Game of F'ing Thrones: the F'ing Show

Page: 1 ... 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16 ... 24
Online now: DukeofNuke, Metacell
Post Reply
ukimalefu want, but shouldn't, may anyway
User avatar
Alexander Supertramp posted:
True story, I think it's hard though. I don't think I've ever had a productive discussion with someone about a comparison between an adaptation and its source material. Rings, Hobbit, Harry Potter, this...whatever it is, people tend to think of them as the same entity and just end up being angry that one is different from the other.

Anyway, pretty much what you said.


"Rings, Hobbit, Harry Potter"

You haven't read the books, you're not a real fan.
Alexander Supertramp this was uncalled for.
User avatar
ukimalefu posted:
Alexander Supertramp posted:
True story, I think it's hard though. I don't think I've ever had a productive discussion with someone about a comparison between an adaptation and its source material. Rings, Hobbit, Harry Potter, this...whatever it is, people tend to think of them as the same entity and just end up being angry that one is different from the other.

Anyway, pretty much what you said.


"Rings, Hobbit, Harry Potter"

You haven't read the books, you're not a real fan.


I can't tell if you're being sarcastic or not but Jesus Christ, this is exactly my point. I've read all of them, the Hobbit about 15 times and Rings at least 5.
ukimalefu want, but shouldn't, may anyway
User avatar
Alexander Supertramp posted:
ukimalefu posted:
Alexander Supertramp posted:
True story, I think it's hard though. I don't think I've ever had a productive discussion with someone about a comparison between an adaptation and its source material. Rings, Hobbit, Harry Potter, this...whatever it is, people tend to think of them as the same entity and just end up being angry that one is different from the other.

Anyway, pretty much what you said.


"Rings, Hobbit, Harry Potter"

You haven't read the books, you're not a real fan.


I can't tell if you're being sarcastic or not but Jesus Christ, this is exactly my point. I've read all of them, the Hobbit about 15 times and Rings at least 5.


Not sarcastic at all. I feel that way. Call me an annoying geek, but when someone says "I love the Harry Potter movies"... that's ok, but HP is a series of books. Same with LOTR.

I've read all the HP books at least once a year, I think, since they came out.

I got into LOTR late in life, but read the books (including The Hobbit) about a year before before the movies, and have read them all many times.

I also like and have watched all the movies a few times.

And yes, there are LOTS of differences between the books and the movies.
user Stupid cockwomble
User avatar
There are always differences. What can be imagined in the mind of the reader can't always be shown on a screen. Books can also be far more detailed. The critical aspect for me has always been how faithful to the general story and if that deviates much, whether the book author was involved. I was upset about the HHTG movie until I found out it was from a script DNA had written himself.
Alexander Supertramp this was uncalled for.
User avatar
ukimalefu posted:
Alexander Supertramp posted:
ukimalefu posted:
Alexander Supertramp posted:
True story, I think it's hard though. I don't think I've ever had a productive discussion with someone about a comparison between an adaptation and its source material. Rings, Hobbit, Harry Potter, this...whatever it is, people tend to think of them as the same entity and just end up being angry that one is different from the other.

Anyway, pretty much what you said.


"Rings, Hobbit, Harry Potter"

You haven't read the books, you're not a real fan.


I can't tell if you're being sarcastic or not but Jesus Christ, this is exactly my point. I've read all of them, the Hobbit about 15 times and Rings at least 5.


Not sarcastic at all. I feel that way. Call me an annoying geek, but when someone says "I love the Harry Potter movies"... that's ok, but HP is a series of books. Same with LOTR.

I've read all the HP books at least once a year, I think, since they came out.

I got into LOTR late in life, but read the books (including The Hobbit) about a year before before the movies, and have read them all many times.

I also like and have watched all the movies a few times.

And yes, there are LOTS of differences between the books and the movies.


Did you not enjoy True Detective because it took liberties with the King in Yellow? Was the Lion King a bad Hamlet adaptation because it used lions instead of people?

I mean, enjoy things as you will. But why do you feel like you can't be a fan of something without an exhaustive knowledge of the source material?
ukimalefu want, but shouldn't, may anyway
User avatar
True Detective had a book? didn't know. Loved it.

I've seen and liked a lot of Shakespeare adaptations and never read the original source. :shrug: :p

-

I did say it's ok to like the movies, but if you've only seen the movies, you know only a fraction of what happens, and some of the thing you know from the movies never even happened.

