Game of Thrones

[DarkLink]

So, is anyone else watching the HBO adaption of one of the best epic fantasy series ever? If you aren't, you should be. Reading the books first is not a requirement, though the books are, as I said, some of the best fantasy novels out today. So far the tv series has done an impressive job of following the plotline closely, while still adapting little things to work on the screen.

[ankhcitizen]

SPOILER ALERT
So far I've only seen the first 14 minutes (courtesy of IGN) I have to say I'm impressed. A considerate adaptation is a very rare (eg. Walking dead and pretty much everything else).
Though an exceptional writer, Martin's habit of killing off major and indeed main characters could well throw off general viewers, I know people who loved the 1st book but were turned off when eddard lost his head. People new to the the song of ice and fire may love the show now but when characters they have vested in emotionally begin to die the ratings could slump -> lower budget -> commercially induced changes -> Suck fest.
Hopefully they'll think the show is awesome enough that they'll stomach the often gruesome deaths of major characters (eg. Catelyn, Rob Stark etc) and continue.

[Cyberscape7]

Haven't read any of the books yet; only started watching it because the trailer made it look cool;
Rating: LOVE IT :D

[Connjurus]

I really love it so far - gives me hope for an Honor Harrington HBO adaptation someday.

[DarkLink]

They did a brilliant job with the casting so far, especially Tyrion Lannister. If you even read that bio of the guy playing Tyrion, he sounds a bit like a real life version of the character (aside from the whole 'youngest son of the richest evil family of nobility' part).

[MarneusCalgar]

I´m also watching it... And is amazing!!

Despite Catelyn seems a little older because of the actress...

[scadugenga]

I haven't seen it yet, but have high hopes--it's one of the best fantasty series ever--even if it is a retelling of the War of the Roses... ;) (And explains why you should never get attached to any one character.)

[Morgan Darkstar]

Episode 9

:eek::eek::eek::(

oh well I had guessed it was coming but boy that was a shock!

this has got to be one of the greatest series i have watched in a long time.

[Whoop!]

I haven't read the books, but I am going to now! I love this series, it is very brutal.

[MarneusCalgar]

Well, last night´s episode, the ninth for a total of 10, was AMAZING.

Only one remains, and if it keeps the excellent quality level the rest have had... No doubt it will be AWESOME

[gwensdad]

I watched the first one, but haven't had the time to catch up on the series.
But some friends of mine did start a podcast about it:
http://tyrionslanding.podbean.com/
(which I will listen to when I catch up on the series)

[Denzark]

It is pretty awesome, the books are better. Only gripe? For me you could cut the whole Danerys (sp?) arc across the sea and cover just the 7 kingdoms.

Respect to his depth though.

Anyone played any of the war/roleplay game versions?

[MarneusCalgar]

It is pretty awesome, the books are better. Only gripe? For me you could cut the whole Danerys (sp?) arc across the sea and cover just the 7 kingdoms.

Respect to his depth though.

Anyone played any of the war/roleplay game versions?

The real problem of the TV series is that the book is HUGE even in main characters and in background, so for only 10 episodes they must choose and avoid some minor points even if books´s fans love those points or not.

[DarkLink]

Right, I'm amazed that they've been able to keep all the major plot points within their time frame, while still introducing the important players, and doing it all without majorly diverting from the way the book lays things out. They've even managed to incorporate many important minor plot points, like the Raven and the Stark's Direwolves, even if they're only subtly hinted at and most new readers probably don't realize their significance yet.


I haven't seen it yet, but have high hopes--it's one of the best fantasty series ever--even if it is a retelling of the War of the Roses... ;) (And explains why you should never get attached to any one character.)

Supposedly the books were originally a simple historical fiction trilogy about the war of the roses, but Martin ended up incorporating magical realism into the plot and the book grew and grew from there.


Well, last night´s episode, the ninth for a total of 10, was AMAZING.

Only one remains, and if it keeps the excellent quality level the rest have had... No doubt it will be AWESOME


It is pretty awesome, the books are better. Only gripe? For me you could cut the whole Danerys (sp?) arc across the sea and cover just the 7 kingdoms.


