6 Ways Game of Thrones Surpasses Its Source Material

[balladbird]

The most frustrating thing about the Tysha/Tyrion/Shae/Jaime storyline in the show isn't the fact that the storyline of Tysha was cut, to me. The first rule of the different medium is "show, don't tell," and in the books, the story of Tysha is only ever reiterated verbally, which would have been hard for a tv show to use as motivation for so many character-defining actions. Plus it would have added a new character to a series that already has more than it can handle.

Nor is it the fact that the show is basically white-washing Tyrion to make him a more morally just character. It's a change for change's sake, but I kinda get it. Having one more character the audience can unconditionally root for is important when you're dealing with a world as dark as Westeros, and I can see why such a decision would be made on a "attract as broad an audience as possible" level.

No, the most frustrating thing about the whole ordeal is that they cut the Tysha backstory/Shae betrayal buildup, then didn't replace it with ANYTHING, and had the plot move forward as if they had included the book information. As a result, everything about what was supposed to be an epic payoff felt like it came outta nowhere. Shae went from lovingly devoted, even when no-one was watching, to treacherous and father-seducing based off of one slight, involving Tyrion wanting her to not die? I couldn't follow why any of the characters were doing any of the things they were doing, and in a character-driven epic, that's not good.

It bothers me because it could have been remedied SO easily. Even with whitewashed Tyrion, devoted Shae, and well-intentioned Jaime, they could have still set up a plot where all the characters wound up at the same finish line as the book, but still stayed true to their new guidelines. (Well, to be fair to Jaime, even with Tysha he hadn't lied out of spite, but out of fear of his dad, but still)

Tywin had threatened to kill Shae if he saw her again, Shae refused to leave when Tyrion asked her to, and snuck off the boat. Have it so Tywin finds her, tells Jaime she's connected to Joffery's assassination plot, and send him out to apprehend her, make it so that something happens when he confronts her, and she ends up dying. Then, once you get to the point where Jaime busts Tyrion out of jail, have Tyrion talk about Shae implicitly, have Jaime realize what he did and confess, then Tyrion get mad.

boom, boom, boom, Tyrion's mad at Jaime, has motivation to go out of his way to murder his dad, and Shae died without suddenly betraying her previously established character for little to no reason. I'm far from a creative guy, and even I could come up with a more smooth transition to where you wanted the characters to be than you did.

 

[Janichsan]

Conveying all that [the cold] through written word is difficult. Text can only deliver a single idea at a single point in time, so creating the feeling of that kind of omnipresent threat would mean constantly reminding the reader of it.

Let's just say that a masterful author can convey this in a written text as well?

 

[TravelerSF]

Hello, author of the article here. After waking up to this and seeing that I've managed to create quite a strong reaction in people I feel I should say a few words.

This is strictly an opinnion piece and is in no way meant to imply that the show is objectively speaking better than the books. These are simply some personal observations that me and The Escapist thought would be interesting to share.

I've been trying to read through the post to try and figure out what apparently went so wrong with writing this, but so far the biggest thing I can point to is simply differences in opinnion and in experincing the show and the books. I still stand by what I wrote and fully acknowledge the mistakes the show made while adapting the books. I simply feel that the good outweights the bad.

 

[Seracen]

I agree with 1 and 5 for the most part, and point 6 halfway. Honestly, I got tired of reading horrible people doing terrible things to other horrible people...especially when they all died afterwards, rendering the entire exercise pointless (especially when they didn't actually change anything). The Iron Islands did me in. Great book series, don't get me wrong, but I was done after that...though early parts with Stannis came close to killing me from boredom...

Conversely, the series is more more palatable. Also, the "original" content really isn't all that original, considering that they got the Cliff's Notes version from GRRM, from what I've read. So yes, perhaps it's done differently from how GRRM will do it, but it will happen, unless GRRM decides to change his mind (which might not be a bad idea, depending on how it's received and what epiphanies he has).

 

[Jandau]

1. TV shows and books have different pacing? You don't say? Look, I understand that you personally might prefer the pacing of a TV show, but don't put that forward as an inherent advantage.

2. TV is a visual medium and can present visual aspects better? Really? Tell me more! Seriously, I love how you point out the obvious inherent differences between the two mediums. Also, even though the show does sport some really nice visuals, it also fucks up a fair bit (Dorne. Everything about Dorne.)

3. Yes, the fights are so much better, especially the ones they skip because of the lack of budget. To be perfectly honest, the show had ONE really good fight (Viper VS Mountain) and some OK ones, but that's about it, nothing special to write home about.

