Game of thrones: why is it so WRONG.?

[Innocent Flower]

I can totaly understand why some things aren't in the series when they were in the books. It would have been a total pain in the ass to cast every minor character from the first book and hold onto them well into the latter series. I can understand perfectly why we don't see every minor lord and knight in the tv series like we do in the books. But many of the changes are just... stupid.


My issue is dialogue and some of the plot divergences.

Take john snow for instance. In the books the halfhand asks him to come with him (for the wolf). In the tv series he awkwardly blurts a request to go with the half hand. This paints him as far more childish, unloyal and naive and there's no reason for this change. In the books danaerys isn't a spoilt ***** who isn't issuing threats all the time at the worst possible times.

In the books Jon,Arya, daenerys, bran,rickon theon and many others are far better characters. Admittedly i think Brienne of tarth is far less likeable in the books than she is in the tv series. but brienne is a rare exception (she really is a chore to read in the books).


The rest of my post is kind of a rant about how certain events are more stupid than the book versions.

Arya is completely different in the books.

In the tv series she's a weakling. Her stay in Harrenhall for instance is entirely different. in the tv series it's shallow. In the books there's a lot of character development for Arya in Harrenhall. The names she gives to Jaqen and the manner she gives them to jaqen allow for far less character development. The way she's taken to Harrenhall is different. The way she rarely sees Tywin is very important (how could you forget to say his name when he's right there like in the tv series?)

Spoiler

In the third book she kills the ticker and his men in an inn with the hound, she reclaims needle during this fight. How can she fight them in the tv series if they're already dead?

The big changes Danaerys' stay in qaurth is so horrifically wrong that it makes me want to punch her. It's not even that it's very different that bothers me. It just feels so... dumb and cliché.

Books- One of her handmaidens doesn't survive the red wastes. She sends out her bloodriders in three directions from an abandoned city, one of them comes back with pratt prie, xaro and the vieled woman who wish to take her and her dragons back to the city.

Tv series- She sends out bloodriders. One of them dies. another comes back telling of a city. When she gets to the city she begins making death threats. Then a guy cuts his hands to let her in.

Books- People offer her gifts, xaro (who's hinted at not being hetrosexual) wishes to marry her for her dragons, she is trying to buy ships. She's politely invited into the house of the undying with the promise of knowledge.

Tv- Xaro has a wonderful vault with nothing in it. He betrays her for dragons with the warlocks. Her dragons get taken, because dragons let themselves be taken. xaro's only prize for the betrayal is one of the handmaidens.


also in the books the Reeds arrive before theon arrives. They become good friends with bran and hide with him in the crypts during the sacking. None of this creepy bullshit that they seem to be doing in the tv series.

 

[Innocent Flower]

You don't need a budget to not make Jon snow look like a dick

 

[thebobmaster_v1legacy]

I can see where you are coming from, but at the same time, no adaptation is going to be perfect. To you, the changes to the characters make them more boring. To the people watching it...well, they seem to disagree, considering how highly rated the show is. I understand you not liking aspects of the show, and I respect that. But saying that they are doing it "wrong", when George R. R. Martin is directly involved with production, and therefore overseeing the final product, seems a bit disingenuous.

Again, I have my own issues with what I've seen for the series. The scene where Davos tries to kill Melisandre is done much better in the book, in my opinion. The way it is done in the series, it makes Stannis look like a jerk, and Davos like an idiot. I wouldn't say the way of the series is "wrong", though.

Also, you complain that the scene for Arya in Harrenhal is less developed. Well, considering they are stuffing a 900 page book into a season, there are going to be some things that are going to be less elaborate. Not as much as if they tried to make a movie, and not any major cuts, but they can't have everything be exactly like the books.

However, I definitely agree with the "Dany in Qarth" thing. The changes there seem to be pointless. Not saying it's wrong, just that I don't understand them.

 

[Wadders]

I agree with the above points, but some changes seem utterly unnecessary.

