hbo HBO's Game of Thrones

[Luc2k]

1 hour ago, Syanide said:

 

@Luc2kI'll be honest, that's one change I didn't like either, but again, we're going back to square one and comparing books and the show. The fact that they made Shae's love for him honest, as opposed to books where he was played, sort of replaced the situation with his first wife. I don't think it changed that much overall for his motives to kill Tywin, but it did weaken the reason for Tyrion to seek him out in the first place. That's the type of shortcut the show takes from time to time that I don't like either, when characters go somewhere (literally or figuratively) because the endpoint demands them to, rather than naturally progressing there.

They should have just committed with one or the other from the start.

 

Didn't really feel anything different between both versions of Shae. She had some extra stuff in the show but the actress didn't pull it off. Actually, it weakened the kill as well because Shae was in actual fact a ######, while Tywin had Tysha gang raped by his garrison and forced Tyrion to be the last one, leading him to believe she was one too (also the reason why he only spends his time in the company of prostitutes). On the other hand, the show did hammer "woe is me, everybody hates me because I'm different!" repeatedly as a secondary motive. I don't know about you, but one of those scenarios would get my blood boiling a hell of a lot faster. Also no shortcut was required, just change the dialogue in two scenes and you're good to go. So little needed for an incredibly more powerful pay off.

 

The scene between the brothers also suffered greatly from this. If they meet again in the show, they'll probably end up hugging each other, while in the books.. let's just say I'm very much looking forward to that family reunion.

 

Spoiler

A Lannister always pays his debts.

 

Edited May 11, 2016 by Luc2k

[Syanide]

@Luc2k Shae's was among the worse acting performances on the show. It's weird, because apparently she's an award winning actress in Germany, yet she was pretty bad in Game of Thrones. I couldn't really put my finger on the reason why, until much later, when I saw a clip of the actress talking about he show, where she struggled with English a bit. I seriously think it affected her performance, because she probably struggled to remember the lines, or had a hard time trying to act and trying to pull it off in English. I know that just because she's not a native speaker doesn't have to mean anything, the guy who plays Jaime pulls of both British and American accents really, really well, but in her case, I think that was the reason.

 

As for Jaime and Tyrion meeting each other again, at first I actually took it as a pretty clear sign it won't happen and that Jaime might bite it before Tyrion comes back to Westeros, but then in season 5 I think, Jaime did state he's fairly bitter about Tyrion, so in fact they just reversed that dynamic.

 

Anyway, I'd still rate the show as a really good adaptation. As much as they change, I do think that they do it mostly do respect the medium they're adapting to. If you want it to be like the books, read the books. The Expanse actually had a reverse problem, at least imo. That show had a few episodes where it really felt like they were just omitting a few pages/paragraphs, and directly adapting others, which really hurt the flow of the episodes. I mean, I didn't read those books, but there was one episode mid-season which really felt... unprocessed. Game of Thrones treats the episode as a single serving unit of the story, and I always like how they incorporate a theme to an episode to an extent, or how a theme will flow throughout. Sometimes when they rearrange stuff, they really elevate the storytelling, e.g. how the Ironborn repeat their phrase a few times ("What is dead may never die") in their scene, which is placed right before the Jon resurrection scene, or even better, in Oathbreaker, how Sam takes on the role of the father, followed by Ned's search for Lyanna at the Tower of Joy, followed by a Daenerys Targaryen scene. There's still a lot to love about the show. And as I mentioned earlier, I can't wait for the character count to further drop, and for the stories and characters to start overlapping even more, it should really give some much needed space for them to grow.

[Luc2k]

1 hour ago, Syanide said:

@Luc2k Shae's was among the worse acting performances on the show. It's weird, because apparently she's an award winning actress in Germany, yet she was pretty bad in Game of Thrones. I couldn't really put my finger on the reason why, until much later, when I saw a clip of the actress talking about he show, where she struggled with English a bit. I seriously think it affected her performance, because she probably struggled to remember the lines, or had a hard time trying to act and trying to pull it off in English. I know that just because she's not a native speaker doesn't have to mean anything, the guy who plays Jaime pulls of both British and American accents really, really well, but in her case, I think that was the reason.

