Support NeoGAF

[Azrael]

Also...

Spoiler

I have NO idea wtf they are going to with Theon for two seasons now, or how the Ramsay stuff is going to play out next season.

I'll just repost my speculation regarding Theon and Season 3 from Westeros.org. ASoS spoilers follow:

Spoiler

When we pick up, he's imprisoned in a dungeon. Theon and the other prisoners are regularly taken from the cells to be tortured by a hooded Ramsay Snow, and a scene or two of this is depicted. "Reek" is introduced as a fellow prisoner in the dungeons, who befriends Theon and slowly gains his trust. Reek confides in Theon his plan to escape from the dungeon, and they successfully break out in the night and run for freedom. Reek leads Theon to a clearing in the woods where they are surrounded by Bolton men, and Theon is recaptured. Theon is tortured some more, and he loses a finger, which is given to Robb by Roose at the Twins. Ramsay removes his hood and reveals himself to have been Reek all along. At the finale of the season, Ramsay taunts Theon. Robb and his men are dead, and Roose controls the North now. Balon Greyjoy is dead, and the Ironborn have gone home and are fighting each other. No one is coming to rescue him, and no one is coming to take his head in vengeance and end his torment. An utterly broken Theon becomes Reek. It's not revealed until after the Red Wedding that it was Ramsay and his men who sacked Winterfell.

 

[-Pyromaniac-]

Maybe it's because I read the books, but I didn't get that at all. It was very compressed, but I still got the sense that Jon did what had to be done (as Qhorin told him in a previous episode) to get in with the Wildlings.

What did the other non-book thread think about it? Or impressions in general on the internet? Is it popular opinion that he killed Qhorin out of anger?

I think a lot of people just forgot that happened, or wanted it to be spelled out better right before it happened. I for one enjoyed the ambiguity of the execution, though I guess it wasn't really ambiguous since as you said, they did talk about it in th episode before.

 

[28 Posts Later]

though I guess it wasn't really ambiguous since as you said, they did talk about it in the episode before.

If anything the fact the writers have made Jon appear unintelligent and lost this season lends itself to the confusion. Jon has acted so foolishly throughout his travels north of the wall, and his reaction to the comment you mention so slight, I was left wondering if Jon was smart enough to understand the poorly veiled comment Qhorin made to him and thus if the writers had meant for us to understand Jon knew why Qhorin acted the way he did and what he wanted him to do.

If it's meant to be ambiguous it's a strange way to handle it, as his motivation will alter the way the audience views the character. There doesn't seem to be a reason to have made Jon's motivations unclear -

Spoiler

even if they choose to try and push the angle that Jon has fallen for Ygritte and thus considers himself a Wildling it would be a more dramatic revelation due to Qhorin's demands / sacrifice.

 

[Forsaken82]

I think a lot of people just forgot that happened, or wanted it to be spelled out better right before it happened. I for one enjoyed the ambiguity of the execution, though I guess it wasn't really ambiguous since as you said, they did talk about it in th episode before.

I think its going to be one of those moments in which (asos)

Spoiler

when it comes time for Jon to explain himself back at the Wall, the non book readers are gonna be like "What? When did that fucking turncloak agree to that?! *rewatches* ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo ALL IS FORGIVEN JON!

 

["God's Beard!"]

Great example. Don't skip the first book. There are a lot of these types of things you'll miss. Things that would have made the show A+ grade.

I think skipping flashbacks was a great decision that kept the show grounded in reality and less meandering and heavy-handed like so many fantasies tend to get. The show does a really good job of suspending disbelief and focusing on the people rather than the mythos. I'd probably stop watching if there was some sweeping legend of days past and internal monologues every episode. TV and books are different mediums, and I think they made the right choice.

 

[Steelyuhas]

I'll just repost my speculation regarding Theon and Season 3 from Westeros.org. SERIES spoilers follow:

Spoiler

When we pick up, he's imprisoned in a dungeon. Theon and the other prisoners are regularly taken from the cells to be tortured by a hooded Ramsay Snow, and a scene or two of this is depicted. "Reek" is introduced as a fellow prisoner in the dungeons, who befriends Theon and slowly gains his trust. Reek confides in Theon his plan to escape from the dungeon, and they successfully break out in the night and run for freedom. Reek leads Theon to a clearing in the woods where they are surrounded by Bolton men, and Theon is recaptured. Theon is tortured some more, and he loses a finger, which is given to Robb by Roose at the Twins. Ramsay removes his hood and reveals himself to have been Reek all along. At the finale of the season, Ramsay taunts Theon. Robb and his men are dead, and Roose controls the North now. Balon Greyjoy is dead, and the Ironborn have gone home and are fighting each other. No one is coming to rescue him, and no one is coming to take his head in vengeance and end his torment. An utterly broken Theon becomes Reek. It's not revealed until after the Red Wedding that it was Ramsay and his men who sacked Winterfell.

