The Game of Thrones

[oldschool]

This comment from the E09 Rant and Rave thread over at asoiaf.org sums this season up perfectly:

 

And to think the whole Northern plot from the books could have resulted in wonderful TV. The Manderly/Umber/Bolton/Frey tension, the awesome monologues, the Frey pie, the conspiracy unfolding while Stannis approached. But instead we got "nah bro, not shocking enough, let's rape Sansa and burn Shireen".

[Starkiller]

This comment from the E09 Rant and Rave thread over at asoiaf.org sums this season up perfectly:

 

And to think the whole Northern plot from the books could have resulted in wonderful TV. The Manderly/Umber/Bolton/Frey tension, the awesome monologues, the Frey pie, the conspiracy unfolding while Stannis approached. But instead we got "nah bro, not shocking enough, let's rape Sansa and burn Shireen".

They don't have to pay the characters in a book. And clearly, GRRM doesn't have to limit himself to 10 episodes per season...

[oldschool]

They don't have to pay the characters in a book. And clearly, GRRM doesn't have to limit himself to 10 episodes per season...

​Your point doesn't make any sense. They've wasted a ton of time on Dorne this year they could have easily gone into the Northern story Arc. No one is saying the Show should have done a blow by blow rendition of the story. To make matters worse, they've now vilified Stannis. Who is going to care who wins between Stannis and the Bolton's now?

[reo]

​Stannis and the Bolton's now?

Maybe that's the point. What if Sansa starts manipulating Ramsy and comes out on to over both of them somehow? 

[Starkiller]

​Your point doesn't make any sense. They've wasted a ton of time on Dorne this year they could have easily gone into the Northern story Arc. No one is saying the Show should have done a blow by blow rendition of the story. To make matters worse, they've now vilified Stannis. Who is going to care who wins between Stannis and the Bolton's now?

As I said, the Dorne stuff may be necessary down the road and they simply minimized how much time they spent on it vs the books. 

as for Stannis, why the hell would book readers root for him either? I never have. He is just another guy who thinks he is entitled to the throne despite the fact that no one likes him. He would be a terrible king. But people still want him to beat the Boltons to open Winterfell back up for the Starks. Stannis doesn't want to stay there and rule the North. 

[reo]

I've always thought Stannis was an interesting character but I've never rooted for him per se either. Its hard to do when he's already sacrificed people and cheated on his wife for a throne that you have to assume will end up going to someone else.

[oldschool]

As I said, the Dorne stuff may be necessary down the road and they simply minimized how much time they spent on it vs the books. 

as for Stannis, why the hell would book readers root for him either? I never have. He is just another guy who thinks he is entitled to the throne despite the fact that no one likes him. He would be a terrible king. But people still want him to beat the Boltons to open Winterfell back up for the Starks. Stannis doesn't want to stay there and rule the North. 

​Sounds like you didn't really get Stannis as GRRM defines him. I'm not a fan either but he's not evil. In fact the opposite is true. He's widely considered one of the protagonists which the show runners just threw out the window.

[Guest]

​Your point doesn't make any sense. They've wasted a ton of time on Dorne this year they could have easily gone into the Northern story Arc. No one is saying the Show should have done a blow by blow rendition of the story. To make matters worse, they've now vilified Stannis. Who is going to care who wins between Stannis and the Bolton's now?

​I don't think the show is invested in this point. As a watcher of the show, the situation centered around Winterfell has one likeable protagonist--Sansa--and I'm not sure it necessarily needs more. Stannis is a troubled character, but his story is defined by his continual reliance to the lord of light. The political intrigue is something that is more plot device than plot point. 

Now, I'm not saying I don't agree that this season has been flawed and that there are some points worth criticism-far from it. But I've never been big on criticisms of a show that rely on an understanding of the book. The show has it's own kind of logic and narrative structure it has to adhere to and I think it's more cogent to discuss how those have been built up or have been broken down. 