For instance, why invent a new wife for Robb? What's wrong with Jayne Westerling? it would not have taken any more time to explain who she was than it did to have Robb meet this other woman. I can't even remember her name. As far as I can see the change serves little purpose at all. I'd e happy to be corrected on this, if anyone can see a reason.

Again, the Reeds: It would not have been difficult, more costly or more time consuming just to introduce them in the previous series.

 

[Johnny Impact]

A great deal of adaptation was necessary to make Lord of the Rings suitable for the big screen. Whole scenes and characters chopped before filming even began, dialogue shifted and given to other characters, etc. The end result was three of the best adventure movies ever. Have you got a crypt's worth of bones to pick about that as well?

Did you see The Avengers? Are you going to tell us Thor should be this fellow [img/]http://media1.shmoop.com/images/mythology/thor-hammer-attack.jpeg[/img] instead of Chris Hemsworth in magi-tech armor? Or that Hulk should be Frankenstein's monster or Mr Hyde rather than an adaptation of both?

What is this thing people have, this defect that makes them say, "I hate this with every fiber of my being....but give me more!" If adaptation bothers you so much, maybe you could, I dunno, stop watching the series?

 

[Amaror]

The thing that bugged me the most was the fact that tywin and arya meet in Harrenhall.
They have done it in such a stupid way! They even state that he knows that Arya is from the North and that she is of noble blood and make him just let it be.
That goes against completely against the character of Tywin.

 

[Crenelate]

Again, the Reeds: It would not have been difficult, more costly or more time consuming just to introduce them in the previous series.

Yes it. How many people died in season 2 meaning the wouldn't be back in 3? They get a limited budget per season. They probably didn't have enough for 2 more actors until thy got rid of some. Costs add up quickly. There's only so much money to hire new actors each season.

I assumed the same thing. Also, they had a greater focus on Theon than they did in the books (which I think was amazing, Theon's hubris and fall were some of my favourite parts of season 2). I think introducing two more characters and having to delve into Bran too much last season would weigh down the episodes too heavily.

That being said, I didn't like Dany's bitchyness, Robb's FLI or Arya's easy ride, so I'm hopeful that this season will stick closer to the books, which it looks like it may.

 

[IronMit]

OP, I half agree with you.

It's not the change of locations, the removal of characters and change of dialogue that is disappointing. This is to be expected, budget constraints and TV can't be a word for word adaptation and it's great when you see them adapt the script to show stuff in a different 'tv' way.

.....but some (But Not All) of the key character development scenes are cut or altered potentially leading to key characters having a different personality from the book.

Arya and Jon Snow are quite worrying. Dany is a cause for concern in season3...hopefully they show some of her development in subsequent episodes some how.
However some of the development between Dany and Jorah may of happened earlier in season 2 when Dany snaps at him. I can't remember if that also happened in the second book or if they put it in their early. Something to think about.

Season 3-4 are not finished yet..so they may show Arya's character development a different way..maybe she kills someone else. lol

I'm towards the end of the 4th book, I think Xaro isn't important enough to complain about and the Reeds children can just become friends with Bran now. Timing isn't important as much as staying faithful to the characters in the book.

Hold back the season 3 complaints until the season is finished because they may show the character development at another time. I am concerned about Dany though.

 

[bartholen_v1legacy]

Oranges and apples, people. It's just opinion. I for one don't think Arya's either version is inferior to the other. Emphasising her terror and will to just escape made her a bit more likable in the series. If you'd translate her directly from the books, she wouldn't be half as popular a character. In the books she's a borderline psychopath, but it works there because the book can convey her feelings of abandonment and thirst for vengeance in a way visual media can't.

I thought Dany's development was actually better in the second season than in the second book.

Spoiler

In the second book she practically achieves fuck-all, and just treads water for all her time in Qarth, save for the House of the Undying, which was undoubtedly way cooler in the book than in the series. But by the end of the second second season she's realized she can truly only trust herself, and the bit where she locks Xaro in the vault really made an impact on me. She evolved from a frightened girl to a ruthless khaleesi, and that worked.

