

I think it's safe to say that if the books didn't have a substantial fanbase in the first place to build off, the chances of the show being made are much smaller. And really I think it's perfectly reasonable to expect them to only make changes when necessary which so far they haven't (whether you like the changes or not most weren't completely necessary.). They keep on harping on about how passionate and resectful of the source material they are, but so far I've seen little to show it.

[Padraig]

They keep on harping on about how passionate and resectful of the source material they are, but so far I've seen little to show it.

Except that it is one of the most faithful adaptations ever. :P

And what is a completely necessary change? D&D would probably argue that something is necessary if they think it makes better (not too expensive) TV. Others would argue that it is only necessary if they broke a law to film the scene as it was described in the books (e.g. the age of the characters).

I think there are some flaws in the show but I don't think many of them are due to changes per se.

I'm also not sure how big an impact the popularity of the books had in making HBO decide to produce GoT. A lot of obscure books have been made into TV shows/films. Sure, it didn't hinder the show but how much of the audience did we originally represent (5%?).

[Abaddon]

I think it's safe to say that if the books didn't have a substantial fanbase in the first place to build off, the chances of the show being made are much smaller.

The fanbase now is 10x the size of the fanbase before the show. So, does that mean the show-only viewers are nine times as important as the book readers?

I, and many others, disagree that "most" changes weren't "necessary". As an example, many were dismayed when the Hound's story to Sansa was given to Littlefinger. The message board erupted with people angry at the change. We found out much later that the change was required because of a production issue and that the only options were to give the story to someone else or cut it. Was the change "necessary"? Technically speaking, no. In a perfect world there wouldn't be scheduling issues, every actor wouldn't decide not to return/die/break a leg, there would be unlimited budget, unlimited shooting schedule, no problems like tents being blown over in a tornado, and ability to do everything they way they want to do it. There wouldn't be directors having to drop out at the last moment and be replaced (that ended well though!). These are all realities of production that can force change, where it doesn't seem "necessary" to someone who isn't privy to the day-to-day details of bringing off the most complicated show on TV.

Again, there are obviously changes that are quite intentional from the start and are not coming from practical difficulties or limitations, and opinions on those are always going to be mixed. To say "most (changes) weren't completely necessary" shows a tremendous ignorance of the realities of bringing such an incredibly complicated and expensive adaptation to TV.

I have my own gripes about the show... I was really disappointed with how the Halfhand arc turned out and the whole S2E10 (after the incredible high of Blackwater) was a bit of a letdown. I didn't have high expectations for it going in, mind you, and i think the episode was a decidedly mixed bag. I have more sympathy for S2E10 though, the Halfhand arc was a great mini story that was practically written for the screen, where the stuff in EP10 was all fantasy stuff that would have been hard to pull off with a movie budget or flat out impossible to translate well to the screen. I haven't heard an explanation for why the Halfhand story was handled the way it was, so we can only guess about that, but it seems likely they wanted to feature Rose/Ygritte more and the (brilliant) relationship between Jon and Halfhand suffered as a result. We can and should discuss these disappointments (as well as successes) as fans. Painting with a broad brush instead of pointing to details isn't grounds for discussion, which is what we should be doing here.

[protar]

Well I guess what I mean is, I wish they'd stop these little bouts of creativity where they deviate from the source material for no reason other than that they thought it was cool. The Talisa change for example has from little bits and pieces been pretty much confirmed to be this. It's just hard for me to believe that they do respect the source material when every other scene they're deviating from it because they had "a better idea"

[Abaddon]

The Talisa change for example has from little bits and pieces been pretty much confirmed to be this. It's just hard for me to believe that they do respect the source material when every other scene they're deviating from it because they had "a better idea"

Yeah, that hasn't been "pretty much confirmed" at all.

I can imagine it went like this: the whole Westerling sub-plot was cut for time purposes. (Too long to establish a minor household for the purposes of making her an unknown Lannister bannerman). This is extremely likely. There simply isn't time in the show to devote to that kind of background detail. Additionally, the character of Jayne herself works okay for a 14-year old boy; it would not work for the Robb as portrayed by Richard Madden as written in the book. So, a change was necessary. Because otherwise, it wouldn't be plausible, due to the fact that Robb-the-book and Robb-the-show aren't the same.

