|
All book discussion in this thread is now allowed. |
On May 03 2011 00:21 HowardRoark wrote:
Two questions regarding the show:
1. Where is Rickon Stark, has he ever been filmed? Did they remove him from the story, if so, why did Jon Snow mention that Ned had 5 children?
2. Who was the older man that was in the king's chamber when Jaime Lannister was invited? They were talking about killing, but I am certain he was not introduced to the viewers.
1. He shows up 2 times in Ep1 and is mentioned by others characters in Ep2.
2. That was Barristan Selmy, Lord Commander of the Kingsguard.
|
Syrio is so badass! I love the show.
|
I SO need to get my hands on these books.Promised myself that i won't watch next episodes before i finish first book at least.
But of course i watched this one as soon as it was available.
|
Is it just me or Syrio speaks and acts exactly like Zevran from Dragon Age: Origins?
|
On May 02 2011 23:42 Quotidian wrote:
I'm starting to fear that they're meddling with the story too much - like the scene with Joffrey and Cersei was completely unnecessary.
That was the first thing in the series so far that actually pissed me off (the rest I pretty much love). That scene was terrible. But compared to most adaptations, it's pretty faithful on all the important points.
I recently read Pillars of the Earth after having seen the series. Other than the names of the characters and places, it's a completely different story. GOT makes some compromises, but it's really pretty faithful on the important stuff so far.
|
On May 02 2011 15:38 Drowsy wrote:Show nested quote +On May 02 2011 15:25 Gene wrote:
can someone tell me what about the syrio scene was so cool? Is it just that arya is getting what she wants, her character evolving? The actual fight choreography? because the former i can understand easily, but i fear the answer is the latter, which to me looked bad. or am i totally off base what did i miss Ned's "vietnamn flashback" reaction contrasted with the playful and joyfulness of Arya being allowed to do something fulfilling. It was like one minute I was laughing and smiling at cute Arya finally doing what she loves and being happy, then the mood suddenly turned somber as we're reminded of the violence Ned Stark has been through and how it's desensitized him. Syrio and Arya are also very cute in general. (And I was happy that not all the short guys are total a-holes that everyone but me loves.)
More than Ned's flashbacks (for me anyway) I think it's the contrast between Arya enjoying being allowed to drop the pretense of being a proper little lady for a while and the beginning of the end of her innocence. She's being trained to kill and Ned is saddened by the thought that she may need that training sooner rather than later. I think he's hearing the instructor say she's dead over and over and picturing someone trying to stick a real sword in her and knowing how real a possibility that is. Ned was very determined to raise his kids apart from the intrigue and conspiracy surrounding the royals but he's getting sucked back into it.
|
On May 02 2011 23:42 Quotidian wrote:
I'm starting to fear that they're meddling with the story too much - like the scene with Joffrey and Cersei was completely unnecessary. These two characters don't need to be humanized or be made more "relatable" than they are in the books.
As somebody who hasn't read the books I must say doing that was perfect. In the first two episodes they seemed to be just evil for the sake of being evil and it felt really really bad. Giving them a bit of a human touch stopped them from being grey and stupid.
|
On May 03 2011 01:25 CaptainFwiffo wrote:Show nested quote +On May 02 2011 23:42 Quotidian wrote:
I'm starting to fear that they're meddling with the story too much - like the scene with Joffrey and Cersei was completely unnecessary. That was the first thing in the series so far that actually pissed me off (the rest I pretty much love). That scene was terrible. But compared to most adaptations, it's pretty faithful on all the important points. I recently read Pillars of the Earth after having seen the series. Other than the names of the characters and places, it's a completely different story.
I felt that scene was perfect. It fitted perfectly in the story and further explores Joffrey and Cersei.
The books display two different reasonings as to why Joffrey is such a screwed up human being.
On the one hand you get told he is a psychopath
+ Show Spoiler +He cuts open a pregnant cat to see the baby cats
And on the other hand it's his upbringing
+ Show Spoiler +A mother that tells him every day he is great and superior to everyone and he will be the greatest king that ever lived. On the other side you have his father Robert that never cared for him, that beat him very regularly and who never gave a damn about him whilst Joffrey craved the attention.
I think this is a good build up towards that 2nd version that the books tell you. The scene in the previous episode leans more towards the first.
In that regard i think the series does it perfectly. It doesn't adapt it word for word but in spirit and message it's 1:1.
|
On May 03 2011 01:07 Zane wrote:
Is it just me or Syrio speaks and acts exactly like Zevran from Dragon Age: Origins?
He uses the same accent but has an entirely different manner of speech and he isn't a literal slut. Just so
|
On May 03 2011 01:30 Rflcrx wrote:Show nested quote +On May 02 2011 23:42 Quotidian wrote:
I'm starting to fear that they're meddling with the story too much - like the scene with Joffrey and Cersei was completely unnecessary. These two characters don't need to be humanized or be made more "relatable" than they are in the books. As somebody who hasn't read the books I must say doing that was perfect. In the first two episodes they seemed to be just evil for the sake of being evil and it felt really really bad. Giving them a bit of a human touch stopped them from being grey and stupid.
