(December 17, 2014 at 4:04 pm)FatAndFaithless Wrote: *Keeps his spoilery fucking mouth shut*

I haven't read the books - deliberately. I know they differ significantly from the series but I understand there are enough similarities that reading them can give significant spoilers.

Usually, I'm not concerned about spoilers as they don't ruin the enjoyment of a show for me. However, GoT is so twisted I'm enjoying the surprises.

(December 17, 2014 at 4:33 pm)Beccs Wrote: I haven't read the books - deliberately. I know they differ significantly from the series but I understand there are enough similarities that reading them can give significant spoilers.

Usually, I'm not concerned about spoilers as they don't ruin the enjoyment of a show for me. However, GoT is so twisted I'm enjoying the surprises.

I wouldn't really say that they differ that significantly. I don't think you can find a show or movie that's been adapted from a book where purists won't complain profusely about every little change. Also you have to cut out some characters to make it a watchable show for television. The writers of the show do an amazing job at adapting it. Probably the best adaptation of a book to T.V. show of all time.

(December 17, 2014 at 7:02 pm)CapnAwesome Wrote: I wouldn't really say that they differ that significantly. I don't think you can find a show or movie that's been adapted from a book where purists won't complain profusely about every little change. Also you have to cut out some characters to make it a watchable show for television. The writers of the show do an amazing job at adapting it. Probably the best adaptation of a book to T.V. show of all time.

I would agree. Benioff and Weiss do a fantastic job. I wonder, sometimes, about some of the seemingly unnecessary changes, though. Little things, like the Thenns being cannibals, the weird Cersei/Jaime rape scene next to Joffrey's body, Vargo Hoat/Locke, the love interest between Grey Worm and Missandei, etc...

Warning: possible minor book spoilers and major show spoilers if you haven't watched it.

(December 17, 2014 at 9:43 pm)SteelCurtain Wrote:

(December 17, 2014 at 7:02 pm)CapnAwesome Wrote: I wouldn't really say that they differ that significantly. I don't think you can find a show or movie that's been adapted from a book where purists won't complain profusely about every little change. Also you have to cut out some characters to make it a watchable show for television. The writers of the show do an amazing job at adapting it. Probably the best adaptation of a book to T.V. show of all time.

I would agree. Benioff and Weiss do a fantastic job. I wonder, sometimes, about some of the seemingly unnecessary changes, though. Little things, like the Thenns being cannibals, the weird Cersei/Jaime rape scene next to Joffrey's body, Vargo Hoat/Locke, the love interest between Grey Worm and Missandei, etc...

Well some of that actually makes sense to me (not the Jamie/Cersei thing though :/) Like with the Thens you just don't have time to go into the whole history of them or explain that much about them. There isn't really a way to do it without distracting too much, so they just combined the fact there was Cannibals north of the wall with identifying of an important tribe. As for Locke

Quote: Locke is a bannerman of Roose Bolton and is Roose's best hunter. His character was created specifically for the television series Game of Thrones in which he is played by Noah Taylor. Locke replaces the character Vargo Hoat from the books. When the producers eliminated Vargo's lisping and slobbering as being too over the top, George R. R. Martin requested the character's name be changed as he had become too different from Vargo Hoat. He may be a member of House Locke.

and I think the whole thing with Grey Warm and Missande isn't going anywhere or that significant. In the book they mention that some of the unsullied would visit prostitutes despite being castrated just to enjoy the company of women. This just serves the same plot purpose without having to introduce more characters or do a confusing scene. The general rule that they seem to do is to reduce and combine characters whenever necessary and I think that is responsible for many of the changes. Some subtle changes I actually prefer in the show. Such as the amping up of the violent side of Brienne of Tarth. She enjoys violence way more in the show and how that plays with the huge boner that Jamie gets for her. It's great, an improvement on the book. For me I think the biggest change is how the basically eliminated Tyrion's ex-wife as a plot element. They mentioned her a few times and then sort of dropped it. I think that's because without his internal dialog you can really get how important she was to him. Instead they replace that whole emotional element with Shay and amp up their relationship to something far more real than it was in the book, which I think works great. A real improvement on the book. To me the scene where he strangles her is one of the most emotional scenes ever put on television and is far more so than in the book.

Like I said, I'm a huge Game of Thrones nerd.

Oh, believe me, so am I.

I was resistant to even reading the books at first, my friend told me to read them when I was in the Navy on a long cruise. I was like "I don't like fantasy books, dragons and magic don't do it for me." Boy, was I wrong. I have never gotten into a series like this one. I have read the books twice, and it has made me a bit of a purist when it comes to the series.

I do understand some of the characters being combined. This book series was deemed unfilmable, because of the scope and magnitude of it. Some of it, I don't understand, though. The replacement of Jeyne Westerling with Talisa as Robb's wife is one that rankled me, coupled with the fact that her character was present and murdered at the Red Wedding in the series, but Jeyne was sent back to the Crag and wasn't killed in the books.

Also, why not give Tyrion the different colored eyes that are so prevalent in the books?

And a minor but fantastic line was omitted, and I don't know why. When Tyrion kills Tywin, why oh why couldn't he say the line "Lord Tywin Lannister did not, in the end, shit gold." I wanted it so bad!

(December 18, 2014 at 1:42 am)SteelCurtain Wrote: I do understand some of the characters being combined. This book series was deemed unfilmable, because of the scope and magnitude of it. Some of it, I don't understand, though. The replacement of Jeyne Westerling with Talisa as Robb's wife is one that rankled me, coupled with the fact that her character was present and murdered at the Red Wedding in the series, but Jeyne was sent back to the Crag and wasn't killed in the books.

