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.

[Mike Darancette]

I assume you haven’t read the books, too bad.

[OddLane]

Sandor Clegane is one of my favorites, despite the fact that he's a sociopath.

He's one of the more self-aware characters in the series, and honest enough not to gloss over some of the horrific things he does.

I hear that the series butchers his character though, and gives most of his good lines to Littlefinger.

[Mike Darancette]

I'd say the only character I actually like is the dwarf, not because he's good, but just because he's cool.

If you had read the books (all 5) you would know how really cool he is. The perfect anti-hero.

[Mike Darancette]

The world depicted in the series is kind of a medieval world without Christianity..

I believe story is based on a world before the last ice advance.

[fr_freak]

Only if you’re too dumb to understand it.

Oh look, a butthurt fanboy. How dare anyone criticize my show! You just aren't capable of seeing its true genius!

lol

[Mr. Jeeves]

Unless he dies and leaves the book series unfinished and incomplete.

I half expect that. Like Robert Jordan before him, Martin doesn't appear to be in the best of health. Brandon Sanderson made a heroic effort to salvage Jordan's "Wheel of Time" series and pulled it off to a degree, but it had already spiraled into way too many open plot lines and most of them had to be ended in a way that was unsatisfactory to the long-time reader. Authors who attempt such massive tales should really write them in a serial form, with each book a complete story that can stand on its own.

But I'm still amazed Game of Thrones got made for TV at all, and even more so that it has remained fairly true to the books thus far.

[Some Fat Guy in L.A.]

Wonder if there will ever be a Wheel of Time series or movies? That I would watch, though I may borrow some DVD’s and give Game of Thrones a chance. Love the books, but I too dislike the killing off of too many characters and the lack of a “good vs evil” plotline. EVERYBODY in A Song of Ice and Fire is evil, except for a few that seem to do relatively good things when it benefits them. I have always thought of Martin as the anti-Tolkien......

[fr_freak]

I assume you haven’t read the books, too bad.

Actually, I got halfway through the first book before I lost interest. Part of the reason for that was that I started reading it only after the show got underway (I had never heard of it before then). The book did not offer any greater depth than the TV show. Sure the TV show can't portray every single event or conversation that is in the book, but the show seems to have captured the book perfectly, and, in my opinion, that is because the book was written just like a Hollywood screenplay. Martin was a Hollywood screenwriter by trade before he wrote the books (and still is I'm sure) so it makes perfect sense.

I'll hand it to Martin - he wrote a series of books that many, many people love, so it would be silly to say that it isn't a well-written story, but if you contrast the depth of say, the Lord of the Rings, to the Song of Ice and Fire, there really isn't any comparison. Tolkien wrote for a generation that still had to imagine most things, and was accustomed to classic literature, whereas Martin wrote for a generation that grew up watching TV and movies, and thus think cinematically. I prefer the old style of Tolkien, which is why the Martin book didn't really appeal to me that much.

[JoeProBono]

[vladimir998]

I have found that tendency (i.e. “EVERYBODY ...is evil”) is very common nowadays. The re-imagined Battlestar Galactica, Walking Dead, it seems that there are few REAL good guys, just some characters who are not as evil as others.

[discostu]

Oh look a guy that thinks explosions are plot claiming something is boring.

You didn’t actually criticize anything, you just advertised that you don’t like plot. Ann no, there was no butt hurt, unless you’re talking about your own butt.

Sorry but out here where people can comprehend complex plots and know that explosions aren’t actually that interesting, Game of Thrones isn’t boring at all. It’s a show so tightly wound that one single sentence can change the whole story, that’s not boring. Unless you’re too dumb to notice the sentence.

[Jmouse007]

I agree with everything you said in your post. They have remained very true to the books. It is costing a fortune to produce and they have spent the money very well. The quality of the production shines in every scene. They have also done a marvelous job picking the actors for the various roles and the actors are doing an exceptional job fleshing out the characters and portraying them on the screen. I just wish the author didn’t make it his seeming over-arching goal to kill nearly every “good” and decent character he can. It is very disheartening and as a result it makes it hard for the reader to stay engaged because most of the characters left by the end of book five are hard to care about or root for because most of them, with a very few exceptions are schmucks. It is like being forced to root for someone in the Obama Administration because there are no men of honor and decency left. What is the point? They are ALL nefarious!

[fr_freak]

Yes, let the butthurt flow through you!

I think the show, as banal as it is, is too complex for you to understand, so you think it is genius. Genius, I tell you! lol

[Vanders9]

hey, take a look at what's happening around the world here and now. Most of what you see is ***holes battling for supremacy!

I agree, I like adventures where good battles evil and ultimately wins - it appeals to my sense of justice. But tragically, that is not how the world works. The best, and I mean the very best, you get is a bunch of flawed people who are trying to do right eventually beating a bunch of even more flawed people who have given up.

[Vanders9]

I sympathise, but in my view, this only adds to the excitement. One of the downsides of so many series is that deep down, you as a viewer KNOW that the lead characters are not in any real danger, otherwise how are they going to do the rest of the season? In Game of Thrones no-one has script immunity.

[fr_freak]

But tragically, that is not how the world works. The best, and I mean the very best, you get is a bunch of flawed people who are trying to do right eventually beating a bunch of even more flawed people who have given up.

I can't argue with you there, friend. However, it is rare that a dramatic piece, whether it be TV series, movie, play, novel, or puppet show, fully reflects real life. And why not? Because real life is generally bland and dull, even when people are killing each other. Real life doesn't have a soundtrack with soaring crescendos whenever you say something noble, assuming you have the chance to say anything noble at all. Real life doesn't let everyone be pretty or handsome, and doesn't often allow for true soulmates-for-eternity love. It doesn't often allow for inspiring moments where you get to speak your mind to the world.

That's why we rarely have movies which are based on nothing but real life. At least, in the days when movies were art and stories were inspirational, we didn't. Sometimes now, we do, but the real lives they are based on are usually despicable people who are only inspirational to the wicked. Otherwise, movies and TV were stories meant to distill the human experience into the best of the best, and show it back to us, to inspire us to feel, and be, better. A story doesn't have to have the good guy win in the end, or the romantic happy ending, to be inspiring, but it must at least give a glimpse of what men are capable of, even if only when the situation is hopeless, or the circumstances are dire. A story that shows only how the mediocre fail, well, why is that a show worth watching?

[Tanniker Smith]

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.

Actually, it doesn't. I saw season 1 before reading the book. The season had a little bit of closure, but I figured it was left open for season 2. Not really. The book has no particular ending. (In fact, part of the beginning of book 2 was taking out of book 1.)

The thing about the first series is that there are these independent story lines which never merge or overlap. There's a promise that they will in the future, but we don't get to see it. Hell, there isn't even much of a hint of it with the mortality rate as it is.

[stuartcr]

Depends on what reference one applies to flawed, doesn’t it?

[discostu]

you’re so cute when you’re admitting you can’t pay attention.

[Hulka]

Agree.