As someone who hasn't read the books, you might think it is perfect, but it really isn't. Now it seems like they're very concerned about playing up to what tv audiences expect.That scene just felt way too "written for television" and is out of character for the story as a whole. Every character in the book is complex, as are their motivations, but in the tv series, it seems they're just going too far with it. At least in the case of the obvious villains of the show. Joffrey is much more interesting as the messed up little-napoleon character he is in the books rather than this "innocent" that is just being led by adults without understanding his actions. We'll see though, there's hope for him yet.
Cersei is, simply put, much more interesting in the books. The whole thing of creating this black haired baby the she lost isn't in the books, and for good reason. + Show Spoiler +The Cersei of the books would NEVER have a baby by Robert. Their marriage was entirely a political maneuver, there was never any love there - unlike in the show, where they're hinting at a story of lost love. Lena Headey has even stated that she thinks Cersei loved Robert at one point, which just shows she doesn't understand her character - or at least not the character of the books
|
Seeing the TV show really makes you appreciate the ridiculously good job Roy Dotrice did on the audiobook.
I was expecting a super fat and extravagant Varys and a stronger accent on Littlefinger.
|
Well, my big gripe is that in the books, he was not at all opposed to marrying Sansa + Show Spoiler +and actually lusted after her
+ Show Spoiler +And of course it's not one or the other. He's a complete monster, one of the most evil and disturbed characters in a series full of terrible human beings. I guess Gregor and his gang, and the Brave Companions actually have a more impressive score of depravity, but Joff is right up there.
|
On May 03 2011 01:41 Quotidian wrote:Cersei is, simply put, much more interesting in the books. The whole thing of creating this black haired baby the she lost isn't in the books, and for good reason. + Show Spoiler +The Cersei of the books would NEVER have a baby by Robert. Their marriage was entirely a political maneuver, there was never any love there - unlike in the show, where they're hinting at a story of lost love. Lena Headey has even stated that she thinks Cersei loved Robert at one point, which just shows she doesn't understand her character - or at least not the character of the books
I do not agree with you. + Show Spoiler +Cersei states (in book 4 I think) that she did at one point consider her marriage a real one until she learned that Robert still loved Lyanna and didn't care for her. At that point she became the Bitch Queen of Westeros.
|
On May 03 2011 01:41 Quotidian wrote:Show nested quote +On May 03 2011 01:30 Rflcrx wrote:On May 02 2011 23:42 Quotidian wrote:
I'm starting to fear that they're meddling with the story too much - like the scene with Joffrey and Cersei was completely unnecessary. These two characters don't need to be humanized or be made more "relatable" than they are in the books. As somebody who hasn't read the books I must say doing that was perfect. In the first two episodes they seemed to be just evil for the sake of being evil and it felt really really bad. Giving them a bit of a human touch stopped them from being grey and stupid. As someone who hasn't read the books, you might think it is perfect, but it really isn't. Now it seems like they're very concerned about playing up to what tv audiences expect.That scene just felt way too "written for television" and is out of character for the story as a whole. Every character in the book is complex, as are their motivations, but in the tv series, it seems they're just going too far with it. At least in the case of the obvious villains of the show. Joffrey is much more interesting as the messed up little-napoleon character he is in the books rather than this "innocent" that is just being led by adults without understanding his actions. We'll see though, there's hope for him yet. Cersei is, simply put, much more interesting in the books. The whole thing of creating this black haired baby the she lost isn't in the books, and for good reason. + Show Spoiler +The Cersei of the books would NEVER have a baby by Robert. Their marriage was entirely a political maneuver, there was never any love there - unlike in the show, where they're hinting at a story of lost love. Lena Headey has even stated that she thinks Cersei loved Robert at one point, which just shows she doesn't understand her character - or at least not the character of the books
don't pour any more oil on my fire... Lena Headey is so clearly not cut out to impersonate Cersei... she does not have this backstabbing / snake like demeanour as the Cersei in the books. She just appears to be a bit scared by the role she has to play and if it is true what you say in the spoiler, then it's even worse (the part about her interpretation of Cersei's and Robert's relationship).
I bet in real life she is a good and gentle person and can't identify at all with such a scheming slut like Cersei.
|
On May 03 2011 01:56 -Archangel- wrote:Show nested quote +On May 03 2011 01:41 Quotidian wrote:Cersei is, simply put, much more interesting in the books. The whole thing of creating this black haired baby the she lost isn't in the books, and for good reason. + Show Spoiler +The Cersei of the books would NEVER have a baby by Robert. Their marriage was entirely a political maneuver, there was never any love there - unlike in the show, where they're hinting at a story of lost love. Lena Headey has even stated that she thinks Cersei loved Robert at one point, which just shows she doesn't understand her character - or at least not the character of the books I do not agree with you. + Show Spoiler +Cersei states (in book 4 I think) that she did at one point consider her marriage a real one until she learned that Robert still loved Lyanna and didn't care for her. At that point she became the Bitch Queen of Westeros.
