No Right Answer: Is Game of Thrones Overrated?

[RandV80]

Simple answer is the show is not overrated, rather this is just a side effect of becoming popular. Pretty much everything has it's audience, but when something becomes this popular it creates the impression that everyone should like/watch it. For some people it just isn't going to work, doesn't mean it's bad or overrated. And even if you don't like it, how cool is it that a show which first season ends with a naked chick hatching 3 baby dragons became so popular that it became common pop culture?

Personally I see two legit criticisms of the show.

1. People just watching won't pick up on this, but when translating from an epic book series to a TV show some things are going to be lost in translation. Some things just aren't going to work on the screen, either due to TB budget restrictions, time restraints, or things that don't translate well like flashbacks/dreams/inner thoughts & reflections. Like for example: "Promise me, Ned". People who just watch the show will have no idea what that is, but it's a recurring theme through the first book. And if you only watch the show don't try looking it up. Also in the video you kept showing GRRM's picture when talking about the gratutious nudity, but that was totally HBO and the two show writers.

2. One of your complaints are legit, there's so many damn characters that for someone new it's going to be hard to pick up on. Unless you're really sharp you need to either commit to having another viewing or two, or read up a little on the non-spoiler extra's HBO provides on family tree's & characters and such. Now the show isn't actually poorly written, like I said if you're sharp everything is there, just for the average person the moment you have to ask "who is this again?" the big picture can fall apart. While I still don't think there's anything wrong with this, the complexity is one of the things that make it stand out, but you have to acknowledge that you will lose some viewers on it who can't keep up and aren't interested enough to try.

 

[LysanderNemoinis]

You know what I'd really love, to have a episode on why Nintendo games are overrated. Now I know that Chris couldn't participate because he works there and all, but I think it would be interesting to see the shoe on the other foot.

And full disclosure, I've never seen Game of Thrones, but I do want to watch it some day. But I can totally empathize with the show's fans as I feel that way about certain things as well, and God help people if they try to say RahXephon is overrated...that is if there's anyone aside from me that's freakin' seen it.

 

[Vigormortis]

You know....sometimes it's a good thing to recognize, admit to, and accept the flaws in the things you love.

I have never understood why people are so afraid of analyzing the things they love in an objective sense. I do it all the time with the things I enjoy. In fact, when some "hater" tries to put me down by pointing out flaws in something I like, I usually retort by pointing out even more flaws and still profess my love for it.

Game of Thrones; both show and novels; has its flaws. Some of them brought up in the OP video.

Learn to recognize them. Who knows? It might leave you with a greater appreciation and understanding of the material.

What you don't want to do is something like this:

Honestly, you are 100% wrong and there's just too much stupidity to even try arguing.

It achieves nothing but making you look foolish and confrontational, fails to further the discussion, and does nothing to prove or support your side of the debate.

If you watch the show and have not read the books.... your doing it wrong.

If reading the books is a requirement to understanding the show, the show is badly written.

This is a rationalization I've never understood. And I've heard it far too often whenever criticisms are brought up about the show.

"The show is good and well written! But you need to read the books before you can understand it."

Does the contradiction elude them? Seriously?

 

[Crazy Zaul]

I saw the title and thought 'this gonna be good'.
GoT is definitely overrated but its still kinda good. It is all about a massive build up to a some big awesome things that will never actually happen, but it also has moments of unexpected awesome things happening.

 

[Shaolen]

Personally, I watch Game of Thrones because I actually like the actors in it. I have personally met Peter Dinklage and Lena Headey at a charity supper, and they are both wonderful people.

I also like Game of Thrones because of the beautiful scenery in each scene. I mean, you could literally press pause, take a screen cap, put it on a post card and send it off and have it be believable(unless you pause at a naughty moment, then, well, hmm...).

I also don't like my story spoon fed to me in a simple fashion, and actually enjoy the multi-layered storyline and multiple characters. It keeps me vested in the story, keeps me guessing on who will betray who, and who may die. Heck, many people even made drinking games out of this show, and HOW is that a bad thing? lol

And yes, I have read the books, and I like the changes they made to the show that combat the slowness in certain parts of the books. It is a new entity that does remain true to the books for the most part.

See, not everyone is here for teh bewbs, blood and dragons. They aren't a bad addition to an ADULT show. Hooray for HBO!

