Game of Thrones
Apr. 21st, 2011 07:56 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
shapinglightOkay, I've never read the books and I'm a long way from remembering everyone's names, but I thought I'd make a quick post about it.
Spoilers for ep 1 within (and I should probably nip over to![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
queenofthorns's LJ and nab some icons.
First of all, I'm not nearly as much of a fantasy fan as I used to be. As a child I lapped up the Narnia books and Tolkien, and moved on from there to discover other writers, notably Ursula K Le Guin, who I think is by far the best writer out of those three. However, although I still will occasionally read some fantasy (I love Terry Pratchett and Diana Wynne Jones), I've not that much interest in the genre these days, or rather in certain permutations of it. I may never read the source material for this series, and I came to it as someone who is a little impatient with the rather po-faced Tolkienian version of fantasy.
As such, there were moments when watching ep 1 of A Game of Thrones when I found myself desperate for a bit of humour, or when my brain started making up sarcastic comments. However, there weren't many such moments, because it was just so well made and beautiful to look at -the prologue set in that snowy landscape beyond that wall thing, was brilliantly done. Also, I had enough trouble trying to keep track of who all the characters were - and there were an awful lot of them.
I think by the end I was pretty clear on who was who, and was already beginning to decide who I liked and who I didn't. In the like column, Sean Bean's character, the bastard son character (gotta feel sorry for the bastard son), most of the women, especially the careworn looking mother of the family, and the dwarf. The dwarf was my favourite. In the not-sure column, all the other male characters, the Queen and the blonde girl, though I felt desperately sorry for her. In the loathe and want to condemn to the fiery pits of hell column (there are three columns, who knew?) the blonde girl's horrid brother.
There was also a lot of rather iffy stuff in the ep, including some of the racial casting and the amount of female nudity. I have thoughts about that too - in that, though there were an awful lot of boobs on display, on one notable occasion, to be all 'wahay!boobs!' about it, you would have to be looking at them from the position of a very nasty abusive character. I also understand that one of the sexual incidents in the ep was a lot more rape like than in the book, but have to say the way it looked to me, to make it less rape like could well have made it more offensive, not less. Still, it's a very fine line. And some people are still going to be 'wahay!boobs!' about it because they don't care if they're identifying with an abuser, in fact it may turn them on.
I would like to know what the makers' reasoning was for the changes they made. Were they thinking about anything like that, or was it just that they felt they were showing a medieval-type patriarchal world in which women have to find other ways of exercising power and they thought that was one way of showing it? I dunno.
Anyway, I'll definitely carry on watching. I think trying to bring something this big and intricate to the small screen must be very difficult and so far I'm impressed (though occasionally weirded out, and occasionally inclined to mock).
Spoilers for ep 1 within (and I should probably nip over to
queenofthorns's LJ and nab some icons.First of all, I'm not nearly as much of a fantasy fan as I used to be. As a child I lapped up the Narnia books and Tolkien, and moved on from there to discover other writers, notably Ursula K Le Guin, who I think is by far the best writer out of those three. However, although I still will occasionally read some fantasy (I love Terry Pratchett and Diana Wynne Jones), I've not that much interest in the genre these days, or rather in certain permutations of it. I may never read the source material for this series, and I came to it as someone who is a little impatient with the rather po-faced Tolkienian version of fantasy.
As such, there were moments when watching ep 1 of A Game of Thrones when I found myself desperate for a bit of humour, or when my brain started making up sarcastic comments. However, there weren't many such moments, because it was just so well made and beautiful to look at -the prologue set in that snowy landscape beyond that wall thing, was brilliantly done. Also, I had enough trouble trying to keep track of who all the characters were - and there were an awful lot of them.
I think by the end I was pretty clear on who was who, and was already beginning to decide who I liked and who I didn't. In the like column, Sean Bean's character, the bastard son character (gotta feel sorry for the bastard son), most of the women, especially the careworn looking mother of the family, and the dwarf. The dwarf was my favourite. In the not-sure column, all the other male characters, the Queen and the blonde girl, though I felt desperately sorry for her. In the loathe and want to condemn to the fiery pits of hell column (there are three columns, who knew?) the blonde girl's horrid brother.
There was also a lot of rather iffy stuff in the ep, including some of the racial casting and the amount of female nudity. I have thoughts about that too - in that, though there were an awful lot of boobs on display, on one notable occasion, to be all 'wahay!boobs!' about it, you would have to be looking at them from the position of a very nasty abusive character. I also understand that one of the sexual incidents in the ep was a lot more rape like than in the book, but have to say the way it looked to me, to make it less rape like could well have made it more offensive, not less. Still, it's a very fine line. And some people are still going to be 'wahay!boobs!' about it because they don't care if they're identifying with an abuser, in fact it may turn them on.
I would like to know what the makers' reasoning was for the changes they made. Were they thinking about anything like that, or was it just that they felt they were showing a medieval-type patriarchal world in which women have to find other ways of exercising power and they thought that was one way of showing it? I dunno.