4. No, just no. The subtlety of the storytelling was one of the cool things about the books. It allowed minor plots to blossom in the background, it allowed for nuanced characterization, it encouraged the reader to think for himself and draw his own conclusions. The show just spoon feeds you everything and is poorer for it.

5. Yes, warmer characters. Like when Jaime rapes his sister next to his dead son's body. That (completely unnecessary) reinterpretation of the books really made viewers warm up to him, right? Or that 10 minute scene of Joffrey beating up prostitutes in Season 2 - that one was really crucial, wasn't it? The show changed some characters - some were made more sympathetic (Hound, Sansa) and some were demonized (Joffrey was a shit in the books, but in the show he is a total monster; Jaime was pretty much gutted in comparison to the books), and not all changes were for the better.

6. Some minor characters were given bigger roles, true, but a TON of characters were cut out to make room for them. While this does fit the TV show format better, the overall narrative is lessened by it. Also, many of the "bigger roles" didn't really help the character - Ramsay's torture sequences with Theon were needlessly drawn out, Talisa was a terribly generic and out of place character who only served to undermine Robb's storyline, Bronn did shine but the whole Dorne plotline was atrocious and felt like a cheap excuse to put more Bronn in.

The show is different than the books, nothing wrong with that. It tends to be better when it sticks to the books, making only the necessary alterations to fit the medium, and goes entirely to toilets when they start writing their own shitty fanfics in (Dorne [and no, I won't drop it, Dorne was awesome in the books and is a total joke in the show], Talisa, etc.). It had a chance to surpass the books in quality when it got past the first 3 books (which were excellent) and got into the last 2 (which were alright, but not nearly as good), but missed that chance by going off the rails a bit too much. It's still a good show and won't be competing with the books come next season, but this article fails to address this properly.

Seriously, for a moment there I thought I stumbled into Buzzfeed by accident...

 

[rgrekejin]

7. Every once in a while, a new installment of the show actually comes out.

/thread

 

[Politrukk]

Hello, author of the article here. After waking up to this and seeing that I've managed to create quite a strong reaction in people I feel I should say a few words.

This is strictly an opinnion piece and is in no way meant to imply that the show is objectively speaking better than the books. These are simply some personal observations that me and The Escapist thought would be interesting to share.

I've been trying to read through the post to try and figure out what apparently went so wrong with writing this, but so far the biggest thing I can point to is simply differences in opinnion and in experincing the show and the books. I still stand by what I wrote and fully acknowledge the mistakes the show made while adapting the books. I simply feel that the good outweights the bad.

You somehow managed to either disregard the source material completely (have you even read through all of it?)
Or misunderstand vehemently.

It's not just a difference of opinion when you are misrepresenting facts and base your comparisons on that.

The article reads like a "show fanboy rant".

Aside from all that it makes me wonder if you've read the books before you saw the show or the other way around.

Edit:

Just read the comments and admit you may very well be wrong here.

 

[happyninja42]

I agree with making the characters more human and easier to relate to. My biggest hurdle with the books was...I forget which book, I think book 3? Maybe it was 4. It was the one where the focus of the book was mostly Cercie and Sansa, and

Spoiler

It's the book where Cercie is stripped and made to walk through the city, whichever book that was

I remember almost having to put that book down forever, because of all the internal dialogue I was being forced to read from two of the most annoying and stupid/insane characters in the series. Seriously, hearing those two women's internal rationale for their actions, and how utterly and fucking stupid/insane it was, made me want to tear the book apart with my teeth.

With Cercei, it was seeing the inner workings of a manipulative sociopath, and how she justifies her actions as being the "right" actions was honestly terrifying to me.

And with Sansa, it was her dogged clinging to her fairytale idea of what nobility was and supposed to do, even in the face of glaring examples to the contrary, was mind numbingly frustrating. Seriously, so much of the plot in the books revolved around Sansa being a complete idiot, and going along with incredibly stupid plans, because why wouldn't she help him? He was a noble and good! Because the stories all say nobles are good! GAAAAH!!! *smashes face* Seriously, the Idiot Ball trope is one of my most hated tropes, and they welded that ball to Sansa's head for waaaay too long. Now, at first, sure, she was naive and clueless about the world, I get that, I understand that. But she kept her naivety for FAR too long to be reasonable for a person in her situation in the books.

