Look Past The Dragons In Game of Thrones

New York Magazine ^ | May 19, 2013 | Matt Zoller Seitz

[OddLane]

We’re only halfway through the season, and it’s only May, but it’s already hard for me to imagine any show topping Game of Thrones on my 2013 year-end best-of list. There are more innovative and original series, but none that satisfies on so many levels, or that juggles so much plot and so many characters with the appearance of ease.

Since HBO’s blockbuster adaptation of George R.R. Martin’s fiction debuted in 2011, many have lodged complaints about the show’s racial stereotypes and simplistic sexual dynamics—and rightly so; Thrones was a problematic series and still is, despite course corrections that suggest showrunners David Benioff and D. B. Weiss heard their critics. Beyond that, however, the show doesn’t get enough credit. Nearly a decade after ­Peter Jackson won Oscars for a film ­series about wizards and hobbits, fantasy is still seen as disreputable nerd bait rather than a legitimate mainstream genre.

That should change this year, and if it doesn’t, fans can cry foul.

[Perdogg]

Game of Thrones = “The War of the Roses” + “Hyborian Age by Robert E Howard”

Lannister = House of Lancaster

Stark = House of York

[fr_freak]

For a show about a mythical land where dragons and magic exist, not to mention naked womenzes left and right, this show can be incredibly boring.

[x]

Since HBO’s blockbuster adaptation of George R.R. Martin’s fiction debuted in 2011, many have lodged complaints about the show’s racial stereotypes and simplistic sexual dynamics—and rightly so

That is the sort of thing you have to say to work at Vulture.com.

[Perdogg]

The actual sex and nudity has fallen off since the first few episodes in season one. The problem with the show is it uses violence, sex (including homosexual), and nudity as shock value rather than adding anything to the plot. I am not opposed to it as long as it make sense to the development of the story.

[Steve_Seattle]

I had never seen the show until this week, when I bought Season 1 after hearing several people praising the show. After three or four episodes, I’m having the same problem I had with “24” - I get so angry at the evil characters, and the delayed sense of justice, that I can hardly watch it, despite all the naked women prancing around.

[Perdogg]

Have you seen any of the episodes?

[discostu]

It’s not about a mythical land where dragons and magic exist. It’s about the exercise of power. That power happens to be exercised in a mythical land where a few dragons and small amount of magic exist, but that’s set dressing.

[gorush]

The House of Lancaster lead to the Beaumonts (the bastard children of John of Gaunt and Katherine (de Roet) Swynford) which every English monarch since Henry VII is related to.

[Mmogamer]

Well it won’t get any better, and don’t get too attached to any character.

[gorush]

Tha’ts 1399 to present.

[Secret Agent Man]

proud to say never spent a second on anything to do with game of thrones.

[Steve_Seattle]

"Well it won’t get any better, and don’t get too attached to any character."

The world depicted in the series is kind of a medieval world without Christianity, with a little fantasy and magic thrown in. So far, it seems like a dark world, a Dark Ages, darker than the so-called Dark Ages of real history.

[fr_freak]

It’s not about a mythical land where dragons and magic exist. It’s about the exercise of power.

OK. For a show about exercising power in a land where dragons and magic exist, it can be incredibly boring.

[needmorePaine]

Except this thread.

[gorush]

I read the first book, interesting but too fantastic. Mercifully we don’t get TV so I haven’t had to witness the ultimate “it fails in comparison to the book” syndrome.

[x]

I saw season one.

It's fantasy and it's on cable, so they can pretty much get away with anything. Heck, if they can go after the all powerful dwarf-American lobby, nobody is safe.

Smarty-pants culture journalists create controversies about racism and sexism in fantasy worlds to attract an audience. I really doubt anybody is that serious about such complaints, especially since those "stereotypes" don't all run in one direction. But I could be wrong: Seitz and his colleagues could be that silly.

[LonePalm]

I think you meant the Beauforts.

Garde la Foi, mes amis! Nous nous sommes les sauveurs de la République! Maintenant et Toujours!
(Keep the Faith, my friends! We are the saviors of the Republic! Now and Forever!)
LonePalm, le Républicain du verre cassé (The Broken Glass Republican)

[chris37]

So far this season of Game of Thrones has been fantastic.

They are following the books very closely, with only a few differences.

I do wish Strong Belwas was included, but overall I suppose he is a minor character.

They have also really focused on the torment of Theon, whereas in the books the reader only knew of it after it happened, and not until quite a bit later.

Only thing that really bugs me is the continued insistence on showing gay sex. I figured it was done since Renly is dead, but I should have known that as long as Ser Loras remains, so does the potential for more...crap.

But I guess these are the times I live in, so I do not dwell on that unfortunate part of an otherwise excellent adaptation of truly brilliant books.

[OddLane]

A great (non-fiction) work about that conflict is Fatal Colours .

One of the things I wish Martin did more with the books is go into the strategic thinking behind the actual battles, rather than simply focusing on the atrocities and economic/military consequences of their outcomes.