That would be pretty good I think.

 

[Joe Shlabotnik]

Don't skip any books ever. Stop it. They are not the same, they are always worth reading. If you think you are going to die from boredom from reading a book you generally know the plot to then don't read any books at all, and/or look into ADD medication.

The first two books will be even more enjoyable because your brain won't be occupied with keeping track of the various storylines and all of the history and character building will fill in that much easier for you.

 

[Fuzzy]

I think skipping flashbacks was a great decision that kept the show grounded in reality and less meandering and heavy-handed like so many fantasies tend to get. The show does a really good job of suspending disbelief and focusing on the people rather than the mythos. I'd probably stop watching if there was some sweeping legend of days past and internal monologues every episode. TV and books are different mediums, and I think they made the right choice.

I'd like them to continue doing animated extras like they did on the S1 BR set to fill in some of those things.

 

[Wray]

I'll just repost my speculation regarding Theon and Season 3 from Westeros.org. ASoS spoilers follow:

Spoiler

When we pick up, he's imprisoned in a dungeon. Theon and the other prisoners are regularly taken from the cells to be tortured by a hooded Ramsay Snow, and a scene or two of this is depicted. "Reek" is introduced as a fellow prisoner in the dungeons, who befriends Theon and slowly gains his trust. Reek confides in Theon his plan to escape from the dungeon, and they successfully break out in the night and run for freedom. Reek leads Theon to a clearing in the woods where they are surrounded by Bolton men, and Theon is recaptured. Theon is tortured some more, and he loses a finger, which is given to Robb by Roose at the Twins. Ramsay removes his hood and reveals himself to have been Reek all along. At the finale of the season, Ramsay taunts Theon. Robb and his men are dead, and Roose controls the North now. Balon Greyjoy is dead, and the Ironborn have gone home and are fighting each other. No one is coming to rescue him, and no one is coming to take his head in vengeance and end his torment. An utterly broken Theon becomes Reek. It's not revealed until after the Red Wedding that it was Ramsay and his men who sacked Winterfell.

That would be an entertaining S3 arc, but

Spoiler

then wtf is Theon going to do in S4? You cant have him locked up in a dungeon for most of S3 with an escape attempt, then do the same thing all over again in S4 (Dreadfort Dungeon and Kyra escape).

Also, did anybody else enjoy the foreshadowing the writers layered in?

Spoiler

Ramsay blowing the horn and Theon raging how much he hates that fucker etc. Plus Shae telling Tyrion to fuck all this shit and just come to Pentos.

I think skipping flashbacks was a great decision that kept the show grounded in reality and less meandering and heavy-handed like so many fantasies tend to get. The show does a really good job of suspending disbelief and focusing on the people rather than the mythos. I'd probably stop watching if there was some sweeping legend of days past and internal monologues every episode. TV and books are different mediums, and I think they made the right choice.

I think skipping flashbacks were more just a time/budget thing. They'll have plenty of time to do some flashbacks in S3 and S4 though, since they'll be plenty of time to breath with SoS being split in two. One flashback a season or something would be more than enough. I only really need to see three flashbacks.

- Robert slaying Rhaegar Targaryen at the Trident.
- Jaime Lannister killing the Mad King
- Tower of Joy (If it ever becomes relevant on the show)

 

["God's Beard!"]

Don't skip any books ever. Stop it. They are not the same, they are always worth reading. If you think you are going to die from boredom from reading a book you generally know the plot to then don't read any books at all, and/or look into ADD medication.

The first two books will be even more enjoyable because your brain won't be occupied with keeping track of the various storylines and all of the history and character building will fill in that much easier for you.

I started with the 2nd Girl with the Dragon Tattoo after watching the movie and didn't feel any worse off for wear. I'm not against reading it, I just don't want to waste time if it's mostly the same story.

Don't say I don't read, though. That's rude. Just this semester is when I started getting into popular fiction and I've already read through the Hunger Games, House of Leaves and half of Haruki Murakami's catalogue. Before I was sticking to stuff like Tokyo Vice and other non-fiction books, history and psychology mostly.