 

[Darth_Payn]

Poor Michelle Rodriguez. She should fire her agent for that.
Awww, dammit. You make some good points. So many characters look alike, it's hard to keep track of who's who and why I should care when they're inevitably killed off, especially when we haven't seen them do anything of note for a LONG time. I don't have a problem with TV shows with complex characters with flaws, my problem is with characters who have little to no redeeming or relatable qualities. It's like the comic books of the '90's all over again.

 

[deathmothon]

Are you face-blind Chris? It's not that hard to tell the people apart. It's okay if GoT is too complicated for you though. I'm sure there's some good formulaic programming to be had, oh let's say, ANYWHERE ELSE!

(I will give you that the way sex is portrayed is gratuitous and unnecessary some of the time.)

 

[IVIX1]

I also agree with Chris on this one.

The show has good/great production value, don't get me wrong. It's hyped up beyond belief. Great production value and hype do not a great story/plot make. Fantasy zombies, magic, and dragons sell to everywhere-icans all day long, and add in some nudity and you've got a show for the masses. That's why its loved so much and blindly so at that. I miss and wish Rome was still in production, and/or Deadwood, shows that had a base in reality, impecable writing, historical relavance, etc. BUT as HBO found when they put those shows on and the took them off of the air, the masses go for fantasy and magic more than reality and quality of story. It is what it is.

I don't hate GOT by any means, at least its not another rediculously shallow zombie-whatever-show which litters too many mediums at this point. GOT's I'll watch it. I just hope that maybe, just maybe they'll add a show a little more grounded in reality to balance this fantasy/magic act.

 

[Bocaj2000]

1) Lack of focus and tone
I heavily disagree. Multiple stories with multiple sub-tones, does not necessarily equate to a dilution to the point of nonexistence. The tone is established in the first episode (arguably the first two scenes) as a dark fantasy with elements of political thriller. This overarching tone persists throughout the series.

Your complaint about the lack of focus also feels like a misunderstanding. Utilizing multiple story lines and arcs shows the subtle (or not so subtle) interweaving of events and their effects. The juxtaposition of back to back events may serve as self referential allegory and comparison. George Martin is not stupid. His work has a lot of depth.

2) Pacing issues
Winter coming isn't the focus of the show. Winter is simply a McGuffin to get the interesting parts up and running. As for individual episode pacing: slow pacing is not a weakness. In fact, I wouldn't even consider it to be slow. Much like Baccanno!, it fits so much into one episode that rewatching it adds a lot to the experience.

If that still doesn't satisfy you, then can you compare Winter to the Numbers from Lost? How long did that take for payoff?

3) Every one looks the same
*Gasp!* Racist!

4) Sex sells
I have yet to hear any fan or critic discuss the show's sexual themes as a hook of any kind. This is something in which you are flat out wrong without question.

 

[Ishal]

I... well... yeah.

I mean, as a book reader, I'll agree with some of these points. If you weren't around when the show was just getting off the ground, the prevailing talk was about how "this turned out way better than we expected." That's because things like this, fantasy and just anything resembling the world building that Martin does, generally doesn't make it to TV, and for good reason. It's fucking HARD to do. Budget is a big issue, it's why the battle scenes are done with ~40 dudes and seem lack luster. It's why a scene where you would have seen a big fight between the watch and white walkers but it was cut completely. It's spread too thin is what you're saying, I think. And, yeah, it is.

I grow tired of the things that are popular as well. It's all focused on characters and smaller stories. I'm sure some people like The Witcher, but I can only take so much backstabbing and "drama" between, *ahem* "interesting characters." It's all just a song and dance with a lot of these books and modern media. Shrink the focus down to micro stories and micro arcs revolving around characters and how their particular threads intertwine, all while everything else suffers. There are criticisms but I think you're reaching a bit too far here. The tone of the show is in how the characters interact and die. But, if it's not your cup of tea, I totally understand.

It subverts tropes by killing the main character and many of his family members to show that just because you look rugged and carry around a +10 morality shield, doing stupid shit will still get you killed. Many people, myself included, at least find that refreshing. But then you get the folks who go off on tangents about how rare it is to have characters die. It's not, and Martin is hardly the first, or the best, at doing it. Several characters are allegories for certain things. Ramsay Bolton is the evil of rape, made manifest. He shows how the evil perpetuates long after the act itself is done.