-

Oh, and one more thing, I've only read The Silmarillion... maybe twice, I'm only sure about once. A movie, or six, would be impossible.
user Stupid cockwomble
User avatar
I've tried to read The Silmarillion as a first crack at LOR. A mistake, it seems, because it's an expansion meant for those already familiar with the works, making it a tough slog for the ignorant reader.

Now I've got a set of the movie-cover paperbacks that I got for free - much easier to read.
Alexander Supertramp this was uncalled for.
User avatar
ukimalefu posted:
True Detective had a book? didn't know. Loved it.

I've seen and liked a lot of Shakespeare adaptations and never read the original source. :shrug: :p

-

I did say it's ok to like the movies, but if you've only seen the movies, you know only a fraction of what happens, and some of the thing you know from the movies never even happened.



The Yellow King is a book of short stories. True Detective references it often and plays with a lot of its themes. In many senses an adaptation but also a discrete piece of work.

If you only watch, for example, Harry Potter movies and don't read the books, you don't have the same immersive sense of the world but you do get a story from start to finish.

If it's done well it doesn't have less merit, it's something different.

Again, enjoy something as you will but there's no 'correct' version of something in these cases. Judge them on their own merits.
Alexander Supertramp this was uncalled for.
User avatar
user posted:
I've tried to read The Silmarillion as a first crack at LOR. A mistake, it seems, because it's an expansion meant for those already familiar with the works, making it a tough slog for the ignorant reader.

Now I've got a set of the movie-cover paperbacks that I got for free - much easier to read.


The Silmarillion was rough. I struggled through it and retained basically nothing.
Alexander Supertramp posted:
Did you not enjoy True Detective because it took liberties with the King in Yellow?

Lolwut. Referencing lines from some of the stories in The King in Yellow is way different from saying that True Detective is an adaptation of it. Have you ever read it? How is it any kind of a version of those stories? If you really want to get down on it, TD is more of an adaptation of Ligotti's philosophical writing.

And there is a big difference in basing a story from another work and making it "new" (like say, Lion King and Hamlet or Clueless and Emma) vs outright saying it is a direct adaptation like LOTR as a movie instead of the written word.
Alexander Supertramp this was uncalled for.
User avatar
StaticAge posted:
Alexander Supertramp posted:
Did you not enjoy True Detective because it took liberties with the King in Yellow?

Lolwut. Referencing lines from some of the stories in The King in Yellow is way different from saying that True Detective is an adaptation of it. Have you ever read it? How is it any kind of a version of those stories? If you really want to get down on it, TD is more of an adaptation of Ligotti's philosophical writing.

And there is a big difference in basing a story from another work and making it "new" (like say, Lion King and Hamlet or Clueless and Emma) vs outright saying it is a direct adaptation like LOTR as a movie instead of the written word.


I have read the King in Yellow. True Detective does more than referencing a few lines. I felt like the earlier episodes set you up to believe it was an homage (and made me think there would be true supernatural aspects to the show) before taking it in a different direction.

But I was making a point about how closely these things need to be tied to each other to be considered worthy or correct or right or whatever.
TOS
User avatar
they're different media, books and tv/film

no matter what they'll never be the same because they can't be the same

apples and oranges, man
ukimalefu want, but shouldn't, may anyway
User avatar
Going back to topic, I never read the Game of Thrones books, but it doesn't matter because this thread is about the stick fiddling show :P

(I'd like to read the books)
user Stupid cockwomble
User avatar
I've reading the first book in e-format, mostly in downtimes at work. It's on my phone and I can dig it out of my pocket for a quick read. Some minor differences: the old guy gets executed, not the young one; the horse-faced reference to Ayra. I'll try to not get too far but it's easy for me to get caught up in reading good novels and I have a series of 5 of the books.

As far as the show goes, I believe I'll keep watching until they finally kill off a character that I like far too much to want to continue. I'm afraid that it's bound to happen. Now comes the long hiatus. Maybe I'll revive this thread next year.
Pariah Know Your Enemy
User avatar
Farmerkev posted:
StaticAge posted:
Pariah posted:
Farmerkev posted:
DukeofNuke posted:
Lena Headey deserves an Emmy for her walk of atonement.
(Yeah, I know they used a body double, but still ... )


I was rather hoping to see her bloody revenge tonight, something to look forward to next year I guess.

