Game of Thrones - Season 2 Discussion

[hepcat]

Also felt a bit bored with the Tyrion/Shay scene. I love Tyrion for the most part so there is that, but I am really not liking the actress that plays Shay. We shouldn't see a whole lot more of her though.

You'll see a hell of a lot more of her if you search the internet using her real name...

[Carpet_pissr]

Why can't they have some text across the screen when they are at a new location?? Like "Dragonstone. Seat of Stannis Barathoreon" or something like that? That would help a little.

Disagree. That would help a hell of a lot! Great idea.

[Odin]

Also felt a bit bored with the Tyrion/Shay scene. I love Tyrion for the most part so there is that, but I am really not liking the actress that plays Shay. We shouldn't see a whole lot more of her though.

That scene didn't really do a lot for me, either. I wouldn't count on Shae disappearing, however. Much like "the red whore" in season 1 (and perhaps season 2?), part of her job is to be on the receiving end of Tyrion's ruminations so that stuff the viewer needs to know can be expressed through dialogue. While she has other (direct and indirect) roles to play, I don't think they'd have given up the precious screen time to the two of them if they didn't expect her to be around. Also, she gets nekkid, which is a big plus in HBO-land.

[dedewhale]

Also felt a bit bored with the Tyrion/Shay scene. I love Tyrion for the most part so there is that, but I am really not liking the actress that plays Shay. We shouldn't see a whole lot more of her though.

You'll see a hell of a lot more of her if you search the internet using her real name...

well thank you for that. It is not often a women who did pron gets a big role like this. I am now routing for her to be the next Queen of Westeros!!!!!

[Zaxxon]

Why can't they have some text across the screen when they are at a new location?? Like "Dragonstone. Seat of Stannis Barathoreon" or something like that? That would help a little.

Disagree. That would help a hell of a lot! Great idea.

They actually do this. Not sure why it's not consistent, though.

[Odin]

Also felt a bit bored with the Tyrion/Shay scene. I love Tyrion for the most part so there is that, but I am really not liking the actress that plays Shay. We shouldn't see a whole lot more of her though.

You'll see a hell of a lot more of her if you search the internet using her real name...

Apparently Sibel Kekilli's done her fair share of porn.

[Scuzz]

After reading through part of this it is obvious if I were to buy the DVD's and start watching them with my wife I would spend the entire show explaining to her what just happened.

[Zaxxon]

I just stumbled upon this interactive map, which is pretty much the best thing ever. Don't look if you aren't caught up on the series. The map presents the current locations of all characters in the show along with summaries of their background and how they got to be where they're at now.

Fantastic for non-book readers.

[hepcat]

And thank ye again, fair Zaxxon of Eastern Octopusland.

[theohall]

Concerns - watching this with someone who has not read the books, but did watch Season One with me.

1) No, they don't explain Melisandre. They never even say her name.
2) The kid killing thing - that went so quickly from the throne room to the next, it was not as easily put together for my friend while it was painfully obvious to me, because I had read the books.
3) Not using names and locations of folks is confusing when there is a huge break between one season and the next.

I had to constantly remind her of names and events, because they were not as clear as some seem to think. Reading the series made it much easier to remember the names, locations, whys and wherefores. I would have been lost with the Melisandre thing had I not read the books.

[Inverarity]

1) No, they don't explain Melisandre. They never even say her name.

Does it matter what her name is at this point in the story? She's the lady with the fire-red hair.

2) The kid killing thing - that went so quickly from the throne room to the next, it was not as easily put together for my friend while it was painfully obvious to me, because I had read the books.
3) Not using names and locations of folks is confusing when there is a huge break between one season and the next.

Having not read the books, I was still able to get the bastard-killing stuff, but I have watched all the episodes twice. THIS I recommend to everyone whose first introduction to the story is the tv show. HBO even makes it easy for you by airing the new episode back-to-back.

I also think - though maybe some of the comments in this thread make me think otherwise - that it's a case of not knowing what I don't know. Having never read the books, I simply don't know what I'm missing. You folks who have read the books are aware of a deeper story and therefore have a hard time understanding how I'm able to follow all the stuff they leave out (which I'm blissfully unaware of). The show is working by itself, on its own, and it's wonderful. All the show-only viewers I know feel this way. All the book-and-show folks I know seem to be worried about me not following it.

[theohall]

1) No, they don't explain Melisandre. They never even say her name.

Does it matter what her name is at this point in the story? She's the lady with the fire-red hair.

2) The kid killing thing - that went so quickly from the throne room to the next, it was not as easily put together for my friend while it was painfully obvious to me, because I had read the books.
3) Not using names and locations of folks is confusing when there is a huge break between one season and the next.

