One question that desperately needs to be answered, WHERE THE HELL IS GHOST?! Him and Jon were nigh inseperable during his time at the wall, and he is nowhere to be seen D:
Commentary on "Lord Snow"
- Thread starter Slycne
- Start date
The show people need to learn how to inform the audience of things without resorting to long boring exposition. I am enjoying the show but I can not imagine how someone who hasn't read the books would enjoy it.
Really on TV you have to show the audience not tell them. Like when Jaime and Ned were talking about the death of Ned's father and brother why in the world would they not have a flash back and actually show the audience.
Also I am with people here who are annoyed about the show forgetting about all the animal characters all of the time. Especially Ghost.
Really on TV you have to show the audience not tell them. Like when Jaime and Ned were talking about the death of Ned's father and brother why in the world would they not have a flash back and actually show the audience.
Also I am with people here who are annoyed about the show forgetting about all the animal characters all of the time. Especially Ghost.
There is definitely a fine line between being faithful and being needlessly beholden to the books. Syrio, for what you said, is a great example. He doesn't need to look exactly like what's described in the books, because his character is defined by his actions less than his appearance. He's there to teach Arya "fencing" and hopefully we get to see his awesome moment of taking down five Lannister guards with his wooden sword.ThaBenMan said:
Im almost certain that guy who whipped Viserys becomes one of Daenerys's bloodriders rather than being one of Drogo's. Also I never realised that Ghost and the Raven were nowhere to be seen until my second viewing and I was hoping that'd we get to see the Tourney of the Hand this week. Really want to see Thoros, Loras and the fight between the Mountain and the Hound 
1) Flashbacks nearly always terribly executed? Maybe we watch completely different programs. But many shows in recent years have cut aways that mesh seamlessly with what is going on in the actual timeline and are far more effective then.Skyweir said:
Jaime: Lord Stark let us have this boring dialogue that will be incredibly confusing and ambiguous for those who have not read the books.
Ned: Why I say, let us do that post haste!!!
*Boring soon followed.*
2) 95% of the information is given to the audience as exposition in this show, which is way too much. Perhaps it is because the source material is completely ill-suited to be television, or the producers didn't change the presentation enough from the source material. But the sad truth of the matter is that those who are not fans of th book are going to start tuning out if the show remains, 'The Exposition Hour'.
3) It doesn't matter that these characters are animals. They are important to the book and as this is television you have to show the audience that these things exist to remind them. As if it is not being seen then it might as well not exist. Obviously they can't have the animals do the same sort of blending with the characters as they did in the books. But they can at least show Ghost following John around in the establishing shot in every scene. And then just not pan to him again. The audience will figure Ghost is always there and all you have to get the dog to do is follow a guy for 10 seconds.
I am liking the show overall. But I am positive I would not if I were not such a huge fan of the books. I mostly find joy in looking at how they are executing the locations and the characters. The small things the show is doing a good job at. But it needs some work on the big things.
A last note: Anyone else find Cersei lacking the teeth and intellect she seemed to possess in the books. I basically hated her on every page of the books, it was amazing. She seems really watered down. Especially how she seems to show disdain for Jaime's advances. Something she would never do in the books.
Kind of missing Ghost. Not having read the books I don't know just how much he's supposed to follow John but his omission is a little strange.
I haven't read the books and so far I find the series awesome. I think flashbacks would be suitable in some instances, but in this particular instance it was not necessary, the dialogue did all the work (even letting us imagine the event).LordOfTheDance said:
As for the Direwolves, I get that they are supposed to be vigilant companions, present at all times ( I think)and I would like that, but I think that's just difficult to film with actual animals and no one would be pleased with CGI-animals.
The exposition has been spot on sofar; although selfishly I want a flash back for the battle of the trident, with ser Arthur Dayne and the 'sword of the morning' "it was an oath..."
I would love to see the Robert and Rhaegar fight.dandahammer said:
As for the show, I love it. It's not 100% perfect, and it's incredibly streamlined, but it's enjoyable, entertaining, and it hits all the big stuff right. I could complain, but it's very well done, and it could have been a lot worse...
YES SWORD OF TRUTH I AM LOOKING RIGHT AT YOU. YOU MAY CRAWL BACK INTO THE KEEPER'S ARMS NOW.
edit: I agree about Ghost. After watching the third episode, the lack of Ghost's presence was notable. I don't mean he should have been the focus or anything, but should have been there.
I am loving the show so far - but I do hope to see more of Ghost down the track. I don't like to nitpick at something I like even if aspects of it aren't how I imagined them.
However as to the flashback thing: I personally don't know if I can handle a show with flashbacks after Lost - I feel that flashbacks now work best in dramatic shows if used sparingly (comedies are a different kettle of fish where they can be used for quick jokes). Besides using a flashback would give away too much about what happened - I think that doesn't sound like a bad thing but in this story the reader gets to piece together what happened in the past piece by piece.
There is one exception to all of what I said above though: I would like Ned to have a flashback of Jamie sitting on the Iron Throne.
However as to the flashback thing: I personally don't know if I can handle a show with flashbacks after Lost - I feel that flashbacks now work best in dramatic shows if used sparingly (comedies are a different kettle of fish where they can be used for quick jokes). Besides using a flashback would give away too much about what happened - I think that doesn't sound like a bad thing but in this story the reader gets to piece together what happened in the past piece by piece.
There is one exception to all of what I said above though: I would like Ned to have a flashback of Jamie sitting on the Iron Throne.