Game of Thrones - Season 5

[Scalito]

If Tyrion, Dany and Snow all end up riding Dragons to some kind of Targarean victory, I will be really, really pissed off. That is Lord of the Rings-type stuff where everyone was born into whatever happens and they can't escape their fate. I hope Martin doesn't cop out with such a silly ending.

Tolkien's story didn't have a hint of predestination in it; it was a classic Catholic story about free will.

I hear all the time from folks who don't read fantasy that they like GoT because it's somehow different than normal fantasy. Younger readers of fantasy will tell you it's a more sophisticated kind of fantasy because it's darker or whatever. Sad to say, no matter how much Martin and his fans might wish it weren't the case, it's just a well-written fantasy series relying on familiar tropes lesser authors developed in the genre Tolkien created.

Unlike Tolkien, his imitators love prophecy and predestination. It's pretty standard fare. And Martin's no different. Ignore his use of prophecy and visions of the future (through various mechanisms in the books and television shows) to your peril. He's not including them to break the mold.

 

[ZooCougar]

Tolkien's story didn't have a hint of predestination in it; it was a classic Catholic story about free will.

I hear all the time from folks who don't read fantasy that they like GoT because it's somehow different than normal fantasy. Younger readers of fantasy will tell you it's a more sophisticated kind of fantasy because it's darker or whatever. Sad to say, no matter how much Martin and his fans might wish it weren't the case, it's just a well-written fantasy series relying on familiar tropes lesser authors developed in the genre Tolkien created.

Unlike Tolkien, his imitators love prophecy and predestination. It's pretty standard fare. And Martin's no different. Ignore his use of prophecy and visions of the future (through various mechanisms in the books and television shows) to your peril. He's not including them to break the mold.

I think it's definitely a modernized take on fantasy. I have never liked the genre and yet I get into this. There's good and bad within the good and bad. "Good" guys make really terrible decisions. Some of the bad look for a measure of redemption but they can never be fully forgiven. Also I like the sudden chaos of it, with key characters being killed off unexpectedly.

 

[Excalibur]

The Jon Snow theory is a popular one.

As for the ending, I will feel a bit cheated if it ends as Nelson suggests. I agree that the story is at its heart a well-written fantasy series, but what set it apart was the story of political intrigue that overlays it. I want the winner to win because they were more cunning than the rest, not because they team up and have Dragons. I will feel a bit cheated if that's the case.

 

[Scalito]

I think it's definitely a modernized take on fantasy. I have never liked the genre and yet I get into this. There's good and bad within the good and bad. "Good" guys make really terrible decisions. Some of the bad look for a measure of redemption but they can never be fully forgiven. Also I like the sudden chaos of it, with key characters being killed off unexpectedly.

That's what the younger fantasy fans will tell you too when they contrast series like GoT with slightly older series like The Wheel of Time. I disagree. Although that trend is relatively true for fantasy in general, inasmuch as the protagonists are almost always dark or anti-heros now, such protagonists aren't new, just more dominant. Even one of my favorite childhood fantasy books, little more than a D&D role-playing game in novel form, focused on a good guy gone bad who still often did good things.

P.s. I think one of the reasons the books are more appealing to non- fantasy fans is due to the relative absence of some magic system in his world. But even that's not unique to Martin. He's just near one of the ends of the spectrum vis a vis magic (it exists, but isn't used frequently, and the rules behind the magical system aren't developed or dwelled on at all).

The Jon Snow theory is a popular one.

As for the ending, I will feel a bit cheated if it ends as Nelson suggests. I agree that the story is at its heart a well-written fantasy series, but what set it apart was the story of political intrigue that overlays it. I want the winner to win because they were more cunning than the rest, not because they team up and have Dragons. I will feel a bit cheated if that's the case.

I hear you, but I'm telling you to prepare yourself.

Fwiw, I'm not saying there will be three people who win the throne by teaming up with three dragons. That's unlikely. But the series is not called the Game of Thrones, only the first book is, because winning the throne isn't the overarching plotline. The series is called The Song of Ice & Fire---the battle with the Others, which Danny and her two-dragon comrades will wage to save the world or some such thing.

