Game of Thrones - mostly

[brewster]

You check out Billions? Its pretty decent. A bit too Sorkinesque for my tastes, but worth watching.

Watched the first three seasons, good show, love the pacing, there is a show that refuses to slow down, and punches way above it's weight because of it. GoT could learn a lot from Billions when it comes to having basically no stall tactics, and just rolling along with the story and not getting bogged down with needless side tangents.

It's a much simpler story about the conflict of 2 people. I enjoyed the 1st season but something about S2 turned me off. But all the hoopla around S4 has convinced me to try again.

Re GoT spinoffs, I think the jury's out one way or the other. Completely depends on the writing and showrunners. GRRM's own "Hedge Knight" prequels about young Aegon were an OK read. The world has already been built, that's the hardest part. From here on in it's just genre writing, like writing a western or sword and sandals epic. If its hack writing it'll be bad. I'm hopeful that they understand that what people want is the novel on screen that you mock. A story with an end in sight from the beginning, not to be milked till it's wrung out and discarded like Lost.

So what do you think of David Simon doing Roth's "Plot Against America"? They'll be filming in my hood. People are going to be projecting a lot of current events on it without a doubt.

[Kath]

Benioff and Weiss trying to be too faithful to the books hurt the television show to appease fans of the book, bad call. Faithful adaptions at the expense of not exploiting the medium you are adapting the original story too, ends up in a worse product, every single time.

If you can't handle criticism of a show you like, that's your problem not mine. The show is still highly watchable in my opinion, even with all it's flaws. It's just not as great as it used to be, and if they screw the landing up really badly, then that would put the show in How I Met Your Motherville.

Thankfully while I am worried they won't nail the landing, I don't think they are going to screw it up that badly even if it's a rough landing. But you never know, endings are hard, and this Game of Thrones ending seems especially high difficulty, they saved a lot for the endgame, not sure if they can get it all in with the time remaining and do it justice, but I hope they do, and at least have some kind of payoff for all that mid-late season filler.

Less Arya would have been more, too much filler in her storyline aside from Harrenhal, and her time with The Hound would have been better if it wasn't just point A to point B travelling, though if they are going to spend a lot of time travelling from point A to point B with Arya, then The Hound was the character to choose. But in general there is way too much travelling in show, with nothing but dialogue, and no real story progress, that works a whole lot better in a novel, not so great on a television show.

A few points:

A bad call in your opinion is a fantastic call for others. Following the book may annoy you, but the people who made this show possible are very satisfied. (referring to all those book buyers.)

I agree with some of what you say, generically speaking, but earlier you said they should have left Arya behind until the end. I was explaining that parts of her journey were fantastic viewing. Don't criticize an entire character's journey because you disliked one part.

Dialogue is called character development, and enriches the overall story. I like delving into characters; I think that's what this show does best. Perhaps nothing but death and destruction without character development is interesting to you, but I don't think that's the norm. If someone tells me a story about how her brother went to prison for 10 years and then got shot in a jailbreak, I'd want to know how we got from his being a normal guy to the end state. Explosions need context. Go watch Michael Bay movies if all you want is the visuals.

I'm not concerned about criticism about a show I had nothing to do with, except be a consumer. Perhaps it's just your style to sound absolutely as angry as possible about things you supposedly love. Maybe you think it makes you look insightful; dunno.

They have six episodes, but have said that some of them will be full feature-length films. It may actually end up being more than 10 episodes worth of stuff; wait and see. I highly doubt they destroy the ending like Lost. Every new season in Lost brought evidence that they weren't going to close out all the loops they started in earlier seasons. I've never felt that way about GoT, even if some parts of some journeys were slow. With Lost, by the time we got to just before the last episodes, it was rather obvious that the ending wasn't going to be satisfactory. I see no such evidence that GoT ending will get the Lindelof/Cuse treatment. Those two simply gave up when they realized they had no answers to the questions they posed back in season 1.

[StCapps]

A few points:

A bad call in your opinion is a fantastic call for others. Following the book may annoy you, but the people who made this show possible are very satisfied. (referring to all those book buyers.)

Popularity does not imply quality. Sacrificing quality for popularity might make the show more money, but it makes it less entertaining.

