Thyroid

Game of Thrones (TV show)

Recommended Posts

Copyright blocked outside the U.S.

You're all such good, obedient kids. I am so proud.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I loved being back in Westeros. It's very pleasant! But tell me, did anyone else feel that Carice van Houten (who plays the witch, Melisandre or something? Her name isn't mentioned) had a terrible Dutch accent? Maybe for non-Dutch people it's 'exotic', but for me it's just a person speaking English with a bad accent. Carica is usually delightful, but this was off-putting.

Maybe it's because she had to speak in more of an English accent as opposed to an American one? I severely noticed it too, but I'm doubtful if anyone who isn't familiar with Dutch would notice that it's a Dutch accent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So Games of Thrones pulled the ever crowd pleasing "hot rat bucket" trick last episode.

:campbell:

On the other hand, The Adventures of Tits and Lemonface (Sci-fi's "Lost Girl") is in no way worth watching.

Edited by Orvidos

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does anyone else think the supernatural elements in Game of Thrones are lame and unnecessary? I don't understand why they're in at all. The show is 98% completely awesome feudal warmongering and powerstruggles. Why shoehorn demons and zombies and shit into the remaining 2%? It makes no sense and is super lame every time it gets, literally, only a few seconds of screentime.

Could the answer really be as depressing as 'it's a fantasy epic, so there has to be magic in it'?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm just waiting for Geoffrey to grow another dimension. He's the flattest character on television and apparently only there to make the show difficult to watch.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Does anyone else think the supernatural elements in Game of Thrones are lame and unnecessary? I don't understand why they're in at all. The show is 98% completely awesome feudal warmongering and powerstruggles. Why shoehorn demons and zombies and shit into the remaining 2%? It makes no sense and is super lame every time it gets, literally, only a few seconds of screentime.

Could the answer really be as depressing as 'it's a fantasy epic, so there has to be magic in it'?

Well, obviously the actual answer is "because it's in the books". As for the question of why it's in the books... that's somewhat harder to figure out.

I think one of the basic concepts of the story is that this world used to be magical, with dragons and White Walkers and Children of the Forest and all that stuff, but it's been a very long time since any of that stuff was seen. Running parallel to that, the story also begins at the end of the longest summer the realm has ever seen, more than a decade long if I remember rightly. I think George Martin has, from a few different angles, tried to suggest that all of these squabbles between the mortals are all well and good, but they're really only making themselves more vulnerable as the genuine threats start to reveal themselves once more. The Wall and what's beyond it is really where any fantasy hero should be heading, to save the world and so forth, but they're all too wrapped up in their own power struggles.

However, while that's kind of a neat concept... I do sort of share your lack of enthusiasm for how it's been shown so far, both in the books and the TV series. For all that being reminded that all of this noble infighting isn't actually good for anyone in the long term is somewhat useful and interesting in itself, the supernatural aspects of the story still remain kind of an intrusion. I am curious whether it's all going to tie together beautifully at the end of the story, but so far it seems like both the readers and viewers of this tale are having to take it on faith that all of this will pay off.

Edit: Forgot I also wanted to briefly respond to this:

I'm just waiting for Geoffrey to grow another dimension. He's the flattest character on television and apparently only there to make the show difficult to watch.

Yeah, kinda. He's more of a plot device than a character, but every time I think along the lines you do I remember that Joffrey actually existed. Many times. History is full of people gaining too much privilege too early and going off the rails. It's also full of people who feel the only way to exercise their power is to hurt people with it. It's hard to argue that he's flat or unrealistic when he's possibly the most traditionally true of the archetypes. The mad king was a reality, over and over again. Eddard Stark is actually the character that is least believable in a historic context. You could even argue he's no more interesting, as well, since we see the heroic, selfless defender of the realm and upholder of honour character all the time. He is almost as locked in to his path as Joffrey is to his own - 100% Paragon and Renegade characters are never as interesting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, sure. But one-dimensional characters, realistic or not, do not make for very interesting viewing. I don't know if the books make a case for Eddard Stark not being completely stupid

in the way that he got himself killed

, but in the series he comes across as something of a dimwit and certainly not interesting.