In the show at least, since I don't have to see the fine detail of the inner workings of their brains, they do come across as more human, and better written. Also, they definitely seem to have drastically reduced Sansa's stupidity timeframe in the show. She's more just stuck in some horribly unfortunate situations and she doesn't have any viable ways out, not so much her stumbling into them by her own actions as often. It still happens yes, but nowhere near as badly as in the books.

 

[Thunderous Cacophony]

snip

Funnily enough, I found Cersei's POV to be the best part of that book. She is manipulative, but I don't know if she meets the definition of sociopath; she just built her entire life around external factors like her children and her ability to wield influence as power, and when one or the other fails she panics and lashes out blindly to try and get it back. Her big problem is that she doesn't understand that she's flailing, and justifies it to herself as a masterful bit of strategy, because she has enough hubris to give a Greek pause.

And for Sansa, a lot of the problem is that she's still a child mentally (which is not exactly an Idiot Ball, though it looks like it), and she cannot rewrite everything she believes easily. It's easier for her to keep justifying actions in the framework of stories than it is to admit that the stories are wrong, and even when she does let that go she has no real foundation to build a new worldview. She has no real goal other than survival (and eventually escape) but she has no idea how to go about that, and she has no peers or guiding figures who can serve to show her how things work (observing the people of King's Landing just makes her not want to be like them, and keep some of her morals). I personally enjoyed her journey towards being an adult, for all that I wanted to shake her and tell her how the world works.

 

[happyninja42]

snip

Funnily enough, I found Cersei's POV to be the best part of that book. She is manipulative, but I don't know if she meets the definition of sociopath; she just built her entire life around external factors like her children and her ability to wield influence as power, and when one or the other fails she panics and lashes out blindly to try and get it back. Her big problem is that she doesn't understand that she's flailing, and justifies it to herself as a masterful bit of strategy, because she has enough hubris to give a Greek pause.

I totally agree with your assessment of her mental process, it doesn't make it any less terrifying and insane to me. I mean, if even half of her mental gymnastics is realistic to how people like her justify what they do, it's a terrifying look inside the human mind. She was a horrid person, and seeing that reinforced with every thought she expressed only made me dislike her more.

And for Sansa, a lot of the problem is that she's still a child mentally (which is not exactly an Idiot Ball, though it looks like it), and she cannot rewrite everything she believes easily. It's easier for her to keep justifying actions in the framework of stories than it is to admit that the stories are wrong, and even when she does let that go she has no real foundation to build a new worldview. She has no real goal other than survival (and eventually escape) but she has no idea how to go about that, and she has no peers or guiding figures who can serve to show her how things work (observing the people of King's Landing just makes her not want to be like them, and keep some of her morals). I personally enjoyed her journey towards being an adult, for all that I wanted to shake her and tell her how the world works.

I would agree that she is childish, if we didn't have Arya as a counterpoint to her. Sansa is older than Arya by at least a few years in the book I think? And while she also displayed traits of naivety and innocence at the start of the show, she grew up really quick. Hell, all of the young children of the Starks did this. Bran, Arya, I don't really count Rikken, because GRRM basically stuck him on a bus and forgot about him, and the show has as well. But all of the Stark children had their education in the harshness of life very early, just as badly as Sansa, and yet she's still acting like a child. And I just refuse to believe that anyone living in that world, and having experienced what they've experienced, would still be that naive at this point. At first, like season 1, maybe into season 2, sure. But season 5 and she's still nearly as clueless as she was at the start? Sorry, I don't buy it. I know at the end of season 5, they're showing her as starting to become more cunning and manipulative, I just don't buy that it would take that long for her to reach that state, unless she has some kind of mental disability or something. I mean seriously, the other Stark kids figured it out way quicker than her, and they're all younger than her. So far, she's basically just been a trophy that's been passed around from location to location, with practically zero agency of her own, and it just frustrates me. I'm delighted she's beginning to show some teeth of her own when it comes to The Game, but I think it should've happened a lot sooner, both in the books, and the show. That's why I say she was given the Idiot Ball, because I just don't buy any other logical explanation for why she's so clueless at this point other than "she's an idiot". Of course, I blame this on the writing of her in the books. But the show I think has done a better job of showing her not being so stupid and vapid, and I actually empathize with her in the show, whereas in the books, she was one of my most hated characters, because she just radiated so much stupid!!!

 

[Terminal Blue]

This is strictly an opinnion piece and is in no way meant to imply that the show is objectively speaking better than the books. These are simply some personal observations that me and The Escapist thought would be interesting to share.