 

As for Jaime and Tyrion meeting each other again, at first I actually took it as a pretty clear sign it won't happen and that Jaime might bite it before Tyrion comes back to Westeros, but then in season 5 I think, Jaime did state he's fairly bitter about Tyrion, so in fact they just reversed that dynamic.

 

Anyway, I'd still rate the show as a really good adaptation. As much as they change, I do think that they do it mostly do respect the medium they're adapting to. If you want it to be like the books, read the books. The Expanse actually had a reverse problem, at least imo. That show had a few episodes where it really felt like they were just omitting a few pages/paragraphs, and directly adapting others, which really hurt the flow of the episodes. I mean, I didn't read those books, but there was one episode mid-season which really felt... unprocessed. Game of Thrones treats the episode as a single serving unit of the story, and I always like how they incorporate a theme to an episode to an extent, or how a theme will flow throughout. Sometimes when they rearrange stuff, they really elevate the storytelling, e.g. how the Ironborn repeat their phrase a few times ("What is dead may never die") in their scene, which is placed right before the Jon resurrection scene, or even better, in Oathbreaker, how Sam takes on the role of the father, followed by Ned's search for Lyanna at the Tower of Joy, followed by a Daenerys Targaryen scene. There's still a lot to love about the show. And as I mentioned earlier, I can't wait for the character count to further drop, and for the stories and characters to start overlapping even more, it should really give some much needed space for them to grow.

Can't say I know much about the actress apart that she did porn. I found her pretty bad all around, talking or not.

 

I don't know if they'll meet again in either medium, but the book scenario has more potential. It may be bitterness now, but in the book it went from love to threat instantly. To me the show feels like it relies to much on conflicts between positive and negative characters, while failing at it when it's between just positive ones.

 

Personally, I'd rate it between great and fan fiction. The good thing about its state now, is that it's made me so disengaged that I don't feel it has any bearing on the books' story, regardless of what happens. It's conversation material with friends.

 

A lot of foreshadowing is in the books, though it's less in your face like the show. First example with the Ironborn/resurrection just sounds like a cool catchphrase to say before it happens since I don't see any connection between the them, be it physical state, religion or lineage. Your second example puzzles me though because I can't find any meaningful connection between the two, it's all just superficial. If I get this correctly, you're trying to assign aspects of The Seven to various characters, but the Starks don't follow them for example, and to my mind the characters don't really fit these archetypes under scrutiny. Or you're going for Sam = father to an adopted son, but it doesn't exactly fit snugly with Ned's position since Gilly's baby is of no consequence among other things. The baby in the book is a much better fit, but even then it's stretching. Maybe I just misunderstood you, do elaborate.

 

While I wouldn't say a lot to love, there is enough though, like Olly's purple face. Several minutes of him struggling in the noose would have been some good filler.

[Syanide]

11 hours ago, Luc2k said:

A lot of foreshadowing is in the books, though it's less in your face like the show. First example with the Ironborn/resurrection just sounds like a cool catchphrase to say before it happens since I don't see any connection between the them, be it physical state, religion or lineage. Your second example puzzles me though because I can't find any meaningful connection between the two, it's all just superficial. If I get this correctly, you're trying to assign aspects of The Seven to various characters, but the Starks don't follow them for example, and to my mind the characters don't really fit these archetypes under scrutiny. Or you're going for Sam = father to an adopted son, but it doesn't exactly fit snugly with Ned's position since Gilly's baby is of no consequence among other things. The baby in the book is a much better fit, but even then it's stretching. Maybe I just misunderstood you, do elaborate.

 

While I wouldn't say a lot to love, there is enough though, like Olly's purple face. Several minutes of him struggling in the noose would have been some good filler.

The Ironborn/Jon was foreshadowing through the words spoken. Jon was dead, then he wasn't. Not subtle, but nice.

 

As for the other (Sam/Ned/Dany), not aspects of the seven, it's foreshadowing about

 

 

 

 

Jon's parentage:

- You have Sam taking on the protective role and 'adopting' Sam Jr. to protect him.

- The next scene is Ned looking for Lyanna. We all pretty much know by know what happens in the tower - he gets Jon to protect and take care of.

- And the next scene is a Targaryen one, again, thematically wrapping it up.

