GAME OF THRONES: SEASON 4 (Page 19) | Entertainment Discussion | Forums | Final Fantasy Online

Final Fantasy Online

You are not logged in. Log In or Sign Up.

Final Fantasy Online Forums > Community Discussion > Entertainment Discussion

GAME OF THRONES: SEASON 4

< Prev 1 ... 17 18 19 20 Next >

0

09.25.2014 10:39pm

Kellios
Yikes and away!

Oh I just love watching you guys arguing over sexism and apparently know exactly what's going to happen on Season 5. So you're part of the show runners now? Neat! Get me some swag!

Also realize that while D&D are the creative heads behind GoT, it's ultimately HBO that provides budget and has the final say. Maybe they made the call to cut Arianne and not D&D - you don't know, likely will never know, nor do you know if she is actually truly cut or saved for another season. You're all making such leaping conclusions. Maybe that makes me naively optimistic, but sorry, I don't believe D&D cut out people for just the sake of it/are sexists/etc.

Not to mention - you all haven't really accepted by now that the show and books are pretty much completely separated - and you can no longer compare the two. The show is clearly going it's own routes - for what works for TV. And the books continue as they do, because they are books and a very different medium. And both have different goals - the show wants viewers and money, GRRM wants readers and to tell a story (and probably money too). The show sticks to the source as much it allows them, but there are just things that work in books that don't on a TV show, and vice versa, and it just ultimately happens. Why can't you enjoy each individual ones as they are?

It certainly looks like D&D are trying to give GRRM as much time as possible (no Bran/Hodor apparently, Jaime going to Dorne, etc) so they don't overstep him - which is incredibly respectful. So while that might make this season a little out there/much different from the books, the courtesy of doing that for GRRM will also ideally make the last few seasons that much better - and that's a change I'm okay with. I personally would rather have the show keep on par with the books as long as possible (if we're dreaming of a 2015 release for TWoW) than just steamrolling ahead.

Does the show dumb shit down? Absolutely. Because you don't have the luxury that books do. That's the nature of the medium. And if you truly believe they are lazy and make these decisions lightly, then I don't know what to tell you.

Jesus, you're all a bunch of whinny fanboys with absolutely no idea how television production works.

0

09.26.2014 12:10am

Mole
Somebody loves ya.

^

Perfect breakdown of why I don't bother with these threads, which should be called "I DON'T UNDERSTAND ADAPTATIONS: SEASON 5."

0

09.26.2014 2:05am

(Edited on 09.26.2014 at 2:15am)

Rhaegar
World Warrior 21007

Sorry, Kellios, but the whole "it's different mediums" argument is extremely lazy, not to mention insulting to one's intelligence. Precisely because every time someone makes that argument, they don't give a good reason WHY something wouldn't work when adapted from book to screen, or WHY it needed to be changed (or why the change is even acceptable). And, so far, no one has given a satisfactory reason why Arianne needed to be cut and replaced by an aged-up Trystane. As reido mentioned, if anything, that complicates the narrative even further. And Game of Thrones has had enough problems with hanging subplots here and there as it is.

Another thing, too, is the argument that D&D are trying not to get ahead of GRRM. So they cut characters and streamline/cut plots out of the two books that overall have less plot movement to begin with than the first three? That makes so much sense. :/

I will absolutely make the comparison between the original source books and the show adaptation if it's becoming clear that the latter isn't doing it justice. Or is even heading into the realm of it not being good TV anymore. And so far, sorry to say, Season 5 is headed clear down that path.

Nor am I making accusations of D&D being sexist lightly, because it's actually been pretty evident up to this point. It started subtly, then came to include changes like Jaime raping Cersei (there was NO reason for that one), changing Oberyn's story to say the ruler of Dorne was his father instead of his mother, recharacterizing Shae to an extent she doesn't act nearly with the same degree of self-agency as she does in the books, the increasingly gratuitous sexploitation. Some of that, I've let slide in the past, but now it's getting to the point where it's getting obnoxious and actively hurting the show's quality.