Daenerys is an awesome character. She and Arya go through a great coming-of-age story, one about learning to be a queen and the other about how to survive in a deadly world.

It fits a bit better in a book, since you have room to pull off the divergant plots, but they've done a good job of keeping it in. Even in the books, her plot rarely ties in with the other plots, and when they do they do so indirectly as in the assassins.

Her plot is like Jon Snow's plot with the White Walkers at the Wall. They might not be important yet, but they add a sense that everything is growing to a massive climax and that the War of the Five Kings is just a prelude to something far, far more horrible. As a result, her plot isn't something you could really cut.


On that note, one thing that the series could have done better is put extra emphasis on the phrase "winter is coming", even though they've mentioned it repeatedly.

[wittdooley]

Daenerys is my wife's favorite character by a long shot. Despite all the nekkidness, she loves how you see Daenerys becoming more powerful and self assured every episode (she's never read the books).

I thought Season One did a marvelous job of keeping all the plot threads intact.

I did conclude after watching Fellowship of the Ring, that Sean Bean must really enjoy dying in the projects he chooses. He does it so well.

[MaltonNecromancer]

Martin's habit of killing off major and indeed main characters could well throw off general viewers

As I understand it, that's because, for want of a better word, it's "realistic". As I understand it, it's just the English War of the Roses: the Lannisters are the Lancasters, and the Starks are the Yorks. House Targaeryon are the Plantagenets, and the Khalassar is the Mongol horde. The White Walkers are the Scottish. The dragons are dragons. Yeah, that's the bit where this falls apart, but you get the idea.

In essence, it's not a series about heroic deeds performed by larger than life heroes (hence SPOILER ALERT!!! Khal Drogo's utterly pathetic and anticlimactic death at the hands of a woman). It's about how individuals are ultimately pretty powerless (even if they're King - Robert Baratheon is the most powerless man in the seven kingdoms, hence why he's such a drunken failure of a man) because the world's a bloody awful place.

Brilliant series. But then, it's HBO. They only really do good series these days (*sigh* I keep hoping they'll do another series of "Oz"; what a nightmarishly horrific hour's viewing that used to be...)

[BuFFo]

The final episode was easily the worst one out of the entire season.

Such a anti climactic let down.

[scadugenga]

Just one more week until A Dance With Dragons is out...

[eldargal]

I really want to get into this series, but I spend too much time worrying over what will happen to Daenerys in books 5-7, every female blonde fantasy character I like tends to be killed off howwibly.:rolleyes:

[MaltonNecromancer]

The final episode was easily the worst one out of the entire season.

Such a anti climactic let down.

That anticlimax? That was why I loved it. Some of us don't want to see glory and heroism. Some of us want to see the brave and glorious heroic/antiheroic characters die pointlessly and needlessly without ever achieving the slightest thing.

Kind of like in real life.

There's plenty of stories out there about heroes achieving glory and doing impossible deeds. If I wanted those, I'd read Black Library books, or Rob Liefeld comics.

There's far fewer stories about those characters failing pathetically without ever really having a chance to succeed, then analysing the consequences of those failures (which is an inherently more interesting story.)

I love anticlimax, and I get that it's an acquired taste. Far more reflects how things are in real-life. I also like the way that it points out that no matter how scary or hard you are, you're not invincible. Anything that punctures that particularly popular and utterly foolish myth that being good at fighting means you'll live longer gets my approval. It means you'll survive more fights, yes... But you just make more enemies, meaning you get into more fights. And while a Terminator may be able to utterly destoy a single Guardsman, that same Terminator versus a thousand... those odds not looking so hot any more.

It's also the same reason I liked "Oz". And Omar's death in "The Wire". And Stringer Bell's (that one was particularly awesome).

I also think that it depends on which characters you liked. Given that there's no heroes, very, very few even remotely likable characters, and that pretty much everyone (with the exception of Arya and Sansa) deserves a horrific death, I don't know that a "climax" would have been any good. I don't want a climax; I just want Joffrey to die screaming while his mother watches, Arya to kill pretty much everyone, and Tyrion to get away scot-free.