Edited by brkl

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know about the TV series, but in the book(s) Joffrey's a fairly well-rounded character. Most are.

re:the magic: it's mostly going to be very low-key. You're going to get one of the "big" fantasy moments in season 2 (and rather soon, actually); but it'll never hit typical fantasy levels.

A lot of it is also very tied to character development. I like how magic is used in this series.

but so far it seems like both the readers and viewers of this tale are having to take it on faith that all of this will pay off.

It's already starting to. A Dance With Dragons spoiler:

What about Bran, Bloodraven, and greenseeing?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Oh, sure. But one-dimensional characters, realistic or not, do not make for very interesting viewing. I don't know if the books make a case for Eddard Stark not being completely stupid in

the way that he got himself killed

, but in the series he comes across as something of a dimwit and certainly not interesting.

We might want to keep that in spoilers still. I recognise most of the people on this forum have probably either read the first book or seen the first season but I really found that particular event quite surprising and engaging when I first read it. That alone probably tells me that he probably seemed smarter and more well rounded in the books. Though actually, if you remember, that event wasn't meant to happen as it did. Arrangements had been made. It was the interference of

Joffrey

that caused it to go the way it did.

A lot of it is also very tied to character development. I like how magic is used in this series.

It's already starting to. A Dance With Dragons spoiler:

What about Bran, Bloodraven, and greenseeing?

Yeah, I agree regarding character development.

Daenerys

has the

dragons

, which situation goes up and down rather as her own fortunes go up and down, which I really like. I think that in the case of

Bran

, however, the supernatural elements are still rather out of left field. They're still not really affecting any parts of the story that matter to anyone else. My hope is that

Daenerys and Bran

are both going through such a slow, somewhat unrelated buildup so that if the supernatural elements suddenly make a huge impact on the wider storyline they will feel like they have "earned" it.

Edit: Actually, now that I think about it this speaks to a wider issue I'm having with the later books. It feels much more like a bunch of independent adventures happening to the various characters recently. The first couple of books (and along with them, the TV show to date) have a very interconnected feel. With the exception of with Daenerys, the focus has been almost entirely in Westeros so far and the same characters have been interacting for the most part. The later books have been introducing a lot of secondary characters and locations and plotlines all over the place, many of which don't stick around all that long. In a lot of cases it feels like kind of a diversion. I'm sort of hoping that it is again just a prelude to really "earning" some good resolutions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's been shown before, so it's not out of left field as you might think. For example,

Jon sees Bran's face in a Weirwood tree in A Clash of Kings.

And they're already connected somewhat. You may want to re-read the

Melisandre

chapter from Dance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Eddard Stark is actually the character that is least believable in a historic context. You could even argue he's no more interesting, as well, since we see the heroic, selfless defender of the realm and upholder of honour character all the time. He is almost as locked in to his path as Joffrey is to his own - 100% Paragon and Renegade characters are never as interesting.

I will never understand this perception of Ned Stark. Based on the TV series, at least, he's a bureaucrat with a modicum of conscience ("let's perhaps not assassinate a teenage girl half a world away"). He openly doesn't care who would be a good king (such that that's possible at all), just that the proper rules about succession are followed--he didn't object to Joffrey until

he figured out the kid wasn't legitimate

.

--

I'm ambivalent about the fantasy elements. I like the sense that despite the world-weary cynicism there is more to the world than the pretenders recognize, but I wish less fewer of them were just tools for the powerful (

dragons, Melisandre's sorcery

). The Walkers are symbolically compelling in that sense, but I don't like that they're straightforwardly malevolent/in opposition to humans (though perhaps that's just how they're perceived currently and the series will end with human-zombie reconciliation).

At least last week we had a brief moment of reality intruding from the medic who points out to Robb the fundamentals of war and class privilege.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I will never understand this perception of Ned Stark. Based on the TV series, at least, he's a bureaucrat with a modicum of conscience ("let's perhaps not assassinate a teenage girl half a world away"). He openly doesn't care who would be a good king (such that that's possible at all), just that the proper rules about succession are followed--he didn't object to Joffrey until

he figured out the kid wasn't legitimate

.

