So, I've watched a pretty heavy amount of British television since about '94. I think (for an American) I have a pretty good ear for the accent. I'm also a big fan of the HBO series Game of Thrones (best show on tv), and I think that Peter Dinklage deserves all the acclaim he's getting. But what is it with his accent?!?!
It can't be just me, can it? I haven't seen anyone else comment online; but really. It just sounds so forced and awkward. He over enunciates words like he's stepping around a porcupine. It really sounds to me like a bad Broadway impression of a British accent.
Has anyone else noticed this? Am I going crazy? Am I just too focused on Dany (a possibility)?
Posted by Xavier (Member # 405) on :
It's a faithful Lannisport accent.
Posted by Foust (Member # 3043) on :
The English accent doesn't exist in that world. I find this an odd complaint.
Posted by Aros (Member # 4873) on :
Okay, wiseacres. Grumble, grumble, grumble.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
I've always thought it weird that Americans expect British or pseudo-British accents for roles like that.
Posted by Jake (Member # 206) on :
Yeah, it really is odd, isn't it? We associate British accents (and really, quite a broad range of British accents) with aristocracy in this country, though, which I suppose is probably related to the fact that Aristocracy is something that is viewed as non-American, and as a key element of the society we rebelled against. It alway strikes me, intellectually, as ludicrous that British accents are used in shows depicting Rome during either the republic or the empire, but I wonder if it would feel wrong to me if they went with an American or Italian or made-up-but-consistent-and-well-executed-Latin accents.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
Were you bothered by Kevin Costner's America accent in his Robin Hood movie? A lot of people were.
quote:I wonder if it would feel wrong to me if they went with an American or Italian or made-up-but-consistent-and-well-executed-Latin accents.
One of the main characters in the old scifi show Babylon 5 had a "non-human" accent. It was much mocked by fans and detractors alike.
Posted by Kama (Member # 3022) on :
quote:Originally posted by mr_porteiro_head: I've always thought it weird that Americans expect British or pseudo-British accents for roles like that.
Did it bother you that Charles Winchester in M.A.S.H had a British accent even though he was from Boston? It never bothered me, many Americans view a British accent as bringing as sort of credibility to aristocrat or intellectual figures.
But I could be weird, I grew up hearing British accents all over the place.
Edit: Of course GOT is loosely based on The War of The Roses so maybe British accents are an homage to it?
Posted by Jake (Member # 206) on :
quote:Originally posted by mr_porteiro_head: Were you bothered by Kevin Costner's America accent in his Robin Hood movie? A lot of people were.
Wow, it's been a long time since I thought of that movie. I remember disliking quite a bit about it, but my memories are pretty vague. Wasn't that one one where Costner kind of tried for a British accent in some scenes, but not in others?
quote:
quote:I wonder if it would feel wrong to me if they went with an American or Italian or made-up-but-consistent-and-well-executed-Latin accents.
One of the main characters in the old scifi show Babylon 5 had a "non-human" accent. It was much mocked by fans and detractors alike.
Are you talking about the Minbari accent Delenn sported? I spent about a season trying to decide whether Mira Furlan was a phenomenal actress who was successfully pulling off an alien with distinctly different body language and accent, or someone who couldn't act her way out of a paper bag. I lean toward thinking that she was an actress of average ability who attempted something really cool, and pulled it off as well as her talents would allow. I appreciated the effort, though (or what I perceived as the effort, anyway).
Posted by Jake (Member # 206) on :
quote:Originally posted by BlackBlade:
quote:Originally posted by mr_porteiro_head: I've always thought it weird that Americans expect British or pseudo-British accents for roles like that.
Did it bother you that Charles Winchester in M.A.S.H had a British accent even though he was from Boston? It never bothered me, many Americans view a British accent as bringing as sort of credibility to aristocrat or intellectual figures.
I always assumed that the accent was an affectation on Winchester's part.
Posted by Strider (Member # 1807) on :
Hey Kama! Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
quote:Did it bother you that Charles Winchester in M.A.S.H had a British accent even though he was from Boston?
Nope. I wasn't even aware of that. I'm terrible at identifying English (language) accents. I didn't realize there was any disconnect there.
quote:Wasn't that one one where Costner kind of tried for a British accent in some scenes, but not in others?
Kama's article would indicate so. I don't remember the accent at all, but I've seen people complain about the American accent.
quote:Are you talking about the Minbari accent Delenn sported?
No, I'm talking about Lando Molari. The actor has a normal American accent, but Lando had an outrageous accent. I thought it worked, and was less silly than his hair.
quote:I spent about a season trying to decide whether Mira Furlan was a phenomenal actress who was successfully pulling off an alien with distinctly different body language and accent, or someone who couldn't act her way out of a paper bag. I lean toward thinking that she was an actress of average ability who attempted something really cool, and pulled it off as well as her talents would allow. I appreciated the effort, though (or what I perceived as the effort, anyway).
For a long time I hoped that she would end up playing Sister Carlotta in the mythical Enders Game movie.
Posted by Jake (Member # 206) on :
quote:Originally posted by mr_porteiro_head:
quote:Are you talking about the Minbari accent Delenn sported?
No, I'm talking about Lando Molari. The actor has a normal American accent, but Lando had an outrageous accent. I thought it worked, and was less silly than his hair.
Ah, that. I initially thought that that was what you meant, but since you specified "non-human accent", and since Lando's accent strikes my ear as being distinctly Slavic, I thought that you must have meant Delenn (whose accent truly doesn't have an earth analog, that I'm aware of).
I thought that Lando's accent would have worked better if the other Centauri (some of them, at least) had had the same accent, or if reference had been made to him being from some province other than the one that all of the other Centauri on the show were from. In and of itself, though, I liked it.
quote:
quote:I spent about a season trying to decide whether Mira Furlan was a phenomenal actress who was successfully pulling off an alien with distinctly different body language and accent, or someone who couldn't act her way out of a paper bag. I lean toward thinking that she was an actress of average ability who attempted something really cool, and pulled it off as well as her talents would allow. I appreciated the effort, though (or what I perceived as the effort, anyway).
For a long time I hoped that she would end up playing Sister Carlotta in the mythical Enders Game movie.
I have no idea how she'd do in that role. I've never seen her in anything other than B5, that I'm aware of.
[ May 02, 2012, 01:53 PM: Message edited by: Jake ]
Posted by Jeorge (Member # 11524) on :
She was in Lost, wasn't she? And if I wasn't so lazy, I'd look up online to verify that she's actually Yugoslavian.
Okay, never mind, I looked it up. Yes, she's from Yugoslavia.
Posted by Xavier (Member # 405) on :
quote:It alway strikes me, intellectually, as ludicrous that British accents are used in shows depicting Rome during either the republic or the empire, but I wonder if it would feel wrong to me if they went with an American or Italian or made-up-but-consistent-and-well-executed-Latin accents.
One of the shows I watch is Borgias (set in Rome, about a family which started in Spain but moved to the Vatican). It has a crazy mix of accents within the cast, and within the Borgias family even. One of the sons is painfully British.