Bit of trivia---the series was supposed to be only 5 books long originally. Martin was going to write about the disruptions to the realm and the Stark family wrought by King Robert's death in the first two or three books. The latter books were then supposed to fast forward to a different starting point so that the Stark kids were older. Because the overarching story was never about the game of thrones; Martin just lost control of his series and couldn't wrap up his own plotlines quickly enough. The story was instead supposed to be about the Stark kids & Danny's fight with the Others. Everything else is just a distraction (for the characters at least, if not us).

 

[nelsonmuntz]

Tolkien's story didn't have a hint of predestination in it; it was a classic Catholic story about free will.

I hear all the time from folks who don't read fantasy that they like GoT because it's somehow different than normal fantasy. Younger readers of fantasy will tell you it's a more sophisticated kind of fantasy because it's darker or whatever. Sad to say, no matter how much Martin and his fans might wish it weren't the case, it's just a well-written fantasy series relying on familiar tropes lesser authors developed in the genre Tolkien created.

Unlike Tolkien, his imitators love prophecy and predestination. It's pretty standard fare. And Martin's no different. Ignore his use of prophecy and visions of the future (through various mechanisms in the books and television shows) to your peril. He's not including them to break the mold.

The biggest different between GOT and regular fantasy are:

1) Magic - magic is a plot killer for people older than 12, and GOT could cut its audience in half if spells start winning conflicts.

2) Good vs. Evil - GOT is fairly amoral about good vs. evil. Other than the minor characters like the Moutain, Kraster, the guys that killed Kraster, the warlocks of Qarth, and a few others, there are not many evil characters. Most of the characters are more complex, and that is what makes the story so interesting. The Lord of the Rings looks juvenile by comparison.

The LotR had a lot of predestination. Everyone was the chosen one and son of whoever. Even when I was a kid reading the books, I knew that the good guys would win, which is why I never finished the series.

 

[Scalito]

The biggest different between GOT and regular fantasy are:

1) Magic - magic is a plot killer for people older than 12, and GOT could cut its audience in half if spells start winning conflicts.

2) Good vs. Evil - GOT is fairly amoral about good vs. evil. Other than the minor characters like the Moutain, Kraster, the guys that killed Kraster, the warlocks of Qarth, and a few others, there are not many evil characters. Most of the characters are more complex, and that is what makes the story so interesting. The Lord of the Rings looks juvenile by comparison.

The LotR had a lot of predestination. Everyone was the chosen one and son of whoever. Even when I was a kid reading the books, I knew that the good guys would win, which is why I never finished the series.

By your own admission, you don't know what you're talking about. You're commenting on a genre you don't read and a series you've never finished. And you're contrasting LoTR unfavorably with a GoT series: (1) rife with prophecies about a flaming-sword wielding savoir reborn, Azor of Azahi, who must save the world because you don't like predestination; (2) centered around the offspring and current leaders of ancient families who wear ancient family insignia because you don't like books where everyone is the son of this or that; (3) follows a family whose kids all share the minds with wolves because you don't like magic; and (4) is aimed at millenial-long battle with evil snow creatures, who use human babies to reproduce, because you don't like books with clear lines between good and evil. Makes sense.

The fact is, it's pretty standard fare for the fantasy genre. It just falls within a well-worn subtype. And the only, and I mean only thing which makes GoT more "mature" than LoTR, is all of the boobies Fatso adds for the pimply, fantasy-reading virgins who made the series such a big success it was picked up by HBO.

 

[August_West]

has a great take on this stuff.
No magic?
What the heck is the stuff With the lord of light/ melisandre? Shadow baby kills Renly. Pretty much her whole arc with stannis is one feat of black magic after the other.

That woman who kills the horse to save Drogo?

Flaming swords.....

The house of the undying?

Wild fire at the battle of blackwater?

Dead people brought back to life ( lady stone heart? ) wargs? Children of the Forrest? It is ALL magic

 

[Scalito]

has a great take on this stuff.
No magic?
What the heck is the stuff With the lord of light/ melisandre? Shadow baby kills Renly. Pretty much her whole arc with stannis is one feat of black magic after the other.