I am aware that many people disagree with my opinions on GoT, and would dislike the show more if the showrunners handled things my way, but their opinions do not concern me. Most people who like GoT, like it for the wrong reasons, and the showrunners listening to them has no doubt played into the show not living up to it's potential, especially in the last three seasons. Fan service for the fail.

I agree with some of what you say, generically speaking, but earlier you said they should have left Arya behind until the end. I was explaining that parts of her journey were fantastic viewing. Don't criticize an entire character's journey because you disliked one part.

I did not say leave Arya behind, I just said give her more interesting shit to do, don't just check in for the sake of checking in, there are much better ways to develop characters. If they couldn't come up with more interesting things for her to do, then less is more. All the worst parts of her story come from the shows desire to check in on Arya just for the sake of checking in on Arya.

Dialogue is called character development, and enriches the overall story. I like delving into characters; I think that's what this show does best. Perhaps nothing but death and destruction without character development is interesting to you, but I don't think that's the norm. If someone tells me a story about how her brother went to prison for 10 years and then got shot in a jailbreak, I'd want to know how we got from his being a normal guy to the end state. Explosions need context. Go watch Michael Bay movies if all you want is the visuals.

I also think character development is a major part of what makes GoT better than other fantasy offerings, but that doesn't mean checking in with characters for the sake of checking in is the best way to do that.

I'm not concerned about criticism about a show I had nothing to do with, except be a consumer. Perhaps it's just your style to sound absolutely as angry as possible about things you supposedly love. Maybe you think it makes you look insightful; dunno.

If you can find no faults in even the best television shows, you simply aren't looking hard enough, no TV show is perfect, Game of Thrones is no exception. I can and do in fact shit on all my favorite tv shows, it is in no way an indication that I do not like them, I just have a knack for dissecting what are the best and worst parts of a television show, and yes that does make my opinion insightful, whether you can see it or not.

I can sell people on what makes Game of Thrones best qualities are far better than any Game of Thrones fanboy, and I can shit on Game of Thrones for it's worst habits better than any Game of Thrones hater. That's insight, right thur, blind cheerleading and blind hatred can't hang with me.

They have six episodes, but have said that some of them will be full feature-length films. It may actually end up being more than 10 episodes worth of stuff; wait and see. I highly doubt they destroy the ending like Lost. Every new season in Lost brought evidence that they weren't going to close out all the loops they started in earlier seasons. I've never felt that way about GoT, even if some parts of some journeys were slow. With Lost, by the time we got to just before the last episodes, it was rather obvious that the ending wasn't going to be satisfactory. I see no such evidence that GoT ending will get the Lindelof/Cuse treatment. Those two simply gave up when they realized they had no answers to the questions they posed back in season 1.

I am aware of the extra run time on the episodes, I still worry about them nailing the ending, because endings are hard, especially when you build up hype by saving too many explosions for the end at the expense of the last three seasons. Seems like too many loose threads and not enough screen time to satisfactorily resolve them, and with a show like Game of Thrones, they have to try and resolve them, leaving things hanging won't really work.

The problem with Lost wasn't that they didn't answer all of the questions by the ending, it's that they answered too many of them in unsatisfactory manner. Lindelof learned from that mistake in The Leftovers, which didn't milk the concept past the expiration date, and didn't try to answer questions that didn't need answering, because mystery is huge part of what made the show so great.

The Leftovers ending was fantastic, the series was short and sweet, went out on top, with exceptional showmanship, what a final season. Unlike Lost, which was too long, ran out of steam, solved too many mysteries and had a lame final season. But GoT can't do what The Leftovers did, because that kind of ending doesn't fit with GoT style of storytelling, and they have to try and wrap everything up in a neat little bow with tons of moving parts, which is why I have my doubts, because that is the exact path that lead to Lost's shitty final season/ending.

I hope GoT sticks that landing and gets back to it's old form, or even has it's best season yet, but that's a big ask.

[Kath]

Popularity does not imply quality. Sacrificing quality for popularity might make the show more money, but it makes it less entertaining.

For you. You want a show that caters to your unique tastes? Go develop one.

I'd like to point out that my favorite fantasy story of all time was nothing but hundreds of pages, over three books, of characters travelling from point A to point B. (LoTR.) Travelling doesn't make a story boring. Boring stories make a story boring. We completely agree about Bravos; you just give it more negative weight than I do. Perhaps that's just the nature of a positive mindset versus a negative one.