Posted by Sa'eed (Member # 12368) on :
I like British television as well, but what's ridiculous is the reflexive crutch on English accents to differentiate between the high born and lowborn in fantasy/historical series where it really isn't necessary. That's the problem, not that Peter Dinklage mangles it. The film "Amadeus," based on a British author's play, mixed various accents and the principal cast were played by and sounded like Americans, even Emperor Joseph II. Obviously this was done because the film's primary market at the time of release was the U.S, but it nonetheless worked out great and I wish producers/writers would've learned from it. Hell, they could sound like American even in dramas set in pre-Revolutionary War Britian. The accents we associate with that island only emerged after that time.
Posted by Jake (Member # 206) on :
See, that would drive me up a wall. I don't care a whole lot what accent is used as long as it's executed well and consistently by all of the people who would reasonably be assumed to possess the same accent.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
quote:Ah, that. I initially thought that that was what you meant, but since you specified "non-human accent", and since Lando's accent strikes my ear as being distinctly Slavic, I thought that you must have meant Delenn (whose accent truly doesn't have an earth analog, that I'm aware of).
The actor described it as a "non-human accent". But since I am so bad at accents, I can neither agree nor disagree with you claim that it is distinctly Slavic.
quote:I thought that Lando's accent would have worked better if the other Centauri (some of them, at least) had had the same accent, or if reference had been made to him being from some province other than the one that all of the other Centauri on the show were from. In and of itself, though, I liked it.
Agreed.
Posted by Kama (Member # 3022) on :
hey Strider Posted by Aros (Member # 4873) on :
quote:Originally posted by Sa'eed: I like British television as well, but what's ridiculous is the reflexive crutch on English accents to differentiate between the high born and lowborn in fantasy/historical series where it really isn't necessary. That's the problem, not that Peter Dinklage mangles it. The film "Amadeus," based on a British author's play, mixed various accents and the principal cast were played by and sounded like Americans, even Emperor Joseph II. Obviously this was done because the film's primary market at the time of release was the U.S, but it nonetheless worked out great and I wish producers/writers would've learned from it. Hell, they could sound like American even in dramas set in pre-Revolutionary War Britian. The accents we associate with that island only emerged after that time.
Really? I wouldn't say mangles, but it certainly pulls me out of the show sometimes.
You know what pulls me out of the show? The ludicrous number of contrived opportunities for sex scenes. Compared to that, the accents don't even rate.
Posted by Jake (Member # 206) on :
Yeah. The sex scenes in GoT feel really grafted on to me. If I were shooting the show I'd have had three at this point--the initial one that Bran sees in the first episode, one between Ned and Catelyn, also in the first episode (I think; maybe that would go into the second) and the one between Theon and the ship captain's daughter (in which I'd have had Theon be just as awful to her as he was in the book. Not having him be so really robs the scene of its narrative purpose. If I were going to clean Theon up and make him more sympathetic the way they are in the show I'd have probably skipped the scene entirely).
Posted by Bella Bee (Member # 7027) on :
Speaking of 'non-human accents' that's what Deanna Troi was supposed to have - the actress was trying to make her sound odd, because she thought a London accent on an alien would be silly (clearly not a fan of Doctor Who).
She kind of phased it out later, though.
But yeah, there's such a big accent range in the UK, and so many people who spent time in different places and have got a sort of mid-Atlantic or British-Australian/Caribbean mix, or whatever, most things are acceptable.
Posted by Xavier (Member # 405) on :
quote:Originally posted by Jake: Yeah. The sex scenes in GoT feel really grafted on to me. If I were shooting the show I'd have had three at this point--the initial one that Bran sees in the first episode, one between Ned and Catelyn, also in the first episode (I think; maybe that would go into the second) and the one between Theon and the ship captain's daughter (in which I'd have had Theon be just as awful to her as he was in the book. Not having him be so really robs the scene of its narrative purpose. If I were going to clean Theon up and make him more sympathetic the way they are in the show I'd have probably skipped the scene entirely).
What about Dany and Drogo? I can think of at least three sex scenes between them that were in the book that I'd prefer to be preserved. 1) The initial "No, No, No, Yes" one. 2) The one outside when she takes control. 3) The short one at the lake with her pregnant after eating the horse.
Posted by Jake (Member # 206) on :
Oh, right, Dany and Drogo. I agree with you that all three of those scenes are necessary as well.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
quote:Speaking of 'non-human accents' that's what Deanna Troi was supposed to have - the actress was trying to make her sound odd, because she thought a London accent on an alien would be silly (clearly not a fan of Doctor Who).
That was just Marina Cirtis eventually succeeding in mastering an American accent. (She's Greek.)
Posted by SteveRogers (Member # 7130) on :
I'm hoping the impending HBO series based on American Gods by Neil Gaiman can at least have the decency to get the accents of the various characters/entities correct.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
What is the correct accent for an American Odin?
Posted by Jake (Member # 206) on :
British?
Posted by Bella Bee (Member # 7027) on :
quote:That was just Marina Cirtis eventually succeeding in mastering an American accent. (She's Greek.)
Ya. No. Her family is originally Greek. She's British. The accent was bizarre.
Posted by Aros (Member # 4873) on :
quote:Originally posted by Jake: Oh, right, Dany and Drogo. I agree with you that all three of those scenes are necessary as well.
What about the one that conceived the smoke monster from Lost?
There have also been a few others that helped establish how terrible characters are, namely many of Littlefingers' and the ghastly Joffrey sex scene a couple episodes back. Not strictly necessary, but they did build character. It's not like they have 1000 pages to do it.
Posted by Dan_Frank (Member # 8488) on :
quote:Originally posted by Xavier:
quote:Originally posted by Jake: Yeah. The sex scenes in GoT feel really grafted on to me. If I were shooting the show I'd have had three at this point--the initial one that Bran sees in the first episode, one between Ned and Catelyn, also in the first episode (I think; maybe that would go into the second) and the one between Theon and the ship captain's daughter (in which I'd have had Theon be just as awful to her as he was in the book. Not having him be so really robs the scene of its narrative purpose. If I were going to clean Theon up and make him more sympathetic the way they are in the show I'd have probably skipped the scene entirely).
What about Dany and Drogo? I can think of at least three sex scenes between them that were in the book that I'd prefer to be preserved. 1) The initial "No, No, No, Yes" one. 2) The one outside when she takes control. 3) The short one at the lake with her pregnant after eating the horse.
Yeah. The best part is that they not only add unnecessary sex scenes, but they also change and ruin the sex scenes that are actually in the books ("no, no, no, yes" becomes "cry, cry, cry") Nice twist there, HBO!
Sort of the way they ramp up the gore and violence on some scenes (Hey there, Jory and Yoren's death scenes, respectively!) and simultaneously grossly underplay the things that really were horrifically gruesome in the books (Robert's mortal wound, Sandor's face). Good job on those priorities, HBO!
I saw the episode with Joffrey and the whores the other night, and all I could think was "It's a good thing this season is so long that they have time to include all the important scenes and characters from the books and have enough time left over to make up crap like this! Wait a minute..."
It's frustrating that the writers of the show so clearly, deeply misunderstand the books, and completely distort the characters therein. Damn.