I think skipping flashbacks were more just a time/budget thing. They'll have plenty of time to do some flashbacks in S3 and S4 though, since they'll be plenty of time to breath with SoS being split in two. One flashback a season or something would be more than enough. I only really need to see three flashbacks.

- Robert slaying Rhaegar Targaryen at the Trident.
- Jaime Lannister killing the Mad King
- Tower of Joy (If it ever becomes relevant on the show)

Is it really necessary to add to the plot or characterization, though? I mean, you didn't have the Hound flashing back to being a kid and getting his face burned off when he watched the Wildfire at Black Water, but you knew what he was thinking because of the quality of the actor's performance. Flashbacks on screen always have this kind of "a-ha!" feeling to them that tends to cheapen the moment. They work well in a book because you can't see the character's body language, and there's no uncanny valley.

 

[KuwabaraTheMan]

I started with the 2nd Girl with the Dragon Tattoo after watching the movie and didn't feel any worse off for wear. I'm not against reading it, I just don't want to waste time if it's mostly the same story.

The main plot points of the first book are kept in the first season, but there would be quite a few details that you would be lost on if you started with the second book. A couple of major characters (and several minor characters) were cut for the show, and the second book assumes you know who they are. There are also a number of smaller plot lines that continue, and you just get a greater appreciation for the characters and the back story by reading the book.

You wouldn't be hopelessly lost by starting with Clash, but I wouldn't recommend it. There's a lot to Game that didn't make the show, and those elements will enhance the overall experience.

 

[Jibbajabbawockky]

That would be an entertaining S3 arc, but

Spoiler

then wtf is Theon going to do in S4? You cant have him locked up in a dungeon for most of S3 with an escape attempt, then do the same thing all over again in S4 (Dreadfort Dungeon and Kyra escape).

I wouldn't mind if for season 4, {Series}

Spoiler

they just leave Theon out entirely. Maybe you get references to him here and there being tortured up at the Dreadfort but have him stay offscreen. I think thats the most shocking thing about Theon becoming Reek is that his eventual reappearance in ADwD is shocking, since the last time in the books we saw him was when Winterfell was sacked.

Or, assuming they're mixing Feast and Dance together, maybe they have some of that content at the end of season 4? So maybe at the end of season 4 go back to the Dreadfort and reintroduce Reek/Theon?

 

["God's Beard!"]

The main plot points of the first book are kept in the first season, but there would be quite a few details that you would be lost on if you started with the second book. A couple of major characters (and several minor characters) were cut for the show, and the second book assumes you know who they are. There are also a number of smaller plot lines that continue, and you just get a greater appreciation for the characters and the back story by reading the book.

You wouldn't be hopelessly lost by starting with Clash, but I wouldn't recommend it. There's a lot to Game that didn't make the show, and those elements will enhance the overall experience.

You're the first person to actually answer my question in favor of reading the first book. Thank you. Nobody else said I would miss entire characters and plot lines, just backstory and odd details.

 

[Fuzzy]

I think skipping flashbacks were more just a time/budget thing. They'll have plenty of time to do some flashbacks in S3 and S4 though, since they'll be plenty of time to breath with SoS being split in two. One flashback a season or something would be more than enough. I only really need to see three flashbacks.

- Robert slaying Rhaegar Targaryen at the Trident.
- Jaime Lannister killing the Mad King
- Tower of Joy (If it ever becomes relevant on the show)

I think the best we can hope for as far as flashbacks go are these (including the first two you listed).

BR Extras - http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLED599893751E9307&feature=plcp

Maybe we'll get more but I wouldn't hold my breath. We may get some monologues about them though.

 

[Wray]

Is it really necessary to add to the plot or characterization, though? I mean, you didn't have the Hound flashing back to being a kid and getting his face burned off when he watched the Wildfire at Black Water, but you knew what he was thinking because of the quality of the actor's performance. Flashbacks on screen always have this kind of "a-ha!" feeling to them that tends to cheapen the moment. They work well in a book because you can't see the character's body language, and there's no uncanny valley.

The difference between the flashbacks I listed and the example you gave though is that Rhaegar Targaryen and The Mad King are two very important characters to the mythos of the entire series who we've never met, and because they are dead already, never get the chance to meet them.

Doing a Trident and Mad King flashback scene would introduce those characters to tv viewers in a way they haven't been before. In addition it would flesh them out even more, and most importantly, give viewers a visual understanding of who these people were and how important they are to the events of the entire series.