[wittdooley]

Right with you Malton. I thought the final episode was fantastic, and really makes me (and my wife) excited for the 2nd season. I presume you've not read the books, so I won't spoil season two for you, but suffice it to say if they maintain the truth of the books you're going to really enjoy it.

@eldargal - I'm with you there, in that Martin makes it pretty clear that no character is safe, but I can't help but trust to hope that there is a positive outcome for both Daenerys and Jon Snow (I like to think they marry and lead the 7 kingdoms to an age of prosperity). It's probably a foolhardy hope, but I'm gonna hang on to it, at least until after I read Dance of Dragons.

[DarkLink]

I loved the final episode as well, but I've also read the books. I can see how a new viewer would be frustrated by not seeing the promised battles, but if you've read the books then you know those battles won't be wrapped up neatly in one to two episodes. In fact, there are three whole books of battles and conflict that this season has built up to, and each battle builds up to the next. The final episode didn't leave out a single critical battle to solve everyone's problems. The final episode just set the stage for an entire war.


In fact, I think the anti-climax is what makes the books work so well in the long run. Instead of building up a conflict then resolving it nice and prettily, Martin has one conflict flow into the next, with people getting killed off here and there and plots and plans being screwed up by nearly random chance. Each subsequent cliffhanger makes you forget about the previous ones as they quickly become irrelevant and you're drawn along into the chaos of the character's struggle.

[eldargal]

It worries me beyond Daenerys too, if you kill off too many characters the fanbase can start to disconnect from the story. I for one would lose interest in the series if she were killed off, I happen to think the story is much better with her in it, the whole exiled noblewoman discovering her powers thing is compelling reading/viewing.

I actually auditioned for the role of Daenerys. Well, sort of. I was dismissed as being too 'tall and womanly' and didn't actually get to audition.:rolleyes:


@eldargal - I'm with you there, in that Martin makes it pretty clear that no character is safe, but I can't help but trust to hope that there is a positive outcome for both Daenerys and Jon Snow (I like to think they marry and lead the 7 kingdoms to an age of prosperity). It's probably a foolhardy hope, but I'm gonna hang on to it, at least until after I read Dance of Dragons.

[BuFFo]

My friend was confused about the giant battle that never happened. He asked me if it will happen in the second series, and I told him, um, no, the battle happened when Tyrion got knocked out cold.

He said, no, that's when the skirmish battle happened.

I told him, no, that's when the entire battle between the two forces happened.

He said, really? F$#K! What a let down! Also, the entire first season went by without anything to do with the white walkers? Almost nothing got resolved.

I agreed, and we both decided to not watch the series because of how much of a let down the last episode was.

Sure, it may work in the books, but we aren't reading the books. We are watching a fantasy, and sure, real life is anti climactic. We aren't watching a show to view ourselves. We want fantasy, adventure and a deep story, not build up to, virtually, nothing.

We loved the hell out of the show until the last episode, and we it was so terrible for a TV show cliff hanger episode we are just dropping the entire thing. We don't feel like waiting 300 episodes so we MIGHT see a white walker, or see nothing resolved with just pointless "shock" deaths left and right.

[wittdooley]

The producers of the show have already stated that you'll see more of the battles in the 2nd season. In the books, the first skirmish isn't focused on that much either. They're pretty true to the source material.

I didn't really see the deaths as "shock deaths," nor did I in the novel.

SPOILERS



Without Ned's death, the War of Five Kings doesn't happen. Ned confessed to treason because he trusted Joeffry to be noble and true to his word. We now know that Joeffry is a petulant, violent, little man.

Khal Drago's death has to happen for Daenerys to take her next steps as a leader of the Doth'racki people. Previously, she was able to hide be Khal Drago's might and could 'govern from the shadows' as it were. Now, she's the figurehead and the unquestioned leader. We saw her growth as a leader throughout the first season; his death forces her into queendom, perhaps sooner than she's ready for.