On topic, Peter Dinklage's Tyrion is, I think, the best thing to come out of this show. He's certainly the only character from the show who occasionally pops into my head-canon when rereading the books. I hear him reading dialogue from the later books, that Dinklage has never actually spoken, and I don't mind his accent at all. Posted by Jake (Member # 206) on :
quote:Originally posted by Aros:
quote:Originally posted by Jake: Oh, right, Dany and Drogo. I agree with you that all three of those scenes are necessary as well.
What about the one that conceived the smoke monster from Lost?
There have also been a few others that helped establish how terrible characters are, namely many of Littlefingers' and the ghastly Joffrey sex scene a couple episodes back. Not strictly necessary, but they did build character. It's not like they have 1000 pages to do it.
While I did like the metaphor of their having sex knocking pieces off the board, I'd probably have skipped it. The whole setup for that scene irritates me, really; they changed Stannis' character pretty fundamentally.
The sex scenes that Littlefinger have been in have all felt like tiresome ways of inserting sex into the show to me, and the one with Joffrey didn't seem necessary. It would be more than clear enough that he's a monster without having that scene there.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
quote:I'm hoping the impending HBO series based on American Gods by Neil Gaiman can at least have the decency to get the accents of the various characters/entities correct.
The more important question: just how much sex will Shadow have?
Posted by Jake (Member # 206) on :
quote:Originally posted by Dan_Frank: On topic, Peter Dinklage's Tyrion is, I think, the best thing to come out of this show. He's certainly the only character from the show who occasionally pops into my head-canon when rereading the books. I hear him reading dialogue from the later books, that Dinklage has never actually spoken, and I don't mind his accent at all. [/QB]
Dinklage is definitely doing a good job with the role. I'm incredibly impressed with the girl playing Arya, too. She looks almost exactly how I pictured Arya looking when I first read the books, and is doing a good job with the character.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
quote:Originally posted by Bella Bee:
quote:That was just Marina Cirtis eventually succeeding in mastering an American accent. (She's Greek.)
Ya. No. Her family is originally Greek. She's British. The accent was bizarre.
Nevertheless, her initial accent wasn't an affectation. Her lack of one later on was.
Posted by Bella Bee (Member # 7027) on :
Not going to get into this since I don't actually care, but the actress' real accent is full on London normally (don't remember which bit of London), and that weird accent was nothing like any London accent at all.
I just thought it was funny since so many sci-fi and fantasy actors have to put on a fake British accent of some variety, and this was someone covering one up.
And there's no such thing as the 'lack of an accent', though I get what you mean.
Posted by Xavier (Member # 405) on :
quote:Dinklage is definitely doing a good job with the role. I'm incredibly impressed with the girl playing Arya, too. She looks almost exactly how I pictured Arya looking when I first read the books, and is doing a good job with the character.
Yeah I keep telling Niki that Arya is the only "perfect score" for me. She says for her Dinklage as Tyrion is perfect, but I'd rate him "very very good" or "excellent".
Posted by SteveRogers (Member # 7130) on :
quote:Originally posted by TomDavidson:
quote:I'm hoping the impending HBO series based on American Gods by Neil Gaiman can at least have the decency to get the accents of the various characters/entities correct.
The more important question: just how much sex will Shadow have?
I'm hoping the amount of language and violence in the novel will counteract any additional sex scenes which might be added. In addition, I believe Neil Gaiman is, if nothing else, writing the pilot, so I'm hoping the show will be free of the HBO sex factor for the most part.
As for the accents, I recall some of the other characters being described as having very specific European accents, so I'm really hoping they just don't Americanize all of the characters.
Posted by Jake (Member # 206) on :
quote:Originally posted by Xavier:
quote:Dinklage is definitely doing a good job with the role. I'm incredibly impressed with the girl playing Arya, too. She looks almost exactly how I pictured Arya looking when I first read the books, and is doing a good job with the character.
Yeah I keep telling Niki that Arya is the only "perfect score" for me. She says for her Dinklage as Tyrion is perfect, but I'd rate him "very very good" or "excellent".
: nod : I'm definitely with you there rather than Niki.
Posted by Jake (Member # 206) on :
quote:Originally posted by SteveRogers: In addition, I believe Neil Gaiman is, if nothing else, writing the pilot, so I'm hoping the show will be free of the HBO sex factor for the most part.
I'm kind of curious to see how he handles the scene with Bilquis in the first chapter.
[Edit - huh. I could have sworn that that took place in the second chapter]
Posted by Aros (Member # 4873) on :
Eh, I don't get what all the concern over the sex and violence is. I think they're doing a great job. It's a freaking adult show.
Way better than the books. And almost perfectly cast (Jon Snow is a little meh).
Posted by Bella Bee (Member # 7027) on :
quote: I'm hoping the amount of language and violence in the novel will counteract any additional sex scenes which might be added. In addition, I believe Neil Gaiman is, if nothing else, writing the pilot, so I'm hoping the show will be free of the HBO sex factor for the most part.
I just hope that the scene in which that one goddess consumes that guy's entire body with her bajingo like a venus fly trap is not shown in graphic detail. The description in the book was terrifying enough, it freaked me out and I'm a woman - I dread to think what it could do to a rather sexually nervous man.
Posted by SteveRogers (Member # 7130) on :
There are some things in the book which could conceivably stretch the limits of television appropriate even provided the show's broadcast on HBO, so I'm not sure. Neil Gaiman has a fairly successful past writing scripts/screenplays, so I'm just hoping he has a deft enough hand to adapt his own work.
Posted by SteveRogers (Member # 7130) on :
quote:Originally posted by Aros: Eh, I don't get what all the concern over the sex and violence is. I think they're doing a great job. It's a freaking adult show.
If I'm gathering correctly based on what I've read about the show here and elsewhere, the primary issue with the sexual content is the way in which it may detract from the content in the original novels purely because it's on HBO; by which I mean, they can show such things without regard for whether it's true to the source.
Posted by Aros (Member # 4873) on :
A show can't detract from a novel. That's just silly. It exists as a work of art unto itself. That said, it has to pursue other avenues of characterization (as opposed to the LENGTHY exposition in these particular books). That it chooses to do so through sex and violence is merely a bonus.
Posted by SteveRogers (Member # 7130) on :
I wasn't trying to take a position on either side of the fence because I've neither read the books nor watched the show; I was just attempting to take a stab at what I imagine most people's issues with the sexual content to be. I'd guess they think it takes away from the merit of the series as an adaptation of the other work; I know I personally have a hard time looking at an adaptation individually of the source material, so I can see how that might be a concern, provided that's the meat of the complaint being made.
Posted by Dan_Frank (Member # 8488) on :
The girl playing Arya, physically, isn't nearly horse-faced enough. And her acting has been improving but first season was pretty unimpressive.
Aros: The mind boggles. You are so totally, fundamentally wrong I have no idea where to begin! Anything in particular that stands out to you as substantially better in the show? Of the top of my head I think the HBO writers have done their damnedest to distort the portrayals of a host of characters... Sandor, Tyrion, Petyr, Dany, Drogo, Jon, Robb, Renly, Loras, Varys, Cersei...