That's a fair point. I also noted myself but didn't really factor it in to my analysis of his character that there are compromises being made by him, though they aren't necessarily for his own benefit. That said, though, I don't know if I'd paint him as a bureaucrat due to his being a stickler about the succession. I think that could be more aptly explained by loyalty to the former king, his best friend.

A character that I'd legitimately like to criticise in the TV show is Petyr Baelish. We mentioned it before regarding a composite picture of a scene between him and Cersei, but he continues to be weirdly heavy handed with his supposedly somewhat secret information. In the most recent episode he antagonises another Queen over another sexual impropriety. Either he is very focussed on Queens having traditional sex or he's just not as good at this subtlety game as he thinks he is.

Again I wonder if it was this way in the books, it's been so long since I read the first two that I can't remember well enough.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Baelish is quite the subtle, manipulative bastard in the books. I'm not liking some of the things you guys are saying. I'm not longer looking forward to the TV series as much as I was a day ago. Actually I just looked-up a scene between him and Cersei that was never in the books and he's so out-of-character - so hot-headed - I'm wondering what the writers are doing.

A lot of Ned's character was cut out of season one. Due to the backstory-lenient structure of the novels, which they can't adapt smoothly into a TV series, you get a lot more to him in print than you could on TV.

I really, really recommend reading the books. Season one was fine, but pales compared to the novel. Not least for all the little things they understandably couldn't work in.

Ah, I hope book six comes out soon. I'm going to re-read all five in anticipation of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm sure I've mentioned it before, but I tend to watch TV/cinema for the actors rather than the rest of it, and Kevin Sorbo, between Andromeda. Hercules and Beastmaster, he is right up there in my "List of guys I would have no objections playing ever male lead role ever"

Damn right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Does anyone else think the supernatural elements in Game of Thrones are lame and unnecessary? I don't understand why they're in at all. The show is 98% completely awesome feudal warmongering and powerstruggles. Why shoehorn demons and zombies and shit into the remaining 2%? It makes no sense and is super lame every time it gets, literally, only a few seconds of screentime.

Could the answer really be as depressing as 'it's a fantasy epic, so there has to be magic in it'?

Wasn't there somebody recently asking the same question but the other way around? Like why the hell set it in a fantasy world if you're NOT going to have supernatural elements?

I guess it's hard to please everybody.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah, I hope book six comes out soon. I'm going to re-read all five in anticipation of it.

Heh. It took him long enough for DoD. Reckon he'll kark it before that comes out.:tdown:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wasn't there somebody recently asking the same question but the other way around? Like why the hell set it in a fantasy world if you're NOT going to have supernatural elements?

I guess it's hard to please everybody.

That's the opposite point, though. They're saying that you should stick to genre conventions (or otherwise just find a genre your work is more comfortable in). I'm saying writers should be able to do whatever they wan't. I dislike that argument you mention though. I've heard it before, along the lines of 'why make what is essentially a discovery cruise in space? Just put it on a ship in the ocean.' That argument ignores the value of environmental and cultural context. Having a fantasy setting without magic is totally valid, for reasons of context and creation.

ElMuerte: in a weird irony, after my rant about Warehouse 13 being kind of lame, season 3 picked up and now I'm actually anticipating the fourth. Go figure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, I know it was the opposite, that's why I said "you can't please everybody". Some people were saying it made no sense not to have supernatural elements, you're saying they don't need them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So the new Game of Thrones episode, that was pretty intense! So many of these characters that I like on both sides. I don't want them to die, but a lot probably will.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So the new Game of Thrones episode, that was pretty intense! So many of these characters that I like on both sides. I don't want them to die, but a lot probably will.

You can always read the books and know what'll be happening seasons from now :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So the new Game of Thrones episode, that was pretty intense! So many of these characters that I like on both sides. I don't want them to die, but a lot probably will.

You have no idea how right you are.

Make a list of your five favorite characters. I can guarantee you, sight unseen, three of them will be dead.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Make a list of your five favorite characters. I can guarantee you, sight unseen, three of them will be dead.

Oh, god.. that makes me sad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I watched two episodes of Game of Thrones S2, and would have watched more (soo good) except i went to the cinema to see The Raid. It was bloody and brutal and awesome. I also got to see Whimsyshire in Diablo when i logged in for a half hour, so good day all round.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now