I figure we have to get to the fighting pit so that Drago can come in, kill half the people, and leave with his mommy. Then again, we are no longer following the books, so anything can happen.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Game of Thrones (HBO)
- Thread starter Huntn
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Ah look at you, being all investigative. I'm too lazy for that. I like to have a little surprise in my TV viewing
The one for last week had some blurb and then 'John Snow travels'. Biggest undersell ever!
For anyone looking for comparisons between the book and the show, or to refresh their memories, status at the end of Feast For Crows. For those just watching the show these spoilers are mostly trivia and inconsequential.
- Margaery and Cercei are both in custody of the Faith. Tyrell forces have abandoned their siege of Storm's End rushing back to Kings Landing, supposedly to help Margaery Tyrell. Cercei seems to have lost all power as the small council has been transformed and she's is locked in a cell.
- Samwell Tarley is in Old Town presumed to start forging his Maester's chain. With the info he provided, an Arch-Maester has departed to find Daenery Targarian to help her fulfill the prophecy.
- Jaime has just negotiated the end of the siege at River Run and burns a note from Cercei pleading for help.
- Sansa is continuing to pose as Little Finger's daughter Alayne at the Eyrie. She is not married to Ramsey Bolton as in the Show.
- Arya is continuing her duties at the House of Black and White.
- Brienne in her search for the Stark girls just got seriously wounded in a fight and is being judged by Lady Stoneheart.
- The Ironmen (Greyjoys) of the Iron Islands are uprising against the Crown (Lannisters).
- Arianne Martell, daughter of Prince of Dorne, is being judged by her Father for trying to spirit Myrcella Lannister (Cercei's daughter) away and name her Queen of The Seven Kingdoms to start a war with The Lannisters. In the attempt Myrcella was maimed. Ser Balon Swan is bringing the Mountain's head to prove that he was killed as an appeasel for Prince Obyern's death and they worry what will happen when Myrcella's appearance becomes known to the Lannisters.
- Jon Snow is not in this book, presumed to be at the wall along with Stannis and The Red Lady.
- Daenerys is not in this book, dealing with the challenge of ruling Astophor.
- Bran is not in this book, presumed to be somewhere North of the Wall, with Hodor Meera, and Jojen.
- Tyrion Lannister and Lord Varys are not in this book, presumed to be somewhere East across the Narrow Sea, but it's possible that Lord Vatys is skulking around Westeros.
- Theon Greyjoy (Reek) is not in this book and presumed to continue to be a prisoner of and abused by Ramsey Bolton.
Last edited:
I think you have to view any TV or movie adaptation of a book as a stand alone entity. If you're constantly comparing it to the books you're bound to be disappointed or upset. the show is either good or bad on its own merits, not because it's faithful or unfaithful to the books.
Except, you are drawn to a story based on the book, based on reading a fabulous book, not some new creation by the writers and director. That's like false advertising. Now, I give Game of Thrones a break, because it's really really good, holding the same environment, high standard, and tone the author created, although in comparison to the books, feels more like the cliff notes version, or a bare bones consolidated outline of the books. True Blood on the other hand was turned into an overbearing gay spectacle, one-eighty out from the author who in my opinion sold out for the big bucks. Was there some gayness in the books? Yes, but not like what Alan Ball envisioned.
You may be drawn by the books, but if you come expecting the show to be the books just in a different medium, that's on you. How many countless times had TV or film changed or distorted great books? Too many to count, so you should really expect it at this point.
Absolutely not, it's not on me. You are not disappointed when something you love as a book is ruined in a movie or tv show? Because that is your perceived norm, that makes it ok with you?
Your are welcome to your standard, but mine says that if you are going to create a movie and call it Gone with the Wind, you have a moral responsibility to be faithful to the original work (which mostly it was) or call it Crap Hits The Fan.
Otherwise it is false advertising. Does expecting something calling itself a BMW and in reality it's a Lada, make it ok, I should expect it? I don't think so, but this does not mean I'm ignorant or not wary. I am, very much so, and rarely do I pay full price for theatrical releases. If you don't mind, I'll remain indignant about the sliding of this standard and you can be content with being disappointed.
Absolutely not, it's not on me. You are not disappointed when something you love as a book is ruined in a movie or tv show? Because that is your perceived norm, that makes it ok with you?
[...]
I'll remain indignant about the sliding of this standard and you can be content with being disappointed.
I don't see the books as "ruined" by TV or movie adaptations. I see the books the same as I ever did and judge the TV show or movie on whether it succeeded on its own merits.
That's why I'm not disappointed - because I don't go into it with the same expectations you do. I expect something based on the books but changed to accommodate the chosen medium, not a rigorous transfer of page to screen.
You're disappointed because you expect something that cannot be delivered. I'm not disappointed because I understand the inherent differences and limitations in presenting the same idea, even the same story, in different mediums.
You are so wrong, and I'll explain. First go back to psychology class.
I can and have been satisfied numerous times when my expectations are met in TV and movie adaptions. I have no idea what compelled you to leap to your conclusion. If I was always dissatisfied, you might have a point, but you only have me holding up True Blood, which is among the worst TV adaptions if you expect the atmosphere of the book to hold up. So my expectations are reasonable... and I'm entitled to mine as you are entitled to yours. Please stop telling me what is good for me.
Absolutely not, it's not on me. You are not disappointed when something you love as a book is ruined in a movie or tv show? Because that is your perceived norm, that makes it ok with you?