0

09.26.2014 2:26am

Thread Creator

reido
(\/)(o,,,o)(\/)

You're right. I am a whiney fanboy. I'm a fanboy for the books and the show and the genre, and I want to be able to enjoy it, this show I love, without constantly having to find excuses for its hilariously blunt misogynistic tone--of which the Arianne change is just the latest in a long and awful line going back to "fuck them 'til they're dead", the rape of Cersei, the death of Ros, Littlefinger coaching superflous naked prostitutes, and on, and on..

I want to give D+D and HBO the benefit of the doubt, but they've just failed so many times on this particular front.

I'm not against change because it's change. There are plenty of changes to the source material that I have no problem with, or actively enjoy, or even love. I'm against THIS change, THESE changes, because they're awful and insulting to the audience's intelligence and empathy, because they cheapen the characters and the setting and the story.

0

09.26.2014 5:11am

(Edited on 09.26.2014 at 5:33am)

Kellios
Yikes and away!

Y'all realize I'm a woman, right? And that it's the world of Westeros and Essos that's sexist and not D&D? That GRRM has written many more terrible things that happen to women in the books? I don't see any of you calling him sexist. The women of Westeros and Essos live in completely oppressive conditions - like many women still do today. And as a woman, I love seeing how these women characters act and fight back (or not), because I personally can relate to that. And I don't need to have every single woman character be "strong" - women are people too, we all have different thoughts and values and how we react to things. We're - GASP - human. We all know dumbasses - male and female. GRRM portrays that very naturally in his books, and the show does a fine job too (I personally have more issue with attractiveness vs. relistic portrayal of a lot of the women on the show than their character).

The rape of Cersei I'll give you, but I attribute that far more to horrible, horrible direction and editing than writing. And anyways, I could even make the argument that that entire scene in the books is told from Jaime's perspective - not Cersei's. It could've been completely non consenual, for all ~~Moonboy~~ we know. GRRM uses unreliable narrators, and even in the books it's pretty fucking rapey at first.

The sexpositions? Yeah, that's dumb. And much more of an issue in season 1 and 2 than the latter ones. Death of Ros? I actually liked her - and it's in line with what Joffrey would do. The switch of Oberyn's mother to father? I personally don't even remember that detail from the books, and I'm rereading them now. Shae? Ever hear of writing to the actor/actress? Especially those who has been on the show for quite some time?

That's something else you're missing - the portrayal of these characters by these actors will influence how the show's story is told. That's one way the medium is "different" - in the books, it's just GRRM. On a TV show, it's a shitload of people. Hell, consider the aging of the kids - showArya has to be different now than bookArya, because the actress is much older at this point in the plot. Some of bookArya's actions wouldn't make sense for an older and wiser showArya. Same thing for Bran. Margaery. Sansa. Dany. Missendei. Jon Snow. A lot of them.

Hell, I have much more major issues with how Loras is treated. He's this ultra out, ultra flaming flamboyant "knight" that wants to fuck any cute twink that comes his way, as opposed to being deeply in love with Renly and trying to come to terms of losing a lover by being a hot headed arrogant twat. But I don't see many of you guys complaining about that.

But hey, that's showLoras - and that's fine for the Westeros the show created. And I'll always have bookLoras to hate whenever I like.

Sorry, Kellios, but the whole "it's different mediums" argument is extremely lazy, not to mention insulting to one's intelligence. Precisely because every time someone makes that argument, they don't give a good reason WHY something wouldn't work when adapted from book to screen, or WHY it needed to be changed (or why the change is even acceptable).

Clearly your mind is already made up and nothing I say will change it, but what you said here shows just how very little you know about how TV and film production works. The amount of people needed to do as true adaption as you can with something on the scale of ASOIAF is mind boggling. You realize there's at the very least five different locations to film (King's Landing, The Wall, Essos, Riverlands, the Vale, now Braavos, Dorne and beyond...). You try to use as much as the same places as you can, but to tell the story right, you gotta go to diffeent world locations.