Anyway, I'll definitely carry on watching. I think trying to bring something this big and intricate to the small screen must be very difficult and so far I'm impressed (though occasionally weirded out, and occasionally inclined to mock).
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2011-04-21 07:05 pm (UTC)lol, i totally should have been able to guess that you'd hate the queen's brother. *g*
personally, i'm really happy to see lena headey (sp?) in something again, she was awesome in the sarah connor chronicles. and i think they did a pretty good job balancing dense exposition with pacing.
i've never read the books, but with only a little concentration, i was able to parse out who's who. and i'm definitely looking forward to the next ep!
no subject
Date: 2011-04-21 07:24 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-04-21 07:54 pm (UTC)Secondly, there actually were some instances where HBO chose to clothe people who were naked in the books (like the queen and her brother in the last scene) so overall, there were no more breasts than in the books :P In the case of Danaerys (the blonde princess), part of it may have been titillation but I also think they were trying to provide a shorthand for how she's just a commodity to her brother and to her new husband. Rest assured that she does NOT stay a commodity for the duration of the series; she comes into her own quite spectacularly eventually.
As for the racial casting ... well, the Dothraki are sorta based on Mongols (or Huns) and given that they filmed in Malta, rather than Mongolia, I guess they had to go for the Maltese extras on hand. I find that part of the books the least well done, tbh, because we only see this culture from one POV (that of Danaerys, the blonde princess.)
no subject
Date: 2011-04-21 08:07 pm (UTC)If you mean the nasty platinum blond, yeah, I loathed him. If you mean the queen's incestuous brother, jury's still out, but in the normal way of things I take a dim view of people who murder 10 years olds. We'll see. Don't feel I know enough about him yet, whereas I feel I need all I need to know about the other bloke.
and i think they did a pretty good job balancing dense exposition with pacing.
I agree. I was pretty impressed. And I'm looking forward to the next ep too. :)
no subject
Date: 2011-04-21 08:09 pm (UTC)I usually like the bastard sons. Even Edmund from King Lear.
no subject
Date: 2011-04-21 08:15 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-04-21 08:19 pm (UTC)Oops! So sorry. I've changed it.
Secondly, there actually were some instances where HBO chose to clothe people who were naked in the books (like the queen and her brother in the last scene) so overall, there were no more breasts than in the books
Ah, good to know. Interesting. I did get it being a shorthand about her being a commodity, sort of what I was trying to say. I guess it might go over some viewers' heads, but that will always be the case.
she comes into her own quite spectacularly eventually
Good to know. I felt so sorry for her, poor little thing.
I find that part of the books the least well done, tbh, because we only see this culture from one POV (that of Danaerys, the blonde princess.)
That's a pity. It may be one of those cases where I wish the makers weren't so faithful to the source material. I wished that a lot when watching LotR: the Two Towers with my family.
no subject
Date: 2011-04-21 08:20 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-04-21 08:23 pm (UTC)I preferred McKellan's Widow Twankie.
no subject
Date: 2011-04-21 08:29 pm (UTC)I think you'll be majorly pleased with the fate of Viserys (the horrid brother) and it should only take a few eps to get there. :)
The sexism thing is tricky with this. The world in the books is almost as misogynist as the real middleages were. But the female characters are amazing and every bit as different and versatile as the male ones. And they each have their own way of adapting to the circumstances, from playing the game,subverting it from underneath, to completely rejecting it,everything is present.
no subject
Date: 2011-04-21 08:37 pm (UTC)Actually I think they broke even. Because the scene where the Viserys is talking to Dany and he physically accosts her (before she gets into the bath) is done through her clothes. He doesn't rip her dress off.
...the pinch cruelly hard through the rough fabric of her tunic.
I just started reading the book series and noticed that difference. So the Lannisters were clothed, while Dany was undressed prematurely by her brother rather than later when she entered the bath with her serving girls attending her.
[eta] part of it may have been titillation but I also think they were trying to provide a shorthand for how she's just a commodity to her brother and to her new husband
Oh, I see you said this! Well, I'm not entirely sure I agree in the sense that I think the nudity between Viserys and Dany may also be hinting at how the Targaryen siblings were known to marry each other in order to keep the bloodline pure. So it was probably more a hint at the potentially incestuous relationship between them, at least in how her brother approached things.
no subject
Date: 2011-04-21 08:37 pm (UTC):)
no subject
Date: 2011-04-21 08:46 pm (UTC)I thought the actor playing the role was very good. He was also quite sexy. It was easy to see why the ladies of easy virtue liked him.
I did see some article saying that the female characters in this should be regarded in the same way as the ones in Mad Men, only perhaps even more so. Sounds about right. No one would call Joan or Peggy a pushover.
no subject
Date: 2011-04-21 10:52 pm (UTC)Very glad you wrote this, I'll be curious about your opinions as the show progresses to get the perspective of someone who hasn't read the books.
no subject
Date: 2011-04-21 10:55 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-04-22 12:45 am (UTC)Horrid brother is horrid, yo. King Robert is pretty much exactly the way he appeared in the episode (and it was great casting. That's pretty much exactly the way I pictured him). Basically all the main casting was good. All the main characters seem to be basically the way one would envision them.