Many of these distortions could be argued to be necessary for the new medium... one or two of them really are, and the rest would be argued wrongly. And just for fun, a couple of them have no such justification at all, and were done apparently just Peter Jackson style, for the giggles of changing a masterpiece.
Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
quote:Originally posted by Xavier:
quote:It alway strikes me, intellectually, as ludicrous that British accents are used in shows depicting Rome during either the republic or the empire, but I wonder if it would feel wrong to me if they went with an American or Italian or made-up-but-consistent-and-well-executed-Latin accents.
One of the shows I watch is Borgias (set in Rome, about a family which started in Spain but moved to the Vatican). It has a crazy mix of accents within the cast, and within the Borgias family even. One of the sons is painfully British.
I've met the director and some of the production people and cast, because they shoot it here. The director is quite clear on the point that he finds consistency in accents to be, a) asinine and anti-historical, b) narratively problematic and c) pretentious. And as a matter of pure practicality, since many supporting roles are cast in Czech Republic, insisting on some version of the queens English would be expensive and probably pointless. His attitude, which I took from a talk he gave at the American center a while back, was that Rome is, and was, a place where accents and languages were fluid, and casting classical British actors (a la Rome) rather smoothes over that part of the ambiance.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
quote:If I'm gathering correctly based on what I've read about the show here and elsewhere, the primary issue with the sexual content is the way in which it may detract from the content in the original novels purely because it's on HBO; by which I mean, they can show such things without regard for whether it's true to the source.
I've heard lots of complaints not that it's not just true to the source, but that it actively detracts from the storytelling.
Posted by Aros (Member # 4873) on :
quote:Originally posted by Dan_Frank: Aros: The mind boggles. You are so totally, fundamentally wrong I have no idea where to begin! Anything in particular that stands out to you as substantially better in the show? Of the top of my head I think the HBO writers have done their damnedest to distort the portrayals of a host of characters... Sandor, Tyrion, Petyr, Dany, Drogo, Jon, Robb, Renly, Loras, Varys, Cersei...
Many of these distortions could be argued to be necessary for the new medium... one or two of them really are, and the rest would be argued wrongly. And just for fun, a couple of them have no such justification at all, and were done apparently just Peter Jackson style, for the giggles of changing a masterpiece.
I'm fundamentally wrong on my opinion? No . . . I think I understand my opinion better than you.
And though some that might agree with me may also believe your contention (that the books are a "masterpiece"), I certainly don't. I won't debase them by speaking my opinion too loudly. But to say that they "meander" and are "self-important" might prove an understatement.
The show is fast paced, well made, and full of intrigue. I don't care if they've radically destroyed the characters from the books -- the ones on television are some of the strongest currently on air. Very much akin to either True Blood or The Walking Dead -- the series is different and great on its own merits. I'd say that all three are superior in many respects to their source material.
Do you want a more faithful adaption? Put up the billion dollars that it would take for a 70+ episode series. No one would watch it.
Posted by SteveRogers (Member # 7130) on :
quote:Originally posted by mr_porteiro_head:
quote:If I'm gathering correctly based on what I've read about the show here and elsewhere, the primary issue with the sexual content is the way in which it may detract from the content in the original novels purely because it's on HBO; by which I mean, they can show such things without regard for whether it's true to the source.
I've heard lots of complaints not that it's not just true to the source, but that it actively detracts from the storytelling.
I've even heard similar complaints directed at the show True Blood in relation to the novels upon which it is based. And my understanding is that those novels already include quite a bit of sexual content to begin with.
quote: The show is fast paced, well made, and full of intrigue. I don't care if they've radically destroyed the characters from the books -- the ones on television are some of the strongest currently on air. Very much akin to either True Blood or The Walking Dead -- the series is different and great on its own merits. I'd say that all three are superior in many respects to their source material.
As someone whose familiarity with The Walking Dead is limited only to the show, I must state my opinion that I feel the program works incredibly well as a stand-alone work. At no point have I felt I needed the comics to further explain something which occurs in the show. The program is compelling enough on its own two feet.
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
quote:Do you want a more faithful adaption? Put up the billion dollars that it would take for a 70+ episode series. No one would watch it.
Game of Thrones as a mega-miniseries?
Sign me up.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
quote:I've even heard similar complaints directed at the show True Blood in relation to the novels upon which it is based.
Um, the complaint that I mentioned (not one that I've made -- I don't watch the show) has nothing to do with the show's relation to the original.
Posted by SteveRogers (Member # 7130) on :
I didn't mean to imply that it was.
Edit:
Some would suggest Game of Thrones has sacrificed some story and characterization for excessive sexual content; some similar complaints have been made against the show True Blood because the sexual content which served more of a purpose in the original novels has been increased and has made the show even more of a soap opera.
I was making an admittedly poorly explained logical leap from one to the other.
I can see, though, how my wording could be read in that way, so I apologize for my poor wording. Posted by Dan_Frank (Member # 8488) on :
quote:Originally posted by Aros:
quote:Originally posted by Dan_Frank: Aros: The mind boggles. You are so totally, fundamentally wrong I have no idea where to begin! Anything in particular that stands out to you as substantially better in the show? Of the top of my head I think the HBO writers have done their damnedest to distort the portrayals of a host of characters... Sandor, Tyrion, Petyr, Dany, Drogo, Jon, Robb, Renly, Loras, Varys, Cersei...
Many of these distortions could be argued to be necessary for the new medium... one or two of them really are, and the rest would be argued wrongly. And just for fun, a couple of them have no such justification at all, and were done apparently just Peter Jackson style, for the giggles of changing a masterpiece.
I'm fundamentally wrong on my opinion? No . . . I think I understand my opinion better than you.
You aren't wrong on your opinion. Your opinion is wrong.
Yes yes yes, art is subjective it's all just opinions nobody's really right so there's no point in arguing blah blah blah. If you feel the need to stress subjectivity, mentally add "in my opinion" after the "you are wrong" above, and after everything else I say. It doesn't change anything. You'll still be wrong.
quote:Originally posted by Aros: And though some that might agree with me may also believe your contention (that the books are a "masterpiece"), I certainly don't. I won't debase them by speaking my opinion too loudly. But to say that they "meander" and are "self-important" might prove an understatement.
You're wrong about that, too, but that's a different argument for another day.
quote:Originally posted by Aros: The show is fast paced, well made, and full of intrigue. I don't care if they've radically destroyed the characters from the books -- the ones on television are some of the strongest currently on air.
Yeah, even butchered as it is, it's certainly still good by the standard of other shows. That's not really my point, and it's mostly a comment on the quality of other shows.
You didn't answer my question, though. What are some examples of changes that you like?
The only specific positive statements you've made about the show are that it is "fast paced, well made, and full of intrigue."
Well, I'll grant you fast paced. They rush through the content in the books at a lightning pace. I've never really understood complains that the books are slow-paced, though. Plenty happens in every chapter. It usually seems like those complaints just stem from people not getting to see the things they want to happen as soon as they want to see them.
Well-made... that's pretty vague. It certainly has a good budget. Not sure how to measure this against a book anyway.
