CliqueClackDo Game of Thrones’ changed reveals really matter?
After months of waiting, Game of Thrones is back … and back with a vengeance. Reports say that the show brought in 4.4 million viewers Sunday night, breaking…
After months of waiting, Game of Thrones is back … and back with a vengeance. Reports say that the show brought in 4.4 million viewers Sunday night, breaking its own record (Torrentfreak also reports that the premiere set some piracy records as well, and had been downloaded an estimated 1 million times in the two days since). Fans tuned in and caught up with Jon Snow and the wildlings, Joffrey and his new bride-to-be, Stannis tasting defeat … and, of course, those dragons.
The producers of Game of Thrones have an incredibly difficult job trying to manage portraying George R. R. Martin’s epic work on the television screen, and of course can’t make everyone happy. Fans were more than a little disappointed that favorites like Arya and Bran Stark were left out of the premiere. Having seen the first couple of episodes, I can say that their stories are tracking well, and making more room for them in the second episode back was a good move. The series has seen its share of changes from the books, changes that Bob and I have largely supported in Beyond the Wall. This week however, we’re going to take a deeper look at how some of the awesome reveals from the books will be lost on those that only watch the show.
Bob: Books and TV are different animals. This is not news. It’s been fun watching how the writers of Game of Thrones transform the vast amounts of story in George R. R. Martin’s novels into mere hours of televised content. They have really done it almost flawlessly to date, but I think it’s going to get harder as we move forward, and we are beginning to see some of the differences between the two mediums arise.
Last week we talked briefly about the Arstan/Barristan Selmy issue. We got an answer to our questions this week as Arstan was tossed unceremoniously aside (along with his badass Gandalf beard) in lieu of Barristan Selmy. There was no big reveal (though, I suppose there was a small one). In the books we didn’t know that Selmy was Arstan for quite some time. It’s not a huge thing, but it does illustrate nicely the types of things you can do in writing versus on the screen.
Ivey: As someone who was really, really looking forward to the Arstan/Barristan reveal (I mentioned in our previews of season two if you remember), I completely understand the decision to change how that story played out on the screen — though, if I have to read any more IMs from you bemoaning the fact that Strong Belwas was left out, I might puke. But as with last year, I like gaming out how these changes will affect the story moving forward. Later in Storm of Swords when Barristan is actually “unmasked,” he reveals to Daenerys that her most trusted advisor, Ser Jorah Mormont, had been spying on her on behalf of Varys and the Small Council of Westeros. How’s that going to play out now?
Bob: I think it’s kind of nice to have something different to look forward to. Arstan had gained Dany’s trust before he revealed himself and gave up Jorah as a spy. I think it will play out similarly on the show, only without the question of Selmy’s identity. He needs to earn Dany’s trust while evaluating her potential as a leader. Certainly, with a secret identity it would be easier for him to hit the road, but I don’t think it’s going to matter.
I guess my question to you is this: are we (or more importantly, folks who haven’t read the novels), missing out on some fun moments with these “surprises” not being in the show? Or are we completely over thinking things? (I mean, we would never do that when it comes to this show, right?)
Ivey: Us overthink things? I thought I examined and thought through things entirely too much … then I visited the A Song of Ice and Fire subreddit at Reddit. Those guys redefine the word “overthink.” But to answer your question, yeah, I think we are missing out on some fun reveals. But that’s the nature of adaptation. On the flip side, there was Cersei’s great inside joke line about Tyrion not missing his nose … that’s a bit of fun that people who only watch the show missed out on (and isn’t the only inside joke the producers have included in the first four episodes).
No, I’m not going to miss Ser Dontos. He was — at best — a tool of Littlefinger in both the literal and narrative sense. He is exactly the type of character that the show needs to jettison — though I think they should have done so before introducing him and his Captain America armor in the season two premiere. That being said, they could have still held off identifying Littlefinger as Sansa’s secret benefactor. That might have been a good reveal in the books, but it wasn’t one I ever found particularly critical or fun.
Bob: I tend to think that these little changes aren’t all that important. I really don’t find either of the changes we’re talking about to be a problem. It’s funny. I’m also a huge fan of The Walking Dead, and have read all the comics as well. That show is so much more loosely based on the source material than Game of Thrones. In comparison, it barely seems like the writers of Game of Thrones are changing anything. I guess everything is relative.
Ivey: I agree completely. Some of these changes are inherent in any adaptation like this, and others are probably reflective of other changes down the road that the producers figured they’d have to make. There’s not been one change thus far that I think is so massive of a departure from the source material that the show — or even an important storyline — will become unrecognizable compared to the original. Plus, you’re right about another thing (and admitting you were right twice meets my quota for the month): if the show was a perfect adaptation of the books, we would know every twist and turn that was coming. At this point, I think we are informed enough as an audience, and the changes provide just that extra incentive to pay close attention to what’s going on.
One Comment on “Do Game of Thrones’ changed reveals really matter?”
I’m surprised to hear your opinion that there have been very few departures, in terms of storyline, from the original text. I for one was very disappointed that we didn’t get the suspense of “the ghost of Harrenhal or the Weasel soup escape plot. And what happened to the Daenerys plot in Quarth?!
Having just watched Episode 2 of season 3 I am already worried at the surplanting of Tom and Lem with Thoros of Myr. It seemed to me that most of the episode comprised of made up scenes, characters and information. All these changes and the removal of characters has me worried about the books George is still to write. Is he going to be limited in how his story can develop because of what has gone before in the tv series. I have a feeling that Osha is going to replace Meera on the trip north of the wall with Bran. That for me is too big a change. Is the story going to lose it’s ability to surprise? Characters who are missing already can be as good as forgotten about in the books. They can’t do anything of import. Let’s just hope that Robb doesn’t survive the Red Wedding!