So that alone is basically 5+ entire film crews. You need to do location scouting to find the best places to film. You need producers to get all the working permits. You need to find cameramen, cinematographers, sound designers, directors, extra actors, set designers, catering once you're actually on set. You need extra hands to help out when you have hectic film schedules. You need people to make the costumes, people to build the sets, people to find all the items and props. You also need to do that all 5+ times for all the locations. You also need people to do the CG for things that can't otherwise be created (dragons, for starters). People to edit the episodes and do post production. People to do localization and translations. People to do marketing, people to do PR, people that have to oversee all these other people to make sure everything is staying on track, on schedule, on budget.

I'm barely scratching the surface here. This series is a huge production, and HBO's most expensive. GRRM's budget is his imagination.

So tell me again how that's a "lazy" argument and insulting to your intelligence. Honestly, it's insulting to my intelligence that you think that both are one and the same. But hey, again, I'm not gonna be changing your opinion on this. I hope your bubble's comfortable.

Do I like that Arianna so far hasn't made an appearance? No, not at all. But I don't have a crystal ball either. I don't know what's in store for her character, and we still don't have plain fact that she won't ever be in the show. Many characters have had their introductions delayed. Why Trystanne is being called the heir of Dorne in promotional publishings? I don't know, but I'm waiting for D&D to show me why - and not jump to conclusions. It's promotional copy - which can and has lied.

If she never makes it in the show? That'll fucking suck. And that's why I have the books and will keep rereading them. I'll always love the books more than the show, that's for certain. But I do certainly enjoy the show for giving me the closest to real life Westeros any of us will likely see.

I'm out. You all can return to your circlejerk now.

Edit: One last comment on the different medium argument.

Imagine you're D&D, reading through the books, trying to figure out what gets on screen. Say you're reading this passage:

(AFFC spoilers)

Spoiler: Move your mouse over the container to reveal.

No happy choice. Sam thought of all the trials that he and Gilly suffered, Craster�??s Keep and the death of the Old Bear, snow and ice and freezing winds, days and days and days of walking, the wights at Whitetree, Coldhands and the tree of ravens, the Wall, the Wall, the Wall, the Black Gate beneath the earth. What had it all been for? No happy choices and no happy endings�?� The wind was in the sails, and to the north Sam could even see a scattering of stars, and the red wanderer the free folk called the Thief. That ought to be my star, Sam thought miserably. I helped to make Jon Lord Commander, and I brought him Gilly and the babe. There are no happy endings.

How do you translate that onto the screen? Can it be? Should it be? Is it absolutely necessary to the world? GRRM's writing is incredibly nuanced. And things will just naturally be lost in translation.

0

09.26.2014 5:33am

(Edited on 09.26.2014 at 5:44am)

Rhaegar
World Warrior 21007

And reciting all that takes place in TV/film production (which I knew already) has to do with the issue at hand of cutting Arianne out, how? Especially when we know Dorne is in Season 5?

Keep in mind it looks as if she's effectively being replaced by a character who is essentially being made-up. (Trystane in the books is given a couple of allusions but no actual sight time as is 10 years old, IIRC.)

0

09.26.2014 5:47am

Lexx
I know how they work

Kellios said:

Hell, I have much more major issues with how Loras is treated. He's this ultra out, ultra flaming flamboyant "knight" that wants to fuck any cute twink that comes his way, as opposed to being deeply in love with Renly and trying to come to terms of losing a lover by being a hot headed arrogant twat. But I don't see many of you guys complaining about that.

"When the sun has set, no candle can replace it."

Except, apparently, for manwhores and cute squires.

0

09.26.2014 5:49am

(Edited on 09.26.2014 at 6:05am)

Kellios
Yikes and away!

Budget, since I have to spell it out for you. Making the the show's plot easier to understand to the majority of viewers (who are not book readers). Not throwing too many new characters at the viewers. Maybe combined into one of the Sand Snakes, maybe showing up later in season 6+ (ala Reeds). The show itself hasn't confirmed or denied explicitly if she's cut or not, so I really don't understand why everyone is automatically assuming she'll never make it in. We don't even know the entire cast for season 5.