And intrigue. Yeah, the show sure is full of "intrigue." Nevermind that it's intrigue stripped of subtext, where everyone spells everything out to everyone else in as painfully obvious a way as possible. Where they go well out of their way to show us who's bad and who's not as quickly as possible, to leave as little room for nuance they can.
I'm having a hard time with this one, man. How exactly does the show do intrigue better than the book?
And if that's not what you were saying, then what were you saying? You said the show is way better, so... how?
quote:Originally posted by Aros: Do you want a more faithful adaption? Put up the billion dollars that it would take for a 70+ episode series. No one would watch it.
70 episodes? This isn't about cutting content. I'm content with them cutting content. Heh.
This is about changing content, more than anything.
Edit: Although I'm with Sam, if they did do a version where they cut as little content as possible, I'd be on that like X trait on Y noun stereotypically bearing X trait.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
quote:I've even heard similar complaints directed at the show True Blood in relation to the novels upon which it is based.
I don't understand how a similar complaint (which has nothing at all to do with it being an adaptation) can be directed at a show in relation to the original.
Posted by SteveRogers (Member # 7130) on :
Please see my edit above. Posted by Aros (Member # 4873) on :
<Facepalm> Dude . . . I could care less what they change or what they don't. I'm not obsessive enough about it to even notice what they changed. I read the books two years ago . . . how the heck am I supposed to remember all of this supposed subtext.
Posted by Dan_Frank (Member # 8488) on :
So your statement boils down to:
"I don't remember the books at all, except that I remember I didn't like them. I like the show a lot."
Is that accurate?
Posted by SteveRogers (Member # 7130) on :
quote:Originally posted by mr_porteiro_head:
quote:I've even heard similar complaints directed at the show True Blood in relation to the novels upon which it is based.
I don't understand how a similar complaint (which has nothing at all to do with it being an adaptation) can be directed at a show in relation to the original.
Well, I suppose I just misunderstood your original post.
Sorry.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
Not a problem. I saw your edit, and I see what you were saying.
Posted by SteveRogers (Member # 7130) on :
My intention wasn't to put words in your mouth or anything of the like. I was just expanding upon your original comment. Posted by Jon Boy (Member # 4284) on :
quote:Originally posted by Jake: Ah, that. I initially thought that that was what you meant, but since you specified "non-human accent", and since Lando's accent strikes my ear as being distinctly Slavic, I thought that you must have meant Delenn (whose accent truly doesn't have an earth analog, that I'm aware of).
The ironic thing is that, as others have noted, the actress who played Delenn is actually Slavic and used her natural accent, while the actor who played Londo is American and used an invented one.
Of course, I have to admit that I don't know what Croatian sounds like. It probably sounds considerably different from, say, Russian, which is probably what most people think of when they think of Slavic.
Posted by Dogbreath (Member # 11879) on :
The show really requires you divorce it from the books to enjoy it. For the first half of the first season, I was constantly comparing it to my experience with the books (which I was so deeply enthralled with that I walked around in a daze for the first week or so after reading GoT), and was deeply disappointed. After that, I simply tried my hardest to forget my memory of the books and watch it as if it was an original production, and I found I actually really enjoyed the show, especially the second time around. *shrugs*
I do agree that the gratuitous sex scenes are annoying though - I don't mind the ones that progress the story, but a lot the time the story stops cold to make room for for the sex scenes. And so far, they've been really terrible. If I just wanted to watch people having sex, there's a lot of great porn that does a much better job.
Posted by SteveRogers (Member # 7130) on :
On that note, I watched a few episodes of the television program based on Jim Butcher's The Dresden Files, and it was totally awful. So, I had to totally obliterate any specific memory of the series to protect my emotional investment in the book series. So, that street can go both ways.
Posted by Carrie (Member # 394) on :
A change I like: Tywin Lannister sitting at Harrenhal. Sure, the castle was in flux, but at this point in the books, the Brave Companions were pretty much running the joint, but Tywin (and no leeching...) works. (For me.) (In my opinion.)
I generally watch each episode twice: once to get all of the annoying 'What the...' moments out and once with a group of friends. Many of these friends have read the books, though some have not; all, however, have played the board game. We sometimes have to pause to think whether certain scenes were in the book or whether certain characters really would keep talking in a conversation with the Queen Regent when he clearly had the advantage without actually saying what he was quite clearly implying... Um. Right.
I'm not convinced the writers have "radically destroyed" or "distorted" most of the characters. The characters are certainly more transparent than when we're inside their heads on the written page, and sure, some scenes read very, very differently on the page than on screen. With ten-episode seasons, though, perhaps the writers found that skipping subtext allowed the plot to actually move. I don't know. I wasn't in the writers' room. For me, the essentials of each character are there - and the ones who seem different suffer from being developed at all at this point in the series. Of Dan's list of changed characterizations ("Sandor, Tyrion, Petyr, Dany, Drogo, Jon, Robb, Renly, Loras, Varys, Cersei"), several hadn't even been developed beyond a couple lines in the books. For two examples, Loras doesn't get interesting - or, quite frankly, relevant - until he gets to King's Landing, and it's only when Joffrey starts having Sansa beaten that Sandor becomes a human character instead of a random sword-wielding hound. Indeed, I contend that one of the most changed characters doesn't even fall on Dan's list (though Jake did mention it): Stannis, and it comes down to one scene. There was always an implied sexual relationship between Stannis and Melisandre, but a) I didn't need to see it on the map table, of all things, and b) it was never about bearing sons, because Stannis already had a child. And a fool.
This brings me to the sex, to which I say, "Meh." It's Game of Thrones and HBO. Neither entity on its own is exactly a paragon of sexual virtue, and combining the two provided exactly what I expected: boobs and violence against people who have them. They're tiresome, but honestly - I'd rather they be included than a bunch of minor characters be woefully underintroduced for the minute and a half (tops) it takes to get through one such scene. I'm also quite glad there's consistency with the hookers; it's difficult to keep all the ladies straight in the books.
Anyhow, divorcing the show from the books seems to be how most fans handle the differences. It's still a quite good show; as an adaptation, it's among my favorites. And it's certainly not one that angers me (I have issues with "The Walking Dead", mostly because of Shane [and essentially every woman on the show]; the only movie that truly and legitimately angers me is "Troy").
Posted by Dan_Frank (Member # 8488) on :
quote:Originally posted by Carrie: A change I like: Tywin Lannister sitting at Harrenhal. Sure, the castle was in flux, but at this point in the books, the Brave Companions were pretty much running the joint, but Tywin (and no leeching...) works. (For me.) (In my opinion.)