That woman who kills the horse to save Drogo?

Flaming swords.....

The house of the undying?

Wild fire at the battle of blackwater?

Dead people brought back to life ( lady stone heart? ) wargs? Children of the Forrest? It is ALL magic

Exactly. It's just not a well-defined magical system where the author lays down the rules and limitations in advance because it's not central to the story. Magic stuff happens when and how Martin wishes it to happen.

In that way, it's very akin to LoTR. Tolkien had a super-powerful wizard, Gandalf, traipsing around his books, who never performed all that much magic if you think about it. And we're never told exactly what he could and couldn't magic. He fought with sword more often than spell.

 

[August_West]

The Jon Snow theory is a popular one. As for the ending, I will feel a bit cheated if it ends as Nelson suggests. I agree that the story is at its heart a well-written fantasy series, but what set it apart was the story of political intrigue that overlays it. I want the winner to win because they were more cunning than the rest, not because they team up and have Dragons. I will feel a bit cheated if that's the case.

Well you may get that. That is why these books and series are so good. It's also why GRRM has written himself into a "mereenese knot "

He has characters like littlefinger who are born into nothing, but play the cunning game better than anyone. You never know what a red herring is with GRRM and what his final goal will be, but some things are just there because they have to be, and I believe the 3 dragons/ 3 riders is the most glaring overall plot point. 20 years, 5 books and millions of words and thousands of characters are all interesting ( mostly) fluff to get to the point where that happens. How it happens and what the end is is anyone's guess.

 

[Scalito]

Waylon & Zoo ---

Before you decide that I am talking out of my arse here---even though I assure you I was once the pimply-faced virgin making Martin a millionaire---I'd recommend another fantasy series, which does everything you say you like about GoT only better (it doesn't have the political intrigue Excalibur likes however). It's called The First Law Series, by Joe Abercrombie. Not only is there little black-and-white morality and minimal amounts of magic, it has the benefit of being finished. It is a well-contained trilogy, and it's hands down a better series. Maybe not an a book-to-book comparison with Martin's early efforts, but without a doubt as an overall series. It also has my two favorite fantasy characters---a mass-murdering barbarian warrior with a conscience, and a man crippled by torture who becomes a malevolent torturer. Great peep, both.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

Aren't Orcs made in a magic factory in Lord of the Rings?

My biggest problems with GoT are 1) the way Renly was killed, and 2) Dondarion coming back to life (along with possibly others).

The problem with magic is that it makes everything else irrelevant. Who cares what everyone's motivations are? All that matters is what the wizard is doing.

Likewise, I have never seen a science fiction movie that uses time travel that doesn't have a major plot hole. It is just not possible to avoid it.

 

[Scalito]

Aren't Orcs made in a magic factory in Lord of the Rings

Nah. You're thinking of a scene from the movie version. The Orcs are made from captured Elves in the very beginning of time by Sauron's master. It's recounted in the Simarilion. Sarumon then enhances the strength of his Orcs by cross-bReEDiNg them with goblins or maybe trolls, I forget, the product of which you see in the movie's factory scene.

Tolkein was writing during the time of eugenics, massive technological advances, and two world wars. His world might be a magical word, but don't mistake that for simplicity. It's no mistake that the bad guys in his books manipulate genes and tear down forests to feed industry-like furnace fires.

The problem with magic is that it makes everything else irrelevant. Who cares what everyone's motivations are? All that matters is what the wizard is doing.

To each their own. I won't presume to tell people what they should like. I just think that many of the HBO fans, at most those who like the books, are off when supposing Martin is particularly unique in the genre. He's only a type. And an exceptional writer, of course.

 

[CTGoonie]

@ I just finished A Dance With Dragons. What is the next best series to that? I also loved the Dark Tower.

 

[Scalito]

@ I just finished A Dance With Dragons. What is the next best series to that? I also loved the Dark Tower.