Trystane could maybe be the male heir of Dorne (marketing ain't exactly known for their knowledge of the shows they promote, and could have made an error). I don't know. Neither do you. I guess I'm more forgiving of the show. I want to see how D&D justify it, since they've neither confirmed or denied and have stayed remarkably quiet on the whole thing.

And if not... well, again, that's why we have the books.

edit:

Spoiler: Move your mouse over the container to reveal.

And since book readers also ultimately know that Doran's plan was to get Arianne onto the Iron Throne, and have Quentyn rule in Dorne, that could be an influence on Trystane too. Have Trystane act as the heir apparent but secretly plotting to get Arianne to the throne? Who is maybe taking on more of Quentyn's role? Possibly in season 6 with an alliance with Young Griff?

Young Griff is apparently someone else that many people think will be cut, and I don't understand that either.

0

09.26.2014 7:07am

Lexx
I know how they work

Kellios said:

Spoiler: Move your mouse over the container to reveal.
Young Griff is apparently someone else that many people think will be cut, and I don't understand that either.

Spoiler: Move your mouse over the container to reveal.

That's because of the lack of anyone being cast for Old and Young Griff. We know Tyrion will be going on his journey to Meereen, with at least the trip down the Rhoyne happening, but there's been no mention of the Griffs being involved.

Plus, and this is pure speculation on my part, I think Young Griff will ultimately prove to be unimportant to the overall plot of the series. He'll just be one more challenge for Daenerys to overcome. "Slaying the mummer's dragon", to be precise. Also, his landing and subsequent campaign in Westeros takes a LOT of wind out of Dany's sails. I could see the showrunners wanting to avoid that.

0

09.26.2014 3:24pm

Thread Creator

reido
(\/)(o,,,o)(\/)

Okay, I'm'a get off the sexist-show argument train because it's just going in circles and I'm pretty sure we've had this exact conversation in this exact thread. I think the show is sexist. If you don't think so--cool for you, I guess. I think the books are sexist too, but to a significantly lesser degree that mostly gets inflated because of the way the perspective narrative is structured. The show doesn't have that excuse. The only perspective the show has is the camera. It's an omniscient 3rd person perspective that is completely different than the books limited 3rd person. And the people in charge of the camera? Hella sexist. Also probably they don't understand gay people very well, either.

I still love the show. I can love it and consider it flawed. I can love it and want it to be better. And if I'm wrong and Arianne shows up or gets cast or if Trystanne's plot somehow still keeps the Dorne I know and love--the Dorne that is literally the only place in Essos or Westeros where women are not second-class citizens--well, other than Bear Island, which we'll probably never see--then I'll eat crow.

The bird, not the guys on the wall.

SEGUE

And as a side note: I don't argue about Loras because I just don't know how to talk about homosexuality as well as I'd like to, so I generally avoid getting into it so as not to make an ass out of myself. This is something I'm learning, though, so let's give it a shot:
Loras on the show is a caricature of gay men, based on a character who is portrayed as a caraciture of gay men from a bunch of super-biased perspectives--again, the difference between the book's limited and the show's omniscient 3rd person is really damaging. There's a difference between the character narratives describing Loras as a flamboyant girly sword-swallower (or, in Sansa's case, the ultimate gallant knight) and the show describing him as

this ultra out, ultra flaming flamboyant "knight" that wants to fuck any cute twink that comes his way, as opposed to being deeply in love with Renly and trying to come to terms of losing a lover by being a hot headed arrogant twat.

The reason this bothers me less is because Loras in the books is only ever described by other characters--we don't actually KNOW anything about him as a character, except that he was in love with Renly and that he's kind of an asshole. The shows interpretation of him is problematic because it's socially problematic, not because it changed him from a nearly blank slate. The book portrayal is problematic mostly because it barely exists.

