Game of Thrones (HBO)

Discussion in 'Community Discussion' started by Huntn, Apr 18, 2013.

  1. ThunderSkunk macrumors 68030

    ThunderSkunk

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2007
    Location:
    Milwaukee Area
    #1926
    That’s exactly why I decided to wait til the show is over before reading. It seems like due to the inherent limitations of time and cost, shows & films are always a disappointment compared to the depth their book counterparts offer, and I was really enjoying the gorgeous world the show was creating & didn’t want to spoil that. I figure if you wait til the shows over, then you can enjoy the show 100% without screaming at the tv when they go off-book or conflict with the way you imagined it, and then afterward enjoy the books 100%, and with the shows beautiful aesthetics coloring in the story.

    But who am I kidding. Reading puts me to sleep. Having just been given the audiobook of Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy read by the author in his own voice, I’m suddenly sold on the medium. Hopefully there’s a good audio reading of GRRMs work.
     
  2. trillionaire macrumors regular

    trillionaire

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2018
    Location:
    Canada
    #1927
    Yes, I don't know why some people keep trying to justify this season. I will give it a shot and try rewatching from the beginning within a shorter timeframe to see if this season looks better then, but I'm not holding my breath.

    It seems like there was no idea where to go once the books were no longer available for inspiration. The worst part is that it seems the cast and crew knew it, but couldn't do anything about it. Such a shame for the hard work they put into it and they did do an amazing job over the years.
     
  3. Shanghaichica macrumors G4

    Shanghaichica

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2013
    Location:
    UK
    #1928
    I think the book was too complex for TV really. I’ve read other books and watched the films/TV shows before or afterwards and whilst the books are always better the screen adaptation is usually decent. I have the audiobooks but I’ve never listened to them as I prefer reading books as you can read at your own pace, go back and re-read a paragraph and let your imagination really run wild. Really set the scene in your mind.
     
  4. BenTrovato macrumors 68030

    BenTrovato

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2012
    Location:
    Canada
    #1929
    I think they rushed it so that they could focus on the spinoffs. I think it's sad because they did a great job for the first six seasons and it didn't quite get the ending it deserved, but such is life!
     
  5. loon3y macrumors 65816

    loon3y

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2011
    #1930

    It definitely will be. You can tell they smashed 2-3 seasons into 6 episodes.
    --- Post Merged, May 21, 2019 ---

    It definitely was. its just not GoT, Not Martin, Its not just not part of the series.


    Jon should have been killed at the least after the pathetic writers attempt at danys death.
     
  6. VanNess macrumors 6502a

    VanNess

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2005
    Location:
    California
    #1931
    I think that’s more or less fair. I’m looking at the success of the series on the whole - from the very first episode from season 1 to the final season 8 episode. After all of the practically relentless carnage and bloodshed portrayed in prior episodes I’m willing to cut the finale a little slack if they choose to lighten things up a little bit and give viewers a chance to finally exhale.
     
  7. sunapple macrumors 68000

    sunapple

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2013
    Location:
    The Netherlands
    #1932
    George responds...

    http://georgerrmartin.com/notablog/

    Basically saying that yes, the books will be different because there's more time to tell the story and there's more characters in the books who will also get their endings.

    Aegon VI..., talk about writing yourself into a corner :D
     
  8. Obi Wan Kenobi macrumors 6502

    Obi Wan Kenobi

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2011
    Location:
    London, UK
    #1933
    I liked the season finale, but I didn't love it.

    Here are my gripes:
    1) Why didn't Grey Worm and the Unsullied kill John straight away? That wasn't consistent with their execution of the prisoners before and Grey Worm's devotion to Danerys.
    2) If Bran couldn't be the Lord of Winterfell because he was the three eyed raven, how can he be King of Westeros. His glib line of "that's why I'm here" didn't work for me.
    3) Following the battles of Winterfell and King's Landing, I was surprised at how many Dothraki and Unsullied survived. In fact given what happened at Winterfell, I don't really understand how any survived.
    4) Jon's parentage was made to be such a big deal, and ending up a minor plot point. Disappointing.
    5) Not enough dialogue and exposition. There were too many long slow scenes of Tyrion or others walking. Tyrion rearranging the chairs before their cabinet meeting was a waste of screen time.
    6) Bronn becoming Lord of Coin. Don't get me wrong, I loved his character and wanted to see him again, but that role was so incongruous.

    Things I liked:
    1) Brienne's role as Captain of the Kingsguard.
    2) The scene where the new king was picked
    3) The scenes with Drogon (including Drogon melting the Iron Throne and carrying off Danerys's body) and Ghost
    4) Bran's kingship makes sense and guarantees peace in Westeros for some time, although I think it's a disappointing conclusion to the story.
    5) That the series finished with a group of people leaving the safety of the wall, heading north into the forest. This was how episode 1 of the first series started. It gave the show a pleasing (Aristotlean?) unity.
    6) That Tyrion got some good scenes and lines
    7) The cabinet meeting and the banter
    8) That Bran was going to 'find' Drogon

    I wanted to finish my thoughts on that episode with some positives.