It's kind of sad this needs to be said really. I don't think there's anything wrong with what you wrote, even the bits I disagree with.

People need to learn the difference between an opinion piece being "bad" and an opinion piece saying something they don't like.

Regardless, I enjoyed the article (hence why I felt moved to give my opinion). Thank you for writing it.

 

[Thunderous Cacophony]

Snipsa Stark

Running down the list of Stark kids:
Robb: The oldest, but he still held onto his father's morals until they led him to death. He also had a lot of guidance from his father's vassals, and his mother.
Bran: Still carries the idea of a magical good ending to his story; even after he lost his legs, he held out hope that the Three-Eyed Raven would give them back to him, and instead bought into the idea that the special powers he has are worth the trade. He's still holding onto his fantasy.
Arya: She probably matured the most out of the kids, but not in a healthy way. She has an obsession with getting revenge, and the idea that doing so will make her life better. Like Bran, she is being used (in her case by the agents of the many-faced god) and being given purpose by another.
Rickon: Is a pointless character, may be written entirely so that there's someone to come out of the woodwork and take the Stark throne at the end of the series.

Sansa didn't have anyone there to guide her and explain things to her, so she couldn't change her paradigm; She saw Santa was just a man breaking into the house, but no one explained what Christmas really means in spite of that. I'd argue that she is clueless in she operated, but you could see her make a number of attempts at playing the game over the series, starting with her trying to manipulate Joffrey and dealing with her servants. She lacked experience and guidance, but she did try her best. There were also people who tried to manipulate her, as others did to Bran and Arya, but she was smart enough (and they were foiled by other interests enough) that no one managed to totally sweep her away for some time. Even when she finally did agree to work with Littlefinger, it was with open eyes and a fuller understanding of her use.

 

[Lightknight]

Hello, author of the article here. After waking up to this and seeing that I've managed to create quite a strong reaction in people I feel I should say a few words.

This is strictly an opinnion piece and is in no way meant to imply that the show is objectively speaking better than the books. These are simply some personal observations that me and The Escapist thought would be interesting to share.

I've been trying to read through the post to try and figure out what apparently went so wrong with writing this, but so far the biggest thing I can point to is simply differences in opinnion and in experincing the show and the books. I still stand by what I wrote and fully acknowledge the mistakes the show made while adapting the books. I simply feel that the good outweights the bad.

Wait, are you really unaware of the longstanding feud between fans who prefer the show and fans who prefer the books? You poked a bear, my friend, that is all. It's like you wrote an article on some forum dedicated to the Twilight on why Edward is better/worse than Jacob or whatever the vampire/werewolf names were respectively. But poking the bear isn't bad. It's provocative and that's exactly what I want my sources of entertainment to do with their work.

You made a good article with solid points. The book and show both tell an amazing story. I do personally prefer the books but only because of the ownership over it that my imagination may possess. So I understand both positions of preference but I really can't claim your points are wrong. They are just opinions like you said and those are parts I really like about the show so I can't complain.

Good luck with these posts though. Power through them and keep up the good work!

 

[TravelerSF]

Wait, are you really unaware of the longstanding feud between fans who prefer the show and fans who prefer the books? You poked a bear, my friend, that is all. It's like you wrote an article on some forum dedicated to the Twilight on why Edward is better/worse than Jacob or whatever the vampire/werewolf names were respectively. But poking the bear isn't bad. It's provocative and that's exactly what I want my sources of entertainment to do with their work.

You made a good article with solid points. The book and show both tell an amazing story. I do personally prefer the books but only because of the ownership over it that my imagination may possess. So I understand both positions of preference but I really can't claim your points are wrong. They are just opinions like you said and those are parts I really like about the show so I can't complain.

Good luck with these posts though. Power through them and keep up the good work!

In hindsight I could've adressed the opposing view more prominently than I did. For some reason, even though I usually like to emphasize that what I'm writing is strightly just my own opinnions, I felt that since this piece was published by The Escapist I should try to distance myself from it and just let the text be its own entity.

I certainly didn't expect people to simply agree with me, I was well aware that most fans prefer the books over the show. And of course, that's completely fine. Still, I didn't quite expect the backslash to be as strong and harsh as this. Well, you live and learn I suppose.

 

[Bewbies]

There are a few unfortunate truths to the ASIF adaptation, in my opinion:

Firstly, when you squeeze written word through the tiny hole of film, you cannot get something that can (or should) be compared apples-to-apples with its source material. Period. The end. That's all she wrote. That said; typically articles only imply that the film version is better than the book -- this article actually asserts it in the title. I think this is the root of all the hate in these comments.