0

09.26.2014 5:13pm

Lexx
I know how they work

reido said:

And as a side note: I don't argue about Loras because I just don't know how to talk about homosexuality as well as I'd like to, so I generally avoid getting into it so as not to make an ass out of myself. This is something I'm learning, though, so let's give it a shot:
Loras on the show is a caricature of gay men, based on a character who is portrayed as a caraciture of gay men from a bunch of super-biased perspectives--again, the difference between the book's limited and the show's omniscient 3rd person is really damaging. There's a difference between the character narratives describing Loras as a flamboyant girly sword-swallower (or, in Sansa's case, the ultimate gallant knight) and the show describing him as

The reason this bothers me less is because Loras in the books is only ever described by other characters--we don't actually KNOW anything about him as a character, except that he was in love with Renly and that he's kind of an asshole. The shows interpretation of him is problematic because it's socially problematic, not because it changed him from a nearly blank slate. The book portrayal is problematic mostly because it barely exists.

The thing is, Book Loras isn't described as a flamboyant stereotype. The few instances we really get to see him he's either acting like a gallant knight, an entitled douche, or an angry, withdrawn teen. In terms of other people describing him, we have Jaime thinking that Loras is a nearly exact clone of Jaime at age 17. Most everyone else thinks of him as a charming, well-loved knight who is also one of the most deadly warriors in the Seven Kingdoms.

In a lot of respects you're right, he is a blank slate, but the the way he's been developed in the show isn't based on any characteristics in the books beyond, "he's gay". I think I damaged the structural integrity of my skull from how hard I rolled my eyes when Show Loras started talking about how he's always dreamed of a big wedding with all the pretty dresses. And the fact that he's a punchline to practically every character who mentions him in the show, whereas in the books the only person who thinks dismissively of him is Cersei. But, you know, the only person Cersei doesn't think dismissively of is herself.

It's a stupid and lazy way to write a gay character. Oberyn's writing, on the other hand, was pretty damn good, so that's why I can't be too bothered by Loras. I thought the topic of Oberyn's bisexuality was handled very well. It's interesting though, because honestly, Book Oberyn isn't THAT much more developed than Book Loras. We see Oberyn a couple times, hear people talking about how dangerous he is, then he fights the Mountain. Show Oberyn was given a lot more scenes and development, but none of it was problematic when it came to his sexuality, unlike Show Loras. I may be making mountains out of molehills, but it's an interesting line of thought.

0

09.26.2014 5:25pm

Thread Creator

reido
(\/)(o,,,o)(\/)

Lexx said:

The thing is, Book Loras isn't described as a flamboyant stereotype. The few instances we really get to see him he's either acting like a gallant knight, an entitled douche, or an angry, withdrawn teen. In terms of other people describing him, we have Jaime thinking that Loras is a nearly exact clone of Jaime at age 17. Most everyone else thinks of him as a charming, well-loved knight who is also one of the most deadly warriors in the Seven Kingdoms.

Yeah, my reading of Book!Loras is definitely tainted by Show!Loras' portrayal.

(And by the fact that I don't care for the character.)

0

09.26.2014 11:51pm

(Edited on 09.29.2014 at 5:58pm)

Testament
Shamshot

IMO, Game of Thrones is at its best when not deviating from the books. I didn't read the books until I'd watched the first season and that season is pretty damn close to the first book (minus Ros and all accompanying scenes, of course) and is stronger for it.

While I understand that all threads aren't equally important to the storyline, I would hate to find out that a good portion of them are superfluous.

0

09.27.2014 12:22am

Zo
another blue ribbon

What's interesting about Oberyn's bisexuality is that it comes up basically once, before he gets to spend the rest of the series being a manly man with a beautiful woman on his arm - whereas Loras and Renly are preening, vain manchildren, punchlines to the rest of the cast. Basically you can be whatever you want, so long as a manly man is what you choose to be.

0

09.27.2014 1:50am

Thread Creator

reido
(\/)(o,,,o)(\/)

If Renly hadn't, you know, died, I wonder if his arc would have been more interesting? Loras is sort of a chunk of wood but Renly actually had a personality.

It's on a long list I have in my head of "WHAT IF?!"s.

< Prev 1 ... 17 18 19 20 Next >

Jump to

© Copyright 2024 Final Fantasy Online, All Rights Reserved
Home | Articles | Games | Forums | Shop | Contact Us | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy

Become a Facebook Fan

Follow us on Twitter