Also, why not give Tyrion the different colored eyes that are so prevalent in the books?

And a minor but fantastic line was omitted, and I don't know why. When Tyrion kills Tywin, why oh why couldn't he say the line "Lord Tywin Lannister did not, in the end, shit gold." I wanted it so bad!

I thought that Talisa was a big improvement, it gave emotion to that character and to their relationship, and made the Red Wedding all the more tragic (in case it wasn't already.) Jeyne is dull and pointless. In the book Rob betrays Walder Frey because he felt a sense of duty towards Jeyne, where as in the show he is clearly in love with Talisa. That's the real kicker. Also that she was carrying his unborn child that was going to be named Ned! Even unborn baby Ned Stark gets killed I actually thought that and the difference with the enhanced version Brienne of Tarth are the main improvements that the show made over the book. Oh I love her not in the-book battle with the Hound too. It's funny because I know book purists who have complained about the episodes that George RR Martin himself has written for the show. Ha. I think the eyes and the fact he didn't lose his nose are just not wanting to deal with constant make up and I believe that in the book he only thought that line, and not said it. I wouldn't be surprised if it is said by someone in the next season though. So no complaints from me on any of that. The main problem with the show is that you don't get all the internal dialog that you get in the book, which of course is impossible. Also I think Stannis from the books is a far more compelling character than in the show. I don't think the writers of the show like him as much as George RR Martin does. Oh, and the one character that I truly miss who was cut from the show is Patchface (I know! I know! Under the sea they go!) I know they've combined his role or future role with Shireen in the show, but still, he fit so well into Stannis' creepy court.
You know what I think is interesting, every time I read Game of Thrones again. (I'm not sure what re-read I'm on) I feel less and less sympathies for the Starks. They come across as trigger happy war mongers the more you think about it. Also as tragic as the Red Wedding is, look at it from Walder Frey's perspective. Rob sent hundreds of his men and kin to their deaths in the suicide battle against Tywin in an early book, I believe it was described as being largely Frey men and we know how seriously Walder Frey takes his family. As easy as it is to see Walder as evil and Rob is good tt's not like it's some minor betrayal that he did really. Still, I hope Stannis ends up burning them all.

(December 17, 2014 at 7:02 pm)CapnAwesome Wrote: I wouldn't really say that they differ that significantly. I don't think you can find a show or movie that's been adapted from a book where purists won't complain profusely about every little change. Also you have to cut out some characters to make it a watchable show for television. The writers of the show do an amazing job at adapting it. Probably the best adaptation of a book to T.V. show of all time.

I've never really understood why people complain when book stories are changed for film or TV. Do people honestly expect the story and characters to stay the exact same for a medium that tells the story in an entirely different way and with a different time frame? It should be expected that things are subject to tweaking, and even drastic change if it suits better for TV/film.

I honestly just get the impression from people who complain about changes like this, that they want to sit on their high horse as though they're superior in some way to everyone else who didn't read the books. Kind of like how some people act like they're hipsters when it comes to music... "I was following this band before they went mainstream, now everyone thinks they know them". Ugh.

Also, keep in mind that in the books we have a constant, immediate stream of consciousness reaction to the events with us reading the character's thoughts. It would be super awkward and nearly impossible to follow if the characters in the show blurted out their inner thoughts every two seconds just to keep an interesting side story alive. So although the "Tywin did not shit gold" line was awesome in the books, it would've been really awkward for Tyrion to just come up with that out of nowhere in the show since we couldn't see his thought process.

Another point that caused a tumblr shitstorm (the arbiters of good art, of course) was the omission of the Tysha part of Tyrion's backstory in season 4 and how Jaime confessed to him about her true nature. Again, this goes back to the point that we can't hear Tyrion's thoughts. In the book he's constantly reminiscing about her, but almost none of it is verbal. We only had Tyrion's short telling of that story from season 2 to go on, and if Jaime just suddenly came out of nowhere in the show and confessed it would've been extremely jarring and the majority of watchers wouldn't know what the heck was going on. That, or Tyrion would literally have to mention Tysha by name in every other episode to keep her in our minds.

People bitch waaay to much about adaptations, it's rare enough we get one this fantastic.

You are all right, to be honest. I love both the shows and the books, and sometimes for different reasons. I guess instead of thinking about why the differences are there, I am always thinking about the very fact that there are differences that could easily not be differences.

I do understand the change from Jeyne to Talisa. Jeyne was a tertiary character at best and I would bet we'd never hear from her again anyhow. Changing that character probably had zero effect on the storyline, and did add to the massive heartbreak of the Red Wedding.
Maybe what rankled me was the fact that the character could have very well been Jeyne Westerling, with the same story. But it doesn't really matter, in the end.

I never minded the downplay of the Tysha story. It was a casualty of the sheer number of storylines, even if it was quite important. They made up for it with the onscreen relationship between Tyrion and Shae, and the trial scene brought all of the emotion that was necessary to convey that point.

I agree with the Capn that Stannis is greatly improved over the book version. And I had forgotten about Patchface! Patchface is the poops! ("Here we eat fish, under the sea, the fish eat us. I know. I know...") <---That guy's got some hidden intelligence!

I do think that some of the more developed characters might speak to a greater role in future episodes than we might expect.