Game of Thrones

Come here and discuss your favorite Non-Tolkien movies.

Game of Thrones

Postby Edemardil » Sat Apr 16, 2011 3:10 am

Not really a movie but it looks fairly epic! Anyone looking forward to Game of thrones? I admit I have not read the books but I may now that it is coming into media.
User avatar
Edemardil
Citizen of Imladris
 
Posts: 24
Joined: Fri Nov 14, 2003 8:27 pm
Location: Iceland
Top

Postby Pax » Sat Apr 16, 2011 7:49 am

I have it scheduled on my DVR to record. :-) I am looking forward to it. It looks good!
User avatar
Pax
Rider of the Mark

 
Posts: 828
Joined: Thu Sep 11, 2003 4:19 pm
Top

Postby Swordsman_Of_The_Tower » Sat Apr 16, 2011 3:49 pm

Looks fairly epic is well said!

And it's HBO. So even if it's "average" HBO it's still probably great.

I'm looking forward to it.
User avatar
Swordsman_Of_The_Tower
Ranger of the North


 
Posts: 4490
Joined: Sat Aug 10, 2002 3:40 pm
Location: Massachusetts
Top

Postby hamlet » Mon Apr 18, 2011 11:25 am

Meh.

Watched it last night.

Just . . . meh.

When did the White Walkers turn into Morlocks?
User avatar
hamlet
Ringbearer

 
Posts: 10545
Joined: Sun Apr 29, 2001 12:01 pm
Top

Postby Swordsman_Of_The_Tower » Mon Apr 18, 2011 12:56 pm

Didn't watch it last night. Read mixed reviews. Apparently it's heavy on the sex scenes?

I think I was probably better off doing my re-watch of Battlestar Galactica
User avatar
Swordsman_Of_The_Tower
Ranger of the North


 
Posts: 4490
Joined: Sat Aug 10, 2002 3:40 pm
Location: Massachusetts
Top

Postby hamlet » Mon Apr 18, 2011 1:11 pm

Swordsman_Of_The_Tower wrote:Didn't watch it last night. Read mixed reviews. Apparently it's heavy on the sex scenes?

I think I was probably better off doing my re-watch of Battlestar Galactica


Yes, there are sex scenes, but really not any more than are in the books, or would have been in the books had some of these added scenes been in the original novels. For the most part ungratuitous, though they really rushed to get Emilia Clark's clothes off.
User avatar
hamlet
Ringbearer

 
Posts: 10545
Joined: Sun Apr 29, 2001 12:01 pm
Top

Postby The_Angel » Mon Apr 18, 2011 2:34 pm

They seemed rather reluctant to let her put them back on, also.
User avatar
The_Angel
Ranger of the North

 
Posts: 4324
Joined: Sun Dec 31, 2000 9:54 am
Top

Postby Telemachos » Mon Apr 18, 2011 5:16 pm

The_Angel wrote:They seemed rather reluctant to let her put them back on, also.


And what's wrong with that?

I'm probably close to the perfect audience for this, since I've read the books but don't remember many specific details (and also felt that the series became increasingly rambling and unfocused). So IMHO a TV adaptation is exactly what the story needed: focusing and streamlining.

I enjoyed the pilot. It felt a little by-the-numbers in a couple of spots, but overall I found it entertaining and a good setup for what's to come.
User avatar
Telemachos
Ringbearer


 
Posts: 13782
Joined: Wed Jan 17, 2001 11:19 pm
Location: Los Angeles
Top

Postby Gandalf'sMother » Tue Apr 19, 2011 6:49 am

Meh is right.

I still think the first season of "Rome," with the amazing Ciaran Hinds as Julius Caesar, is HBO's best attempt at historical fiction. I know this isn't history, but in many ways "Game of Thrones" is just the War of the Roses with a thin fantasy veneer.

Perhaps subpar books make for a subpar series, in this case...