Tywin was at Harrenhal. The change is that when Arya's time intersected with his she was still working with Weese, and didn't become cupbearer till she and Jaquen displaced Lorch and the other Lannister men Tywin leaves behind. Then Bolton arrives, and she becomes cupbearer. So this isn't a change so much as a time squashing. (Disclaimer: haven't actually seen this episode yet, I'm I think 2 behind schedule)
quote:Originally posted by Carrie: I'm not convinced the writers have "radically destroyed" or "distorted" most of the characters. The characters are certainly more transparent than when we're inside their heads on the written page, and sure, some scenes read very, very differently on the page than on screen. With ten-episode seasons, though, perhaps the writers found that skipping subtext allowed the plot to actually move. I don't know. I wasn't in the writers' room. For me, the essentials of each character are there - and the ones who seem different suffer from being developed at all at this point in the series. Of Dan's list of changed characterizations ("Sandor, Tyrion, Petyr, Dany, Drogo, Jon, Robb, Renly, Loras, Varys, Cersei"), several hadn't even been developed beyond a couple lines in the books. For two examples, Loras doesn't get interesting - or, quite frankly, relevant - until he gets to King's Landing, and it's only when Joffrey starts having Sansa beaten that Sandor becomes a human character instead of a random sword-wielding hound. Indeed, I contend that one of the most changed characters doesn't even fall on Dan's list (though Jake did mention it): Stannis, and it comes down to one scene. There was always an implied sexual relationship between Stannis and Melisandre, but a) I didn't need to see it on the map table, of all things, and b) it was never about bearing sons, because Stannis already had a child. And a fool.
I agree that I left out Stannis and Selyse. Really, I left out more than them, too, I just let my list fade because I felt I'd made my point
To some of your other comments though... yeah, I disagree. On the Hound, he absolutely had characterization in the first book.
One of his best scenes wasn't even cut from the show, they just inexplicably gave all of his lines to Petyr. So instead of having a tense one-on-one moment with Sansa where he tells her how he got his scar, Petyr tells Sansa (and Jeyne & their Septa)... about an event that only Sandor & Gregor were present for. So not only is Sandor robbed of a great scene, but the change makes no damn sense at all.
Similarly, they've glossed over plenty more in the first few episodes. It's not that surprising; most of Sandor's best stuff in early Clash is very subtle, and the show doesn't do subtle. Ever, as far as I can tell.
To some of my other characters...
Loras is unbelievably whiny in the show, so yeah, he hadn't been developed much in the books by this point, but the development the show has done has been... bizarre, and incongruous with his character as it appears later.
Renly has been turned into a wimp and a courtier. I guess to play up the gay angle and hit those stereotypes? I dunno, but he's also totally distorted.
Petyr hasn't changed so much, but his portrayal has. He wasn't nearly so overtly pure evil this early. His motives were unclear, and he seemed mostly seemed more opportunistic than Machiavellian until late in Storm.
On the flip side, at this point in the books Cersei was less sympathetic than the show seems to be trying to make her.
Robb spent the beginning of the last episode I saw justifying his war in a nonsensical scene with a random battlefield healer. I don't even know what to say about that scene, or what it says about the show's version of Robb.
Drogo was made less sympathetic, what with his blatantly raping Dany at their wedding instead of the much more interesting "no, no, no, yes" scene.
And similarly, Dany had a lot less growth in the first season, for similar reasons.
I'm not sure I will ever really forgive the writers for ruining the scene where Jon finds Ghost. Having Theon dismissively "assign" Ghost to Jon because it was the runt completely robbed Jon of one of his best moments in the first book, when he takes active responsibility for Ghost and basically tells Theon to go screw himself. The scene was inverted, for no good reason that I can see.
Most of these are relatively trivial, though. Sandor's crappy treatment hurts the most of them, him being one of my favorite characters.
But even worse is Tyrion. In a move that really solidly illustrates the fact that the writers fundamentally don't know what they're doing, they horrifically distorted Tyrion in a recent episode.
When did they do this? When they got rid of Jacelyn Bywater and folded his role into Bronn. At first glance this seems okay... Bywater had few lines and wasn't a major character.
The problem is, it profoundly changes the events.
In the book, Tyrion removes from office a corrupt, evil toady in Joffrey's (or Cersei's or maybe Petyr's) pocket and replaces him with a hard-nosed, basically honorable man. This is him living up to his promise to "do justice."
Then, when Bronn delivers his line "Without question? No. I'd ask how much." it serves to illustrate that though Tyrion is fundamentally a better person than most of his family, he still recognizes (as his father does) that sometimes you need an evil dog to do your dirty work.
In the show, he removes from office a corrupt, evil toady in Joffrey's pocket and replaces him with... a corrupt, evil toady in Tyrion's pocket. Bronn's amusing line now serves to underscore in no uncertain terms that Tyrion is just as bad as the other people at court.
It's a seemingly trivial change... remove a minor character... that, if you pay attention, has huge implications for his character. It's a massive, massive distortion of his character.
Frankly, I expect more of these. The writers fiddle with the story with impunity, and I don't think they have a very good idea of the consequences of that fiddling.
quote:Originally posted by Carrie: They're tiresome, but honestly - I'd rather they be included than a bunch of minor characters be woefully underintroduced for the minute and a half (tops) it takes to get through one such scene. I'm also quite glad there's consistency with the hookers; it's difficult to keep all the ladies straight in the books.
Huh. Really? I always hear people complain that the books have too many characters to keep straight, but I've never really experienced that.
Posted by Aris Katsaris (Member # 4596) on :
quote:"Then, when Bronn delivers his line "Without question? No. I'd ask how much." it serves to illustrate that though Tyrion is fundamentally a better person than most of his family, he still recognizes (as his father does) that sometimes you need an evil dog to do your dirty work."
I think you're imagining stuff, treating everything in the books in the most charitable way possible, and treating everything in the series in the least charitable way possible.
Tyrion's look in the series after the scene where he asks Bronn, very clearly shows that it's not the attitude that he'd have *wished* of someone in his employ. That alone distinguishes him from people like Joffrey.
Tyrion in the books on the other hand uses Bronn to murder a musician (who was just doing some relatively innocent -for the standards of the world- blackmailing) and makes his body into soup.
Drogo was indeed made to *seem* less sympathetic in the series. In the books he doesn't rape Dany, but he still leads his horde to rape all those other women, and he still vouches to rape all those women of Westeros.
So, yeah, he's more sympathetic in the books in that he isn't raping the *protagonist*, he's just raping everyone *else* -- that's the sort of thing that is a moral deficiency of the books themselves, as they make a character look nicer just because he's being nice to a POV character, as opposed to all those other insignificant NPCs he's butchering and raping -- yay how sympathetic...
Renly and Sandor are worse in the series, but Loras is better. You mention Loras' whining in the series, but that's all I remember of Loras in the books: Loras whining that he wasn't allowed to chase after the Mountain and Loras whining about wanting to kill Brienne of Tarth -- in the series we instead see Loras conspiring to make Renly a king, and we also see him be intelligent enough to *figure out*, even in his grief, that it must have been Stannis, not Brienne that did it.
In short: Some characters are better in the books, but some characters are better in the series.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
Bella -- it turns out that you were right about Marina Cirtis. I was wrong.
It feels good to be right again. Posted by Dan_Frank (Member # 8488) on :
quote:Originally posted by Aris Katsaris:
quote:"Then, when Bronn delivers his line "Without question? No. I'd ask how much." it serves to illustrate that though Tyrion is fundamentally a better person than most of his family, he still recognizes (as his father does) that sometimes you need an evil dog to do your dirty work."