Having not read the books, I was still able to get the bastard-killing stuff, but I have watched all the episodes twice. THIS I recommend to everyone whose first introduction to the story is the tv show. HBO even makes it easy for you by airing the new episode back-to-back.

I also think - though maybe some of the comments in this thread make me think otherwise - that it's a case of not knowing what I don't know. Having never read the books, I simply don't know what I'm missing. You folks who have read the books are aware of a deeper story and therefore have a hard time understanding how I'm able to follow all the stuff they leave out (which I'm blissfully unaware of). The show is working by itself, on its own, and it's wonderful. All the show-only viewers I know feel this way. All the book-and-show folks I know seem to be worried about me not following it.

Living with the friend who depises "re-watchinig" shows.... that is not an option. Why should we have to "re-watch" a show to get it??? That seems idiotic.

[Inverarity]

Living with the friend who depises "re-watchinig" shows.... that is not an option. Why should we have to "re-watch" a show to get it??? That seems idiotic.

Well then you should get it the first time you watch it? I'm confused. If you don't get it the first time, my point is that you have the episode right there to watch again. If you refuse to do that, and you can't follow it the first time, I dunno...I guess there's always WWE.

[theohall]

Living with the friend who depises "re-watchinig" shows.... that is not an option. Why should we have to "re-watch" a show to get it??? That seems idiotic.

Well then you should get it the first time you watch it? I'm confused. If you don't get it the first time, my point is that you have the episode right there to watch again. If you refuse to do that, and you can't follow it the first time, I dunno...I guess there's always WWE.

Why should someone have to spend two hours to "re-watch" something? Why isn't one viewing sufficient? This is the point. It's complicated enough, yet they seem to not even bother attempting to explain things which are not easily understandable - without prior knowledge or the HBO Go thing.

Screw WWE. That's like a Spanish Novella only in English with worse acting.

[Peoux]

The problem is the amount of material they have to compress into just 10 episodes. They are being very true to the books, I'm really impressed by that. But I have to say I agree with those who haven't read the books - there are a number of characters being introduced in a very compressed and unclear manner. Having re-read the books back to back this winter, nothing that happens catches me by surprise, but the introduction of Stannis, Davos and Melisandre was not well handled.

Compared to how the books give you -so much- background information about just about every single character, there is nothing explaining who Melisandre is, how she is a new advisor to Stannis and why it is that the old maester is so desperate to stop her that he tries to poison her. The scene makes all kinds of sense to anyone who has read the book, but her persona on-screen didn't convey the sense of eerie mystery and dread that was explained so well in the book. She looked way too... ordinary? at least in my opinion. YMMV.

[Zaxxon]

The problem is the amount of material they have to compress into just 10 episodes. They are being very true to the books, I'm really impressed by that. But I have to say I agree with those who haven't read the books - there are a number of characters being introduced in a very compressed and unclear manner.

I concur that the massive amount of compression makes things very difficult for the show. I don't really agree that they did a poor job with these characters' introductions, though. Not everything needs to be perfectly clear after a single episode. Melisandre *should* be mysterious at this point. This isn't a show that spoon-feeds every aspect of each situation to the viewer on a silver platter. I think it's a better show for that.

However, on the Cressen-Melisandre poison scene, it was quite clear to those paying attention. The Dragonstone section began with Melisandre burning the gods and Cressen speaking out about how and why she needed to be stopped. Then a few minutes later he tries to stop her, and this is confusing?

Not all stories are made for casual, pay-half-attention viewing. This is one that's certainly not. As such, it's going to lose some people, some will follow the main storyline and have the finer points go over their heads, and some will put the requisite amount of attention in--along with perhaps checking out the interactive features and/or viewer's guide--and will catch nearly everything that's going on. I don't mean for this to sound condescending and I'm not intending to put anyone here in these buckets. But I've been watching the show with enough real-life non-bookers to know that the problems being described here are a function of the level of investment the viewer has in the show, not of the show itself. I'd rather have the show we have, and risk losing some folks, than to dumb it down and have an HBO version of Legend of the Seeker.

[Exodor]

However, on the Cressen-Melisandre poison scene, it was quite clear to those paying attention. The Dragonstone section began with Melisandre burning the gods and Cressen speaking out about how and why she needed to be stopped. Then a few minutes later he tries to stop her, and this is confusing?

I got the bit about old guy wanting to stop her and the poison scene was clear enough - but I had no idea what was burning on the beach.

Not all stories are made for casual, pay-half-attention viewing.