For example, if you follow Sansa's story as uniquely presented by the show, her rape is a logical plot development. It makes sense in that it's what the sum of Sansa's experiences have made to be inevitable for her. Likewise, Shireen's death makes sense for the Stannis of the show world, and it has pushed his character to a dark place that will be interesting to explore--whether he is likeable now or not is irrelevant to the Stannis painted by the show. 

Anyways, the show has far from a dearth of likeable characters--but is lacking more flawed ones that we legitimately care about. Think about it--we've been plagued with a lack of empathy ambiguity for a while now. Daenerys is up against faceless assassins, Jon Snow has his zombies to fight, Tyrion is on the run, Sansa (and Reek) under the manipulations of Joffery 2.0, Arya in training, etc. Cersei is probably the only character who we truly have to struggle to understand our own feelings for at this point in the show--until Stannis's heel turn. 

Stannis is a character that I was really beginning to like this season (my favorite moment was his grammar quip--aside from this episode's beheading) and his decision in this episode was something that really made me feel strongly about his character--that feeling of betrayal, even though Shireen's fate was blatantly foreshadowed was a big narrative moment that got to me as a viewer. I think you have to consider that on its own merits. The show has made the decision to be a more brutal representation than the world of the books (apparently)--I think asking whether or not that (in itself) moves us in a meaningful way is a more powerful question than going back to the books. 

But again, I (1) haven't read the books and (2) am in general against those kinds of comparisons when both forms are good enough to stand on their own merits. I think the show is good enough to have earned consideration on its own right. 

Personally, the presence of sexualized violence and violence against women as a theme is really challenging the way I think about, understand, and feel for the characters of this show. 

Will I, as a viewer, come to peace with Stannis's murder of Shireen the way I have with Tyrion's murder of Shae and with Jamie's rape of Cersei? 

It certainly seems not, however that in itself really makes me consider my own sense of value--Tyrion killed a whore out of passion, Stannis sacrificed his own daughter to win a war. I think it's a strong narrative achievement that has impacted me as a viewer. Stannis's single mindedness is actually quite a compelling character trait, Macbethian really, and his steadfast reliance on Melisandre is setting up a truly powerful moment--when she either succeeds in what she has promised or has failed. 

 

Edit: Also, forgot that Tyrion axed his pappy and my favorite--Tywin. Come to think about it, has there been a single character death this entire show that really altered the way we think about the person that perpetrated it? 

 

 

Edited June 8, 2015 by Guest

[oldschool]

​I don't think the show is invested in this point. As a watcher of the show, the situation centered around Winterfell has one likeable protagonist--Sansa--and I'm not sure it necessarily needs more. Stannis is a troubled character, but his story is defined by his continual reliance to the lord of light. The political intrigue is something that is more plot device than plot point. 

Now, I'm not saying I don't agree that this season has been flawed and that there are some points worth criticism-far from it. But I've never been big on criticisms of a show that rely on an understanding of the book. The show has it's own kind of logic and narrative structure it has to adhere to and I think it's more cogent to discuss how those have been built up or have been broken down. 

For example, if you follow Sansa's story as uniquely presented by the show, her rape is a logical plot development. It makes sense in that it's what the sum of Sansa's experiences have made to be inevitable for her. Likewise, Shireen's death makes sense for the Stannis of the show world, and it has pushed his character to a dark place that will be interesting to explore--whether he is likeable now or not is irrelevant to the Stannis painted by the show. 

Anyways, the show has far from a dearth of likeable characters--but is lacking more flawed ones that we legitimately care about. Think about it--we've been plagued with a lack of empathy ambiguity for a while now. Daenerys is up against faceless assassins, Jon Snow has his zombies to fight, Tyrion is on the run, Sansa (and Reek) under the manipulations of Joffery 2.0, Arya in training, etc. Cersei is probably the only character who we truly have to struggle to understand our own feelings for at this point in the show--until Stannis's heel turn. 

Stannis is a character that I was really beginning to like this season (my favorite moment was his grammar quip--aside from this episode's beheading) and his decision in this episode was something that really made me feel strongly about his character--that feeling of betrayal, even though Shireen's fate was blatantly foreshadowed was a big narrative moment that got to me as a viewer. I think you have to consider that on its own merits. The show has made the decision to be a more brutal representation than the world of the books (apparently)--I think asking whether or not that (in itself) moves us in a meaningful way is a more powerful question than going back to the books. 