I wouldn't mind if for season 4, {Series}

Spoiler

they just leave Theon out entirely. Maybe you get references to him here and there being tortured up at the Dreadfort but have him stay offscreen. I think thats the most shocking thing about Theon becoming Reek is that his eventual reappearance in ADwD is shocking, since the last time in the books we saw him was when Winterfell was sacked.

Or, assuming they're mixing Feast and Dance together, maybe they have some of that content at the end of season 4? So maybe at the end of season 4 go back to the Dreadfort and reintroduce Reek/Theon?

Spoiler

With the way HBO built up Theon in S2, I can't see them keeping him off screen for an entire season though. At worst, I can see them doing it in a similar fashion that they did with Jaime in S2, and just limit his presence to 4-5 episodes.

I do see them moving up 3-4 Reek chapters from Dance though.

 

[Arment]

You're the first person to actually answer my question in favor of reading the first book. Thank you. Nobody else said I would miss entire characters and plot lines, just backstory and odd details.

No, you really can't safely skip anything. The sheer amount of backstory not covered in S1 will be covered in Book 1. Skipping any book really is bad advice. The show and the book are more different than you think.


If you start at book 2 you'll be missing out on a lot of inner monologue historical references that will be referred to later. Not to mention all the character building and things that weren't in the show of which there are countless tidbits.

I said as much although I definitely could have elaborated. Anyhow, I hope you'll take the advice of reading book 1 now that you understand you'll be missing so much.



Theon/Series

Spoiler

I'd love it if they'd put him on a backburner for a while. Emulate the books by letting the audience forget about him. Remind us of his existence only through mentions by Rob, Bolton and 'Yara'. Then, when they get to season 5 (or so), make him look NOTHING like Theon. Make it so the audience doesn't even realize it's Theon until they make it very apparent. The shock the audience would experience would be on the level of the shock we experienced in the books.

 

["God's Beard!"]

The difference between the flashbacks I listed and the example you gave though is that Rhaegar Targaryen and The Mad King are two very important characters to the mythos of the entire series who we've never met, and because they are dead already, never get the chance to meet them.

Doing a Trident and Mad King flashback scene would introduce those characters to tv viewers in a way they haven't been before. In addition it would flesh them out even more, and most importantly, give viewers a visual understanding of who these people were and how important they are to the events of the entire series.

We'll have to agree to disagree, then. I think it would take away from the sense of the present that the series holds on to so strongly. We already know how important the Mad King was because his affect on different characters is discussed among them constantly. You don't see what Stennis sees in the fire and you don't need to. It obviously has a huge effect on what he's going to do and it comes off clearly in the actor's performance.

Even if there was a huge revelation about the king's death, I don't think it would be necessary for anything other than jaime lannister to say it with the appropriate weight.

I said as much although I definitely could have elaborated. Anyhow, I hope you'll take the advice of reading book 1 now that you understand you'll be missing so much.

"More different than I think" didn't mean anything or answer my question, though. I just wanted to know if I would understand the story, and everyone came in and either said to read the books because it's better than the show or that they flesh out the details of the world. Neither one answered my question. Only ones that did were the ones that said to start with book two instead of three, so I considered it a consensus.

 

[KuwabaraTheMan]

Theon/Series

Spoiler

I'd love it if they'd put him on a backburner for a while. Emulate the books by letting the audience forget about him. Remind us of his existence only through mentions by Rob, Bolton and 'Yara'. Then, when they return, make him look NOTHING like Theon. Make it so the audience doesn't even realize it's Theon until they make it very apparent. The shock the audience would experience would be on the level of the shock we experienced in the books.

Spoiler

The logistics of doing that are difficult from a TV perspective. What if Alfie Allen gets a better job offer and leaves the show? They need to have him at least appear in the next two seasons. I don't know if they need to give him a complete story arc, but they need to have him at least a couple of episodes each season. This isn't like the books where a character can just disappear for two books. Actors need work, and if they don't give it to him, someone else will (especially after the amazing job he did in this season). We're definitely going to get some scenes of him in prison, and probably a proper introduction to Ramsay in Season 3.

 

[Arment]

Spoiler

The logistics of doing that are difficult from a TV perspective. What if Alfie Allen gets a better job offer and leaves the show? They need to have him at least appear in the next two seasons. I don't know if they need to give him a complete story arc, but they need to have him at least a couple of episodes each season. This isn't like the books where a character can just disappear for two books. Actors need work, and if they don't give it to him, someone else will (especially after the amazing job he did in this season). We're definitely going to get some scenes of him in prison, and probably a proper introduction to Ramsay in Season 3.