Yeah I remember something very similar in the books. Many characters have changed dramatically over the course of the books, I think a lot of people are letting their images of how characters act in book 4 dictate how they feel about the portrayal of the characters in season 1, which is just wrong.
I agree that Headey isn't a great Cersei, but that's mostly because she's not a very good actress in general
|
You also have to understand that you cant port a book into a series, even if the people who order it (like hbo) grant you a good amount of episodes. I was already slightly annoyed by the "lol lets be evil because we are evil" way both characters acted. Of course characters are complexe, but I won't wait for season 4 for that to happen. Seriously, if they would have continued with this I proberbly would have stopped watching at one point (depending on the rest of the storyline) as I can't stand "villains", especially if they are as simple and primitive as they are in episode 1 and 2.
Also, how can you say he is not a little napoleon in this show? He just talked about how he would create a personal armie and conquer everybody who would oppose him..
|
It's interesting having not read the books seeing people complain about scenes and events being changed. I guess it's impossible when you've read the books not to look for specific events which you liked/thought were meaningful.
In reality if they replace a scene you expected with one equally meaningful, albeit slightly different, then it makes no difference to someone watching the series.
So far it's nothing short of incredible to me.
|
On May 03 2011 01:41 Quotidian wrote:Show nested quote +On May 03 2011 01:30 Rflcrx wrote:On May 02 2011 23:42 Quotidian wrote:
I'm starting to fear that they're meddling with the story too much - like the scene with Joffrey and Cersei was completely unnecessary. These two characters don't need to be humanized or be made more "relatable" than they are in the books. As somebody who hasn't read the books I must say doing that was perfect. In the first two episodes they seemed to be just evil for the sake of being evil and it felt really really bad. Giving them a bit of a human touch stopped them from being grey and stupid. As someone who hasn't read the books, you might think it is perfect, but it really isn't. Now it seems like they're very concerned about playing up to what tv audiences expect.That scene just felt way too "written for television" and is out of character for the story as a whole. Every character in the book is complex, as are their motivations, but in the tv series, it seems they're just going too far with it. At least in the case of the obvious villains of the show. Joffrey is much more interesting as the messed up little-napoleon character he is in the books rather than this "innocent" that is just being led by adults without understanding his actions. We'll see though, there's hope for him yet. Cersei is, simply put, much more interesting in the books. The whole thing of creating this black haired baby the she lost isn't in the books, and for good reason. + Show Spoiler +The Cersei of the books would NEVER have a baby by Robert. Their marriage was entirely a political maneuver, there was never any love there - unlike in the show, where they're hinting at a story of lost love. Lena Headey has even stated that she thinks Cersei loved Robert at one point, which just shows she doesn't understand her character - or at least not the character of the books
I feel like you completely misunderstand that scene. Or the books. Joffrey is in no way put in a better light by that scene, and Cercei's motivations were always just to have Joffrey succeed as king. She doesn't want anybody dead for no reason. She wants Joffreys safety whether or not that means cooperating with people she doesn't like, such as the Starks. There are a lot of hints and things she say in the books that say the same things as this scene, they are just not gathered into one scene like this.
Book 1 spoiler:
+ Show Spoiler +
In the books, Cercei (and others) tried really hard to get Ned to keep quiet. She had no intention of killing him before it was too late and he proved to be too stubborn to not be a threat. The coup was an act of desperation. She did not at all want to kill Ned because she knew that would lead to war and destabilze the realm and be a threat to her son's rule. These are the points that this scene put forward. She sees everybody that is not a Lannister as a threat and an enemy, but she still knows that she needs to keep up relations in order to stay in power.
About the black haired child, I think that was done to avoid bringing in the geneaology book where a black haired child between a Lannister and Baratheon was mentioned 90 years previously. Having it in an early episode and having him being a child of Cercei and Robert makes it possible to the viewer to catch on to the fact that Jaime is the father of her other children, and this is after all the main secret/conspiracy of this season. Also, in the books, I got the impression that Cercei would have given Robert a chance, but at their wedding night, when he fucked her, he said the name of Lyanna instead. This was what really made her hate him.
That is a small change anyway. It's not that big of a deal. We will know later how it is tied into the other events.
|
The only thing i dont like about the show is Ghost, i mean where the hell is he. In the books they talked about ghost as much as jon in his chapters and you dont even see him in the background at all, except in episode 2 on the way to the wall, unless i missed him.
|
Apparently they had a lot of difficulty working with the dogs they got to play the direwolves, so their role was much reduced.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