Your are welcome to your standard, but mine says that if you are going to create a movie and call it Gone with the Wind, you have a moral responsibility to be faithful to the original work (which mostly it was) or call it Crap Hits The Fan.
I haven't read the books, but my daughter has, and she's pointed out where the books and series have diverged. I can see where book readers might prefer that the television and printed versions remain in sync. However, that would be practically impossible within the constraints of a 10-episode-per-season series with a finite budget that will end in 2017, which may be before George RR Martin finishes the last book. Weiss and Benioff have been quite transparent about this. They are aware of GRRM's rough idea for an end game (he reportedly shared this in case something happens to him), and they're guiding various arcs toward that destination. In some instances, that will mean introducing elements that are unique to the series, like last episode's battle scene.
There are similarities to Star Trek: I've been a huge fan since the original series and was doubtful that JJ Abrams' reboot would be good. But despite the many departures from the established Star Trek universe, I've enjoyed the movies, in large part because of strong production values and acting.
The differences between the books and the series - surely more will follow - are not a problem for me until now. The only thing that could be a real problem is, if the series has an alternate "bad" ending, that doesn't feel right. As long as the series tells a good and intriguing story, i'm on board with the writers.
I've thoughly enjoyed the Star Trek reboot, despite the liberties taken.
I'm a realist and understand the fiscal limits of the show and am good with that. Despite the differences and it feeling like an outline of the books, Game of Thrones is still most excellent. I want to say the idea of taking a book and creating an alternate reality due to time and fiscal limits is a relatively recent idea. Good movies are often/usually judged and rightfully so to their faithfulness to the original story. That's one of the reasons, Lord of the Rings gets a huge thumbs up from me.
Last edited:
I've thoughly enjoyed the Star Trek reboot, despite the liberties taken.
I'm a realist and understand the fiscal limits of the show and am good with that. Despite the differences and it feeling like an outline of the books, Game of Thrones is still most excellent. I want to say the idea of taking a book and creating an alternate reality due to time and fiscal limits is a relatively recent idea. Good movies are often/usually judged and rightfully so to their faithfulness to the original story. That's one of the reasons, Lord of the Rings gets a huge thumbs up from me.
It's worth considering that movie or TV versions can improve upon the source material. Not that they were an example of this, but what did you think of the recent Hobbit movies, which took considerable liberties with the original, including adding characters who weren't in the book? I enjoyed them, though the story could have been done in two movies.
I separate LOTR from The Hobbit in this judgement. LOTR was supurb, mostly faithful to the 3 books (3 movies) it represents. The Hobbit (one 300 page book, three 3+hr movies) was completely over the top and strayed far away from the tone of the book. That's my artistic literary appraisal.
I could have better accepted 2 movies too, with the first movie ending somewhere in the vicinity of Mirkwood Forest. Although faithful to the world Tolkien created, and following the general outline of the book (The Hobbit), it should have been called something like The Middle Earth Chronicles. Jackson lotrozied The Hobbit, adding over the top action scenes, and attributes to Bilbo that I disagree with, blatantly disregarding the original atmosphere, content, and tone of the book, which I cherish because of the book, not because of Jackson's bloated creation. I don't expect agreement on this point.
Apparently so, at least the head dudes. If the info in this thread about it is accurate (I've not researched it), most of the walking dead are the necromancer's puppets.
Found the following:
http://awoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/Others
http://awoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/Wights
Last edited:
That was just awesome. Stannis though..not so awesome.
I'm nervous about what this kid (Olly) might do...
It does seem ominous.
Also, Stannis! What a son of a bitch! The reaction of Selyse surprised me. Up until now, it seems like something she would've championed.
Agreed. A great episode.
In the Inside the Episode video about S5E9, one of the show's creators revealed that George RR Martin had shocked them about Shireen's death. But the character is apparently still alive in the books, so was this a major spoiler for book readers or not? The books and series have diverged in other significant ways, and this may be another.
Based on the preview for the finale, we know they'll cover a lot of territory on Sunday. The shot of Tyrion, Daario, and Jorah sitting around looking forlorn makes it seem that they have no idea where Dany went, and Jon looks to be in major trouble. We'll also get to see Cersei post confession, and Brienne finally jumps into the frey. I'm wondering when the Mountain will awaken, or will they leave that for a future season?
Based on the preview for the finale, we know they'll cover a lot of territory on Sunday. The shot of Tyrion, Daario, and Jorah sitting around looking forlorn makes it seem that they have no idea where Dany went, and Jon looks to be in major trouble. We'll also get to see Cersei post confession, and Brienne finally jumps into the frey. I'm wondering when the Mountain will awaken, or will they leave that for a future season?
Gee that's the name of the 5th book, imagine that! But it's hard to imagine a King getting away with burning his kid as a sacrifice to his God and still finding wholehearted support from his followers. Maybe if they are all as devout as he is, but time will tell.
While acknowledging this event is unique to the show, with his special bond to the daughter Shiireen, I wonder how Ser Davos will react to the news. Maybe he'll see how Melisandre looks strapped to a pillar of fire. It's possible she'd get a climax from the experience.
But it's hard to imagine a King getting away with burning his kid as a sacrifice to his God and still finding wholehearted support from his followers. Maybe if they are all as devout as he is, but time will tell.While acknowledging this event is unique to the show, with his special bond to the daughter Shiireen, I wonder how Ser Davos will react to the news. Maybe he'll see how Melisandre looks strapped to a pillar of fire. It's possible she'd get a climax from the experience.