/shrug

[StCapps]

Popularity does not imply quality. Sacrificing quality for popularity might make the show more money, but it makes it less entertaining.

For you. You want a show that caters to your unique tastes? Go develop one.

I'd like to point out that my favorite fantasy story of all time was nothing but hundreds of pages, over three books, of characters travelling from point A to point B. (LoTR.) Travelling doesn't make a story boring. Boring stories make a story boring. We completely agree about Bravos; you just give it more negative weight than I do. Perhaps that's just the nature of a positive mindset versus a negative one.

/shrug

The most boring parts of Lord of The Rings was too much point A to point B travel. LOTR did a better job than most with it's point A to point B travel, as does GoT, but that isn't what makes GoT or LOTR good, too much of that stuff holds them back.

[Kath]

Mine is not a negative mindset, it's positive one, it's just isn't as positive as yours, so you mistake it for negativity.

You've always been negative. Perhaps it is your writing style, but you come off as a boy living in his mom's basement who doesn't have any friends. If you want to be perceived as a positive person, try behaving in a more positive way.

Do you disagree that LoTR was a fantastic series based on nothing but characters travelling from A to B?

[StCapps]

Do you disagree that LoTR was a fantastic series based on nothing but characters travelling from A to B?

I liked LOTR in spite of too much point A to point B travel, same with GoT. I am not being negative, you just don't like people criticizing television shows you like, that's all.

Some shows don't have enough point A to point B travel, some shows have too much of it, GoT is in the latter category, in the first four seasons, the show was a lot closer to the Goldilocks Zone on that tip, but the last three seasons, way too much of it. Hopefully they'll have less of that in the final season, since they need to spend the time on actually wrapping things up, which should leave less screen time for that kind of filler.

[Kath]

Do you disagree that LoTR was a fantastic series based on nothing but characters travelling from A to B?

I liked LOTR in spite of too much point A to point B travel, same with GoT. I am not being negative, you just don't like people criticizing television shows you like, that's all.

Nah. You just primarily focus on the negative with all things; it's your thing. We all get it. You come across angry. Perhaps you don't mean to, but you always sound like you are pissed off.

Which parts of LoTR were NOT about travelling? LOL.... A few brief rest stops along the way doesn't mean it wasn't all about the travel. Shire > Mordor > Shire. Nothing but a giant round-trip journey to get a ring in some fire. The fact that they stayed in some hotels along the way doesn't detract from that.

[StCapps]

Do you disagree that LoTR was a fantastic series based on nothing but characters travelling from A to B?

I liked LOTR in spite of too much point A to point B travel, same with GoT. I am not being negative, you just don't like people criticizing television shows you like, that's all.

Nah. You just primarily focus on the negative with all things; it's your thing. We all get it. You come across angry. Perhaps you don't mean to, but you always sound like you are pissed off.

Which parts of LoTR were NOT about travelling? LOL.... A few brief rest stops along the way doesn't mean it wasn't all about the travel. Shire > Mordor > Shire. Nothing but a giant round-trip journey to get a ring in some fire. The fact that they stayed in some hotels along the way doesn't detract from that.

When things happened at specific locations, those were the most interesting parts, travelling between those points were the most boring parts.

I'm not angry at all, you are projecting based on how you would feel if you wrote the same words, I am quite laid back when criticizing Game of Thrones, I can assure you. To you I might come across as angry, but that doesn't mean I'm angry, it just makes you a shitty mind reader, looking for a convenient reason to not put any stock in my opinion. You write me off as angry hater, and that way you don't have to consider my points in good faith.

[StCapps]

During last season when many of you were shitting on Game of Thrones, for time jumping and shit, I was the one saying, this season isn't as bad as people are saying, calm down everybody. The fanboys and haters, I attack them both with equal fervor, Kath is just the squeaky fanboy getting the grease right now is all. If some GoT hater comes in here shooting their mouth off, they'll get theirs too, just watch me.

The heydaralons of the world think I'm way too soft on Game of Thrones, you think I'm too hard on it, but I'm in the goldilocks zone. Bad arguments going to take flak from StCapps, who knew?