The idea to make her from Volantis, we do have some idea, was because they wanted to start dropping information regarding the other parts of Essos we haven't even heard of yet. This is called "economy". And it makes sense. Once you remove the Weterling sub-plot it frankly is not too important if she is Jeyne from Westeros or Talisa from Volantis. Being able to introduce another part of the world at the same time, in a way that isn't forced, is important. Viewers later will hear "Volantis" and immediately have a character they can associate it to (and a nice back-story as well) as opposed to simply wilting with yet more "I've-never-heard-that-what???" fatigue.

Again; once you cut the Westerlings, they clearly thought changing Jeyne-of-house-Westerling to Jeyne-from-Volantis (GRRM says they should choose a different name, so it becomes Talisa-from-Volantis) was a good idea. And honestly, I think it was. Jeyne-of-house-Westerling without the Westerling would have been pretty meaningless. And if you've got the Westerling background, you have to include at least a few family members, which means more actors, where Talisa's family is conveniently in Volantis and expected to never be seen.

You might argue that the Westerling connection is too important to cut, and that's fine. I think the books are chock full of stuff like that and they have to pick and choose the best stuff they can execute on.

[protar]

Yeah, that hasn't been "pretty much confirmed" at all.

I can imagine it went like this: the whole Westerling sub-plot was cut for time purposes. (Too long to establish a minor household for the purposes of making her an unknown Lannister bannerman). This is extremely likely. There simply isn't time in the show to devote to that kind of background detail. Additionally, the character of Jayne herself works okay for a 14-year old boy; it would not work for the Robb as portrayed by Richard Madden as written in the book. So, a change was necessary. Because otherwise, it wouldn't be plausible, due to the fact that Robb-the-book and Robb-the-show aren't the same.

The idea to make her from Volantis, we do have some idea, was because they wanted to start dropping information regarding the other parts of Essos we haven't even heard of yet. This is called "economy". And it makes sense. Once you remove the Weterling sub-plot it frankly is not too important if she is Jeyne from Westeros or Talisa from Volantis. Being able to introduce another part of the world at the same time, in a way that isn't forced, is important. Viewers later will hear "Volantis" and immediately have a character they can associate it to (and a nice back-story as well) as opposed to simply wilting with yet more "I've-never-heard-that-what???" fatigue.

Again; once you cut the Westerlings, they clearly thought changing Jeyne-of-house-Westerling to Jeyne-from-Volantis (GRRM says they should choose a different name, so it becomes Talisa-from-Volantis) was a good idea. And honestly, I think it was. Jeyne-of-house-Westerling without the Westerling would have been pretty meaningless. And if you've got the Westerling background, you have to include at least a few family members, which means more actors, where Talisa's family is conveniently in Volantis and expected to never be seen.

You might argue that the Westerling connection is too important to cut, and that's fine. I think the books are chock full of stuff like that and they have to pick and choose the best stuff they can execute on.

It really wouldn't have taken any time at all to introduce Jeyne Westerling. Just establish that Robb has taken the Crag "the crag is yours sire" there takes a second. Then Jeyne comes up and her introduction can be as long as Talisa's was. The other Westerlings don't even need to be cast outside of extras.

And I'm sorry but I'm not buying that they made her from Volantis to sow the seeds of that plotline. They've specifically said there's no point in giving hints for things happening seasons down the line and it's going to be at least 3 seasons before we see Volantis.

If you look at the interviews it's fairly clear to me that they basically just changed Jeyne to Talisa for fun. They've said that when writing the script for S2 they'd just read DWD and thought Volantis was really cool so they made Talisa Volantene. Not to seed things for later on, but because it was cool. In the same interview that quote is from they said they changed things so Robb could fall in love, indicating they thought that was better than what was in the books. And now with their comments about not wanting to transcribe to the books well...forgive me for coming to that conclusion.

[Abaddon]

It really wouldn't have taken any time at all to introduce Jeyne Westerling. Just establish that Robb has taken the Crag "the crag is yours sire" there takes a second. Then Jeyne comes up and her introduction can be as long as Talisa's was. The other Westerlings don't even need to be cast outside of extras.

That, IMHO, is a pretty pointless gripe. You still don't get any of the depth from the books (who the Westerlings are, why it is important). Also, it's worth noting that we never see Jeyne on-screen at this time in the books... so D&D would have to be inventing a lot of this anyway. It's also easy for you to throw in "just cast some extras" for the family. It's not as easy for them, for such a minor point as this.