\

I love the series and it's compelled me to start reading the books but S2E01 seemed to be the most difficult to follow so far. I know they're jamming a lot of material into an hour and since it's the first episode of the new season they're introducing characters that will be more fully explained later but it's frustrating to have to wait another week for more details.

That's why we badger you book-readers in this thread.

[hepcat]

The only real issue I had was the chick in the red dress and her introduction. However, the answer "she's supposed to be mysterious" tells me that everyone who hasn't read the book was in the same boat.

[Isgrimnur]

One thing I think the book readers are missing is that the Melisandre intro scene in the books was a prologue. At the point the books introduce her, there's not much to go on there either. It's only as you progress and keep coming back to the other POV characters around her that you start getting some of the whys and wherefores about her.

[Zaxxon]

However, on the Cressen-Melisandre poison scene, it was quite clear to those paying attention. The Dragonstone section began with Melisandre burning the gods and Cressen speaking out about how and why she needed to be stopped. Then a few minutes later he tries to stop her, and this is confusing?

I got the bit about old guy wanting to stop her and the poison scene was clear enough - but I had no idea what was burning on the beach.

The fact that they were the gods most of the folks there grew up worshiping was mentioned.

One thing I think the book readers are missing is that the Melisandre intro scene in the books was a prologue. At the point the books introduce her, there's not much to go on there either. It's only as you progress and keep coming back to the other POV characters around her that you start getting some of the whys and wherefores about her.

Exactly. That's what I meant by 'she's supposed to be mysterious' but you said it much better than I did.

[Anonymous Bosch]

I concur that the massive amount of compression makes things very difficult for the show. I don't really agree that they did a poor job with these characters' introductions, though. Not everything needs to be perfectly clear after a single episode. Melisandre *should* be mysterious at this point. This isn't a show that spoon-feeds every aspect of each situation to the viewer on a silver platter. I think it's a better show for that.

However, on the Cressen-Melisandre poison scene, it was quite clear to those paying attention. The Dragonstone section began with Melisandre burning the gods and Cressen speaking out about how and why she needed to be stopped. Then a few minutes later he tries to stop her, and this is confusing?

Not all stories are made for casual, pay-half-attention viewing. This is one that's certainly not. As such, it's going to lose some people, some will follow the main storyline and have the finer points go over their heads, and some will put the requisite amount of attention in--along with perhaps checking out the interactive features and/or viewer's guide--and will catch nearly everything that's going on. I don't mean for this to sound condescending and I'm not intending to put anyone here in these buckets. But I've been watching the show with enough real-life non-bookers to know that the problems being described here are a function of the level of investment the viewer has in the show, not of the show itself. I'd rather have the show we have, and risk losing some folks, than to dumb it down and have an HBO version of Legend of the Seeker.

Well put. I can certainly understand some of the confusion about Melisandre from folks who are unfamiliar with the books, but as Zaxxon and others have pointed out, the TV show managed to compress a great deal of complex story into a 1-hour episode. I suspect that the folks behind the TV show wisely made the decision to reveal Melisandre's sinister side over several episodes, rather than simply throwing everything at the viewer in the very first episode (which most likely would not have resulted in the intended effect, anyway). As someone who has had read the books, I was actually relieved that the actress playing Melisandre seemed to underplay the role somewhat in the first episode. It would have been easy to overdo it and end up pantomiming the role.

As Isgrimnur pointed out, even in the book, you initially had only a vague notion of who Melisandre was and why she seemed like such a threat to the Maester that poisoned her. So I would advise the folks who have not read the book to remain patient, and allow the story play out. I have no doubt that more will be revealed about the Red Lady in upcoming episodes, just as it was in A Clash of Kings.

[Ralph-Wiggum]

I watched the second episode last night ( ) and, without spoiling anything, let me just say that I think it does a pretty good job of fleshing out these characters/issues. At least the people I was watching with (some of whom haven't read the books) didn't seem to have issues following what was going on.

[Zaxxon]

I watched the second episode last night ( ) and, without spoiling anything, let me just say that I think it does a pretty good job of fleshing out these characters/issues. At least the people I was watching with (some of whom haven't read the books) didn't seem to have issues following what was going on.

Sheesh, in a week I go from first group of public peons in the nation to see the episode, to behind the times. Thanks.

[Carpet_pissr]

If this level of one-upmanship continues, if someone doesn't say they work on the set next week, I will be disappointed.

[MHS]

If this level of one-upmanship continues, I expect someone to say they work on the set next week.

I'm Melissandre.