Yeah, I know it's unrealistic, but it'd make damn good TV.

"More different than I think" didn't mean anything or answer my question, though. I just wanted to know if I would understand the story, and everyone came in and either said to read the books because it's better than the show or that they flesh out the details of the world. Neither one answered my question. Only ones that did were the ones that said to start with book two instead of three, so I considered it a consensus.

You're right, I didn't really get most of that across. I thought others had gone into more detail about entirely missing plot points. I even said, "things that weren't in the show". It's not every day you find someone fighting tooth and nail not to read a important part of a series but still I figured my suggestion alone would suffice. There weren't but one or two people saying to skip it. And they hardly made a good case - if you don't call "there isn't much difference between Season 1 and the book" a good case that is. It also has the unfortunate side effect of not being true.

 

[RatskyWatsky]

If I started reading from the third book, would I understand the story only having seen the show?

I'll echo what others have said and say no, you wouldn't. There are a lot storylines and characters that you'd completely miss out on (and when they're mentioned and/or reappear in the third book you'll be totally confused) and yes, even backstory and a ton of world building. The latter two might not be 100% essential, but they certainly enrich the overall experience. It might be a little bit of a bummer to retread some of the story you already know from watching the TV show, but there are quite a lot of things in the first two books that aren't in the TV show that I think will make it new enough for you. It'll be worth it.

 

[PhoenixDark]

The show has been faithful to the book overall, but skipping right to ASOS would be confusing as hell for a new reader. There would be multiple characters you would have no idea about, and plot lines you'd be unfamiliar with.

You have a year until the next season...

 

[suzu]

If I started reading from the third book, would I understand the story only having seen the show?

If you want to you can skip the first book and maybe wiki the details of it later, or perhaps just go back to it another time. I think there's a lot of good stuff in the first book though so it is still worth reading.

Don't skip the second book, because it's a different beast from the show. Because if you skipped right to the third book, you will be confused.

 

[frequency]

Fuzzy said that the extras on the season 1 Blu Ray are really good too. So if you have that, you might be fine skipping book 1.

 

[Fuu]

It's entirely possible to start from the second book. You'll miss good stuff, but it's possible. Not the same can be said about starting from the third, that would be very inadvisable.

It's an experience though. There's a lot of great world and character building in those pages. And great writing. A similar point can be made for watching movies, even if you know the story there's still so much to it. The current discussion reminded me of what GRRM has to say about focusing on plot developments when you read fiction:

Q. How do you make decisions about the depictions of sexual violence that you include in your writing?

Well, I'm not writing about contemporary sex—it's medieval.

There's a more general question here that doesn't just affect sex or rape, and that's this whole issue of what is gratuitous? What should be depicted? I have gotten letters over the years from readers who don't like the sex, they say it's "gratuitous." I think that word gets thrown around and what it seems to mean is "I didn't like it." This person didn't want to read it, so it's gratuitous to that person. And if I'm guilty of having gratuitous sex, then I'm also guilty of having gratuitous violence, and gratuitous feasting, and gratuitous description of clothes, and gratuitous heraldry, because very little of this is necessary to advance the plot. But my philosophy is that plot advancement is not what the experience of reading fiction is about. If all we care about is advancing the plot, why read novels? We can just read Cliffs Notes.

A novel for me is an immersive experience where I feel as if I have lived it and that I've tasted the food and experienced the sex and experienced the terror of battle. So I want all of the detail, all of the sensory things—whether it's a good experience, or a bad experience, I want to put the reader through it. To that mind, detail is necessary, showing not telling is necessary, and nothing is gratuitous.

http://www.theatlantic.com/entertai...-sex-fantasy-and-a-dance-with-dragons/241738/

 

[Lactose_Intolerant]

Just for the record, flashbacks weren't for budgetary reasons. They filmed a scene with the mad king. It just wasn't put into the show.

 

[jayb]

Just for the record, flashbacks weren't for budgetary reasons. They filmed a scene with the mad king. It just wasn't put into the show.

Did they include that in the blueray?

 

[Cornballer]

Did the include that in the blueray?

I don't think so. We just got one brief glimpse in one of the trailers iirc.

 

[Jibbajabbawockky]

I don't think so. We just got one brief glimpse in one of the trailers iirc.

Yup, looks like Brandon and Rickard getting murdered by Aerys. Kind of wondering when they filmed that and what made them decide to ditch the flashbacks. Going by that Cogman interview from earlier today, I wonder if they didn't film this back when they were working on the original pilot maybe.