You can't go too wrong (I hope) by picking up the First Law Series I mentioned earlier, by Joe Abercrombie, if you like Martin. The first book is called The Blade Itself. I personally probably prefer a series which has just been restarted by Robin Hobb, a rare female author in the genre not named J.K. Rowling (I'm likely in the minority because Abercrombie is one often "hot" new authors). The first series, The Farseer Trilogy, begins with Assassin's Aprrentice.

Both series are well written, although they're more character driven and less epic than Martin's work, and neither is the stereotypical young-orphan-is-destined-to-save-the-world stories. Both will purposefully make you think they're going to go down the archetypal fantasy paths, and then both will surprise you because things don't always work out swingingly for the characters. Also, while there's no need to excuse the beginning books of either series, I enjoyed them both, each series gets progressively better, which should be a really nice treat after reading A Feast for Crows.

P.s. There is a lot of dreck out there. I always do what you did by asking for a recommendation or googling my query before committing to something. It's a genre that includes adult and young adult readers, after all, so you can go seriously wrong if you just pick something up off the shelf.

 

[Scalito]

So, back to she show. Episode 2---thoughts? I was surprised and happy by Jaqen's appearance at the House of White & Black. Not sure if that'll ultimately prove different than the books, but there were significant divergences. Looks like HBO is truly taking some control. Should make it more fun to have some unknowns to anticipate.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

HBO is killing it so far.

The show has improved on the Dany storyline, and one a really good job of showing how badly Danny is screwing the pooch as ruler. She is lost and she is not listening to her advisors.

Overall, the show has done a good job in cutting down on the number of characters from the books. Bringing Jaqen back made sense, instead of introducing us to a whole new crew from the Black/White place. Intersecting Brienne and Sansa also made sense. The show may have the same problem with Brienne that Martin does. She is an interesting character, but they can't seem to figure out what to do with her.

 

[billythekid]

You can't go too wrong (I hope) by picking up the First Law Series I mentioned earlier, by Joe Abercrombie, if you like Martin. The first book is called The Blade Itself. I personally probably prefer a series which has just been restarted by Robin Hobb, a rare female author in the genre not named J.K. Rowling (I'm likely in the minority because Abercrombie is one often "hot" new authors). The first series, The Farseer Trilogy, begins with Assassin's Aprrentice.

Both series are well written, although they're more character driven and less epic than Martin's work, and neither is the stereotypical young-orphan-is-destined-to-save-the-world stories. Both will purposefully make you think they're going to go down the archetypal fantasy paths, and then both will surprise you because things don't always work out swingingly for the characters. Also, while there's no need to excuse the beginning books of either series, I enjoyed them both, each series gets progressively better, which should be a really nice treat after reading A Feast for Crows.

P.s. There is a lot of dreck out there. I always do what you did by asking for a recommendation or googling my query before committing to something. It's a genre that includes adult and young adult readers, after all, so you can go seriously wrong if you just pick something up off the shelf.

I so enjoyed the first two seasons of GOT that I decided to read the books. I hadn't read fantasy since reading LOTR as a kid. I worked my way through all five of the GOT books that summer and have been hooked on the genre since. I recently finished the Farseer Trilogy that you mentioned above and enjoyed it. I recently began her next trilogy, The Liveship Traders. A couple of other series that I'd recommend is The Kingkiller Chronicles by Patrick Rothfuss, Mistborn by Brandon Sanderson and the Gentleman Bastard series by Scott Lynch.

 

[Scalito]

I so enjoyed the first two seasons of GOT that I decided to read the books. I hadn't read fantasy since reading LOTR as a kid. I worked my way through all five of the GOT books that summer and have been hooked on the genre since. I recently finished the Farseer Trilogy that you mentioned above and enjoyed it. I recently began her next trilogy, The Liveship Traders. A couple of other series that I'd recommend is The Kingkiller Chronicles by Patrick Rothfuss, Mistborn by Brandon Sanderson and the Gentleman Bastard series by Scott Lynch.

You did get hooked if you plowed through all those already.