I think you're imagining stuff, treating everything in the books in the most charitable way possible, and treating everything in the series in the least charitable way possible.
Tyrion's look in the series after the scene where he asks Bronn, very clearly shows that it's not the attitude that he'd have *wished* of someone in his employ. That alone distinguishes him from people like Joffrey.
Tyrion in the books on the other hand uses Bronn to murder a musician (who was just doing some relatively innocent -for the standards of the world- blackmailing) and makes his body into soup.
The distinction being that Tyrion frequently makes immoral choices on a micro level, but does his best to make the right choices on a macro level, to create a better city/realm for the masses.
I actually think this is sort of the opposite of what you're implying... it makes him a deeply flawed person who we clearly see murder people and commit heinous acts. But we also see, on a broad scale, the good decisions he makes and the ways he tries to rein in Joffrey's worse abuses.
Except in the series, where he doesn't.
quote:Originally posted by Aris Katsaris: Drogo was indeed made to *seem* less sympathetic in the series. In the books he doesn't rape Dany, but he still leads his horde to rape all those other women, and he still vouches to rape all those women of Westeros.
So, yeah, he's more sympathetic in the books in that he isn't raping the *protagonist*, he's just raping everyone *else* -- that's the sort of thing that is a moral deficiency of the books themselves, as they make a character look nicer just because he's being nice to a POV character, as opposed to all those other insignificant NPCs he's butchering and raping -- yay how sympathetic...
Heh, okay, I'll give you Drogo. He was pretty bad. I mostly cared about that scene being lost because of the implications for Dany, not Drogo.
quote:Originally posted by Aris Katsaris: Renly and Sandor are worse in the series, but Loras is better. You mention Loras' whining in the series, but that's all I remember of Loras in the books: Loras whining that he wasn't allowed to chase after the Mountain and Loras whining about wanting to kill Brienne of Tarth -- in the series we instead see Loras conspiring to make Renly a king, and we also see him be intelligent enough to *figure out*, even in his grief, that it must have been Stannis, not Brienne that did it.
In short: Some characters are better in the books, but some characters are better in the series.
I haven't seen the episode where Renly dies (I saw the first 20 minutes of an episode that might be that one; the one with the very superfluous and unnecessary Joffrey/Whores scene. I turned it off after that.)
Loras has seemed constantly irritated and whiny in demeanor so far, though. Loras in the books was privately a bit whiny, I suppose, but also pretty good at the whole gallant chivalry shtick, which he doesn't do at all on the show.
I'm curious, aside from Loras, who else do you think is actually better in the show?
Edited to fix a typo. Thanks Aris, for preemptively fixing it in your quote. That was rad of you.
[ May 03, 2012, 02:56 PM: Message edited by: Dan_Frank ]
Posted by Blayne Bradley (Member # 8565) on :
I personally feel they should rename the show "Tyrion is Awesome The Show".
Posted by Aris Katsaris (Member # 4596) on :
quote:I'm curious, aside from Loras, who else do you think is actually better in the show?
Catelyn is slightly better - though all her tactical decisions are still horrid, as in the books, she atleast gets right the big strategic one that could have averted it all (Don't Go South). That's a plus.
Osha is also better I think; she was very forgettable in the books, to me atleast, but all her attitude in the series and light jabbing (mocking towards Theon, affectionate towards Bran) has made her a good character in the series.
Joffrey is slightly better too -- he was just a sadist kid in the books, and of course he largely still is, but the series has added elements where he moves and thinks independently of his mother (e.g. the baby-massacre has been assigned to him in the series, instead of the Queen -- and he has a scene where he frightens even Cersei herself).
Posted by Dan_Frank (Member # 8488) on :
Interesting observations. I'm not sure if I agree, but I don't immediately disagree, either, so there's that.
Posted by Blayne Bradley (Member # 8565) on :
I agree regarding Joffry, Catelyn was Ned's wife right? Did she say to her son not to go south?
Spoilers I havent read the books.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
If only there were a way to solve that problem.
Posted by Jake (Member # 206) on :
I think you'd enjoy them, Blayne.
Posted by Dan_Frank (Member # 8488) on :
They've been out since the 90s, and you're watching a show about them, and reading a thread where people who have read them discuss that show. I think there's a statute of limitations on this sort of thing. (Warning: Language.)
Also, more importantly...
quote:Originally posted by Blayne Bradley: I havent read the books.
Why the heck not!?
Posted by Blayne Bradley (Member # 8565) on :
I have them, I have this issue where I keep putting off things that I know are good for me.
Posted by Dan_Frank (Member # 8488) on :
Well, fix that issue first, it'll be much better for you in the long run.
Then read the books.
Posted by Dan_Frank (Member # 8488) on :
And then Blayne read Game of Thrones to put off fixing his constant putting things off. Posted by Jake (Member # 206) on :
What if we could convince you that reading the series would be bad for you?
Posted by SteveRogers (Member # 7130) on :
THE BOOKS WILL GIVE YOU BRAIN CAVITIES.
Posted by Dan_Frank (Member # 8488) on :
(Warning: Community season 2 spoiler at the end of the video)
Posted by Blayne Bradley (Member # 8565) on :
I just have a lot going on, I'll get to them eventually, I just finished reading Halo: Glasslands which was awesome and Karen Traviss is now my new favorite scifi author that's still writing military scifi stuff. So I need a moment to recover.
Posted by Dan_Frank (Member # 8488) on :
quote:Originally posted by Blayne Bradley: I agree regarding Joffry, Catelyn was Ned's wife right? Did she say to her son not to go south?
In hindsight it occurs to me: What the heck are you talking about?
How can you agree that the show does a character better than a book you've never read? Posted by SteveRogers (Member # 7130) on :
A Halo spin-off novel? Foolish mortal.
Posted by Jeff C. (Member # 12496) on :
This show is brilliant. That's my only opinion on it.
Posted by Dan_Frank (Member # 8488) on :
Heh, I wasn't even going to go there, Steve. Though I certainly considered it.
Many of us have read and loved crappy books in our lives, sometimes even concurrent with reading and loving good books. It happens.
Posted by SteveRogers (Member # 7130) on :
I will totally admit that in my case as well. My comment was only meant in jest. Posted by Aris Katsaris (Member # 4596) on :
quote:Catelyn was Ned's wife right? Did she say to her son not to go south
I meant that in the series she asks Ned not to go to King's Landing. In the books she likes and supports the idea of Ned going to King's Landing instead.
Posted by Blayne Bradley (Member # 8565) on :
quote:Originally posted by Dan_Frank:
quote:Originally posted by Blayne Bradley: I agree regarding Joffry, Catelyn was Ned's wife right? Did she say to her son not to go south?
In hindsight it occurs to me: What the heck are you talking about?
How can you agree that the show does a character better than a book you've never read?
Im going by the comments in the thread, since I like the current portrayels, thus the books must be worse.
Posted by Amanecer (Member # 4068) on :
quote:Joffrey is slightly better too -- he was just a sadist kid in the books, and of course he largely still is, but the series has added elements where he moves and thinks independently of his mother
I agree that Joffrey is a stronger character in the show, but I think they do that at the expense of making Cersei a weaker character. Since Joffrey isn't under her control, she is far less powerful and less interesting.