 

[aFIGurANT]

I do think if hbo and the writers or whomever are serious about the SoS seasons they could and should really include some of those stories/images, even if they're only like five frames long per flashback. Specifically to embellish and really paint a picture as to why a) SoS

Spoiler

Jaime is somewhat redeemable in a viewer's eyes in murdering aerys (that picture for instance looks pretty crazy) and betraying his king.

And b) SoS

Spoiler

why the red viper is ready to die for tyrion.

 

[Count of Monte Sawed-Off]

I do think if hbo and the writers or whomever are serious about the SoS seasons they could and should really include some of those stories/images, even if they're only like five frames long per flashback. Specifically to embellish and really paint a picture as to why a) SoS

Spoiler

Jaime is somewhat redeemable in a viewer's eyes in murdering aerys (that picture for instance looks pretty crazy) and betraying his king.

And b) SoS

Spoiler

why the red viper is ready to die for tyrion.

I'm sure they'll get the point across without flashbacks. After all, who needs flashbacks when you've got boobies.

 

[Fuu]

There's a certain scene in ASOS where

Spoiler

Jaime goes into full exposition-mode for Brienne and tells her about his past, including how he saved King's Landing from going down in flames, that I wonder if they're planning on using (they're both naked during it so that does make it more likely for the show lololol jk).

It wouldn't require flashbacks but it needs some swift writing so it doesn't feel clunky on TV, since

Spoiler

Brienne just listens while he goes on and on, but there's a lot of backstory in that and it's a relevant character moment for him too.

I honestly wouldn't oppose a bunch of made-up new (ASOS)

Spoiler

Jaime & Brienne scenes

in the vein of Arya & Tywin, haha. The little we got of it this season was gold.

 

[Ignis Fatuus]

OMG

 

[Steelyuhas]

I'm sure they'll get the point across without flashbacks. After all, who needs flashbacks when you've got boobies.

D.B. Weiss: "We were going to do awesome characters that expand our awesome cast of characters, but I thought it would be better to expand Ros and show a lot more boobies."

 

[blahblah...blah]

So I finally bought the first book, but I don't know whether I'll be able to wrap my head around different chapters being focused on individual characters. It's no different to the TV show flitting between different characters and locales, I guess, and I have yet to start it so I could be overreacting.

 

[Count of Monte Sawed-Off]

So I finally bought the first book, but I don't know whether I'll be able to wrap my head around different chapters being focused on individual characters. It's no different to the TV show flitting between different characters and locales, I guess, and I have yet to start it so I could be overreacting.

Well at least with the first book, there are often multiple point of view characters in the same location.

 

[Cornballer]

As something of a counterpoint to the Cogman interview from Alyssa Rosenberg yesterday, Westeros.org is featuring an article from a Serbian television critic who is not happy with with the adaptation so far:

- An Adaptation Without Honor, or Adaptation Morghulis - This One’s Dead Already

He's mad as hell and he's not going to take it any more.



Here's the Cogman interview again for anyone that missed it:

Alyssa Rosenberg @ Think Progress:

- ‘Game of Thrones’ Story Editor Bryan Cogman On the Second Season, Adapting Books He Loves, and the Show’s Secret Main Character

The morning after finale of the second season of Game of Thrones, I called up Bryan Cogman, the show’s story editor. We’d spoken earlier in the year about the third episode of the season, which Bryan wrote. This time, we talked about the full arc of the season, the emergence of important new characters who don’t appear in the novels, race and gender in the show, and the tension between staying true to George R.R. Martin’s sprawling series while adapting it for an entirely different medium.

 

[kirblar]

Ros has essentially become an amalgamation of minor characters, and that's fine.

Especially if (Full series spoiler)

Spoiler

She gets the rap for the Eyrie incident because Littlefinger knows about her double-agent status.

 

[Lactose_Intolerant]

As something of a counterpoint to the Cogman interview from Alyssa Rosenberg yesterday, Westeros.org is featuring an article from a Serbian television critic who is not happy with with the adaptation so far:

- An Adaptation Without Honor, or Adaptation Morghulis - This One’s Dead Already

He's mad as hell and he's not going to take it any more.

Most of the stuff he complains about is stupid. There are financial reasons for some of the stuff he mentions, like Reek. Arya's storyline would have cost a lot more to film if it was anything like the books. Jon's storyline has no excuses though. It was literally just talking in Iceland.