And I'm sorry but I'm not buying that they made her from Volantis to sow the seeds of that plotline. They've specifically said there's no point in giving hints for things happening seasons down the line and it's going to be at least 3 seasons before we see Volantis.

What you say about giving not bothering to give hints for things happening seasons down the line is directly in contradiction of some things Bryan Cogman has said, most recently that we're going to see some hints that were dropped way back in S1E2 come to fruition in S3

possibly we will learn that Joffrey arranged the attempted killing of Bran

. In fact, in this case, there was an actual specific mention that this was an intent of theirs. So, you may not buy it, but that's what we've heard (not just speculation).

[DaveSumm]

Regardless of whether the changes in Season 2 were necessary, what worries me is the description of the changes as a 'trend'. It seems to imply that outside of the difficulties of adapting the series, there's a conscious effort to include more invented material. I was quite pleased with the efforts that they went to in the S2 finale to set things so that a faithful S3 was very possible, so I figured that I'd put the changes down to the length of aCoK and the difficulty of including new characters and locations. This isn't the case going into aSoS: it's the fewest number of book pages they've attempted in a season, and there are no new characters or locations from the end of aCoK (to my recollection...?) so I hope there isn't anymore changes than necessary. Fundamentally, I just don't think it's their job to attempt to improve aSoIaF.

[Padraig]

Also, it's worth noting that we never see Jeyne on-screen at this time in the books... so D&D would have to be inventing a lot of this anyway. It's also easy for you to throw in "just cast some extras" for the family. It's not as easy for them, for such a minor point as this.

Some very good responses there. I also think they changed the Halfhand plot in S2 to give Ygritte more time. It is logical (although I can see why it would upset Halfhand fans), as they probably didn't feel they should spend time on a character that lasts only a half season (given their time constraints). Ygritte's storyline is more important.

The other Westerlings don't even need to be cast outside of extras.

You certainly need Jeyne's mother or what's the point?

And i'm curious to see if they are going to make any gesture towards the non-pregnancy storyline in S3.

Abaddon went through this quite well I thought.

They've specifically said there's no point in giving hints for things happening seasons down the line and it's going to be at least 3 seasons before we see Volantis.

I'm pretty sure they never said that. They have said they don't want to overburden the series with a huge amount of references to future season but that doesn't mean they wanted to avoid all hints. So in S1 they raise the Jon's parentage question and we hear about Stannis. In S2 we hear about the BwB and the Martell's hating the Lannisters etc.

If you look at the interviews it's fairly clear to me that they basically just changed Jeyne to Talisa for fun.

Again. Not true. And we already discusses the "transcribe" issue. Are you still suggesting that transcribing the book is a good thing?

Regardless of whether the changes in Season 2 were necessary, what worries me is the description of the changes as a 'trend'.

I did miss recounting this part of the interview with Bryan Cogman. Basically, he said that aGoT, while obviously challenging, wasn't that bad when it came to adapting. ACoK is a bigger sprawl and aSoS is even more difficult (aCoK still had a central character in Tyrion at least. ASoS doesn't). So he seems to be suggesting that there has to be an inevitable trend away from the books. Not because they want to make changes but because aSoS demands it. Now you can take that part of the interview and panic but I didn't interpret that to mean that there are wholesale changes, just that they do have to deal with the Tully's/Reeds/Mummers differently than the books. They are not trying to improve aSoIaF but they do have to deal with huge challenges in adapting it.

There are still a lot of new characters. Either those they didn't introduce earlier or people like Mance and Daario, who are genuinely new characters. And of course, there are other characters that should be new that they are not going to add at all. Not because they think GoT would be better off without them but because they don't have the money or the time.

[Currawong]

Many of the comments about the changes in Season 2 come from the POV of: 'But if they have changed that, then how are they ever going to show us (insert some favourite minor scene or a character)'? Or, 'Does this mean we won't be getting (again, insert scene or character)'. However, in terms of adapting all the books for TV, I wonder if this is often looking at things from the wrong end.

