[Book Spoilers] This is Bryan Cogman's episode.

[TheHedgeWizard]

They should just give Vanessa Taylor's episode to him next season imo.

Agreed.

[go joff go]

I definitely find the stuff about all the added scenes in the first season interesting. It kind of sounds like they were going to go pretty by the book until they realized that there just wasn't enough material to flesh characters out. I can't imaging the first seson without some of the scens he mentioned

[King in the North Carolina]

I definitely find the stuff about all the added scenes in the first season interesting. It kind of sounds like they were going to go pretty by the book until they realized that there just wasn't enough material to flesh characters out. I can't imaging the first seson without some of the scens he mentioned

I always thought the Jaime/Jory exchange was an underrated scene.

[Toxspecific]

Anyone with max knowledge of the books and less liking for long sex scenes.

[Pinkie Baelish]

I always thought the Jaime/Jory exchange was an underrated scene.

Agreed. It showed a nicer side of Jaime that wasn't really present in the first 2 seasons, and showed just how much he loved fighting. Also fleshed out Jory a bit more, and made his death at Jaime's hands more shocking. I also liked the Theon/Tyrion scene in that episode, because not only does it plant the seeds for Theon's growing resentment and betrayal, but it shows a more dickish side to Tyrion that's present in the books.

[Toxspecific]

So if we're talking about relatively minor scenes that are way under-rated but seriously awesome, I'll say The Hound vs Beric Dondarrion. First of all, because all ASOIAF fights are awesome. Secondly, this was The Hound fighting Beric who was by all means a good man. With a flaming sword. It was The Hound facing his fears to fight fire and win, I think this really showed him as a brave guy.

Wish AFFC and ADWD would have had more scenes like this.

[King in the North Carolina]

Anyone with max knowledge of the books and less liking for long sex scenes.

I am all for the writers having max book knowledge. I'll admit I'm looking forward to the sexy stuff this week, though. Love me some Rose Leslie!

[Thelastactionhero]

Really great Cogman interview that answers a lot of fan questions regarding Season 2 and this one:

http://winteriscomin...ach/#more-25821

The whole interview is great but concerning this particular episode, Cogman confirms that the scene with Orell and Jon as well as the Dany stuff were moved from other episodes and were in fact written by D&D, everything else in the episode was from him.

He also says that while they all contribute to every character arc throughout the season, each of them is given specific character arc responsibilities over the course of the season, In S3, he has Arya, Stannis/Mel/Davos and Bran as his focus. Which would suggest to me that the alteration with Melisandre going to the BwB for Gendry is something he came up with since it's involving both of his storylines.

Here's hoping he rectifies this stupid direction they're taking Stannis' character. I love the dudes writing, but I sure hope he wasn't responsible for that god awful scene on the beach.

[PatrickStormborn]

Here's hoping he rectifies this stupid direction they're taking Stannis' character. I love the dudes writing, but I sure hope he wasn't responsible for that god awful scene on the beach.

I got the impression from that interview that D&D came up with the Gendry/Melisandre plot, but Bryan Cogman just had to work out how it could be shaped over a season. I doubt he was responsible for any changes made to the plot or the characters.

[Thelastactionhero]

I got the impression from that interview that D&D came up with the Gendry/Melisandre plot, but Bryan Cogman just had to work out how it could be shaped over a season. I doubt he was responsible for any changes made to the plot or the characters.

This is very possible. I realize that creating this new arc gives Mellisandre a bit more to do, as the first half of SoS on Dragonstone is a little slow, but I am a bit concerned about how it's all going to play out. Feels to me like the whole Edric Storm storyline would have been easier to stick to than this knot they're tangling themselves in with her actually leaving Dragon Stone and meeting the Brotherhood Without Banners. To tell you the truth though, my biggest concern is the overall manner in which they've chosen to render Stannis the last few episodes. I thought in the second season, despite their expressed dislike for the character, that they offered a fairly balanced and ambiguous rendering of him, whereas so far, they've been creating scenes which feel completely out of character. Still, very excited to see what Cogman does with all this. He has quite a job ahead of him.

[protar]

I think it's pretty clear in that interview that Cogman is not going to give reasons for decisions that were made by D&D, he'd rather they explained if that's something they want to do. So until you get a similar interview situation done with the actual creators, that's probably going to be it. And even if D&D take the time out of their schedule to participate in an endeavor like that, I suspect there are some things they just aren't going to delve into to the level that some fans want them to. Sometimes, "we felt like this was the best way to go" is as much as you're going to get...