But again, I (1) haven't read the books and (2) am in general against those kinds of comparisons when both forms are good enough to stand on their own merits. I think the show is good enough to have earned consideration on its own right. 

Personally, the presence of sexualized violence and violence against women as a theme is really challenging the way I think about, understand, and feel for the characters of this show. 

Will I, as a viewer, come to peace with Stannis's murder of Shireen the way I have with Tyrion's murder of Shae and with Jamie's rape of Cersei? 

It certainly seems not, however that in itself really make me consider my own sense of value--Tyrion killed a whore of passion, Stannis sacrificed his own daughter to win a war. I think it's a strong narrative achievement that has impacted me as a viewer. Stannis's single mindedness is actually quite a compelling character trait, Macbethian really, and his steadfast reliance on Melisandre is setting up a truly powerful moment--when she either succeeds in what she has promised or has failed. 

 

 

 

​Great post. My issue is that they are clearly going for shock value above all else. The grantland article you linked to earlier makes that same point. I think some of the book Nazi's are insane but I find it hard to argue with them on the subject of whether D&D actually understand the source material. The Cersei Rape scene was the first major red flag as that clearly isn't rape in the books. Another one is what Arya's attachment to her sword personifies.  I've accepted the fact the show and the books are not one in the same but it still bothers me when they take liberties with some of the more well known characters for no viable reason other than to film their gotcha moment.

[Mercalius]

My only problem with the scene was the sequencing in regards to the overall episode.  I get ending the episode with Danny flying off on the dragon looked cool and is a picture-esque moment many fans had been wanting to see for awhile...but the sacrificing of Shireen,especially for people invested in the Stannis character, emotionally killed the rest of the episode.  It's one of the darkest things we've seen in the entire series, and jumping straight into a sunny gladiator/assassination gang-brawl climaxing with dragon ownage...it was just hard for me to personally care about.  

They should have flipped the order of those two scenes.  As a fan of Stannis, his decision to sacrifice his own daughter seems more important to me, both in short-term mindset of this individual episode and also going further into the finale of the season and further story-arch, than a clusterfuck smash-brothers style romp in which no mains were killed (or even realistically threatened....I mean, did anyone seriously think anything would happen to Tyrion or Danny there?) 

It went from an emotionally devastating scene in which we watched an atrocious act take place that made us deeply question whether Stannis had ever been worth rooting for at all, or if any future act could even hope to redeem him after what he did,  to a CGI-fest of mask-wearing desert-newbs throwing pointy sticks at a dragon after time and time again convenient last-second happenings prevented anyone we actually cared about from being put in any serious danger.  Beyond suspending our disbelief to see Jorah barely escape dying about 30 times in a row in the pit to then all of the mains being gathered in a circle where they're clearly outnumbered two or three to one by a bigger Sons of the Harpy circle who conveniently attack one assassin at a time until a dragon saves the day.

And I say that not even truly hating the scene...it just felt all the more ridiculous after the Shireen bit.  Swap the order and the episode is better overall IMO.  

Edited June 8, 2015 by Mercalius

[Guest]

​Great post. My issue is that they are clearly going for shock value above all else. The grantland article you linked to earlier makes that same point. I think some of the book Nazi's are insane but I find it hard to argue with them on the subject of whether D&D actually understand the source material. The Cersei Rape scene was the first major red flag as that clearly isn't rape in the books. Another one is what Arya's attachment to her sword personifies.  I've accepted the fact the show and the books are not one in the same but it still bothers me when they take liberties with some of the more well known characters for no viable reason other than to film their gotcha moment.

​Right. I can see this. However, I don't see it as shock value for shock value's sake. I define shock value as an appeal that does something surprising outside of the narrative element. While these events have been really shocking, I don't think you can argue that the storytelling didn't adequately set them up. 