Ultimately it comes down to what you are able to hand wave if you are book reader, and how you are able to take the constant switching and perspectives of whats going on. I consider myself rare in that I'm able to enjoy both the books and show for what they are, without having a meltdown when a change happens that I don't like. It's a very passive experience. I see why you don't like it, but... to your first statement about uniting all the kingdoms. That's a very Dragon Age and thus a very Bioware story. Meaning it sucks. If RR Martin were to tell that story? It's not that easy, people are going to fight, bicker, and backstab the entire way, and one of them would have killed the warden halfway through the game, likely for a petty advancement in power or for some perceived slight. That's the kind of thing Martin is trying to tell, even if he gets side tracked almost half the time... I can't defend this like a fanboy. I don't really want to, and I'm just too passive about the material to raise a shield. Oh well

 

[Therumancer]

Honestly, I've always gotten the impression that reactions to this show were fairly mixed, but there was enough of a following from fanboys and a fantasy hungry population to keep it high in the ratings. For example it seems rather popular to make political attacks on the show, and indeed I've run into a few articles over the last couple of years dealing with how the show is "racist" because of a general lack of minority characters (despite you know, more minority characters wouldn't fit the setting) and most recently because our budding Mother Of Dragons "dared" to free the slaves in a land she was visiting and (*gasp*) the freed slaves were grateful. I've read a couple of big articles slamming the show for her being the "blondest possible savior" and how it's insensitive to have whites do something nice for people of other ethnicities because they should always be shown doing it themselves... the point is it's pretty crazy (no I'm not going to argue it in detail) it's just that this kind of thing, along with other issues, have been coming out of the woodwork in one direction or another, and honestly I'm kind of shocked that the show has even survived.

That said, the whole idea of the entire story is to show all sides of a very gray power struggle where the good guys probably will prevail in the end, but themselves are not pure, and have a real chance of failure (and will probably have to make compromises). Pretty much a work of low fantasy, heavily focused on the politics, which means they don't need a huge FX budget beyond set/props/costumes. The idea here is to show how things are playing out from all the different perspectives. You've got the major houses in Westros beating the living crap out of each other and murdering the quality leaders and decimating their armies, while the heiress of the previous king is slowly building power overseas and planning a return (complete with Dragons... her house symbol, which are supposed to be extinct). While all of this is going on you have an army of undead rallying over the wall that could probably threaten all of those players together, and oh yes, internal forces with supernatural powers manipulating events to try and prevent the various groups from getting their crap together. Among other things you might notice is that these "zombies" are not generally accepted to exist or be a threat, "The Wall" isn't seen as being truly important and largely a crap duty and a place to dump exiles. Indeed a big "surprise" is when it was learned "OMG, there are zombies, this is why there is a wall here, they haven't been seen for centuries... but here they are again..." and the leadership of the watch knew they were out there and wasn't exactly acting as expected.

I admit it could be organized a bit better, but the sheer scope of events is difficult to convey, your pretty much seeing the focus on the kinds of things that usually happen in the background of a fantasy story, or in referenced history. I think the author at one point mentioned that most of the guys who are likely to be the actual "heroes" in the traditional sense haven't even appeared yet. What's more by focusing on all of this stuff it sort of explains why when the inevitable real danger arrives people aren't just going to "get over it" and work together. Oftentimes in a fantasy story the reasons why all the factions don't rally together aren't well explained or reliant on background you haven't really experienced enough to empathize with so people seem stupid.

As far as the sex goes, I think a lot of people miss the point honestly, a big part of it is to sell how decadent this society is supposed to be, especially certain aspects of the leadership. The fact that some big wig is sitting there talking politics and deciding the fate thousands while he has two girls going at it for his amusement says a lot about who your dealing with, their thought processes, and exactly what the problems with this leadership are. It's sort of like the sex scandals involving Bill Clinton, except more extreme, and as we're supposed to be noting... socially accepted. It also explains why some of these high priced whores wind up with big time political secrets, and why one of the biggest spymasters/aquirerers of information happens to be a world class pimp.

Most importantly understand that the world's coolest dwarf happens to find this a problem. When dealing with his father who is a more "serious" ruler, his antics are indeed held against him, and he's told flat out that his whoring has made him an embarasement, he's expected to be married, and if he's caught with another whore in his bed that lady is going to be decapitated as a lesson. These antics are important because they also explain a big part of why "The Imp" and the Lannister Patriarch are not working together and bringing a degree of sanity and competence to the house. There are a lot of reasons why he hates "The Imp", but the Imp's behavior is a big part of why he can't look past him. Of course it should be noted that The Impster is actually falling in love, with a relationship that has been going on for a while, as he was a bit source of the "wild sex in the background" stuff him chilling out a bit has lowered it in the plot. What's more "Littlefinger" (our pimp) has been increasingly in the background, or not having his business (or the trappings thereof) being relevant the the scenes he appears in.