If they can't find the time on their schedules to do a massively in-depth interview than that's one thing. But when they're being interviewed and they're unwilling to talk about why things were changed, all that says to me is that they didn't have a good reason. I mean surely if there was some deeply philosophical and meaningful reason for changing Jeyne and Talisa they'd want to talk about it right? But as it is it's likely no more than "it was cool" so they dodge.

[Newstar]

If they can't find the time on their schedules to do a massively in-depth interview than that's one thing. But when they're being interviewed and they're unwilling to talk about why things were changed, all that says to me is that they didn't have a good reason. I mean surely if there was some deeply philosophical and meaningful reason for changing Jeyne and Talisa they'd want to talk about it right? But as it is it's likely no more than "it was cool" so they dodge.

So what? D&D don't report to you. It's not their job to justify their changes to you or to provide a detailed explanation for a change you want a "good reason" for. Nor are the fans some grand arbiter of what constitutes a "good reason." If they changed because they thought it was cool and for no other reason, that's their prerogative, regardless of whether it meets your criteria for what's a sufficiently acceptable "reason." Bryan Cogman's been pretty gracious in dealing with questions about changes--and honestly, the tone in some of the comments to that WIC.net is so snotty and rude, I'm quite impressed he's so calm and polite--but he doesn't need to be. If he had said "That's just the way we decided to do it" and left it at that, he would have been well within his rights.

...Of course, SanSan fans are still screaming bloody murder over the fact that the story of the Hound's burns in Season 1 was given to Littlefinger instead of the Hound, even though one of the writers or showrunners explained that the Hound/Sansa scene filmed as in the books had to be scrapped because of a production issue.

[protar]

So what? D&D don't report to you. It's not their job to justify their changes to you or to provide a detailed explanation for a change you want a "good reason" for. Nor are the fans some grand arbiter of what constitutes a "good reason." If they changed because they thought it was cool and for no other reason, that's their prerogative, regardless of whether it meets your criteria for what's a sufficiently acceptable "reason." Bryan Cogman's been pretty gracious in dealing with questions about changes--and honestly, the tone in some of the comments to that WIC.net is so snotty and rude, I'm quite impressed he's so calm and polite--but he doesn't need to be. If he had said "That's just the way we decided to do it" and left it at that, he would have been well within his rights.

...Of course, SanSan fans are still screaming bloody murder over the fact that the story of the Hound's burns in Season 1 was given to Littlefinger instead of the Hound, even though one of the writers or showrunners explained that the Hound/Sansa scene filmed as in the books had to be scrapped because of a production issue.

Of course we're not entitled to know why changes were made, but a little bit of fan/producer communication would be nice to assure us that they actually aren't just making changes for the hell of it. Even if they were they could at least come out and say it and I would respect their honesty even if I wouldn't respect anything else about the decision.

Do they report to us? No. But is there any reason to hide these things from us? No. The only reason I can possibly see for D+D being reluctant to go into changes is out of embarrassment that their reasons aren't good enough. It's hardly any effort to just say why they did so and so even if it the reason was just "it was cool." Failing to do so says bad things about whether they actually care about the fans of the books imo.

[Loras]

This is very possible. I realize that creating this new arc gives Mellisandre a bit more to do, as the first half of SoS on Dragonstone is a little slow, but I am a bit concerned about how it's all going to play out. Feels to me like the whole Edric Storm storyline would have been easier to stick to than this knot they're tangling themselves in with her actually leaving Dragon Stone and meeting the Brotherhood Without Banners. To tell you the truth though, my biggest concern is the overall manner in which they've chosen to render Stannis the last few episodes. I thought in the second season, despite their expressed dislike for the character, that they offered a fairly balanced and ambiguous rendering of him, whereas so far, they've been creating scenes which feel completely out of character. Still, very excited to see what Cogman does with all this. He has quite a job ahead of him.

I guess it all comes down to the interpretation of the character. It is interesting that D&D also directed the episode which contained the Melisandre/Stannis exchange. If it had been another director we could have seen that scene in a very different light. I think it was meant to come of as desperate but it didn't quite work out.

[thegreatwhitebear]

One thing I think a lot of book readers should ask themselves before being critical (myself included) is, would u watch the show bc its a good show, or r u just watching bc u read the books and love them. If its a good show and you'd watch anyways, who cares about some changes, just sit back and enjoy. If a scene os better as written then go back and reread your favorite part that's all. No need to continually nitpick all the time.