Me too!

Nah. She totally screwed herself. She dissed Jaime. She never valued Tyrion's accomplishments and even resented her father's direct counsel. She's always been so concerned with her own power that she became blinded to her family's needs. Her hatred of Margaery is mostly because she sees her as an enemy, and because of her jealousy she fails to see the value of her influence on her son, the realm and the city. She has tossed aside everyone she could have used and manipulated and instead made enemies and created powers that now are in conflict with her own needs and wants. She sucks as a ruler, and instead of making plans she only reacts to perceived threats. Her paranoia has done her in, and she is responsible for her own fall.


Don't confuse my bloodlust and wish to see horrible and painful death to the religious nuts as liking her.
Also, the show needs more of Margaery and that crazy Dornish girl.

Ya, this is a challenge. I hate the aristocracy a lot but I think I hate religious nut bags worse.
Best case: They all die. :)
jkahless Custom Title
User avatar
Pariah posted:
Farmerkev posted:
StaticAge posted:
Pariah posted:
Farmerkev posted:
DukeofNuke posted:
Lena Headey deserves an Emmy for her walk of atonement.
(Yeah, I know they used a body double, but still ... )


I was rather hoping to see her bloody revenge tonight, something to look forward to next year I guess.

Me too!

Nah. She totally screwed herself. She dissed Jaime. She never valued Tyrion's accomplishments and even resented her father's direct counsel. She's always been so concerned with her own power that she became blinded to her family's needs. Her hatred of Margaery is mostly because she sees her as an enemy, and because of her jealousy she fails to see the value of her influence on her son, the realm and the city. She has tossed aside everyone she could have used and manipulated and instead made enemies and created powers that now are in conflict with her own needs and wants. She sucks as a ruler, and instead of making plans she only reacts to perceived threats. Her paranoia has done her in, and she is responsible for her own fall.


Don't confuse my bloodlust and wish to see horrible and painful death to the religious nuts as liking her.
Also, the show needs more of Margaery and that crazy Dornish girl.

Ya, this is a challenge. I hate the aristocracy a lot but I think I hate religious nut bags worse.
Best case: They all die. :)


You might be the only people who's wish for this show is fufilled. ;)
Pariah Know Your Enemy
User avatar
jkahless posted:
Pariah posted:
Farmerkev posted:
StaticAge posted:
Pariah posted:
Farmerkev posted:
DukeofNuke posted:
Lena Headey deserves an Emmy for her walk of atonement.
(Yeah, I know they used a body double, but still ... )


I was rather hoping to see her bloody revenge tonight, something to look forward to next year I guess.

Me too!

Nah. She totally screwed herself. She dissed Jaime. She never valued Tyrion's accomplishments and even resented her father's direct counsel. She's always been so concerned with her own power that she became blinded to her family's needs. Her hatred of Margaery is mostly because she sees her as an enemy, and because of her jealousy she fails to see the value of her influence on her son, the realm and the city. She has tossed aside everyone she could have used and manipulated and instead made enemies and created powers that now are in conflict with her own needs and wants. She sucks as a ruler, and instead of making plans she only reacts to perceived threats. Her paranoia has done her in, and she is responsible for her own fall.


Don't confuse my bloodlust and wish to see horrible and painful death to the religious nuts as liking her.
Also, the show needs more of Margaery and that crazy Dornish girl.

Ya, this is a challenge. I hate the aristocracy a lot but I think I hate religious nut bags worse.
Best case: They all die. :)


You might be the only people who's wish for this show is fufilled. ;)

I know! Awesome, right? :D
Almost everyone in GOTs is despicable in some way or another so let the blood flow.
user Stupid cockwomble
User avatar
Ayra is PURE.
Pariah Know Your Enemy
User avatar
user posted:
Ayra is PURE.

Are you kidding? She is a cold as ice killer.
user Stupid cockwomble
User avatar
Pariah posted:
user posted:
Ayra is PURE.

Are you kidding? She is a cold as ice killer.

And what about that makes her not pure?
Arya rules. Hey, though, Bran is pretty pure, right?
Pariah Know Your Enemy
User avatar
user posted:
Pariah posted:
user posted:
Ayra is PURE.

Are you kidding? She is a cold as ice killer.