I have to say, I was initially very puzzled by some of these decisions, but more and more I'm respecting the questions the show is asking and answering and the sheer amount of pressure the show is putting on the genre. I think we when tell these escapist stories into realms of fantasy and heroism we have a certain set of expectations--that characters will be, for lack of a better term, safe. Bad things truly do happen in this series, and they happen to the characters we care about the most. That violence against women is a frequently theme defies the damsel in distress trope that is trotted out time and time again--in this case the innocents aren't always rescued. 

And the more I look at it, the more I see the layers being laid, the webs spun. Think about the red-herring death of Bran and Rickon, and the way that plays with Shireen. In comparing the Starks to Stannis you've got an almost nightmarish mirror image. On one side, a parent who has survived his child in the most horrible, unacceptable way because of a steadfast allegiance to his mission, on the other, the only real survivors are the youngest children--the innocents--who were all set on their paths because their father was sacrificed because of his steadfast allegiance to his own mission. These echoes really excite me. 

[Starkiller]

​Sounds like you didn't really get Stannis as GRRM defines him. I'm not a fan either but he's not evil. In fact the opposite is true. He's widely considered one of the protagonists which the show runners just threw out the window.

So Stannis didn't sacrifice anyone in the books? Human sacrifice is fine... just keep your daughter safe and we will love you...

Edited June 8, 2015 by Starkiller

[Guest]

My only problem with the scene was the sequencing.  I get ending the episode with Danny flying off on the dragon looked cool and is a picture-esque moment many fans had been wanting to see for awhile...but the sacrificing of Shireen,especially for people invested in the Stannis character, emotionally killed the rest of the episode.  It's one of the darkest things we've seen in the entire series, and jumping straight into a sunny gladiator/assassination gang-brawl climaxing with dragon ownage...it was just hard for me to personally care about.  

They should have flipped the order of those two scenes.  As a fan of Stannis, his decision to sacrifice his own daughter seems more important to me, both in short-term mindset of this individual episode and also going further into the finale of the season and further story-arch, than a clusterfuck smash-brothers style romp in which no mains were killed (or even realistically threatened....I mean, did anyone seriously think anything would happen to Tyrion or Danny there?) 

It went from an emotionally devastating scene in which we watched an atrocious act take place that made us deeply question whether Stannis had ever been worth rooting for at all, or if any future act could even hope to redeem him after what he did,  to a CGI-fest of mask-wearing desert-newbs throwing pointy sticks at a dragon after time and time again convenient last-second happenings prevented anyone we actually cared about from being put in any serious danger.  Beyond suspending our disbelief to see Jorah barely escape dying about 30 times in a row in the pit to then all of the mains being gathered in a circle where they're clearly outnumbered two or three to one by a bigger Sons of the Harpy circle who conveniently attack one assassin at a time until a dragon saves the day.

And I say that not even truly hating the scene...it just felt all the more ridiculous after the Shireen bit.  Swap the order and the episode is better overall IMO.  

​

Yeah, I think this would have been better. I see that Dany's bit is ultimately the climax and I get why they tried to use it last as a means of uplifting us from the shadows, but it's hard to argue the emotional impact wouldn't have been higher with a reversal. The idea that we would experience the highest of the high, the cathartic upswing, the literal escape into the sky only to be dragged down into the flames, probably would have been the best of both worlds. Then again, a lot hinges on the last episode. 

I wonder what it's like if you don't shuffle things around and include Dany's escape in the last episode of the season. That might have given us enough distance to get over Stannis-gate. 

[Jamalisms]

The lack of subtlety and nuance, the greying of character motivations, is one of the best aspects of the books. It's increasingly absent in the show and I can't decide whether our not that's a choice they've made or if it's a failing of storytelling on their end.

[Guest]

The lack of subtlety and nuance, the greying of character motivations, is one of the best aspects of the books. It's increasingly absent in the show and I can't decide whether our not that's a choice they've made or if it's a failing of storytelling on their end.

​

The lack of subtlety? (asking for clarification). 

Hard to speak to this without reading the books, however, I think the written word as a medium has both more space and time (and the privilege of spending luxurious amount of time in characters' minds) that other mediums don't have. 

 

Edited June 8, 2015 by Guest