 

 

That's pretty subtle. The show can sometimes be a bit too on-the-nose, but the books aren't really flawless in that regard either. There are so many prophecies, dreams, and hints, that are years away from being revealed, that it can become tiresome. I prefer the show treatment of Jon's parentage, it's been a slow-burn with very subtle hints, and I believe it will gradually be revealed this season. The books probably suffer from GRRM originally planning it as a trilogy, then planting too many hints too early on. Also, I dislike the sheer overuse of prophecies. Not everything has to be destined to happen, like the amount of crap he started cramming into Dany's (fairly boring) story, with Quaithe popping up to "spice" things up.

 

To go back to the show, there is also usually a theme for the episode reflected in the episode name. Oathbreaker: Sam sort of breaks his NW oath to protect Sam Jr, Ned's honor is tested as he does whatever necessary to find his sister, Daenerys didn't follow the Dothraki widow tradition, Arya's could be seen as double, she's betraying who she really is by turning into "No One," but it might as well be a bluff and she's betraying Faceless Men, Smalljon betraying his family's loyalty to the Starks by turning Rickon in, and finally, Jon leaving Night's Watch.

 

That's the stuff that makes an episode a great unit of storytelling, because it ties in various threads of the story that are usually displaced by character location and unrelated narratives. I love that about the show, and when they're not forced to cram too many story beats into a single episode, it tends to work out wonderfully.

[Luc2k]

3 hours ago, Syanide said:

As for the other (Sam/Ned/Dany), not aspects of the seven, it's foreshadowing about

 

  Hide contents

Jon's parentage:

- You have Sam taking on the protective role and 'adopting' Sam Jr. to protect him.

- The next scene is Ned looking for Lyanna. We all pretty much know by know what happens in the tower - he gets Jon to protect and take care of.

- And the next scene is a Targaryen one, again, thematically wrapping it up.

 

That's pretty subtle. The show can sometimes be a bit too on-the-nose, but the books aren't really flawless in that regard either. There are so many prophecies, dreams, and hints, that are years away from being revealed, that it can become tiresome. I prefer the show treatment of Jon's parentage, it's been a slow-burn with very subtle hints, and I believe it will gradually be revealed this season. The books probably suffer from GRRM originally planning it as a trilogy, then planting too many hints too early on. Also, I dislike the sheer overuse of prophecies. Not everything has to be destined to happen, like the amount of crap he started cramming into Dany's (fairly boring) story, with Quaithe popping up to "spice" things up.

If what you're saying is intended, I still find the connections too loose and random, however I see how it might stimulate someone that doesn't know the books. I'll give you the prophecies, even though, as I read, I found most rather obscure, until the predicted event happened exactly.

3 hours ago, Syanide said:

To go back to the show, there is also usually a theme for the episode reflected in the episode name. Oathbreaker: Sam sort of breaks his NW oath to protect Sam Jr, Ned's honor is tested as he does whatever necessary to find his sister, Daenerys didn't follow the Dothraki widow tradition, Arya's could be seen as double, she's betraying who she really is by turning into "No One," but it might as well be a bluff and she's betraying Faceless Men, Smalljon betraying his family's loyalty to the Starks by turning Rickon in, and finally, Jon leaving Night's Watch.

 

That's the stuff that makes an episode a great unit of storytelling, because it ties in various threads of the story that are usually displaced by character location and unrelated narratives. I love that about the show, and when they're not forced to cram too many story beats into a single episode, it tends to work out wonderfully.

I don't see what Sam is doing as oath breaking as of yet. I mean they all do it to some degree if you want to be strict, however only outright desertion or betrayal of the Night's Watch should be considered. Say Sam decides to abandon his quest to become a maester and stay with Gilly, excluding unforeseen circumstances of course.

 

Can't see how Ned's honour was tested. The Kingsguard were standing between him and his family and he only put Dayne out of his misery. Maybe you expected him to punish Howland Reed for the backstab. Dany hasn't followed that tradition for several seasons now. Arya is still in training so we can't draw a conclusion either way. Jon died and his wows with that. Doubt there's a stipulation that says one has to resume them if resurrected. Smalljon is the only one I can agree about, although I'm sure the episode title is referring to Jon.