The point is the sex has a purpose, and did a lot to establish some important characterizations. Ask yourself how seriously you'd take leaders that sit there discussing intrigues and politics while watching hookers get it on, and what that means for things like "informational security". This has literally come up in the show.

 

[Thunderous Cacophony]

I've only got one good counter-point that I would like to make to Chris:

A Question of Tone
A lot of people have written about how the show's tone is "dark political fantasy drama". I disagree; that's what the show is, but not what it's about. What is A Song of Ice and Fire (and by extension, Game of Thrones) about? The same thing that the tabletop RPG Apocalypse World is about.

The world becoming unbalanced. Everything starts off functional, if not perfect: The Seven Kingdoms are united, the Stark family is together, it's a nice long summer. Then, once the books start, everything rapidly falls out of balance: The king dies, the Starks are scattered, Winter starts coming, the fight over the Iron Throne begins, Dany starts plotting to take over Westeros, etc.

Game of Thrones is about things going downhill and rapidly accelerating to an end state. We don't know who will win: Who gets the Iron Throne, who (if anyone) stops the White Walkers, who survives and who dies. All we know is that the old balance is gone, and everything that's happening is because someone is maneuvering to put themselves into a position of power and safety. THAT'S the key: one way or another, we know things settle into a new order, but we don't know how all the chips will land.

That brings up something else I love about GoT: The decisions are binding. Characters don't get to try and try again until they win, they have to make a choice and live with it. Marry that girl? You're happy, but now your ex-fiancee's father is pissed. Use sorcery to kill your brother? Sure, but there's going to be a price. Try to overthrow a slave empire? Go ahead, but the revolution and counter-revolution might spin out of your control.

Together, these two make a great balance: Every character (and I mean everyone; those who seem stationary should be watched the closest) is constantly maneuvering rather than sitting around waiting for the plot to happen, and every step they make has irrevocable consequences for them and the other characters.

 

[daibakuha]

It achieves nothing but making you look foolish and confrontational, fails to further the discussion, and does nothing to prove or support your side of the debate.

The problem is that there isn't another side to my debate. The video is a rambling incoherent mess that tries to pass itself as legitimate criticism. It's lazy and contrarian in the worst ways possible.

This guy couldn't criticize his way out of a paper bag, and it's clear he doesn't have the education or knowledge to even participate in a debate about fiction period.

 

[J Tyran]

How dare you dislike something that I like! /grabs pitchfork

In all seriousness I can see why people think its overrated, Chris has some points too about the characters. In the novels they are far more detailed and you get a really good sense of why the important characters are important instead of just being told they are important, for obvious reasons the show misses a lot of the internalisations of the characters which gives swathes of context the show misses.

Still I enjoy it to see some of the locations and important scenes brought to life.

 

[TheUrglyWorne]

Okay, I really like Game of Thrones, I like the books better than the show precisely because of a lot of things mentioned in this video. In the books, the sex and violent scenes aren't there for the sake of being there, but rather to make the characters feel more human, since getting into fights, having sex, all that, is a lot more immediately relatable than the politics of the story, and in the books, you really get into the characters' heads while all this stuff is happening, which is something that you can't really do in a show the way that you can in a book. I agree that it's stupid and irritating that after 3 whole seasons, the show still hasn't gotten to winter, but you misunderstand, "Winter is Coming," which isn't a prophecy, but is just the sigil of the Stark house, which is why it's repeated so damn much. Yes, the story is kind of crazy and all over the place, with short scenes that do get confusing if you're not already into it, but the makers of the show are trying to fit an entire book into 10 episodes. The shortest book of the series is over 800 pages long, but despite that, the show tries to remain as true to the books as it can. As for the problems with the tone, I kind of feel like you're missing the point. The point is to have these characters that have only heard of crazy fantastical stuff in legends and fairy tales face the very things they've been brought up to believe are fiction. To use the example of the white walkers, they aren't there to change the tone, but to add a new threat that's more interesting than just people. Yes, there are a lot of criticisms to be made against the show, and yes, you made some legitimate ones in this video, they just never really bugged me all that much, and I do disagree with a lot of them. In conclusion, I think that you and other detractors of the show could benefit from giving it another shot, just don't expect it to be like a normal fantasy story, because it isn't. It's more like a period piece in the guise of a fantasy story.