-GM
User avatar
Gandalf'sMother
Ringbearer

 
Posts: 11164
Joined: Tue Sep 19, 2000 2:10 pm
Top

Postby hamlet » Tue Apr 19, 2011 10:23 am

GM: You've said that before, and I really think you're off base with it. Not saying the books are high literature, but "subpar" is, IMO, and objectively incorrect way of characterizing them, especially compared with the dreck that gets shoveled into books nowadays. And the "it's nothing but the Wars of the Roses with a thin fantasy veneer on it" is deeply wrong as well. yes, lots of inspiration from said wars, shamelessly in some ways, but aside from inspiration, they really aren't the same thing other than both being about wars of succession.

Telemachos wrote:
The_Angel wrote:They seemed rather reluctant to let her put them back on, also.


And what's wrong with that?

I'm probably close to the perfect audience for this, since I've read the books but don't remember many specific details (and also felt that the series became increasingly rambling and unfocused). So IMHO a TV adaptation is exactly what the story needed: focusing and streamlining.

I enjoyed the pilot. It felt a little by-the-numbers in a couple of spots, but overall I found it entertaining and a good setup for what's to come.


No. Just . . . no.

And nothing wrong with Emilia Clark without clothes. She's very pretty. She just ain't the character. Doesn't fit. Tamzin Merchant was a much better look for the part.
User avatar
hamlet
Ringbearer

 
Posts: 10545
Joined: Sun Apr 29, 2001 12:01 pm
Top

Postby The_Angel » Tue Apr 19, 2011 10:59 am

I've no complaints as to the cladding or lack thereof of Emilia Clarke, but she does look very young, and there was a large amount "squickiness" during the wedding night scene.

And really GM, "subpar"? That's extremely weak assed trolling, by your excellent standards.

The episode did suffer a little from introductory blues -- V/O: That's Jaime Lannister, the Queens brother! -- but having begun a reread recently, it's very difficult to spot areas where there were obvious missed opportunities. While it wasn't as enjoyable as I feel it ought to have been, I'm at a loss to explain why. Unlike other very faithful adaptations, such as the weaker Harry Potter films, where you can easily spot dozens of scenes that could have been left out, compressed or combined, ASOIAF is so big and so dense that a large amount of groundwork simply has to be done, come what may, or the later parts of the story won't make any sense at all.

I agree though that it's not up there with HBO's greats, like Rome or Generation Kill yet, but I've not seen anything to suggest that it won't be, once its bedded down.
User avatar
The_Angel
Ranger of the North

 
Posts: 4324
Joined: Sun Dec 31, 2000 9:54 am
Top

Postby hamlet » Tue Apr 19, 2011 11:41 am

A lot of the groundwork could have been laid out with a short Star Wars style crawl, though. Just a quick paragraph or three of expo setting the stage and freeing up more screen time for the action of the story.

I suppose the real problem is that HBO makes great shows, as long as it's a from scratch or virtually from scratch thing. That's why Rome and the first season of Carnivale were great. Here, adapting a book that, as was said, is so dense and long, is simply a fool's errand in a way.
User avatar
hamlet
Ringbearer

 
Posts: 10545
Joined: Sun Apr 29, 2001 12:01 pm
Top

Postby The_Angel » Tue Apr 19, 2011 12:47 pm

I'm not sure what could be put in a text crawl that would make space in that pilot. Bearing in mind that there wasn't a great deal of spoken exposition in the episode, I think.

Also, the episode had to introduce the following characters:
    Eddard Stark
    Catelyn Stark
    Robb Stark
    Jon Snow
    Sansa Stark
    Arya Stark
    Bran Stark
    Robert Baratheon
    Cersei Lannister
    Jaime Lannister
    Tyrion Lannister
    Viserys Targaryen
    Daenerys Targaryen
    Khal Drogo
    The Direwolf pups (OK, not characters, but rather important we meet them, nonetheless)

That's not including secondary characters who we'll need to know about such as:
    Benjen Stark
    Magister Ilyrio
    Maester Luwin
    Sandor Clegane


And that's still not including "nice to haves" like the 3 Night's Watchmen who open the story.

At an hour of screen time, you're looking at one new character per rather fewer than 5 minutes of screen time, and you've plots to set in motion too.