[GameOverRob]

Anyone watch the leaked episode that someone ripped from HBO after they accidentally put it online earlier?

 

Spoiler

White-Walkers!

 

Plus you find out why Wylis says Hodor all the time.

 

Good episode!

 

Edited May 22, 2016 by .Rob

[+John. Subscriber¹]

1 hour ago, .Rob said:

Anyone watch the leaked episode that someone ripped from HBO after they accidentally put it online earlier?

 

  Reveal hidden contents

White-Walkers!

 

Plus you find out why Wylis says Hodor all the time.

 

Good episode!

 

Whaaaaaaat? 

 

*downloads* 

 

EDIT: Of course I mean wait until the episode is legally released on the official channels...

[ToneKnee]

Watched the leaked episode, good episode overall.  If you watch the leak, an Alarm goes off (as it's screen recorded) about 35 minutes, so when it happens, don't think it's your computer doing it haha!

[Luc2k]

Spoiler

The creation of the White Walkers doesn't make sense timeline wise. The Long Night, when they first appeared, was a global event that happened during the Age of Heroes. The Age of Heroes started after the First Men and the children of the forest made peace.

 

I don't remember what the show says about the Age of Heroes or the Long Night and records of that period in the books aren't exactly precise, however I can't help but feel slightly disappointed.

 

[+John. Subscriber¹]

Hell of an episode!

 

Spoiler

regardless of the timeline issue with the the White Walkers! #holdthedoor

 

[FiB3R]

1080p quality isn't great. Worth waiting a little longer, I think.

[timster]

4 hours ago, ToneKnee said:

Watched the leaked episode, good episode overall.  If you watch the leak, an Alarm goes off (as it's screen recorded) about 35 minutes, so when it happens, don't think it's your computer doing it haha!

it was a screen capture, I saw a Twitter notification come up in the corner too. someone posted it on HBO Nordic before they were supposed to. I'll still watch it on HBONow later tonight

[Syanide]

My ######## heart broke.

[+John. Subscriber¹]

8 hours ago, Syanide said:

My ######## heart broke.

Agreed! 

 

Spoiler

I guarantee that Bran will cause the wall to fall. He'll go south of the wall with that Mark on him and it'll bust it. Last shot at end of season will be the white king blowing that horn and knocking it down

 

I also have a feeling Bran could possibly be the lord of light? Subtly drawing all the forces to the north to unite and fight the white walkers

 

[Jim K Global Moderator]

Just finished watching last night's episode ... great episode.  Ending was...

 

Spoiler

sad.  Hold the door.  

 

[Syanide]

I've watched that ending several times now, I legit start crying every single time. I never cry watching fiction. To me, this is more tragic than Ned, Red Wedding and Jon combined. Those characters, as unfair their deaths were, still had a say in the situations surrounding them, and at least to an extend had a choice in the matter. Hodor was so pure and so innocent, and to see this messed up fate bestowed upon him... Soulcrushing.

 

It's kind of mindblowing how they turned a punchline character into, what in my opinion is, the most tragic figure of the story.

[+John. Subscriber¹]

29 minutes ago, Syanide said:

I've watched that ending several times now, I legit start crying every single time. I never cry watching fiction. To me, this is more tragic than Ned, Red Wedding and Jon combined. Those characters, as unfair their deaths were, still had a say in the situations surrounding them, and at least to an extend had a choice in the matter. Hodor was so pure and so innocent, and to see this messed up fate bestowed upon him... Soulcrushing.

 

It's kind of mindblowing how they turned a punchline character into, what in my opinion is, the most tragic figure of the story.

 

It was heartbreaking to find out that a character only used for comedic effect had such an upsetting and harrowing back story

[+Warwagon MVC]

Spoiler

 

[mudslag]

 

[Draconian Guppy]

staged. though funneh 

[soniqstylz]

On 5/22/2016 at 0:43 PM, Luc2k said:

  Hide contents

The creation of the White Walkers doesn't make sense timeline wise. The Long Night, when they first appeared, was a global event that happened during the Age of Heroes. The Age of Heroes started after the First Men and the children of the forest made peace.

 

I don't remember what the show says about the Age of Heroes or the Long Night and records of that period in the books aren't exactly precise, however I can't help but feel slightly disappointed.