And what about that makes her not pure?

Pure evil maybe.
My cultural background does not cause me to equate virginity with purity.
user Stupid cockwomble
User avatar
Neither does mine.

Is it evil to want revenge against people who have greatly wronged you and the ones you love?
Pariah Know Your Enemy
User avatar
user posted:
Neither does mine.

Is it evil to want revenge against people who have greatly wronged you and the ones you love?

Not at all, but being unaffected by it at such a young age suggests she may be a sociopath.
TOS
User avatar
ukimalefu want, but shouldn't, may anyway
User avatar
Robert B. Dandy Highwayman
User avatar
So, back in Season 3 -- what the hell happened to Edmure Tully who got married during the Red Wedding? I kind of thought he'd hear about his friend's death and be all "WTF, Walter Frey?" Did he get dragged off to his death, is he living in marital bliss?
Robert B. posted:
So, back in Season 3 -- what the hell happened to Edmure Tully who got married during the Red Wedding? I kind of thought he'd hear about his friend's death and be all "WTF, Walter Frey?" Did he get dragged off to his death, is he living in marital bliss?

Basically Edmure Tully is the sperm donor for the continuation of the Tully line under the total control of Walder Frey. If Edmure gives Walder enough grandchildren to "guarantee" that at least one of them will survive to adulthood, then Edmure will be likely become the last Tully death from the Red Wedding.
Robert B. posted:
So, back in Season 3 -- what the hell happened to Edmure Tully who got married during the Red Wedding? I kind of thought he'd hear about his friend's death and be all "WTF, Walter Frey?" Did he get dragged off to his death, is he living in marital bliss?


It was his sister (Catelyn Stark) and his nephew (Robb Stark). And yeah, if someone doesn't come save Edmure, he's toast once he has a couple of sons. I think it's intimated that his wine was drugged and that will likely be his fate.
TOS
User avatar
such a happy, uplifting show
mmaverick my steady systematic decline
User avatar
Well, it is when you realize the whole story is about how Sam finds a wife and gets to go to hogwarts.
ukimalefu want, but shouldn't, may anyway
User avatar
mmaverick posted:
Well, it is when you realize the whole story is about how Sam finds a wife and gets to go to hogwarts.


You win the internet.
user Stupid cockwomble
User avatar
I must have missed an explanation - isn't Sansa still married to the dwarf? She's a bigamist or she has cause to claim her marriage to the creep void.

Except for the kid she's undoubtably carrying in her belly by now.
jkahless Custom Title
User avatar
Wasn't consumated?
maurvir Steamed meat popsicle
User avatar
jkahless posted:
Wasn't consumated?


I always found it ironic that Tyrion was one of the most honorable characters in the show...
DukeofNuke FREE RADICAL
User avatar
user posted:
I must have missed an explanation - isn't Sansa still married to the dwarf? She's a bigamist or she has cause to claim her marriage to the creep void.

Except for the kid she's undoubtably carrying in her belly by now.


At some point the Maester, or maybe it was the resident priest of Winterfell declared Sansa's marriage to Tyrion null and void, as it was never consummated and he is a traitor and convicted murder on the run. I remember that being mentioned but I can't pinpoint the moment.
user Stupid cockwomble
User avatar
Ah. Still seems terribly easy to discard, esp. considering it was a royal wedding.

And this:

Kit Harington Is Slowly Realizing That the Next 9 Months of His Life Are Going to Be Hell

The fact that he's kept the same hair is very telling. I imagine that would be the first thing to go if he's dropped the character.
Harrington could psych out everyone and cut his hair. Even if it didn't grow completely out by the time filming for the next GoT season started, there is make-up.
user Stupid cockwomble
User avatar
Wigs are expensive and not the same thing, particularly when there's 5 seasons on tape showing it.
TOS
User avatar
hbo chief: "dead is dead is dead"

Quote:
Asked to chime in on whether fan-favorite character Jon Snow is dead, as he appeared to be at the end of last season, Lombardo echoed the show’s producers, saying, “Dead is dead is dead. He be dead. Yes. Everything I’ve seen, heard and read, he is dead.”


also: he expects the show to wrap at the end of season eight
Subsequent topic  /  Preceding topic
Post Reply

Game of F'ing Thrones: the F'ing Show

Page: 1 ... 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16 ... 24