 

[Vyer]

Here's the Cogman interview again for anyone that missed it:

That's a great interview, and really demonstrates how they are considering a lot of this stuff that people like to think happens 'for no reason'. It also makes that second article that much more ridiculous, lol.

 

["God's Beard!"]

As something of a counterpoint to the Cogman interview from Alyssa Rosenberg yesterday, Westeros.org is featuring an article from a Serbian television critic who is not happy with with the adaptation so far:

- An Adaptation Without Honor, or Adaptation Morghulis - This One’s Dead Already

He's mad as hell and he's not going to take it any more.

That was really angry and kinda hard to read, but I liked that he put up a list of things that were changed. The starks knowing about the kids burning really would have made a bigger impact. I was waiting for them to find out the whole time, but I never got the impression from the show that the Starks were the moral anchors, just Ned. So I wasn't shocked when the mom and rob acted the way they did. It seemed in line with their characters to me. I think maybe book readers let their impression of the characters carry over into the show too much, and they make assumptions that would ruin the show to them in ways someone like me wouldn't care about?

That said, even I know the Jon Snow thing is stupid. That's probably the one point in the show I thought wasn't great.

 

[Trojita]

I kind of feeling like starting the books have ruined the show for me. I'm about 200+ pages into Clash of Kings.

It made it seem like in the show that Jon Arynn was killed by Cersei and Cersei/Jaime hired the assassin to kill Bran, using Tyrion's knife he supposedly won from Little Finger, but in the book its still a mystery.

Did they ever mention in the show that Alliser Thorne was sent south to King's Landing with the Wights hand?

 

[Raist]

I kind of feeling like starting the books have ruined the show for me. I'm about 200+ pages into Clash of Kings.

It made it seem like in the show that Jon Arynn was killed by Cersei and Cersei/Jaime hired the assassin to kill Bran, using Tyrion's knife he supposedly won from Little Finger, but in the book its still a mystery.

In the show it feels like Jaime hired the assassin and Cersei thought it was a stupid idea.
In the books, it's never implicitely mentioned, but I do remember than Jaime suspects that Cersei did it. So it's kind of reversed and along the lines of the changes they've made to Jaime's character.

Did they ever mention in the show that Alliser Thorne was sent south to King's Landing with the Wights hand?

I think Mormont tells Jon that he sent him to KL to warn them of the wights menace, yeah, but can't specifically remember if he mentioned the hand.

 

[cubicle47b]

That's a great interview, and really demonstrates how they are considering a lot of this stuff that people like to think happens 'for no reason'. It also makes that second article that much more ridiculous, lol.

That second article got off to a weak start but when it hit the list of changes to characters it started to make some really strong points.

 

[Trojita]

In the show it feels like Jaime hired the assassin and Cersei thought it was a stupid idea.
In the books, it's never implicitely mentioned, but I do remember than Jaime suspects that Cersei did it. So it's kind of reversed and along the lines of the changes they've made to Jaime's character.

In the books, do you mean through Game of Thrones and Clash of Kings? I'm worried that it sounds like its a dropped plot point.

As far as the book goes up into where I am in Clash of Kings., it seems like Little Finger had at least some role in the attempted assassination of Bran and Tyrion remarked how genuinally she seemed when she said she didn't kill Jon Arynn and didn't know who did.

 

[Gvaz]

Season 2 of GOT is a bit divergent from the second book, so while you can generally skip book 1 it is not reccomended. Skipping book 2 to go to 3 is even less reccomended.

I kind of feeling like starting the books have ruined the show for me. I'm about 200+ pages into Clash of Kings.

It made it seem like in the show that Jon Arynn was killed by Cersei and Cersei/Jaime hired the assassin to kill Bran, using Tyrion's knife he supposedly won from Little Finger, but in the book its still a mystery.

Did they ever mention in the show that Alliser Thorne was sent south to King's Landing with the Wights hand?

In the books, it's actually neither of them. It's heavily implied (through several readings it later becomes clearer) that it was a third person who stole tyrions knife and hired someone to kill bran with it, not knowing the value of a dragonbone hilt dagger.

 

[Count of Monte Sawed-Off]

That second article got off to a weak start but when it hit the list of changes to characters it started to make some really strong points.

I don't agree with everything he wrote, but he made some good points here and there.

 

[bengraven]

Did they ever mention in the show that Alliser Thorne was sent south to King's Landing with the Wights hand?

Tyrion tries to talk the Small Council into accepting an audience with Thorne, who's waiting for them in the city, but Cersei cracks a joke about Tyrion believing in snarks and grumpkins and they all laugh and walk out.