[Pinkie Baelish]

I guess it all comes down to the interpretation of the character. It is interesting that D&D also directed the episode which contained the Melisandre/Stannis exchange. If it had been another director we could have seen that scene in a very different light. I think it was meant to come of as desperate but it didn't quite work out.

I'm positive that D and D came up with that scene. They've gone on record to state that Stannis is a "villain", and Weiss even said that Stannis would make a terrible king, which worries me a great deal on the direction they'll look to take Stannis in the future. I guess that's a drawback of adapting a series with such polarizing characters-everyone sees them differently, and if the showrunners see him in a negative light, then you can guarantee that he'll be portrayed as a darker, more villainous figure.

[Queen of Whores]

I'm positive that D and D came up with that scene. They've gone on record to state that Stannis is a "villain", and Weiss even said that Stannis would make a terrible king, which worries me a great deal on the direction they'll look to take Stannis in the future. I guess that's a drawback of adapting a series with such polarizing characters-everyone sees them differently, and if the showrunners see him in a negative light, then you can guarantee that he'll be portrayed as a darker, more villainous figure.

It's a shame that this is true. The same could be said for Tyrion, who is completely whitewashed in the show, with no darker, meaner side to him at all. I'm already expecting all the Sansa hate when it comes to their wedding, all because D&D refuse to make Tyrion at all slightly morally grey.

[Newstar]

I'm already expecting all the Sansa hate when it comes to their wedding, all because D&D refuse to make Tyrion at all slightly morally grey.

Coupled with my earlier comment upthread, I realize I'm starting to sound like some kind of paid shill for D&D, but we don't know how it's going to play out. We haven't even seen the conversation where Tywin mentions the Sansa marriage to Tyrion, which will probably say a lot about how the marriage is going to play out (especially if they discuss Tyrion getting a crack at Winterfell at some length in that conversation). Leaving aside the whitewashing, there are a few things about TV Tyrion and TV Sansa that make the dynamic a bit different (namely that TV Tyrion is neither ugly nor disfigured, and that TV Sansa looks 18 or 19 and not 12 or 13), but these things may have nothing to do with how the marriage is perceived. I mean, if after the marriage is shown and we're into the PW or whatever, if there's a barrage of hatred from viewers towards Sansa because of how things played out, fine, but it seems too early at this stage to worry about it.

As for Stannis, while GRRM seems to make a lot of noise in interviews about how he doesn't like the idea of "villains"--although he accidentally referred to Sandor, Jaime and Theon as such in an interview, oops--I got the impression he had a fairly dim view of Stannis as well. I think he said something on his Livejournal account implying he had a low opinion of Tiberius from I, Claudius, and then went on to state that there was a lot of Tiberius in his Stannis. Could be wrong, though.

Do they report to us? No. But is there any reason to hide these things from us? No.

I get what you're saying, but fans don't have any presumptive right to receive full disclosure as to why changes were made. I mean, they might think that they do, and they might act as if they do, but they don't.

The only reason I can possibly see for D+D being reluctant to go into changes is out of embarrassment that their reasons aren't good enough.

Maybe they don't want to put themselves in the position of trying to appease fans, because there's no pleasing some people, or maybe they don't want to imply by their conduct that they need to justify their decisions to fans, because fans are not the ultimate arbiter of what constitutes a valid or a poor reason for changing stuff from the books.

I kind of like that the showrunners, as far as I can tell from interviews and such, seem to be cheerfully unconcerned with book purists' fury at changes. They also seem pretty nonchalant about GRRM's complaining about changes: I remember one comment in an interview that was basically "Hahaha, he wouldn't shut up about the lack of helmets for the Blackwater episode! Hilarious! What a card!"

It's clear that they're not falling all over themselves to please the fans, and especially not the book purists. They're telling the story they want to tell, haters be damned. Fans have been complaining about Ros since Season 1, and yet she's still there in Season 3. The attitude seems to be "Haters gonna hate." No SanSan unkiss? Deal with it. Too much sexposition for you? Deal with it. Don't like Talisa? Deal with it. And so on. Maybe this is just me, but I find their attitude kind of refreshing, since I've been in way too many fandoms where the creators twist themselves into pretzels trying to please the fans and cater to their favourite characters/plotlines/ships. (I guess the counterpoint would be that D&D are catering to their own favourite characters/plotlines/ships, but at least it's only two sets of opinions as opposed to the multitude of fandom opinions.)