As for Robert; the entire first season he's painted as a self-destructive man, destined to die. And that happens. No real 'shock' there.


I'm merely surprised that the last episode was such a let down for you. I didn't really see it as a cliffhanger; for me it was more of a stopping point. We know Shi+ is going to go down next season, and that's where they leave us.

@eldargal - Too womanly. Heh. Well, Dany is supposed to be only 13 in the books, and 16 or 17 in the series. The chick that plays her looks super petite, though to be fair she's next to the 6'4" Jason Mamoa for most of the first season.

[eldargal]

I know, what a terrible insult.:rolleyes: Quite true though, being six foot one. That is ten inches taller than Emilia Clarke who ended up with the role.

Speaking of Jason Momoa, looking forward to seeing him in Conan (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conan_the_Barbarian_%282011_film%29) later in the year. I really like Robert E. Howards original books, the fact this movie is supposed to be faithful to them gives me hope they may be quite good, unlike the 80s things with Schwarzenegger.

Anyway, back on topic, I actually broke down and watched the first episode today, really enjoyed it. I do think Daenerys will be a survivor, if only because she seems one of the characters earmarked to grow and blossom rather than self destruct or be helpless and put upon.

[wittdooley]

Anyway, back on topic, I actually broke down and watched the first episode today, really enjoyed it. I do think Daenerys will be a survivor, if only because she seems one of the characters earmarked to grow and blossom rather than self destruct or be helpless and put upon.

I think this is the key. The same could be said for Jon Snow as well. Additionally, they are both two of the more selfless characters in the novels, which I think makes a difference.

You are tall. 6'1" is nothing to sneeze at. And agreed about Conan. I've liked Mamoa since he was Ronan Dex on Stargate: Atlantis. I just never realized he was THAT big. Although I doubt you watched it, he looked like he was dressed as a carnival worker when they interviewed him on the latest UFC fight.

[MaltonNecromancer]

We are watching a fantasy, and sure, real life is anti climactic. We aren't watching a show to view ourselves.

You kind of missed the whole point of the series so far then. Fantasy and metaphor are a way to explore real-life. When you watch a character fight valiantly, of course you're watching yourself; you're watching the life you wish you had.

"Game of Thrones" isn't that story, because it's about systems of governance (that would be the "Thrones" in the title) and the way they can be manipulated and played by the clever (the titular "Game"); so it's not going to be for you if you just want escapist stories (which is what it sounds like you're after - goodies, baddies, and a big fight where good triumph. Probably not "good", though, because antiheroes are a bit in vogue again). I mean, the clue was in the fact HBO produced it; this is all they do - stories about how we are destroyed by the systems we subscribe ourselves to (be they family - Sopranos; selfishness - Boardwalk Empire; institutions of governance - The Wire; gangs - Oz; etc...) It's big, sophisticated, adult storytelling, and it's not going to give you the simple answers and heroism you want.


We want fantasy, adventure and a deep story, not build up to, virtually, nothing.


I believe Zack Snyder's already made "300". If you want films where manly men do manly things, then also I believe the whole American film industry is largely geared up for you personally.

And deep story? How does a cast of about thirty detailed, fully realised characters, well acted, not qualify as a deep story?!

And as far as action scenes, Arya's trainer provided more than enough for me. Fighting off six men with a wooden sword? Ten kinds of awesome. Khal Drogo pouring molten gold onto a man's head? And ripping out another man's tongue? Pure unadulterated win.

I loved season 1, and feel it has set absolutely everything in place for the upcoming stories; I look forwards to discovering the sad lives and ignominious deaths of every single character.

Danaerys FTW!

[Denzark]

Favourite character in book and tv? Tyrion. He is a dwarf genius. The TV scene (not in book) when he confesses to 'milking his eel' into the soup is genius.

Who says Squats aren't funny?

[wittdooley]

Favourite character in book and tv? Tyrion. He is a dwarf genius. The TV scene (not in book) when he confesses to 'milking his eel' into the soup is genius.

Who says Squats aren't funny?