Secondly, for the most part, the film version was written in cooperation with GRRM himself. This tells me that he not only gave it his stamp of approval, but contributed to changes that were made. If I were him, I also would've jumped at the opportunity to change some things. (Outside of the tacky word of god, how often do authors get a chance to further clarify previously written content?)

Lastly, GRRM barely meets the Mendoza Line for prose. No, he's not EL James, but reading his books was a labor... of love. I would never do it again. How many times can a character "beetle their brow"? How many times can something be so shallowly described like "white as milk"? Come on. To be fair, this is less truth than it is my opinion. I'm sure there are people (posting here) that think he's some based god of writing. Even if he were a great writer, though, film is just more universally palatable. That's the truth. I mean, even GRRM has no issue with HBO's series surpassing his books: Link [http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/george-rr-martin-game-of-thrones-books-show-ending_55d76e23e4b04ae49703273f]. Looks to me like he's conceding that HBO can present his story better than he can.

TravelerSF, my point: The film adaptation of anything will never be an improvement in the eyes of the book's fans. You make some great points, 5/6 I agree with fully, but the article itself is not formatted to deliver them properly.

 

[TravelerSF]

That said; typically articles only imply that the film version is better than the book -- this article actually asserts it in the title. I think this is the root of all the hate in these comments.

Fair enough. I probably should've thought about the title a bit more. Honestly I just liked how it sounded and left it at that. I thought it would be evident that despite everything I would still only be presenting my own opinnions, when in reality that should've also probably been included in the title as well.

 

[TravelerSF]

To be fair OP I doubt there's actual hate, more strong disagreement sounding badly due to no internet voice. Also, its a matter of timing, after the horrendous last season you'd be hard pressed to remember the merits in the show.

True, hate might be a bit too strong word to use here. And I agree, during the last season the show took a proper dip down in quality.

 

[Ross Zevenhuizen]

I've launched a similar argument before, but for different reasons. Namely: George RR Martin is a world-builder and big-picture storyteller who loves details. He is not a dramatist or character writer. His prose is the brownest I've ever read (with the exception of understatement grandmaster Michael Moorcock), and his characters all speak inhumanly plainly - and all in the same flat voice.

Tyrion is not actually witty or humourous in the books (though he's described to be), but crabby and blunt in what he says. Bronn isn't sarcastic. Olenna (the Tyrell's Queen) has none of her wonderfully cutting banter with Varys, or Tywin, or anyone else for that matter. Littlefinger's debates with Varys - probably some of the best parts of the series - never happen, and the dialogue between the spymaster and Tyrion is truncated to a footnote. I can think of a half-dozen perfect lines that exemplify the Hound's character right now. None of them come from the books. Everyone sounds the same: neutral, terse, plainly spoken if they speak at all. From homely peasants to foreign nobility.

The books are not adept at carrying across emotions - they'll happily describe the dishes and songs and ornaments of a feast, but will spare as few words as possible illuminating how characters act, sound, or look, even in moments of pure rage or total despair.

On the other hand, all of the fantastic and colourful backgrounds, names, and concepts for these people and places come from GRRM's brain. Even a throwaway black brother becomes Stonesnake, or Dolorous Edd. He's adept at drawing up a diverse and colourful cast of characters with nuanced motivations from afar, but abominable at playing them up close. They fall flat when they need to stand in front of an audience, vocalize their thoughts, feel things, and seem human (or worse - larger than life).

You couldn't have the series without the books. Westeros is a world detailed and realized enough that it's often argued to rival Middle Earth, and the grand scale and depth of the plots transpiring within it is something to behold. Neither of these is any mean feat.

But the books aren't flawless; even for their medium they have issues with presentation. It shouldn't be sacrosanct to admit that the series' screen writers know their way around a scene and characters, and can write natural, enjoyable dialogue in circles around the source material.

 

[Amaror]

In the show at least, since I don't have to see the fine detail of the inner workings of their brains, they do come across as more human, and better written. Also, they definitely seem to have drastically reduced Sansa's stupidity timeframe in the show. She's more just stuck in some horribly unfortunate situations and she doesn't have any viable ways out, not so much her stumbling into them by her own actions as often. It still happens yes, but nowhere near as badly as in the books.

I disagree heavily. In the books she at least matures towards the end and learns to take care of herself somewhat. In the show she stays just as retarded as she always was, getting married to another psychopath by her own will, because the last time was so fun, right?