 

[Vigormortis]

The problem is that there isn't another side to my debate.

So you're implying that anyone that dislikes the show/novels, or thinks they're flawed in some way, are just "wrong" and that's the end of it?

Probably not, but the stance you seem to be taking certainly comes off that way.

The video is a rambling incoherent mess that tries to pass itself as legitimate criticism. It's lazy and contrarian in the worst ways possible.

Didn't seem incoherent at all. I understood perfectly what his criticisms were. Not that I necessarily agree with all of them.

And, given that he's admitted to watching the seasons in their entirety I'm not entirely sure how you can claim he's being "lazy" in his critique.

Besides, even if his criticisms were "illegitimate", that doesn't negate the possibility of there being flaws within the material; nor the desire to discuss them.

This guy couldn't criticize his way out of a paper bag, and it's clear he doesn't have the education or knowledge to even participate in a debate about fiction period.

Not only is this just tactless but it further demonstrates the very point I was making before.

To be frank, you're painting a very poor image of what Game of Thrones fans are like. And if all you can muster in response to his critiques is vitriol and insults then all you've done is emboldened his stance.

If you want to prove that he's wrong, offer counter points. Don't just fling mud.

 

[Doom972]

Well this was a waste of my time. I was hoping for something funny or insightful about the show. Seems like he doesn't like it because he doesn't get what it's about.

I was having a problem understanding all the subplots and remembering all the characters, but at some point it sank in.

Also: A 30 seconds video reply, for which he will have a lengthy video to dismiss later on? It would be sad if anyone would actually bother.

 

[Sarge034]

Everything will be fine...

Shots fired, SHOTS FIRED!


The comments are priceless. But to the point... I never did understand why the show was so popular. I couldn't get invested in the characters and the plot was about as cohesive as if the script had been thrown in the washing machine. If you enjoy it cool, but it is most certainly not the end all be all.

 

[Tono Makt]

The main problem the haters have of Game of Thrones is that they don't like the genre while not entirely understanding what the genre is. It is not Fantasy, even though it is classified as such. It is actually Historical Fiction, with Fantasy elements. Why is this important?

This allows GRR Martin to ignore the normal conventions of Fiction and Fantasy - things like a fairly linear plot and defined protagonists, antagonists and secondary characters on both sides. Compare GoT to almost any other Fantasy novel and you'll see that nearly every other Fantasy novel has clearly defined Protagonist (See: Bilbo, Frodo, Rand, Haplo/Alfred, Fat Charlie, etc.), Antagonists (see: Smaug, Sauron, the Dark One, Xar/Sartan Council, Bird God, etc.), Secondary Characters (See: Thorin, Aragon, Mat, Dog, the Lime, etc.) and each has a fairly linear plot (Kill the Dragon, Destroy the Ring, Defeat the Dark One, Save the Worlds, Okay this one is sort of not fitting the pattern but is shows a good exception to the rule!, etc.)

GoT doesn't have any of that. It doesn't need it - in fact, it can't have it. It wouldn't work with it. Think about it like telling the story of the 2016 election. We know that Obama isn't going to be President any more - but we have no idea who will be the next president. Who can you focus on when you can literally have a "protagonist" (Obama) show up out of nowhere to dethrone the Queen in Waiting (Clinton) in a way that is absurdly unbelievable? (Black man + Strange Name + Name eerily close to name of main US Enemy (Osama/Obama) + Middle name IS the name of a major US enemy (Hussein) + Middle of a War + Going Up against a War Hero White Dude... and he WINS?!?!) You can't simply focus on Clinton, or Biden. You can't focus on Paul Ryan, Chris Christie, Rand Paul or Jeb Bush. You have to jump around to everyone, and people connected to them to see where the intricacies lie, to see what's causing the currents and what's getting caught up in the currents.

For people expecting Fantasy and Fiction, it can be extremely frustrating. It's maddening to me, for example - though the huge wait between books is what drove me to stop reading the books entirely.

The show is a bit of an enigma to me - more often than not I just shrug my shoulders and actually have to stop myself from feeling derisive towards who the intended audience seems to be. The sexposition is just lame when I can sit there in my living room, with a cellphone, a tablet and a laptop computer all streaming different versions of the most extreme German porn you can find. Or one of those devices streaming porn movies starring an actual GoT actress, if I wanted to. So really, the sex is just pathetic in my eyes as it doesn't seem to have any purpose other than titillation.