[miltonite]

If this level of one-upmanship continues, I expect someone to say they work on the set next week.

I'm Melissandre.

I am George R. R. Martin

[Carpet_pissr]

If this level of one-upmanship continues, I expect someone to say they work on the set next week.

I'm Melissandre.

Ha! Or that.

I was just about to go back and edit to include: "I'M PETER FUCKING DINKLAGE!"

[Scuzz]

When I broke my fast this morning in my solar I had no idea how the day would go.

[Carpet_pissr]

When I broke my fast this morning in my solar I had no idea how the day would go.

Prolly turned out to be a mummer's farce.

[RunningMn9]

The one thing this show is convincing me of is that I really need to see a show devoted to Tyrion.

[Carpet_pissr]

The one thing this show is convincing me of is that I really need to see a show devoted to Tyrion.

His character is so well written/developed (actually, very much like in the books), he is in danger of overshadowing the rest of what's going on. Dinklage's acting chops perfectly translates that from the books to the screen IMO.

[MHS]

The one thing this show is convincing me of is that I really need to see a show devoted to Tyrion.

His character is so well written/developed (actually, very much like in the books), he is in danger of overshadowing the rest of what's going on. Dinklage's acting chops perfectly translates that from the books to the screen IMO.

He's awesome, and unfortunately shows up the rest of the cast a bit. Cersei comes across as slightly vague and clueless as opposed to the vile bitch she is in the book, primarily because the actress who plays her seems to have one facial expression, which I think is supposed to be disdain but really looks like Botox smug.

[Zaxxon]

The one thing this show is convincing me of is that I really need to see a show devoted to Tyrion.

His character is so well written/developed (actually, very much like in the books), he is in danger of overshadowing the rest of what's going on. Dinklage's acting chops perfectly translates that from the books to the screen IMO.

Yes.

[mori]

I never read the books and I understood the bastard-killing stuff. Then again I watched season 1 in the 2-3 weeks leading to the season 2 premier.

Overall I am not that enthusiatic about the show. I will probably watch the rest of season 2 when they come out on DVD just because of the time already invested. Maybe it is because they are trying to create this huge world, but because of budget constraints, have this small feel. Are there any battles in the books? On the show you get an AAR if that. If I want subterfuge, backstabbing, murder, and backroom dealing, I will watch I, Claudius or one of the other great Roman shows as this show cannot compete with those. Let's see some battles!

What is Martin's fascination with incest? Completely foul.

[MHS]

What is Martin's fascination with incest? Completely foul.

I don't know that Martin has a fascination with incest. It's not like everybody's doing it with every other family member, it's just Cersei and Jamie. And they are twins, who have always felt like they belonged together and to each other in every possible way, which extended to a physical relationship between the two of them. And it's not as if he has everyone in the book saying, "Oh yay, incest!" Stannis and other lords denounce them for it. Plus, it's not as if it was uncommon in real life to have royalty wed to one another- there is a historical precedent for it.

Edit to add: Yes, I know it's alluded to with the Targaryens but Dany and Viserys don't actually get it on so it doesn't count.

[theohall]

What is Martin's fascination with incest? Completely foul.

I don't know that Martin has a fascination with incest. It's not like everybody's doing it with every other family member, it's just Cersei and Jamie. And they are twins, who have always felt like they belonged together and to each other in every possible way, which extended to a physical relationship between the two of them. And it's not as if he has everyone in the book saying, "Oh yay, incest!" Stannis and other lords denounce them for it. Plus, it's not as if it was uncommon in real life to have royalty wed to one another- there is a historical precedent for it.

There is the dude in the North who marries all his daughters while, not so mysteriously, there are no sons around.

[MHS]

What is Martin's fascination with incest? Completely foul.

I don't know that Martin has a fascination with incest. It's not like everybody's doing it with every other family member, it's just Cersei and Jamie. And they are twins, who have always felt like they belonged together and to each other in every possible way, which extended to a physical relationship between the two of them. And it's not as if he has everyone in the book saying, "Oh yay, incest!" Stannis and other lords denounce them for it. Plus, it's not as if it was uncommon in real life to have royalty wed to one another- there is a historical precedent for it.

There is the dude in the North who marries all his daughters while, not so mysteriously, there are no sons around.

Oh yeah, I forgot about Craster. But he's just a creepy weirdo.

[mori]

Episode 1, Season 1. Incest
Episode 1, Season 2. Incest

[Zaxxon]

Episode 1, Season 1. Incest
Episode 1, Season 2. Incest

Well that settles it then, eh?

[Daveman]

Nearly all the battles are told of after-the-fact throughout the books.