    Turning to the show as a whole, and it's wider impact, although I really enjoyed watching it, like others, I'm not sure how it will stand up over time.

    It's certainly affected other significant movies. For example, I think some of the story / plot choices in The Last Jedi - abandoning plot points previously set up, and killing off key characters unexpectedly (Snoke), were conscious imitations of the GoT approach. They didn't work, in my view and damaged the movie. I don't think they can work in a 2 hour format. It needs the much longer format of an epic series to do that.
     
  9. kawalerzysta macrumors regular

    kawalerzysta

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2013
    Location:
    Mt Pocono, PA
    #1934
    Nope, actually feeling sorry for Unsullied.
    untitled.png
     
  10. MileHighPilot macrumors member

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2018
    #1935
    was that in the books or tv series
     
  11. Huntn thread starter macrumors P6

    Huntn

    Joined:
    May 5, 2008
    Location:
    The Misty Mountains
    #1936
    They tried to do the impossible based on time allotted, create a satisfactory climax along with the warm and fuzzy ending which was out of character for the series. The Fire and Ice Book gave me a flashback to the LOTRs. :)
     
  12. Apple fanboy macrumors Nehalem

    Apple fanboy

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2012
    Location:
    Behind the Lens, UK
    #1937
    You can never give a satisfactory ending for everyone. We all want different things.

    The rushed element that has plagued season 7/8 comes down to funding and all those lose ends that needed resolving.

    Imagine if they finished off the LOTR or Harry Potter movie franchise with the books not being complete.

    You could argue that the SW storyline has hardly improved since the George Lucas left!
     
  13. ThunderSkunk macrumors 68030

    ThunderSkunk

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2007
    Location:
    Milwaukee Area
    #1938
    Even if it weren’t for the deadly butterflies, why would anyone care about what the unsullied think about anything? They’re all going to get old and completely die off within this current generation.
     
  14. kawalerzysta macrumors regular

    kawalerzysta

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2013
    Location:
    Mt Pocono, PA
    #1939
    They are still sizable fighting force.
     
  15. VanNess macrumors 6502a

    VanNess

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2005
    Location:
    California
    #1940
    Expectations for the finale were pretty much off the charts so I think some fans - probably a lot fans - we’re going to be disappointed no matter what they did and i’m pretty sure the writers knew that going in. Whether they admit it or not, I think many fans expected a fairy tale ending from a show that was everything but a fairy tale. So Dany defeats Cersei and becomes queen and takes the throne fulfilling her promise as a new benevolent ruler - or Jon fulfills his unlikely hero legacy (and blood right) to take the throne and become king - and none of that was ever going to happen. So when it’s revealed the disappointment goes into hyperdrive with disbelief and nitpicking about the outcome and purported lack of details (not enough explanation for Dany’s change (there was), Jon’s Targaryen heritage didn’t matter at all in the end (it did) and on and on and on...) to justify it. All in all negative reaction to the finale was pretty much set in stone before it even aired and it wouldn’t have mattered if they had more episodes to drag it on even further. More than likely that would have further fueled the already expected flames.

    So my guess is that the writers chose that the finale would be in no small measure a farewell to all of the fans. It’s loaded with subtle call backs to previous events in the series, some noted here and still others - like Tyrion’s arranging of the chairs, something he did rather comically previously in the series at the very same place and same meeting when his father was the hand - apparently haven’t been recognized for that aspect that I’ve seen and just criticized.

    All in all it will probably take some time for the finale to sink in and in my view does nothing to detract from a series that was simply mesmerizing from beginning to end.
     
  16. bobob macrumors 68030

    bobob

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2008
    #1941
    "A character who has proven to be a more than competent military strategist, not to mention a very effective self-propagandist, abruptly decides to commit a war crime after she’s won the war in question, thus needlessly turning the populace against her, because… the plot says so. Because she’s upset and petulant and suddenly a bad person in a way that overrides all her previously established skill sets."

    - via this well written analysis of the series
     
  17. yaxomoxay macrumors 68040

    yaxomoxay

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2010
    Location:
    Texas
    #1942
    Abruptly? No, she was always on the rash side.
    Plus we've seen stuff like that in history, see the Bombing of Dresden in WW2.
     
  18. smallcoffee macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2014
    Location:
    North America
    #1943
    Yup have to agree here. The books and show well support that she could snap. It was rushed in the show and would have been better if it was more drawn out over time, but the precedent was clearly set. She’s been fire and blood the whole time, but the show made us see the conqueror in her in a positive light.
     
  19. Khalanad75 macrumors 6502

    Khalanad75

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2015
    Location:
    land of confusion
    #1944
    Can I get my time back after reading that?
     