Posted by SteveRogers (Member # 7130) on :
quote:Originally posted by Blayne Bradley:
quote:Originally posted by Dan_Frank:
quote:Originally posted by Blayne Bradley: I agree regarding Joffry, Catelyn was Ned's wife right? Did she say to her son not to go south?
In hindsight it occurs to me: What the heck are you talking about?
How can you agree that the show does a character better than a book you've never read?
Im going by the comments in the thread, since I like the current portrayels, thus the books must be worse.
I don't follow this logic. You're saying the books must be worse than the show based on comments which are the opinion of other people?
Posted by Dogbreath (Member # 11879) on :
You're talking to the same person who, when I mentioned a show he wasn't familiar, said "let me check tvtropes and see if I like it." I'm not sure if logic applies here.
Posted by Stone_Wolf_ (Member # 8299) on :
quote:Originally posted by Dan_Frank: How can you agree that the show does a character better than a book you've never read?
[ May 06, 2012, 10:29 AM: Message edited by: Stone_Wolf_ ]
Posted by amarinatale (Member # 12894) on :
quote:Originally posted by Jake:
quote:Originally posted by BlackBlade:
quote:Originally posted by mr_porteiro_head: I've always thought it weird that Americans expect British or pseudo-British accents for roles like that.
Did it bother you that Charles Winchester in M.A.S.H had a British accent even though he was from Boston? It never bothered me, many Americans view a British accent as bringing as sort of credibility to aristocrat or intellectual figures.
I always assumed that the accent was an affectation on Winchester's part.
Nope! Chahles Winchstah the Thuhd was a Boston Brahmin -- absolutely faithful. It's a very weird accent, and increasingly rare. I think it sort of percolated up to the very rich from the original British accents in the area. Here's a sample of the accent. Posted by Noemon (Member # 1115) on :
Very interesting! Thanks!
Posted by twinky (Member # 693) on :
What timely thread necromancy! ElJay and I just finished watching S1 -- rewatching for me. We still haven't seen S2, and won't until the Blu-rays come out (so... like... next summer? Thanks, HBO! Keep clinging to that antiquated business model!), but I'm really looking forward to it. We've both read the first book, but it was quite a long time ago. I stopped reading the series after that, but she's read the first three or four. I'm very curious to see how not having read the second book changes my experience of watching the show.
Based on how much I enjoyed S1, and on how much more I enjoyed watching S1 than reading book 1, I suspect that watching S2 without a clue about what will happen will be even more enjoyable than watching S1 was. If that turns out to be true, I probably won't ever return to the books -- or, if I do, it'll be after the series is done.
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
quote:Originally posted by amarinatale:
quote:Originally posted by Jake:
quote:Originally posted by BlackBlade:
quote:Originally posted by mr_porteiro_head: I've always thought it weird that Americans expect British or pseudo-British accents for roles like that.
Did it bother you that Charles Winchester in M.A.S.H had a British accent even though he was from Boston? It never bothered me, many Americans view a British accent as bringing as sort of credibility to aristocrat or intellectual figures.
I always assumed that the accent was an affectation on Winchester's part.
Nope! Chahles Winchstah the Thuhd was a Boston Brahmin -- absolutely faithful. It's a very weird accent, and increasingly rare. I think it sort of percolated up to the very rich from the original British accents in the area. Here's a sample of the accent.
That's right! It's coming back to me now.
Posted by Dan_Frank (Member # 8488) on :
quote:Originally posted by twinky: What timely thread necromancy! ElJay and I just finished watching S1 -- rewatching for me. We still haven't seen S2, and won't until the Blu-rays come out (so... like... next summer? Thanks, HBO! Keep clinging to that antiquated business model!), but I'm really looking forward to it. We've both read the first book, but it was quite a long time ago. I stopped reading the series after that, but she's read the first three or four. I'm very curious to see how not having read the second book changes my experience of watching the show.
Based on how much I enjoyed S1, and on how much more I enjoyed watching S1 than reading book 1, I suspect that watching S2 without a clue about what will happen will be even more enjoyable than watching S1 was. If that turns out to be true, I probably won't ever return to the books -- or, if I do, it'll be after the series is done.
What a tragedy. Posted by twinky (Member # 693) on :
That I don't enjoy that thing you enjoyed as much as you enjoyed it? It would be a pretty boring world if everyone enjoyed everything the same amount!
I think I'd like the first book more if I read it now, since my taste has changed somewhat, but even so -- for me, the prologue and final chapter of the first book were captivating, but the great wide inbetween was considerably less so. And the final chapter was one of the more predictable plot elements. I'm a lot more open to stories with many characters than I was back then -- heck, I'm on the ninth book of The Malazan Book of the Fallen -- but the show is just so damned good that I think I'm going to absolutely love watching it without foreknowledge.
But these days, if I had to pick a favourite fantasy writer, I'd actually pick the other author I complained about in that thread, R. Scott Bakker.
Posted by Dan_Frank (Member # 8488) on :
Heh, whether or not that's true, that doesn't mean it would be a boring world if everyone enjoyed the really good things roughly the same amount.
But no, it's not really tragic for me when people don't like the novels, per se. What's tragic is when people don't like the novels but like the show. I just... I haven't yet seen an explanation for that that makes sense.
As far as I can tell, pretty much all of the flaws of the books exist on the show, plus lots lots more, minus lots of the best stuff.
Posted by twinky (Member # 693) on :
I don't see why that's tragic. I think the show is great relative to most other television, and doubly so because it's so wonderful to finally see fantasy done well on television.
When I want fantasy done well in book form, I have plenty of other options -- even limiting it to authors I already know I like.
Posted by Aros (Member # 4873) on :
I think it's pacing. I'm not really sure Martin has a handle on it. But the show moves quickly.
Posted by Dan_Frank (Member # 8488) on :
quote:Originally posted by Aros: I think it's pacing. I'm not really sure Martin has a handle on it. But the show moves quickly.
I think your first and last sentence make sense, but I'm having a hard time understanding the middle one.
Posted by Aros (Member # 4873) on :
quote:Originally posted by Dan_Frank:
quote:Originally posted by Aros: I think it's pacing. I'm not really sure Martin has a handle on it. But the show moves quickly.
I think your first and last sentence make sense, but I'm having a hard time understanding the middle one.
I'm not sure that (George RR) Martin has a handle on it (referring to pacing, in the books).
Some people dig slow burn intrigue in their books. I do when it's handled well (early Robert Jordan, Sanderson, etc). But the pacing in the show is much faster (read, it's a show). I even thought the incredibly slow Jonathan Strange book was a more gripping read. Then again, it was the second ASOFAI book that lost me. The first was okay.
Posted by Dan_Frank (Member # 8488) on :
![[Wave]](graemlins/wave.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
Anything in particular that stands out to you as substantially better in the show? Of the top of my head I think the HBO writers have done their damnedest to distort the portrayals of a host of characters... Sandor, Tyrion, Petyr, Dany, Drogo, Jon, Robb, Renly, Loras, Varys, Cersei...![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
I havent read the books.