It's hardly any effort to just say why they did so and so even if it the reason was just "it was cool."

Again, why bother? They don't owe the fans any explanations, and no matter what explanation they give anyway, some or all of the purists will bitch. Better to leave it mysterious and let the fans argue amongst themselves as to possible reasons for the changes than to offer clarification as grist for the fans' mill. At any rate, though, the showrunners from what I can tell don't seem to be losing any sleep over worrying what fans will make of the changes.

[protar]

Coupled with my earlier comment upthread, I realize I'm starting to sound like some kind of paid shill for D&D, but we don't know how it's going to play out. We haven't even seen the conversation where Tywin mentions the Sansa marriage to Tyrion, which will probably say a lot about how the marriage is going to play out (especially if they discuss Tyrion getting a crack at Winterfell at some length in that conversation). Leaving aside the whitewashing, there are a few things about TV Tyrion and TV Sansa that make the dynamic a bit different (namely that TV Tyrion is neither ugly nor disfigured, and that TV Sansa looks 18 or 19 and not 12 or 13), but these things may have nothing to do with how the marriage is perceived. I mean, if after the marriage is shown and we're into the PW or whatever, if there's a barrage of hatred from viewers towards Sansa because of how things played out, fine, but it seems too early at this stage to worry about it.

As for Stannis, while GRRM seems to make a lot of noise in interviews about how he doesn't like the idea of "villains"--although he accidentally referred to Sandor, Jaime and Theon as such in an interview, oops--I got the impression he had a fairly dim view of Stannis as well. I think he said something on his Livejournal account implying he had a low opinion of Tiberius from I, Claudius, and then went on to state that there was a lot of Tiberius in his Stannis. Could be wrong, though.

I get what you're saying, but fans don't have any presumptive right to receive full disclosure as to why changes were made. I mean, they might think that they do, and they might act as if they do, but they don't.

Maybe they don't want to put themselves in the position of trying to appease fans, because there's no pleasing some people, or maybe they don't want to imply by their conduct that they need to justify their decisions to fans, because fans are not the ultimate arbiter of what constitutes a valid or a poor reason for changing stuff from the books.

I kind of like that the showrunners, as far as I can tell from interviews and such, seem to be cheerfully unconcerned with book purists' fury at changes. They also seem pretty nonchalant about GRRM's complaining about changes: I remember one comment in an interview that was basically "Hahaha, he wouldn't shut up about the lack of helmets for the Blackwater episode! Hilarious! What a card!"

It's clear that they're not falling all over themselves to please the fans, and especially not the book purists. They're telling the story they want to tell, haters be damned. Fans have been complaining about Ros since Season 1, and yet she's still there in Season 3. The attitude seems to be "Haters gonna hate." No SanSan unkiss? Deal with it. Too much sexposition for you? Deal with it. Don't like Talisa? Deal with it. And so on. Maybe this is just me, but I find their attitude kind of refreshing, since I've been in way too many fandoms where the creators twist themselves into pretzels trying to please the fans and cater to their favourite characters/plotlines/ships. (I guess the counterpoint would be that D&D are catering to their own favourite characters/plotlines/ships, but at least it's only two sets of opinions as opposed to the multitude of fandom opinions.)

Again, why bother? They don't owe the fans any explanations, and no matter what explanation they give anyway, some or all of the purists will bitch. Better to leave it mysterious and let the fans argue amongst themselves as to possible reasons for the changes than to offer clarification as grist for the fans' mill. At any rate, though, the showrunners from what I can tell don't seem to be losing any sleep over worrying what fans will make of the changes.

A little pressed for time so I'll keep it quick. All that says to me is that D+D simply don't care about the source material or about the book readers. And they should, especially when they go on about how passionate they are about the books. They're not even obliged to respect or connect to us, but the least they could do is respect Martin, who has pretty much singlehandedly given them all this success.

And if they don't care about what purists think, then why hide behind questions and not answer? There's no reason aside from a lack of respect.

[Nuttz]

I think it's pretty ridiculous to assume that D&D, who live and breathe Game of Thrones and aSoIaF, did not make a change without a good reason. The reason they don't tell the fans is because, as has been mentioned, they don't owe an explanation. In addition to that, most fans have no idea what they're talking about. They can say what they think makes good television and what would and would not work in the that medium when compared to the books, but the fact of the matter is that D&D are professionals, and very successful ones at that. The reasons they have for making any changes from the source material have far more knowledge behind them that any book reader will likely have.