And, I suspect that the dwarf will be a fave. The actor is impressive and he has a really good plot.
I also understand that one of the sexual incidents in the ep was a lot more rape like than in the book, but have to say the way it looked to me, to make it less rape like could well have made it more offensive, not less.
It was less rape-like in the book, but I can understand why they changed it because the way the book handled it was... odd. In the book, he doesn't just pounce on her. After he sees her crying, he sits her down. Then he sits facing her, so that he's on her level. She moves to undress him (albeit it's rather subservient). Then she undresses him. They make out some, he asks "No?" and she consents "Yes" and she initiates the sex. However, it's a really strange scene because the follow-up is more along the lines of what you would've expect from the way it was filmed for the show (so I guess things didn't go well after the fade out in the book). And after seeing the series and re-reading the scene, I can see how it could easily have looked a lot more like that scene. The way it played in the book is actually somewhat odd given the story and the Dothraki culture as a whole. So, yeah, it was a change, not as big a change as I initially thought, and not one that I argue with very much. I don't think it will substantially change anything and it doesn't change my perception of the characters. So, in the end *shrug* (Caveat: I really disliked the Dothraki part of the story in the book.)
no subject
Date: 2011-04-22 12:58 am (UTC)On the other hand Tyrion wasn't introduced in a brothel. But then he didn't have a memorable introduction in the book, so I can understand their choosing to make one and one that makes sense to the character.
no subject
Date: 2011-04-22 01:09 am (UTC)I'm only about 200 pgs into the first book. Not sure how I feel about Tyrion's introduction via a brothel.
no subject
Date: 2011-04-22 02:37 am (UTC)Tyrions introduction isn't accurate (as far as the book goes), but I think I understand why they chose that. I won't explain, though, because I don't want to spoil. (I only finished the book this week.)
no subject
Date: 2011-04-22 05:02 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-04-22 07:18 am (UTC)There are some things I just didn't want to wait 10 episodes to see.
no subject
Date: 2011-04-22 09:55 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-04-22 10:03 am (UTC)I'm in the same situation with True Blood. However, from what people have been saying, these books appear to have a great deal more literary merit.
I'm curious as to how the Dothraki will be treated in further episodes, because much of the action having to do with Dany (the blonde girl) is within the confines of their society.
People have been reassuring me that Dany's story is going to improve. Possibly, in the long run, it'll be the racial thing that bothers me more. We'll see, though. If there were shortcomings on that score in the book, it may well be that the show writers will be able to turn that around somehow while still being true to the story.
no subject
Date: 2011-04-22 10:05 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-04-22 10:15 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-04-22 10:20 am (UTC)Caveat: I really disliked the Dothraki part of the story in the book.)
Yes, I've seen you say that several times. Is it because of the dodgy sexual politics, which the episode seems to have succeeded (so far) in making less dodgy but still pretty unpleasant, or is it more the stereotypical exoticism thing? Or neither?
no subject
Date: 2011-04-22 02:38 pm (UTC)The Dothraki are more or less the Huns, with all the stuff that goes with the Huns (i.e. the raping and the pillaging, the slave taking and the slave trading.) And, while they try to show more than that-- I don't think we're supposed to just see them as some horrid barbaric people-- I still found I considered them to be barbarous in a largely unredeeming manner, so I found myself feeling more for their victims than for them.
I also disliked that so much of the first half of Dany's plot revolved more or less around her sexual relationship with her husband.
The way the book is written, different chapters have different POV characters. So there's a chapter through one person's eyes. Then the next chapter is through someone else's (which is a neat device as you then see how different people see things differently). It might take another 100 pages before you come back to that character's POV again. It's not problematic when you have several of the POV characters in the same plot, as happens a lot. It's interesting to see all of their different takes, their misperceptions, and sometimes in the cases of the kids, their failure to really understand what just happened (even though the audience realizes). However, the only POV in the Dothraki story is Dany's. So it would be 50 to 100 pages between her story. So for something that felt like about half of the book, her story is 'how is her sexual relationship with her husband going now?' And in the book, Dany is only thirteen years old. Plus, I never felt Kahl Drogo showed me much (in the show they developed a Dothraki language and they'll use subtitles. In the book there's just precious little conversation between Drogo and Dany, which just made it something that didn't involve me very much. ) Basically, I guess it boils down to the fact I didn't enjoy spending time with the Huns. The plot does have a neat climax (no pun intended), and it's not like brutality is localized to just the Dothraki. It's just if it were only a book about the Dothraki plot, I wouldn't have finished the novel.
no subject
Date: 2011-04-22 02:39 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-04-22 02:59 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-04-22 08:19 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-04-25 03:46 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-04-25 03:47 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-04-25 05:36 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-04-25 05:41 pm (UTC)I haven't watched ep 2 as yet. Hoping to catch up tomorrow morning.
Also, it may possibly interest you to know that the Hungarians have a very different view of the Huns to most people. They believe themselves to be descended from them (not the case, I think) and Attila is (or used to be) a popular name in Hungary.