We didn't actually see the actor this season.

Ros has essentially become an amalgamation of minor characters, and that's fine.

Especially if (Full series spoiler)

Spoiler

She gets the rap for the Eyrie incident because Littlefinger knows about her double-agent status.

I could see that happening. However...

SOS:

Spoiler

Since Marillion has no tongue and probably can't write in this version, he'll be an even better scapegoat. I can see him show up in the Eeyrie to play for Littlefinger's wedding to Lysa. Oh and btw, yeah, I think he'll marry Lysa in the Eyrie and they'll cut the whole Fingers scene.

 

[Trojita]

Fuck, it sucks when you hit to reply to someone and then read a spoiler you didn't wish to read. It's not anyone's fault of course, just a problem inherit with the system.

What I was going to say is that in the part of 2nd book I just read, it sounds like Tyrion basically was like fuck Thorne because of the way he treated him up at the wall.

 

[Jibbajabbawockky]

That's a great interview, and really demonstrates how they are considering a lot of this stuff that people like to think happens 'for no reason'. It also makes that second article that much more ridiculous, lol.

It still doesn't change how some things fundamentally change the nature of how people will view certain TV characters compared to Book versions. Like with the nature of Robb's marriage on TV versus the Books. And conversely how that affects Cat's character. Having Robb marry Talisa purely out of selfish love as opposed to a sense of honor in the books, changes his whole character. Same with the show holding back news that Theon "killed" Bran and Rickon.

Or something like Qhorin and Jon- the show might be able to build Jon into a leader, but it won't be by Qhorin since they stuck with the main plot points and killed him off. Or with Arya in Harrenhal- she might still develop how she does in the books on the TV show, but in sticking with her leaving Harrenhal by the end of the second book, she's lagging behind character wise and the TV show will presumably need to change more future events to accommodate events that should have already happened in Harrenhal.

After seeing how they handled or didn't handle Jon and Qhorin this season, I'm a bit skeptical how they'll end up managing some of these story and character development changes. The main problem being how they're sticking to the main plot points of the books, but cutting out loads of character development moments, so that the TV versions of characters are majorly lagging behind where they should be when they hit future events.

 

[Sir Hamish]

I'll just repost my speculation regarding Theon and Season 3 from Westeros.org. ASoS spoilers follow:

Spoiler

When we pick up, he's imprisoned in a dungeon. Theon and the other prisoners are regularly taken from the cells to be tortured by a hooded Ramsay Snow, and a scene or two of this is depicted. "Reek" is introduced as a fellow prisoner in the dungeons, who befriends Theon and slowly gains his trust. Reek confides in Theon his plan to escape from the dungeon, and they successfully break out in the night and run for freedom. Reek leads Theon to a clearing in the woods where they are surrounded by Bolton men, and Theon is recaptured. Theon is tortured some more, and he loses a finger, which is given to Robb by Roose at the Twins. Ramsay removes his hood and reveals himself to have been Reek all along. At the finale of the season, Ramsay taunts Theon. Robb and his men are dead, and Roose controls the North now. Balon Greyjoy is dead, and the Ironborn have gone home and are fighting each other. No one is coming to rescue him, and no one is coming to take his head in vengeance and end his torment. An utterly broken Theon becomes Reek. It's not revealed until after the Red Wedding that it was Ramsay and his men who sacked Winterfell.

That's a really awesome idea.

Spoiler

The Ramsay reveal would be amazing if he spent half the season in a cell with him pretending to be Reek.

I think they could do with tying it into Bran's arc for season 3. Instead of having Theon in a dungeon he's being blindfolded and taken between several locations. Farmhouse then maybe an abandoned castle.

Introduce the Reeds into Bran's character arc by having Howland send them to protect him, at which point the Reeds will reveal that Bran etc are being followed by men that want to hurt them.

After the Ramsay reveal you described, maybe half way through the season, have Ramsay explain to Theon that they keep moving around because they are hunting Bran and company, but keep it ambiguous as to whether they want to rescue or kill them

In the season finale they can have Ramsay give up on the chase for Bran after the Reeds/Osha/Direwolves successfully ambush them. He'll decide to return to the Dreadfort and will order his to men to burn down the farmhouse he is holding Theon whilst Theon pleads and screams for his life.

They can have Theon stay absent for season 4 then turn up again in season 5 as a prisoner in the Dreadfort.

EDIT: Forgot the spoiler bars there :\ Sorry