I really fail to see how a text crawl would serve any of that.
User avatar
The_Angel
Ranger of the North

 
Posts: 4324
Joined: Sun Dec 31, 2000 9:54 am
Top

Postby hamlet » Tue Apr 19, 2011 12:57 pm

Hmmm. Maybe not. Dunno, just kind of spit balling.

My problem is the whole show bothered me and left me underwhelmed, but for very few identifiable reasons. It was just . . . meh.
User avatar
hamlet
Ringbearer

 
Posts: 10545
Joined: Sun Apr 29, 2001 12:01 pm
Top

Postby The_Angel » Tue Apr 19, 2011 1:02 pm

The word from the critics, who've seen six episodes, is that it starts decently enough, then takes a dip, then gets very good.
User avatar
The_Angel
Ranger of the North

 
Posts: 4324
Joined: Sun Dec 31, 2000 9:54 am
Top

Postby hamlet » Tue Apr 19, 2011 1:15 pm

The_Angel wrote:The word from the critics, who've seen six episodes, is that it starts decently enough, then takes a dip, then gets very good.


That could actually pretty much describe the novels in ways . . .

Yeah, I'm sure it does get better, but I'm not sure I'm willing to tolerate it that long.
User avatar
hamlet
Ringbearer

 
Posts: 10545
Joined: Sun Apr 29, 2001 12:01 pm
Top

Postby The_Angel » Tue Apr 19, 2011 1:53 pm

5/6 weeks?
User avatar
The_Angel
Ranger of the North

 
Posts: 4324
Joined: Sun Dec 31, 2000 9:54 am
Top

Postby hamlet » Tue Apr 19, 2011 2:09 pm

The_Angel wrote:5/6 weeks?


*shrug*

Depends on how long I feel like shelling out for the premium channels, especially when the only other show on them worth the time of day seems to be The Borgias, and even that is wearing thin.
User avatar
hamlet
Ringbearer

 
Posts: 10545
Joined: Sun Apr 29, 2001 12:01 pm
Top

Postby The_Angel » Tue Apr 19, 2011 2:42 pm

Really?

Running the risk of sidejacking the thread here, but we're loving The Borgias. Best new show of the year so far.
User avatar
The_Angel
Ranger of the North

 
Posts: 4324
Joined: Sun Dec 31, 2000 9:54 am
Top

Postby Telemachos » Tue Apr 19, 2011 6:05 pm

HBO's pretty gung-ho about the series: they just picked up a second season.
User avatar
Telemachos
Ringbearer


 
Posts: 13782
Joined: Wed Jan 17, 2001 11:19 pm
Location: Los Angeles
Top

Postby Hobbituk » Wed Apr 20, 2011 1:47 am

Like Tele my memory of the books is mostly positive, but vague.

I enjoyed the first episode a lot. The cast, I thought, was absolutely perfect. The dynamic between Ned and Robert was very well done, Tyrion was splendid and all Ned's children managed to have well drawn characters emerge in a very short space of time.

And I enjoyed it far more than both Rome and Generation Kill, neither of which did anything for me. This felt much more like a labour of love.
User avatar
Hobbituk
Ringbearer

 
Posts: 12828
Joined: Tue Nov 14, 2000 4:53 am
Top

Postby hamlet » Wed Apr 20, 2011 6:00 am

The_Angel wrote:Really?

Running the risk of sidejacking the thread here, but we're loving The Borgias. Best new show of the year so far.


Yeah. A show that's just kind of leaving me a little underwhelmed as well. But it's decent, for sure. Have to catch the third episode somehow before the fourth hits the airwaves on Sunday.
User avatar
hamlet
Ringbearer

 
Posts: 10545
Joined: Sun Apr 29, 2001 12:01 pm
Top

Postby Pericles » Wed Apr 20, 2011 6:41 am

I was really pleasantly surprised by the first episode. I am not familiar with the books but I found it excitingly schlocky with several characters which have already piqued my interest. Although largely predictable there were a coulpe of genuine surprises for me (including the final act of the final scene!) and the whole thing looks wonderful. One of my major barriers to 'fantasy' on TV is the obvious wobbly set design you usually get, but this is first class.