All i know is Peter Dinklage BETTER get at least an Emmy nomination. I think it has a chance to take home best drama ensemble, too.

And I think one of the kids could take home the best new actor/actress for the Emmy's as well.

[MaltonNecromancer]

when he confesses to 'milking his eel' into the soup is genius

During his whole "confession", I laughed until it hurt. Then the whole

"You didn't fight honorably!"

"No. He did."

Cracked me up too.

[BuFFo]

You kind of missed the whole point of the series so far then. Fantasy and metaphor are a way to explore real-life. When you watch a character fight valiantly, of course you're watching yourself; you're watching the life you wish you had.

"Game of Thrones" isn't that story, because it's about systems of governance (that would be the "Thrones" in the title) and the way they can be manipulated and played by the clever (the titular "Game"); so it's not going to be for you if you just want escapist stories (which is what it sounds like you're after - goodies, baddies, and a big fight where good triumph. Probably not "good", though, because antiheroes are a bit in vogue again). I mean, the clue was in the fact HBO produced it; this is all they do - stories about how we are destroyed by the systems we subscribe ourselves to (be they family - Sopranos; selfishness - Boardwalk Empire; institutions of governance - The Wire; gangs - Oz; etc...) It's big, sophisticated, adult storytelling, and it's not going to give you the simple answers and heroism you want.



I believe Zack Snyder's already made "300". If you want films where manly men do manly things, then also I believe the whole American film industry is largely geared up for you personally.

And deep story? How does a cast of about thirty detailed, fully realised characters, well acted, not qualify as a deep story?!

And as far as action scenes, Arya's trainer provided more than enough for me. Fighting off six men with a wooden sword? Ten kinds of awesome. Khal Drogo pouring molten gold onto a man's head? And ripping out another man's tongue? Pure unadulterated win.

I loved season 1, and feel it has set absolutely everything in place for the upcoming stories; I look forwards to discovering the sad lives and ignominious deaths of every single character.

Danaerys FTW!

I bet you loved Lost.

[MaltonNecromancer]

I bet you loved Lost.

A bit. Not as much as I wanted to.

The problem was that it was a mainstream series pretending to be "out there". It wasn't actually as weird or interesting as it pretended to be. This was basically because it was simplistically written a lot of the time, and it's narrative inconsistencies came from this. It suffered from a severe case of "Depending On The Writer"; they obviously hadn't thought stuff out in advance, and that became plainer as the series went on. I think the ending was about as good as it could have been; the trouble with mystery plots is (to quote Cain just before he kills Abel): "It's the mystery that lingers, never the secret!" Basically nothing could live up to the hype. Nothing. It didn't matter what they did, there was no way to satisfactorily resolve the series in a way that wasn't just a case of them going "yeah, a wizard did it." If you watch a precursor series like "The Prisoner", you'll note he does exactly the same thing, largely because all the mysteries are simply an excuse to drive the characters into interesting situations - the actual mystery is ultimately always going to be irrelevant because it's less interesting than the character development it drives.


However, there were parts of it that were excellent: the time travel was very well done (it's not often you see writers follow Novikov's self-consistency principle - and those are always my favourite kind of time travel stories because they don't hurt my head with idiotic plot holes, as well as playing to my somewhat fatalistic worldview).
I also enjoyed Sayid's characterisation a lot, and most of the acting was never less than exemplary. It was also nice to see Jim from "Neighbours" chewing the scenery again.

The bit I didn't like was the heavy-handed religious ending, but then, it's a mainstream TV series, so that's pretty much par for the course.

Overall it felt a bit like Grant Morrison's "The Invisbles"-lite (because it was for the mainstream). I do keep hoping for another series brave enough to go completely non-narrative and headscratch inducing (*sigh* how I miss the days of the animated "Aeon Flux" and "The Maxx").

[Denzark]

The latest book (not the one out in a couple of days) has a couple of incidences of the Kingslayer describing something useless as 'as much use as nipples on armour' (or maybe breastplate).

I have just noticed the Astorath miniature has monster bishop's hat pegs vampire nipples on his.

Coincidence?