I didn't mind the bit at Harrenhal in the series, in fact it was IMO better. It helped establish Tywin's character more efficiently, since in the books he doesn't get particular attention until Storm of Swords. And since the show practically prides itself on ambiguous characters, making Tywin more likable (let's face it, he's a dick in the books) works towards that goal.

I agree with the above points, but some changes seem utterly unnecessary.

For instance, why invent a new wife for Robb? What's wrong with Jayne Westerling? it would not have taken any more time to explain who she was than it did to have Robb meet this other woman. I can't even remember her name. As far as I can see the change serves little purpose at all. I'd e happy to be corrected on this, if anyone can see a reason.

Again, the Reeds: It would not have been difficult, more costly or more time consuming just to introduce them in the previous series.

I think the reason they didn't introduce the Reeds in the second season was because it would have added yet another subplot, where Bran learns all the stuff about being a warg and stuff. The main plot about Winterfell was Theon's arrival, and since the warg stuff is pretty dialogue heavy, it would have shifted focus quite drastically.

The thing I'm worried about right now is will they manage to pull the Reeds off decently? Them arriving out of nowhere felt kinda awkward in the series, but I hope they'll get sufficient attention soon.

 

[The Funslinger]

For instance, why invent a new wife for Robb? What's wrong with Jayne Westerling? it would not have taken any more time to explain who she was than it did to have Robb meet this other woman. I can't even remember her name. As far as I can see the change serves little purpose at all. I'd e happy to be corrected on this, if anyone can see a reason.

The only reason I can think of is they were holding "Robb's wife" auditions, and this more ethnic woman walks in. "Well, visually she's not right for the part of a mainland Westeros nobility, but let's give her a shot", they say.

Imagine she turned out to be the best actress there by a wide margin, I can see them tweaking the role to fit her.

 

[Sean951]

I actually liked the Arya/Tywin subplot in the second season. It was a good way to show that Arya was clever and that Tywin wasn't a complete dick to no development. The way he treats Tyrion already makes him bad enough. Besides, if nothing else, it made her time in Harrenhal less boring. I wish they did the part where the castle revolted, but meh.

The part that has bothered me the most was Robb getting married in front of the Seven. No. Wrong. Incorrect. Robb is King in the North and worships the Old Gods. I can't see the Great Jon or Mormonts following someone who just threw aside the Gods the Starks have worshiped for the last 7-8,000 years.

 

[Nezaros]

In the third book she kills the ticker and his men in an inn with the hound, she reclaims needle during this fight. How can she fight them in the tv series if they're already dead?

This is my biggest issue with the TV series so far. Maybe they just didn't want to have to keep those actors around, but it was easily my favorite scene in A Storm of Swords. It's a defining moment for Arya, and it helps develop the relationship between her and Sandor, and to cut it out seems... awful. I dunno, maybe they'll somehow manage it anyway, but I can't see how, not without cheapening it somewhat.

 

[Silvanus]

The part that has bothered me the most was Robb getting married in front of the Seven. No. Wrong. Incorrect. Robb is King in the North and worships the Old Gods. I can't see the Great Jon or Mormonts following someone who just threw aside the Gods the Starks have worshiped for the last 7-8,000 years.

This hadn't occurred to me, but you're right.

Perhaps Robb is having a Southron ceremony for the sake of his wife?


OT: A great lot of the changes listed by the OP, I'm fine with. I don't care much that the Tickler is already dead; he's such a minor character. It doesn't change anything much thematically for the Reeds to be introduced after Theon.

The biggest difference is the chain of events in Qarth, with Pyat Pree. There were so many prophecies & hallucinations in the House of the Undying that were (understandably) cut. They should at least have shown the Undying, I think, and included one or two of the misdirections the House uses to throw Dany off.

 

[Legion]

Here's the thing ... Game of Thrones is a mediocre fantasy show at best. Be lucky it's this good. And be glad the show has Tyrion, because otherwise it's be below average.

Do you like/have you read the books?

Just curious if you dislike both, or just the show.

Personally I pretty much agree with you, the show is just average really. Tyrion pretty much steals it. Although most of the cast were pretty well chosen, the direction they have taken most characters is disappointing to say the least. Almost all of them come across as considerably less intelligent.

My biggest issue was the complete removal of almost everything to do with Lyanna Stark, Rhaegar Targaryen and the Reed family. The books suggested a lot of foreshadowing in regards to these characters, but they are gone in the television version.

I mean, how could they miss out this scene?

Spoiler: Spoilers for the first book Game of Thrones

The tower was named Tower of Joy by Rhaegar Targaryen. It was used as a hideout by him, where he kept Lyanna Stark.

Lyanna stayed there after Rhaegar left to lead his father, Aerys II's war against Robert Baratheon's rebellion.

At the end of the War, Eddard Stark and six of his companions (Howland Reed, Lord Willam Dustin, Ethan Glover, Martyn Cassel, Theo Wull, and Ser Mark Ryswell) approached the tower.

They found it guarded by three members of the Kingsguard: Ser Arthur Dayne, Ser Oswell Whent, and Lord Commander Gerold Hightower.

"I looked for you on the Trident," Ned said to them.

"We were not there," Ser Gerold answered.

"Woe to the Usurper if we had been," said Ser Oswell.

"When King's Landing fell, Ser Jaime slew your king with a golden sword, and I wondered where you were."

"Far away," Ser Gerold said, "or Aerys would yet sit the Iron Throne, and our false brother would burn in seven hells."

"I came down on Storm's End to lift the siege," Ned told them, "and the Lords Tyrell and Redwyne dipped their banners, and all their knights bent the knee to pledge us fealty. I was certain you would be among them."

"Our knees do not bend easily," said Ser Arthur Dayne.

"Ser Willem Darry is fled to Dragonstone, with your queen and Prince Viserys. I thought you might have sailed with him."

"Ser Willem is a good man and true," said Ser Oswell.

"But not of the Kingsguard," Ser Gerold pointed out. "The Kingsguard does not flee."

"Then or now," said Ser Arthur. He donned his helm.

"We swore a vow," explained old Ser Gerold.

Ned's wraiths moved up beside him, with shadow swords in hand. They were seven against three.

"And now it begins," said Ser Arthur Dayne, the Sword of the Morning. He unsheathed Dawn and held it with both hands. The blade was pale as milkglass, alive with light.

"No," Ned said with sadness in his voice. "Now it ends."

Eddard Stark and Howland Reed were the only survivors.

In the Tower Lyanna was dying and claimed a promise from Eddard just before she died. Afterwards, Eddard pulled stones from the tower to make cairns for the dead. He brought Dawn to the Dayne castle at Starfall.

His sister's body he took back North him so she could be buried with her brother Brandon and her father Rickard.

With Ned's execution, Lord Reed is now the only survivor of the skirmish, and the only witness of Eddard's promise to Lyanna.

 

[Rednog]

Did you see The Avengers? Are you going to tell us Thor should be this fellow instead of Chris Hemsworth in magi-tech armor? Or that Hulk should be Frankenstein's monster or Mr Hyde rather than an adaptation of both?

What is this thing people have, this defect that makes them say, "I hate this with every fiber of my being....but give me more!" If adaptation bothers you so much, maybe you could, I dunno, stop watching the series?

I...wait, what?
The point you're trying to make here, is made terribly...I mean it's one thing when your comparing a direct book to movie like you did with Lord of the Rings. But the Avengers thing is based off the comics, the movie is the film adaptation of the comics not an adaptation of ancient mythology or Shelly's Frankenstein.

OT: The only thing I think is "wrong" about the show is when they interview the cast or various sites have people sitting and discussing the show. In both instances they talk about the character's disposition or what they think will happen to the character, etc. And the thing that drives me up the wall is that they treat it like it's some kind of huge mystery. But compared to other shows who are book adaptations Game of Thrones follows the books fairly closely, the plot isn't a mystery....so why?!