From the interviews with D & D, it seems as though they know fairly well where they are going in terms of the broad storylines way past Season 3, including what parts of the books need to be cut or varied. Because of the complexity of the books, this means that if they have already decided they need to alter or cut certain bits from later seasons, then they may have to backtrack and make pre-requisite changes to earlier seasons, in order to set things up correctly. If the producers are taking the big-picture approach (which I suspect they are), then they already know that they are not going to show the particular favourite scene or character in, say, Season 4, and therefore they can cut or change aspects of Seasons 2 and 3.

That is why it can be so difficult to assess certain changes - we don't know whether it was forced on them for production / budget reasons, whether the producers felt it was 'a much better idea for TV' in Season 2 or 3, or whether it was made because of much longer-term directions.

[protar]

You certainly need Jeyne's mother or what's the point?

The point is that even if there's no time for say Sybelle's involvement in the RW, that doesn't mean they have to completely throw Jeyne out the window. It's about keeping things as close as possible. You may have liked Talisa and D+D may have had their reasons for including her, but to say that her inclusion was an absolute unavoidable neccessity is quite frankly delusional and therefore I consider he inclusion to be a mistake.

Will reply to the rest of your post later, but I'm a bit pressed for time at the moment.

[Padraig]

The point is that even if there's no time for say Sybelle's involvement in the RW, that doesn't mean they have to completely throw Jeyne out the window.

Well, D&D were happy to keep the name but GRRM suggested changing that, so that's harder to argue with. :)

Clearly, Talisa was not an absolute neccessity but that's not how D&D are working. They are trying to look at the bigger picture and if they can combine details so that the overall picture is clearer, they will do so. (In its own way, it is neccessary, in order for people to understand the huge world that GoT is set in). Once they decided to drop the Westerling plot then where she came from was not important. Thus, they took the chance to introduce another part of the world instead. Makes sense big-picture wise.

As I said before, I miss the Westerling plot but once that is gone, I don't care where she comes from. We've never seen the Crag. It holds no attachment to me (neither does her name) and I can't see why it would be important to anyone really.

Now if your rules are that changes must be absolutely unavoidably neccessary then you and D&D (and GRRM) are coming at this from two different angles. There is nothing wrong with your approach as such but it was rather unrealistic, given the history of adaptations.

[protar]

Well, D&D were happy to keep the name but GRRM suggested changing that, so that's harder to argue with. :)

Clearly, Talisa was not an absolute neccessity but that's not how D&D are working. They are trying to look at the bigger picture and if they can combine details so that the overall picture is clearer, they will do so. (In its own way, it is neccessary, in order for people to understand the huge world that GoT is set in). Once they decided to drop the Westerling plot then where she came from was not important. Thus, they took the chance to introduce another part of the world instead. Makes sense big-picture wise.

As I said before, I miss the Westerling plot but once that is gone, I don't care where she comes from. We've never seen the Crag. It holds no attachment to me (neither does her name) and I can't see why it would be important to anyone really.

Now if your rules are that changes must be absolutely unavoidably neccessary then you and D&D (and GRRM) are coming at this from two different angles. There is nothing wrong with your approach as such but it was rather unrealistic, given the history of adaptations.

How is it unrealistic? My rule is specifically if it's realistic for things to keep to the books it should do. It's the very definition of realistic. If they wanted to seed Volantis into the series for later on they could easily have done that in Dany's arc. They could've made Xaro Volantene (though I wouldn't have done that myself.) and it would've made a lot more sense than what we got.

[Dragon greyscale]

How is it unrealistic? My rule is specifically if it's realistic for things to keep to the books it should do. It's the very definition of realistic. If they wanted to seed Volantis into the series for later on they could easily have done that in Dany's arc. They could've made Xaro Volantene (though I wouldn't have done that myself.) and it would've made a lot more sense than what we got.

Why does that make a difference? Neither Qarth nor the Crag is close to Volantis. If anything, Jeyne is the character they could have had the most artistic license with, since all of the events involving her were off page in acok.

Unless you think that because both Volantis and Qarth are "exotic" they are sort of the same. In which case the accusations of GRRM promoting orientalism are not unfounded.

Long story short: Why is Jeyne more dear to you than Xaro?

[Khal Porno]

Probably because they wouldn't need to change his name, haha!

In all seriousness that is kind of odd, because Xaro is developed quite a bit more in the books than Jeyne Westerling (which is sort of like being the world's tallest dwarf).