  20. yaxomoxay macrumors 68040

    yaxomoxay

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2010
    Location:
    Texas
    #1945
    yeah, the article states: "There’s no arc, no track, no work done to show us why she thinks this is a good idea" missing that the why is that Jon Snow is the true heir, she isn't (Despite thinking for years that she is... plus, dragons), that she isn't going to be loved, that he's going to have the North for him as true king of the North too.
    The article doesn't get something: she won the war militarily, but she didn't win the political war ("Mission Accomplished" anyone?). Nothing, and I mean nothing, would've legitimized her on the throne. The only exception? Fear.
    Now, not saying that someone has to like the ending - far from it - but saying that it has no reason is stupid at best.
     
  21. sunapple macrumors 68000

    sunapple

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2013
    Location:
    The Netherlands
    #1946
    So much talk here has been about what the book would be like or what GRRM would have done, I think this short interview gives a great insight.

    Basically, GRRM wanted 10+ season, but D&D only wanted 7.

     
  22. Shanghaichica macrumors G4

    Shanghaichica

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2013
    Location:
    UK
    #1947
    I was thinking about this today. In the books the story is written from different view points. So I was thinking that perhaps we saw Dany through a view point that put her in a positive light but then the view point was flipped and she is now being viewed as a tyrant. Perhaps she was a tyrant all along.
    --- Post Merged, May 22, 2019 ---
    So I watched the last episode again, without expectations and I kind of enjoyed it. Accepting it for what it was. I had a god cry when the Starks were all saying goodbye at the harbour.
     
  23. zmunkz, May 24, 2019
    Last edited: May 24, 2019

    zmunkz macrumors 6502a

    zmunkz

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2007
    #1949
    This isn’t very convincing to me. She was long established as a generally good intentioned ruler, with occasional slips of ruthlessness. Burning the masters in Meereen, burning the Carl’s, even burning the Tarley’s after giving them chances to surrender... these are all insights to the fact shes ruthless and her instincts—when not curbed by advisors—are harsh. Those people were her enemies or were enemies of justice, and to her, that warranted excessive retribution.

    However, none of that, in any sensible way, shows a decline towards madness, like her father. None of that indicated something evil is waiting inside should she snap. They barely made the ruthless->tyrannical case, let alone the tyrannical->evil/mad case.

    The breakdown in King’s Landing was completely unearned. Her strange gleeful, remorseless declaration that she’d liberated them, when she knew damn well she’d just massacred them for no reason, and that she’d do the same everywhere, was totally out of character. It was the rantings of a mad woman.

    Where did her madness come from? The season argued that 1) losing her best friend, then 2) losing her best protector, 3) losing two of her dragons, then most of all 4) losing her lover, were enough cut strings to justify the total breakdown of her personality. I just don’t see it.
     
  24. VanNess macrumors 6502a

    VanNess

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2005
    Location:
    California
    #1950
    You forgot the woman she burned at the stake in season 1 (don't remember her name) and burning Varys in season 8 but really who’s counting?

    In any event I don’t think the filmmakers are making any arguments about anything. They are telling a story and that story encompasses all of the seasons, not just the last one. And as a Targaryen or as an honorary Dothraki or a breaker of chains etc etc she doesn’t see anything she does as madness.

    All of this brouhaha with Daenerys is making me think about when I saw Star Wars (the original trilogy) when it first ran in the theaters. Obviously no internet back then, but nevertheless after everyone saw the empire strikes back, I can assure you that there were two major topics of discussion at that time: first, was empire better than the first - and at that time, untitled - Star Wars movie, and the second and the most divisive topic, was Vader really Luke Skywalker’s father or was it just a trick to bring him over to the dark side. That was a huge debate amongst fans back then. After all, Obi-Wan said in the first movie in no uncertain terms that Luke’s father was “betrayed and murdered” by Vader so it couldn’t be true...

    Apparently the controversy wasn’t lost on Lucas so in return of the Jedi the movie goes out of its way to set up the scene where Luke asks Yoda if Vader is really his father. The soundtrack even hits a sustained pensive note before Yoda answers to punctuate the question and highly anticipated answer even more. Then Yoda finally acknowledges that Vader is in fact his father - and the soundtrack immediately goes into a sweeping doom and gloom passage. Uh-oh...

    The point is, after everyone saw return of the Jedi, everyone accepted that Vader was Luke’s father. It just became part of the overall story. The controversy before basically vanished and after generations and generations have seen the movies, it’s still accepted today as part of the story.

    But if the original stars wars trilogy was released today, the reaction would be along the lines of:

    Darth Vader is Luke Skywalker’s father!?? Are you kidding me!? That’s just stupid! Where’s the narrative background for that? It’s like they pulled it out of nowhere! Might as well just end the movie with Luke writing a book entitled “lies obi-wan told me.”
     

Share This Page