 

It's not hard to believe that The Children made the White Walkers to fight The First Men, but the Night King turned on them and couldn't be controlled, so The Children made peace with The First Men -- enemy of my enemy and all that.  During the Long Night the White Walkers make their way farther south than before and are now known to those in the Riverlands/Reach/Vale, etc.  Once they were driven back, Bran builds The Wall, Night Watch begins, The Children bring Dragonglass, etc.

 

Think of it like this -- The White Walkers live in the Arctic, but during the war they may have fought in Canada against The First Men and The Children.  Peace is made between The First Men (in Canada) and Children, the Age of Heroes begins, etc..  During The Long Night, the White Walkers are able to make their way south deep into America, at which point more of the continent now gives a ###### because it affects us and not those Canucks up in Winterfell.

 

None of it is really recorded because, according to Sam, all we have are runes from the First Men, recorded history doesn't begin until the Andals.

 

[soniqstylz]

On 5/12/2016 at 0:29 PM, Luc2k said:

I don't see what Sam is doing as oath breaking as of yet. I mean they all do it to some degree if you want to be strict, however only outright desertion or betrayal of the Night's Watch should be considered.

"I shall take no wife, hold no lands, father no children."

[Luc2k]

46 minutes ago, soniqstylz said:

It's not hard to believe that The Children made the White Walkers to fight The First Men, but the Night King turned on them and couldn't be controlled, so The Children made peace with The First Men -- enemy of my enemy and all that.  During the Long Night the White Walkers make their way farther south than before and are now known to those in the Riverlands/Reach/Vale, etc.  Once they were driven back, Bran builds The Wall, Night Watch begins, The Children bring Dragonglass, etc.

 

Think of it like this -- The White Walkers live in the Arctic, but during the war they may have fought in Canada against The First Men and The Children.  Peace is made between The First Men (in Canada) and Children, the Age of Heroes begins, etc..  During The Long Night, the White Walkers are able to make their way south deep into America, at which point more of the continent now gives a ###### because it affects us and not those Canucks up in Winterfell.

 

None of it is really recorded because, according to Sam, all we have are runes from the First Men, recorded history doesn't begin until the Andals.

Yours is pure speculation because as far we know the White Walkers did not exist before the Long Night. The children were losing the war, however they didn't make peace to fight some common enemy; and the Night King was "created" after the Long Night and was most likely killed. I do know of course, that the one in the show has little in common apart from the name.

 

To my understanding, the show portrays the Night King as the first White Walker and we also know he was a Lord Commander of the Night's Watch. The Night's Watch, however, was created after the Long Night to defend the Wall against the north (i.e. White Walkers). So, unless I'm missing something, the show's Night King doesn't make a lick of sense.

 

The long Night was a global even with creatures like the White Walkers present in all cultures not isolated on one continent. If the children created them on Westeros, how did they suddenly spread all over la world? I believe there was a far more powerful entity at play than the children.

42 minutes ago, soniqstylz said:

"I shall take no wife, hold no lands, father no children."

He's taken no wife, he holds no lands and he hasn't fathered any children. What is your point?

Edited May 30, 2016 by Luc2k
added more on the Night King

[Syanide]

9 hours ago, Luc2k said:

He's taken no wife, he holds no lands and he hasn't fathered any children. What is your point?

He "fathers" a child. I mean, we know it's not his kid, but to protect them he does go around saying it's his kid.

 

Anywho, the latest episode was fine, sort of a setup for the remainder of the season, but nice developments all around, nice to see that Arya's story is finally going somewhere. Daenerys on the other hand, I swear they wrote that bit in just because they were short of an "epic" episode ending. We heard the variation of that speech about a dozen times now. Nice to see Drogon, but goddamn, move yo ass to Westeros already woman.

 

Also (book spoilers):

 

 

Brotherhood without Banners got namedropped, Freys are back, and both Jaime and Brienne are heading towards Riverrun. LSH hype, anyone?

[Haggis Veteran]

2 hours ago, Syanide said:

He "fathers" a child. I mean, we know it's not his kid, but to protect them he does go around saying it's his kid.

There is a huge difference between fathering a child and looking after one lol