It did feel about half way through that they suddenly remembered they needed to shove in a load of nudity which - while I'm not really complaining about (!) - can just put me off if it's a bit forced (similarly I find Boardwalk Empire has a lot of genuinely unnecessary nudity which cheapens it somehow). I also wasn't crazy about the casting of Mark Addy, or maybe just the character in general; he was too buffoonish to understand how anyone could stay loyal to him.

But overall, very good and I will definitely be back for more.
User avatar
Pericles
Shield Bearer

 
Posts: 494
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2002 7:40 am
Top

Postby hamlet » Wed Apr 20, 2011 6:50 am

Read the books, Pericles. You'll be surprised.

"Excitingly Shlocky"? Just wait.

And, for the record, the tone of the show does not fit the tone of the original novels too well just yet. We'll see what develops, but I'm thinking the show is going to be an entirely different animal, sort of like the difference between LOTR the books and LOTR Peter Jackson's perpetrations.

And as for Robert . . . oh, just wait. By the end of things, you'll be feeling terribly sorry for that man.
User avatar
hamlet
Ringbearer

 
Posts: 10545
Joined: Sun Apr 29, 2001 12:01 pm
Top

Postby Gandalf'sMother » Wed Apr 20, 2011 7:10 am

The_Angel wrote:I've no complaints as to the cladding or lack thereof of Emilia Clarke, but she does look very young, and there was a large amount "squickiness" during the wedding night scene.

And really GM, "subpar"? That's extremely weak assed trolling, by your excellent standards.

The episode did suffer a little from introductory blues -- V/O: That's Jaime Lannister, the Queens brother! -- but having begun a reread recently, it's very difficult to spot areas where there were obvious missed opportunities. While it wasn't as enjoyable as I feel it ought to have been, I'm at a loss to explain why. Unlike other very faithful adaptations, such as the weaker Harry Potter films, where you can easily spot dozens of scenes that could have been left out, compressed or combined, ASOIAF is so big and so dense that a large amount of groundwork simply has to be done, come what may, or the later parts of the story won't make any sense at all.

I agree though that it's not up there with HBO's greats, like Rome or Generation Kill yet, but I've not seen anything to suggest that it won't be, once its bedded down.


Oh, I wasn't trolling. Just stating my factual opinion. :)

-GM
User avatar
Gandalf'sMother
Ringbearer

 
Posts: 11164
Joined: Tue Sep 19, 2000 2:10 pm
Top

Postby hamlet » Wed Apr 20, 2011 7:53 am

Gandalf'sMother wrote:Oh, I wasn't trolling. Just stating my factual opinion. :)

-GM


So when God's on vacation, do you fill in for Him? :wink:
User avatar
hamlet
Ringbearer

 
Posts: 10545
Joined: Sun Apr 29, 2001 12:01 pm
Top

Postby ~Karlina~ » Wed Apr 20, 2011 1:17 pm

I haven't seen it yet, but I too heard on the news yesterday that they picked up more episodes.

And too, not to hijack the thread, but has anyone watched Camelot on Starz?

Personally, I miss Legend of the Seeker... the show based on "The Sword of Truth" by Terry Goodkind. They cancelled it after 2 seasons (2 books in the series)
User avatar
~Karlina~
Shield Bearer
 
Posts: 205
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2007 10:41 pm
Location: Somewhere in Time and Space
Top

Postby hamlet » Wed Apr 20, 2011 1:18 pm

I hate Camelot. No, really. Terrible stuff.
User avatar
hamlet
Ringbearer

 
Posts: 10545
Joined: Sun Apr 29, 2001 12:01 pm
Top

Postby ~Karlina~ » Wed Apr 20, 2011 1:23 pm

I watched the first episode... wasn't impressed... I don't remember the story going exactly that way. I just wondered what others thought of it.
User avatar
~Karlina~
Shield Bearer
 
Posts: 205
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2007 10:41 pm
Location: Somewhere in Time and Space
Top

Postby Malvegil » Wed Apr 20, 2011 8:25 pm

It looks like it won’t air here until July on Showcase, a pay TV service. So I’ll be waiting for the DVD set I guess.
Malvegil
Petitioner to the Council
 
Posts: 9
Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2011 10:37 pm
Top

Next

Return to Movies - Other

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest