I'm utterly sick of Game of Thrones

[Sexual Harassment Panda]

I have already shared them with friends, believe me. I was getting a feel for everyone else so I could debate it. I'm not youthful, I'm 32. You took that completely out of context from the rest of the sentence so it didn't make sense. You need the rest of that sentence for it not to sound patrionising.

The rest of that sentence says "see OP". What part am I missing that makes it not sound "patronising"? Your word. I said this looks like typical unaware youthful elitism.

Unless all that fancy-pants stuff started in S5, then I don't really see it - or, rather, I don't see nearly enough of it worth a damn. Most people aren't watching for anything to be deconstructed, they're watching to see who dies next and in what horrible way, and also simply because it's in vogue.

Most people, eh?...

Just another day on the escapist:

Poster 1: "Pitty the plebeians for being exposed to this uneducated material, they will never know the sophisticated brilliance of ---, the sheer uncompromising artistry when compared to their philistine twaddle!"

Poster 2: "Have you considered the intellectual aspect of how the show does X Y Z"

Poster 1: "Oh check out mister fancy pants here"

OMG. So accurate.

The bulk of the show seems to be characters explaining what they think and why. Outside of a few characters driven mostly by self-interest there is much idealism, a lot of imparting of moral-philosophies... Tempered by pragmatism. A world's worth of human motivations and drama unknowingly about to collide with a force that doesn't give a shit about any of it.

I'm sure you could go ham drawing historical and political parallels too. There's just plenty going on that isn't bare-tits and severed limbs, and I do think that people generally are canny enough to appreciate it, even without understanding what the parallels are... To what extent would that even matter?

 

[RaikuFA]

I'm not a big fan either. I just see it as LotR 2.0. Just endless nonstop walking and talking. And as OP said, it's depressing. I already have to fight depression on a daily basis, I don't need my escapism reminding me that things are bleak.

 

[SirSullymore]

One of my favorite shows, guess I'm just a dumb normie pleb.

I didn't mean it like that. I apologise if it came across that way. I wish people would challenge the actual arguments in the OP though rather than just state a broad sentiment or just say people have different opinions. It would make for a much more fun discussion.

That probably came across as more defensive self pity then it was intended to be and it wasn't directed at you, more at people on the internet in general who seem to be tripping over themselves to tell everyone the don't watch/like GOT (though if you don't watch I sure it must seem like the opposite haha).

 

[Pseudonym]

But this sort of equalising 'everything is equally valid' does nothing but make everything equally unvalid, unshared and not worth discussing.

Well, God knows I do like bitching about things I like. And bitching about things I don't like.

Okay, here's an example: my sister hauled me onto the couch next to her to watch some show she'd dredged up out of Netflix called Maximum Ride. She said it was "like X-Men," and I was on board with that. It turned out to be hot garbage; the CGI was awful, every character had wings for some reason, the bad guy was an emo werewolf, and the whole thing was based off a legendarily crappy series of young adult novels.

And, y'know, I told her all of this. I'm talking about it while we're watching the show, though I bailed halfway through, and she's getting annoyed because she likes it and I'm tearing it apart and that makes her feel insecure about what she likes. And I can kinda sense that - I've done this dance with my sister and some piece of crappy television like Grimm or The Vampire Diaries a dozen times before - so I have to watch where I step.

I think that kind of situation is the tight-rope we're all walking on when we deal with some piece of trash that a friend of ours is weirdly in love with. On the one side, there's "It's all a matter of taste, so all things are equally valid." On the other, there's "Your show sucks and you suck for liking it." And somewhere in the middle, there's talking about what we do like and don't like and why we do or don't like it and what would make our tastes change.

That's the line I try to walk on. I don't want to shame people or tell them they suck because they like a show that I think is a hot turd wrapped in piss-soaked toilet paper. But I'm not going to refrain from telling them that it sucks, because that'd be dishonest. You have to separate the criticism of the show from the criticism of the person for liking the show, which is a lot harder than it sounds.

So I welcome guys like this who say that Game of Thrones sucks monkey taint. I like the show, and I'll recommend it, and if the people I recommend it to don't like it, I'll live. Not everything is for everyone. That doesn't have to mean that "good" and "bad" stories don't exist. It just means that there's a fuzzy grey area in the borderline where we disagree about whether something falls on the good or bad side.

tl;dr - I hate broccoli, my sister likes broccoli, but we both like ice cream and we both hate turds. Ice cream is good; turds are bad; broccoli is a matter of taste.

This I can entirely agree on. I'd like to add that the person listening to criticism should try not to take these things to personal. I like game of thrones more than the OP but I don't take his dislike for the show as a dislike for me (unless somebody literally says 'only cretins like this' or something like that). There certainly is a social and emphatic element here as well, as is apparent from the story with your sister. Sometimes you don't want to tear down somebodies tastes in a certain regard, even if you feel whatever thing they like is the worst thing ever, so as not to ruin their enjoyment.

That wasn't really what I worried about here. Most people in this thread are fairly polite and friendly. I worried that comments like 'just don't watch it' or 'its all a matter of taste' can spill over into straight up making all conversation about these things feel pointless. There is a strange grey wonderland here where we all think some art (in a very general sense of that word) is good and we often think we can give specific reasons why it is good even though we know that we won't convince everyone and we won't even be too upset if we don't. I wouldn't quite compare it to broccoli because there isn't much to say about the taste of broccoli as far as I know. I can't give you a reason to like it if you don't like it, which I can sometimes do for art. But we aren't having some factual or moral argument either where a position or argument can be just plain right or wrong. Artistic taste is a weird thing.

 

[Zhukov]

No. He's a ginger with weird eyes. Nothing more or less. Admittedly he's more handsome than others...

You just said the same thing as me.

He's extra handsome, he has bright red hair (explicitly described as being distinct from a regular redhead) and he has exotic eyes (just like every fanfiction super special protagonist ever). Hence he's super handsome in a distinct and exotic way.

He's literally good at everything he attempts (and is directly described as such).

lolno.

Lolyes. I remember the book explicitly saying he was naturally talented at everything he tried. I remember it because it was the exact moment I thought, "Okay, this is garbage, I'm reading garbage right now."

A succubus/fairy/whatever taught him to be the greatest lover alive.

No. She taught him confidence and some cool sex moves.

Exactly. He gets taught how to be great at sex (and confident!) by a sex goddess.

You're just saying the same thing as me in different words.

He has a super special magic sword with a super special name.

Pretty much no.

Spoiler

The only apparent power Caesura has is that you don't need to care for it very much, if ever. Otherwise it's just a standard sword. If anything, it's actually worse than most because everyone who's used the sword has died a horrible death.

Exactly. A super special one-of-a-kind sword with it's own name.

Once again, you're just saying the same thing as me in different words by way of rebuttal. It's a kinda weird way to debate. Although I suppose it's a step up from "lolno".

If you're really gonna go after Kingkiller for giving the protagonist a dead family, you better go after every single other piece of fiction that uses the same trope.

Dead families and tragic origins on their own aren't the end of the world, although they are painfully common in nerdbait garbage.

It's when you combine them with Mary Sues that the shit really starts to stink.

 

[Saelune]

I really hate these kinds of responses.

I'm not sure what other response I could possibly give. The man doesn't like the show. I do like the show, or I like most of it. What else am I to say other than "guess it's not your thing?" Am I supposed to tell him that he's wrong and has bad taste? Am I supposed to suddenly up-end my own opinion of the show I like and go "no, you're right, it's terrible?"

Like, what response is better than "your opinion is valid, as is my opinion, because tastes vary and no-one is forcing anyone to like anything?"

Ideally both sides would discuss the differences and why they view them differently while understanding that it is all opinion in the end and that you dont -have- to agree.

I know there are somethings I dont like and just think I dont like it, but there are also things I dont like and think are bad.

I guess alot of it depends on where the debate starts from. OP seems to be coming from a POV of "I -could- have liked it but...", so I feel there is more discussion value as to why this time it did not work out.

Like, a vegan wont like any steak, so there is little point in discussing the specifics of the steak. But if a steak lover doesnt like a steak, then the discussion value is different, to use vegans and non as a metaphor.

 

[dscross]

It took me till season 2 to realise precisely what it is: a soap-opera. With more swears, nudity, and violence. That's it. Exploitative, nasty stunt-TV schlock, maybe, but it's not really any different from Eastenders or Coronation Street.

I drifted away after the fourth season. I may drift back, but yeah, I don't blame anyone being sick of it.

...oh and as someone with an interest in HEMA, GoT's attention to detail regarding historic use of martial arts is often pathetic. Maybe it's improved since S5, but the Night's Watch, in particular, are a bunch of hack[ing] Hollywood amateurs.

I totally agree with this. This is one of the main reasons why it winds me up... People don't admit to what it is - just a soap opera. They think it's something it isn't. I'd probably have less of a problem with it if people admitted it was a guilty pleasure rather than amazing, well thought out TV.

 

[Anti Nudist Cupcake]

I'm going to be predictable and say "You can always not watch it."

Look, if it's not your thing, it's not your thing, and it's not likely to become your thing in the future.

It's really not that hard to ignore it.

I really hate these kinds of responses.[footnote]Yes, there is more to your posts that I've snipped out. I'm taking issue with the sentiment quoted only[/footnote] They come across as dismissive, condescending, obvious, and don't contribute anything to the discussion. Of course OP realizes that he is allowed not to watch the show, he says as much in the first paragraph "I have watched a few seasons with friends who like the show, and now I have to flatly refuse."

People should be allowed to criticize shows that they don't like, if others disagree they should argue against the points on their own merits. Not dismiss the criticism out of hand because the person "doesn't have to watch the show." OP has watched several seasons of the show, that is a significant time investment in which many thoughts and emotions can arise. It's better to hash it out and then move on, rather than bottling it all up forever.

You don't like it, fine. However what you've described are simply opinions. You don't think the acting is good, others do. You don't like it, others do. Don't watch the show, go do something else for that incredibly short time period of 1 hour a week that the show is on. Go watch porn or something, it's hardly a massive investment of your time.

Wait, these are opinions?? I'm shocked! SHOCKED!! I was under the impression it was pure hard fact. OP you lied to me!!

Oh wait, no he didn't. Obviously, statements about the overall enjoyability and quality of works of entertainment are completely subjective. You don't need to add disclaimers to every single statement labeling it as an opinion, when it inherently is so.

And in fact, OP did actually include several subjectivity qualifiers which you missed in your rush to dismiss his arguments and state the obvious.

But Game of Thrones doesn't live up to these standards for me - at all.

To me, it seems like George R R Martin is taking lots of different histories...

...It's more of a vibe I get from reading other fantasy novels than anything else but something feels really off about it all to me.

Maybe it's just me, but this show feels almost completely devoid of joy.

So glad someone pointed this out, it's like people don't want to hear anything but more opinions that echo their own. I'd think more people would be intrigued by someone who challenges their opinions as it grants the opportunity to test them.

I'm going to be predictable and say "You can always not watch it."

Look, if it's not your thing, it's not your thing, and it's not likely to become your thing in the future.

It's really not that hard to ignore it.

I really hate these kinds of responses.[footnote]Yes, there is more to your posts that I've snipped out. I'm taking issue with the sentiment quoted only[/footnote] They come across as dismissive, condescending, obvious, and don't contribute anything to the discussion. Of course OP realizes that he is allowed not to watch the show, he says as much in the first paragraph "I have watched a few seasons with friends who like the show, and now I have to flatly refuse."

People should be allowed to criticize shows that they don't like, if others disagree they should argue against the points on their own merits. Not dismiss the criticism out of hand because the person "doesn't have to watch the show." OP has watched several seasons of the show, that is a significant time investment in which many thoughts and emotions can arise. It's better to hash it out and then move on, rather than bottling it all up forever.

Okay...?

Also, I never said that the show was perfect, and I've also said that there are things that I don't like that I think are stupid, but that I don't go seeking them. I'm not gonna stop people from enjoying a thing I don't like, in my case Harry Potter. I think the books and movies are stupid, and incredibly boring. Not gonna be on my friend's case if they talk about it when I'm around and making references I don't get. Because I don't really care.

Perhaps that is just me.

Also also, what do you want the rest of us to say? He's clearly made up his mind and he just wanted a vent. Furthermore, don't presume my intentions because I never said "You don't deserve to watch a thing", nor was I condescending. I'm just wondering why he's making a deal about a piece of entertainment that he doesn't like and can clearly avoid.

So you equate criticism of an art form many people enjoy with attempting to get them to stop enjoying it? Sounds that way. That is generally not what people are trying to do. If you can find great fault with something in an ocean of people appraising it, you tend to want to speak up because you want to understand WHY everyone else hasn't noticed the flaws you have noticed. If you present the reasons why you don't like something to people who do like it, it is because you want to hear from them what you are "missing". Maybe you'll even end up approaching the art again from a mindset and perspective that will finally make you able to share the enjoyment of it.

 

[Anti Nudist Cupcake]

1. The acting is awful

Every single actor (and therefore every single character) on this show is good at one thing. If they happen to be blessed by both the Old Gods and the New, they might be good at two things.

Some of the things in this list: fair enough. But sometimes I feel like you are missing things or misjudging some characters alltogether. Secondly, I don't always hate simplified characters. Sometimes characters are mostly a way to explore certain character traits and are therefore represented in simplistic extremes. I'd like to go by the list you gave one by one to give at least some of the reasons why I think those characters have more to them than you think. Not all of them, in the case Jaime, Ramsey or Daario amongst others I basically agree that they are kind of boring or don't really work.

Spoiler

Kit Harington/Jon Snow: mopes. Alternatively: shivers. Alternatively alternatively: knows nothing, which isn't really a narrative or personal asset.

Jon knowing nothing represents his arrogant behaviour early on as a young adult with an inflated ego, it represents the fact that the peoples north of the wall of whom he knows nothing will generally go unremembered when most of them die, despite how much their differing cultures mean to them, and it is a motif in his relation to the woman he loves. There defenitely is some narrative content there.

Maisie Williams/Arya: asks annoying questions that somehow have managed to go unanswered while aggressively grows her hair out from that super awk bowlcut.

That isn't really her shtick. She is the hateful, vengeful one. The one who takes all the unfairness she sees and wants to become a kind of angel of death to cruelly avenge it all. Secondly, her questions go unanswered because a lot of them adress the systemic unreasonableness of the world she lives in. Generally there are no easy anwers to her questions, not for the charactars inside that world at least, who don't want to fully admit to how awful the world they participate in really is. As a side note, I used to like her character very much, though I have been somewhat disappointed in her plot, character and arc in recent seasons. I find her new incarnation as an actually succesful angel of vengeful death to be rather dull and inhuman.

Lena Headey/Cersei: throws shade/bitches about bitches.

Cercei is a bit of a onedimensional character but I think that is on purpose. Her inability to have personal growth, to learn from her mistakes or to reasonably assess her own power and abilities are part of her character. It being onedimensional is a result of that and is deliberate.

Sophie Turner/Sansa: floats through her admittedly very hard life with doe eyes and a long-expired na'vet

I don't know how far you got but this definitely does change. She becomes a lot more willful somewhere from season 5 onwarth and if you remember, she was just a bit of a ***** in season one. In a sense this does swap out one somewhat simple character for another but there is at least some growth and change there.

Peter Dinklage/Tyrion: drinks. Alternatively: complains about being a dwarf.

While true, that somewhat oversimplifies the character. He is the smart talker, always has a witty response. He is also the relatively decent/squeamish person amongst the lannisters and in kingslanding in general. Lastly, he is a clever manager.

Nikolaj Coster-Waldau/Jaime: Pre-handlessness: patronises. Post-handlessness: bumbles.

Fair enough. I personally don't think Jaime was that well done. What I find interesting about him is, in my opinion, already done better by the hound.

Gwendoline Christie/Brienne: is so earnest it physically hurts to watch.

I didn't hate that, but yes.

Daniel Portman/Pod: is so earnest it physically hurts to watch.

His character is also just not that important. He is often a bit of a last moment unexpected trump card and that's it. I don't think it is entirely fair to expect this character to have that much depth.

Aidan Gillen/Littlefinger: schemes/plots.

Is also in love with Cathelyn Stark/Tully.

Alfie Allen/Theon: human personification of the World's Smallest Violin.

Well yes, but that somewhat hides that he is that in a not entirely simplistic way.

Conleth Hill/Varys: drops knowledge.

That is his job, not his character. He is the one that has a lot of abstract talks about the nature of power. More importantly, he is one of the very few people who seems to take a view towards the common good. He plays the game of Thrones perhaps but he doesn't have a house and more importantly, doesn't care about having a house. He doesn't want his name to last but peace, hapiness and all that stuff. This is mixed with an understandable hatred for fire sorcerers and priests.

Iain Glen/Jorah: pines for Daenerys.

True, but partial. He is also the straight guy. The one who wants Daenerys to get results and reminds her of the practical problems the faces.

Emilia Clarke/Daenerys: she don't need no man because she's an independent woman but also she can't control her children/dragons and is really clueless about how the world works but has great intentions!

So from your desribtion she already isn't just one thing. I do find it weird to describe her as 'she don't need no man because she's an independent woman'. She is married quickly and is very reliant on her husband to the point that when he dies the aftermath nearly gets her killed in multiple ways. She also has a relationship with Daario later.

Michiel Huisman/Daario: pines for Daenerys while looking hot.

Agreed. I would like to note that Daario's first actor did a much better job. First Daario was a considered hedonist with standards of his own, who had no problem with being weird for his principles. This gave him a sort of mysterious charisma. The second Daario is just a bimbo.

Natalie Dormer/Margaery: snatches weaves.

What I find interesting about her is that she represents a strangely humane way of playing the game of thrones. Yes, she wants to be the queen and she doesn't shy back from being manipulative but she hardly ever actively hurts anyone. Whatever her precise motives for helping the poor, the poor are still helped more by her than by Cercei or anyone else.

Dean-Charles Chapman/Tommen: plays with Ser Pounce.

That is what, one scene? He is insecure, friendly and manipulable. Though with this one, I agree he is a bit overly simple and obvious.

Kristian Nairn/Hodor: Hodors.

Hodor is also weirdly benevolent. In any case, I think it is somewhat unfair to ask too much depth from a character that is not that important and mentally handicapped to the point where he can't speak and has an obviously very limited understanding of the world around him.

Iwan Rheon/Ramsay Bolton: rapes, murders, tortures, you know. Just your garden variety sociopath.

Yeah, basically.

So that became more of a wall of text than I intended. I spoilered it for space.

This show is exhausting. Westeros is Medieval/Renaissance Europe in a parallel universe. What this adds to the world - a rustic frame of reference and lots and lots of mud and petticoats - is far surpassed by what it detracts - expediency and efficiency. Everything takes three times the effort and infinity times the time to accomplish.

Well, yes but this has a rather large impact on the plot. Remember that I mentioned how 'you know nothing' can also be read as a statement about Jons lack of knowledge of the wildlings. Similarly the northerners keep saying things like 'the north remembers' and 'the king in the north'. These aren't just nice sounding phrases. There are large cultural differences in this world and it helps further fuel the antagonism between the differing factions. The northerners, wildings and dornish are all very different from eachother and from the more central kingdoms of Westeros. This has been sustained by slow travel times. I also find this interesting because it is different from the thousand other shows where everyone just has a cellphone. The lack of communications in the past really made a difference and I find it interesting to see that in the show. Another effect of this, is that characters don't always believe one another about important plot points like the zombie army. If Jon or one of the lord commanders could just send around some pictures of these zombies on whatsapp, or more realistically, invite some important nobles to look beyond the wall on short notice, he'd have a much easier time convincing everyone to help them fight that menace.

To me, it seems like George R R Martin is taking lots of different histories, mythologies and fantasies from different time periods meshing them together in an unorganised way and then americanising them all.

I have to admit, I am not convinced that the fantasy elements do that much in the show. Besides these problems you mention I find the fantasy strangely half-hearted. Sometimes I almost forget it is there and other times charactars are suddenly hundreds of years old. This may be kind of the point. Half of the characters keep forgetting that magic exists and they systematically undersestimate its importance. This is why nobody bothered to get Dany killed properly and why most of the characters don't believe the white walkers exist. But for me it serves to make the magic feel strangely disconnected and thematically impotent.

Maybe it's just me, but this show feels almost completely devoid of joy. Every time I watched it, I found myself sitting and staring at the screen and questioning why I just subjected myself to such misery. No one ever wins in this show. Every single character is sad, either because the world they live in has made them that way or because they themselves are living the consequences of their shitty choices. The kingdom of the Iron Throne is a bleak, bitter, and hateful place where, personally, I find the people to be of commensurate character.

This complaint is also not without merit. Even if the joylessness of it all is part of the point, after watching it for season after season it becomes too bitter or too dull for a lot of people. I was a bit put off by some of the torture scenes myself. Then again, it isn't joyless by accident, I think. It is joyless as a result of the pointless and reckless game of thones and the inability of the players to consider any sort of greater good.

There is also hope, I think. Some of the heroes who have survived for a long time are exceptions. Tyrion, Jon, Sam, Dany and Varys all do sometimes care about the greater good and all of them have survived for far longer than the other characters would have in their situations. Jon has survived capture by enemies, getting lost in the snowy wilderness, and has even been resurrected. Dany has survived weird adventures with wizards, being captured by Dothraki and other things that would have long since killed a lot of the other characters. These people have plot armour and their plotlines are in some ways more traditional and involve less pointless, hopeless loss and suffering. With all these characters there is the distinct sense (for me at least) that they are going somewhere because of the plot and that isn't going to be stopped by things that could reasonably stop them. I've heard the interpretation of game of thrones where the general misery keeps up untill the end and the end is, as one person creatively speculated 'littlefinger on the iron throne surrounded by whights about to kill him'. I don't expect that. I expect Dany on the throne, possibly with some decentralisation, loss of power for the nobility and an independend north. Possibly not Dany but Jon or even Bran. These rulers will rule in a new style. There are heroes to this show, the underdogs that will pull through after many adventures. The show has just thrown us a real long curve ball about it. Some might have expected Boromir to be the hero or his son, or even Oberyn. When they turned out to be very mortal, they lost hope or interest. I think that there are going to ultimately still be some heroes to this story.

I might be wrong though. Maybe Dany is assasinated next episode, Jon becomes a white walker, littlefinger kills Varys, Bran gets murdered by some holdout anti-wildling and anti-Jon people when trying to cross the wall, Sam never passes his calculus exam, gets sent away from the measters and gets murdered by mercenaries working for his dead and Tyrion gets stabbed by Jaime as vengeance for killing their father. I'd be surprised though.

Lastly, if you are interested in an eloquent perspective on the matter that is a little more positive than you are, and blames the show more than the books for some misgivings, you might want to check out mrbtongues video on the subject: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ek2O6bVAIQQ

edit: jesus christ. I didn't realise I even really cared very much about game of Thrones. I hardly think it is as good as the length of my post could suggest. I hope at least somebody has made it through this post. Otherwise, I guess I at least got to order my own thoughts about it, which I apparently needed to do. Have a good one.

While I don't want to honk my own horn after I made a post in this thread about how actually discussing the OP's criticism might actually change someone's mind of the show...This wall of text actually made me open a new browser window to give episode 1 season 1 another shot.

 

[BloatedGuppy]

GoT has become a Very Silly Show with a lot of terrible problems, but not for any of the reasons outlined in the OP. It's like hearing someone say "Full House was a terrible show!" and you're like "Okay, okay...I'm into this, go on" and then they start talking about how all the cast are lizard people. I'm onboard with the general sentiment, but you're losing me in the details, bud.

I hate Patrick Rothfuss ROWRWOWROWR

Kvothe is an unreliable narrator. There's evidence littered throughout the books that you're getting an excessively floral and biased interpretation of events.

I actually think it's pretty clever.

 

[the December King]

Kvothe is an unreliable narrator. There's evidence littered throughout the books that you're getting an excessively floral and biased interpretation of events.

I actually think it's pretty clever.

I'm hoping that this is the point of the stories as well, mainly because, despite the fact that I find Kvothe's opinion of himself in those tales quite insufferable, it is still quite well written.

 

[dscross]

GoT has become a Very Silly Show with a lot of terrible problems, but not for any of the reasons outlined in the OP. It's like hearing someone say "Full House was a terrible show!" and you're like "Okay, okay...I'm into this, go on" and then they start talking about how all the cast are lizard people. I'm onboard with the general sentiment, but you're losing me in the details, bud.

Ok.... That's not really adding to the conversation though - Can you elaborate on why you think it's become very silly? Also, I take from your paragraph that you liked it to begin with - which I didn't - so I imagine we are coming at it from different angles.

 

[BloatedGuppy]

I don't REALLY want to entertain a debate here, because I think we're coming at this from very different perspectives, but you asked, so...

1. The acting is awful

Subjective, but I disagree. I actually think acting is one of the few major strong notes the show has going for it (along with cinematography). Is it excellent across the board? No. But for a fantastical period piece with a lot of CGI and green scenes, the actors are acquitting themselves very well.

Additionally, your read on the characters is lamentably hollow, even for the show's (admittedly) pared down portrayals. Someone else already went to great effort to answer all of these, blessedly saving me the effort. The characters have significantly more depth than you are allowing for. It's very easy to toss off a quick, cynical examination and pretend there's nothing else there. I get it. Sometimes I dislike things that I feel are inexplicably popular, and it's tempting to exaggerate my condemnations. I'll leave it at "you're doing yourself a disservice by dismissing this element so blithely" and leave it at that.

2. The scenes hang together badly (Edit: to address some contributors' points, this includes pacing within the paragraph)

This show is exhausting. Westeros is Medieval/Renaissance Europe in a parallel universe. What this adds to the world - a rustic frame of reference and lots and lots of mud and petticoats - is far surpassed by what it detracts - expediency and efficiency. Everything takes three times the effort and infinity times the time to accomplish.

I saw this point and started to nod, then saw what you'd actually written and my head spun around and ravens flew out of my mouth. You think the show MOVES TOO SLOWLY? The show's acceleration of events and timelines has become so ridiculous it actually beggars belief. Everything happens at the speed of plot contrivance now, with zero attention given to the laws of physics. It's stupid comic book nonsense.

The show has always had pacing issues, and those issues were "trying to cram 1000+ page doorstopper novels into 10 episodes", not "this drags on too long". At 20 hours a season the show still would have been overstuffed. We have award winning programs like Mad Men where entire seasons go by and virtually nothing of significance happens, but it doesn't matter, because every element of the production is on point. The show needed to be slower. Much, much slower.

3. The mythology is nonsensical

To me, it seems like George R R Martin is taking lots of different histories, mythologies and fantasies from different time periods meshing them together in an unorganised way and then americanising them all. Tolkien's world showed he understood mythology well. Terry Pratchett used Discworld as a mechanism for comedy and used it to reflect elements of our own world that were silly. GRRM doesn't show anything like that. It's more of a vibe I get from reading other fantasy novels than anything else but something feels really off about it all to me.

It's fine. It's a mythology. It's scientifically nonsense but that's fantasy for you. He's not the mythologist that Tolkien was but he has different priorities as an author. The show ends up giving some of it short shrift (again by virtue of being hopelessly over-stuffed and accelerated) but most of the major mythological beats survived intact (at least early on).

4. Joyless

Maybe it's just me, but this show feels almost completely devoid of joy. Every time I watched it, I found myself sitting and staring at the screen and questioning why I just subjected myself to such misery. No one ever wins in this show.

Disagree, and hyperbolic. There are plenty of "wins for the good guys", it can just be difficult at times to ascertain who "the good guys" even are, and the wins are often Pyrrhic victories. If you prefer a more floral, idealistic fantasy environment that of course is a matter of taste, but it's not a flaw in the show or the world building. There are far darker universes than A Song of Ice and Fire, and the show has taken to jamming so much fan service up everyone's ass I'd say that number is actually surprisingly high. In fact, MOST prestige television dramas run as dark if not remarkably darker, from Sopranos to Breaking Bad to Mr. Robot. Again, if you like lighter fare that is absolutely your prerogative, but "joyless" is as solid a condemnation as "This apple tastes too fruity".

As to why I dislike the show...

1. The writing. Not Martin's writing, where it has survived to the screen it has played quite well. The show owes its enormous fanbase to the quality of his writing, world building and characterization. No, I speak of the show specific writing, which ranges from "tolerable" to "hilariously awful", with more and more of the latter as the books the series was based on fade into history and the showrunners are left coming up with a plot out of thin air. Characters say and do stupid, inexplicable things. Plot elements become slapdash and poorly thought out. Complex motivations and characterizations are tossed aside in favor of BADASS! moments and fan servicing.

2. Too much story, too little screen time. Watch a good scene from an excellent show. Pick one. I dunno, The Wire. Watch it. It's probably 5 minutes long. The scene has time to develop, to breathe, to communicate themes. The actors have a chance to work their craft. GoT, by comparison, is spastic. There's so many characters to service it has to jump all over the place.

Mostly, though, it's #1. Shows can survive a lot of problems. Bad writing is not one of them. When GoT simply devolves into spectacle and everyone keeps their mouths shut, it can still be quite arresting. But it was always a talky, political, character driven show, and the fact they can't write it for shit is dooming it to shallow, infantile nonsense.

 

[Baffle]

I find it too tediously miserable. I made it to about series three before I found it eye-rollingly 'what unlikely and pointlessly graphic death is next?'. I quite liked Fortitude though.

 

[stroopwafel]

2. Too much story, too little screen time. Watch a good scene from an excellent show. Pick one. I dunno, The Wire. Watch it. It's probably 5 minutes long. The scene has time to develop, to breathe, to communicate themes. The actors have a chance to work their craft. GoT, by comparison, is spastic. There's so many characters to service it has to jump all over the place.

The Wire is crime drama grounded in the realism of early 2000's urban decay while Game of Thrones is a more mature Lord of the Rings. How serious are you willing to take a dragon mother, a pretty boy who came back from the dead and snow zombies? It's fantasy pulp with better drama and the Wars of the Roses as reference material. It's engaging and entertaining. Not meant to be taken as seriously as The Wire. And to be honest I had more fun with GoT.

 

[BloatedGuppy]

The Wire is crime drama grounded in the realism of early 2000's urban decay while Game of Thrones is a more mature Lord of the Rings. How serious are you willing to take a dragon mother, a pretty boy who came back from the dead and snow zombies? It's fantasy pulp with better drama and the Wars of the Roses as reference material. It's engaging and entertaining. Not meant to be taken as seriously as The Wire. And to be honest I had more fun with GoT.

What makes for good dramatic television/character building doesn't tend to differ much from series to series. GoT is obviously going to have more action set pieces and fantastical environs and I've never faulted the show for either. When it reaches for drama, though, it often pisses all over its own shoes. It could stand to learn some lessons from better shows.

As to "fun"..."fun" isn't necessarily the end goal of everything. I had more fun with GLOW than The Wire, too, but that doesn't mean I consider it a better television show.

 

[Arnoxthe1]

Kvothe is an unreliable narrator. There's evidence littered throughout the books that you're getting an excessively floral and biased interpretation of events.

I think it is a little biased of an account but not as much at all as people theorize it is. Mostly I'm betting the bias is leaking through in his dealings with his (many) enemies he's made. Master Hemme comes to mind. Although even then, even he admits many times he's unnecessarily poked a fair few sleeping bears just because he incredibly stupidly couldn't leave well enough alone.

And in any case, if you stripped out every single piece of personal bias in anyone's story, it would be incredibly boring and would read like a dry autobiography read by a robot. Kvothe's perception of things colors the story in. Maybe sometimes in a somewhat wrong way, but there you go. It's clear that Kote's not an evil person at all nor is he a coward. And furthermore, he's had countless opportunities to lie about or simply even skip past particularly embarrassing parts but he seems to have kept them all in.

He's extra handsome, he has bright red hair (explicitly described as being distinct from a regular redhead) and he has exotic eyes (just like every fanfiction super special protagonist ever). Hence he's super handsome in a distinct and exotic way.

I guess? Seems a pretty small thing to complain about. And also, I'd consider the fact that it's actually WORSE to look good yet be so bad with women. It's like, you got all the tools but you're still too much of an idiot to figure it out.

Lolyes. I remember the book explicitly saying he was naturally talented at everything he tried. I remember it because it was the exact moment I thought, "Okay, this is garbage, I'm reading garbage right now."

He's pretty smart plus he's got a huge drive for obvious reasons. But beyond that he still could get and has gotten schooled by so many people in the book. Even Sim, a student alchemist rolls his eyes at how stupid he is with the subject. Just because you have a knack for picking stuff up =/= doing everything with perfection. Seriously, this really is a ridiculous argument. There's SOOO many times where Kvothe gets his ass handed to him by someone who's simply more talented than him. Or has had more experience. Or is smarter. Or maybe even all three together.

He gets taught how to be great at sex (and confident!) by a sex goddess.

Gee, it's almost as if a fairy demi-goddess of beauty and love has a lot of practical knowledge on the subject. Although a lot of things happened in the Fae that were equally important as well if not a lot moreso than Kvothe having sex. And also, Felurian was pretty much the only way Kvothe could have been introduced to the Fae realm as it can be an insanely hostile place, and especially to one who has no idea how to even navigate it. FFS, Kvothe would have just died right there as well or went insane if he never tried any naming at all. Because that's what Felurian really does. She rips out the life of someone very slowly and then just tosses them away idly like an empty beer can and looks for another life to enjoy and end. Once you look past the beauty and the sex of her, you'll see her for what she really is. A murderer.

Exactly. A super special one-of-a-kind sword with it's own name.

Please tell me what's so super duper fucking special about it, besides the fact that Kvothe's now probably cursed to die some horrible bloody death.

Dead families and tragic origins on their own aren't the end of the world, although they are painfully common in nerdbait garbage.It's when you combine them with Mary Sues that the shit really starts to stink.

I totally understand this. I really do. But the fact of the matter is that Kvothe is simply not a Mary Sue. Just because he has great traits to him doesn't make him one. Also,

 

[dscross]

Snip

Not to worry. I like debating things as long as it's civil and people have thought about it, which you obviously have.

1. Acting - Just to address your contentions with my point about the acting, I don't think we'll agree on this. I think the acting comes across as wooden to me - all the time. It's less a read on the characters as the portrayals of the characters by the actors. It's something that I noticed right from the very start. I think we'll have to agree to disagree on this point though because obviously you think they come across as more 3 dimensional than I do.

2. Pacing - Ive only seen up to season 5 so I don't know if it gets quicker after that but up to where I've seen, it's an accurate description. I really can't stomach any more (as I've made quite clear). I have heard the newest two seasons they have a problem with speeding up, which I imagine leads to a whole different type of problem. I can't really comment on how it's changed but I'm happy for you to enlighten me about it.

3. Mythology - I think what you say is a fair argument, something about the way he does it really annoys me though, but I accept it's a matter of taste. I think I'm used to well thought structured fantasy and historical dramas so it bugs me more.

4. Misery - I have to take issue with this one. It's definitely the most joyless long running serial I've ever seen. The Sopranos is my favourite show of all time - it has PLENTY of comic relief in it. Breaking Bad had fewer nice scenes but there were still comedic ones. I like dark stuff - and I love it when it's got a deeper meaning in films - but they only run for a couple of hours. GoT is too much misery for too long for me. If you can give me some specific booyah or hoorah style examples in the show to prove me wrong please do. They might come after I stopped watching.

5. Your reasoning - I agree. I don't think they contradict mine. It's just more reasons to dislike the show for me - I'd even add them to my list but there are enough things on there that get my back up already. I've still not watched the wire. I keep meaning to watch it but there are soooo many series that it's a bit daunting. Is it your fav show?

 

[BloatedGuppy]

Not to worry. I like debating things as long as it's civil and people have thought about it, which you obviously have.

1. Acting - Just to address your contentions with my point about the acting, I don't think we'll agree on this. I think the acting comes across as wooden to me - all the time. It's less a read on the characters as the portrayals of the characters by the actors. It's something that I noticed right from the very start. I think we'll have to agree to disagree on this point though because obviously you think they come across as more 3 dimensional than I do.

It's possible that, having read the books, I have more context and background info on the characters. Allows me to flesh them out in my head. I do think there are some extremely good performances on the show, though. Charles Dance leaps immediately to mind.

2. Pacing - Ive only seen up to season 5 so I don't know if it gets quicker after that but up to where I've seen, it's an accurate description. I really can't stomach any more (as I've made quite clear). I have heard the newest two seasons they have a problem with speeding up, which I imagine leads to a whole different type of problem. I can't really comment on how it's changed but I'm happy for you to enlighten me about it.

I like a slow burning show and I like slow burning books, and GoT is not slow burning. I found the pace at which it jumped around maddening, starting in season 2. By the current season we have armies and fleets blinking across the map, completing treks that should take many months in the span of a single episode, all for the sake of plot contrivance. Even casual viewers are starting to take umbrage.

3. Mythology - I think what you say is a fair argument, something about the way he does it really annoys me though, but I accept it's a matter of taste. I think I'm used to well thought structured fantasy and historical dramas so it bugs me more.

I have a Tolkien loving friend who dislikes Martin, so you might not be alone in your sentiments. Personally, I prefer his style (and the authors he inspired, like Abercrombie and Rothfuss) more than the classical "high fantasy" given birth by Tokien. But I have great respect for Tolkien.

4. Misery - I have to take issue with this one. It's definitely the most joyless long running serial I've ever seen. The Sopranos is my favourite show of all time - it has PLENTY of comic relief in it. Breaking Bad had fewer nice scenes but there were still comedic ones. I like dark stuff - and I love it when it's got a deeper meaning in films - but they only run for a couple of hours. GoT is too much misery for too long for me. If you can give me some specific booyah or hoorah style examples in the show to prove me wrong please do. They might come after I stopped watching.

The Sopranos follows a brutal, ruthless, murdering mob boss who is completely unrepentant and uses his therapy to inform his reptilian crime dealings. In like, the third episode he murders an informant while on a college trip with his daughter. There's a brutal, graphic rape played out on screen. GoT can be a vicious series, but it has nothing on The Sopranos, nor is it anywhere close to as nihilistic in its worldview. Paulie Walnuts cracking the occasional one-liner or some deft comedic direction by Buscemi does not change the ethos of the series as a whole. GoT has a good versus evil storyline running down its spine, however obscured by its War of the Roses political wrangling. There are Genuinely Good characters, even in the books where their flaws run deeper. If, however, you find tone more important than theme, you might enjoy Joe Abecrombie. His books are arguably even more vicious than Martin's...instead of grey/grey morality he indulges in a lot of grey/black morality. However, he has an extremely pacy writing style, and a very good ear for blackly comedic dialogue and character development. What could be an impossibly dour exercise is as a consequence hugely entertaining in a way ASOIAF's more conservative prose is not.

5. Your reasoning - I agree. I don't think they contradict mine. It's just more reasons to dislike the show for me - I'd even add them to my list but there are enough things on there that get my back up already. I've still not watched the wire. I keep meaning to watch it but there are soooo many series that it's a bit daunting. Is it your fav show?

I still have a hard time not crediting The Wire as the best show in the history of the medium. It just does too much too well. Staggeringly ambitious show. If you ever give it a try, make sure to give it 4-5 episodes to get its wheels turning. There's a ton of characters and a ton of themes and storylines that need to get into motion.

 

[Fiz_The_Toaster]

Snippers

I don't know how you did it, but you lost me.

I never said he can't criticize anything, nor did I even imply it.

All I said was what he said is completely subjective and that if he really doesn't like something then he can avoid it seeing as he put a lot time and effort into trying to see what the big deal is about it. He doesn't like it, and he has stated as much. So, he can avoid it if he so choses.

So I'm gonna say to you what I told the other guy. Don't presume my intentions.