For some reason, I have not been a big fan of Hobb's work outside of the Fitz books. The Liveship Traders is worth reading before the Fool books if you're really committed and have the time, but it's nowhere near as good and it's not a necessary pre-read. I kind of found it a bit of a slog at times (although you do know that there is a character you're familiar with in the book who is basically in disguise and doesn't go by the same name, right?). Just fair warning. It's worth reading, again, just not if you let it stop you from moving on to the Fool books.

Rothfuss pisses me off. He's in danger of becoming another Martin, replete with the sloppy beard and large gut. I downloaded his first book a long time ago based on the rave reviews, but held off from reading it because I promised myself never to start a new author's first series until it was complete. One day I was playing in the Kindle store and saw there were then three books by him, which meant he either finished what I thought was a trilogy or at least had demonstrated timely production. Then I.went to read the third book . . . and realized it was a short-story spun off from the series (classic move by popular but lazy authors looking for cash while they laze about) and he isn't anywhere near ready to publish book 3. .

Your Mistborne recommendation is intriguing. I know Sanderson based on his work in Robert Jordan's The Wheel of Time series. That's the one series that's even more responsible than Martin for my wariness with new series because Jordan died before finishing it. I began the thing on a family vacation in 8th grade, he lost control of the story around book 9,012, died, and Sanderson was picked by his widow to finish it based on his notes and outline. I was in my mid-thirties by the time it was done.

Sanderson did it well though, and I'll always be grateful for that. How would you rank Mistborne? I've had a block on that one because I always worry he simply has Jordan's huge following (The Wheel of Time was hands down the most popular series back in the day. It's online fandom created the template for some of the other fan sites dedicated to lengthy and unfinished series like GoT.).

 

[Scalito]

HBO is killing it so far.

The show has improved on the Dany storyline, and one a really good job of showing how badly Danny is screwing the pooch as ruler. She is lost and she is not listening to her advisors.

Overall, the show has done a good job in cutting down on the number of characters from the books. Bringing Jaqen back made sense, instead of introducing us to a whole new crew from the Black/White place. Intersecting Brienne and Sansa also made sense. The show may have the same problem with Brienne that Martin does. She is an interesting character, but they can't seem to figure out what to do with her.

Agree 100%. We do that so rarely, you and I, I thought I'd say it out loud and give you a like . . . .

 

[ZooCougar]

@ I just finished A Dance With Dragons. What is the next best series to that? I also loved the Dark Tower.

I liked the new Dune books. Pretty good stuff.

If you like a blend of the Greek Mythology, Homer, Shakespeare, robots, horror and hard sci fi then I would check out Ilium and Olympos by Dan Simmons.

 

[billythekid]

You did get hooked if you plowed through all those already.

For some reason, I have not been a big fan of Hobb's work outside of the Fitz books. The Liveship Traders is worth reading before the Fool books if you're really committed and have the time, but it's nowhere near as good and it's not a necessary pre-read. I kind of found it a bit of a slog at times (although you do know that there is a character you're familiar with in the book who is basically in disguise and doesn't go by the same name, right?). Just fair warning. It's worth reading, again, just not if you let it stop you from moving on to the Fool books.

Rothfuss pisses me off. He's in danger of becoming another Martin, replete with the sloppy beard and large gut. I downloaded his first book a long time ago based on the rave reviews, but held off from reading it because I promised myself never to start a new author's first series until it was complete. One day I was playing in the Kindle store and saw there were then three books by him, which meant he either finished what I thought was a trilogy or at least had demonstrated timely production. Then I.went to read the third book . . . and realized it was a short-story spun off from the series (classic move by popular but lazy authors looking for cash while they laze about) and he isn't anywhere near ready to publish book 3. .

Your Mistborne recommendation is intriguing. I know Sanderson based on his work in Robert Jordan's The Wheel of Time series. That's the one series that's even more responsible than Martin for my wariness with new series because Jordan died before finishing it. I began the thing on a family vacation in 8th grade, he lost control of the story around book 9,012, died, and Sanderson was picked by his widow to finish it based on his notes and outline. I was in my mid-thirties by the time it was done.

Sanderson did it well though, and I'll always be grateful for that. How would you rank Mistborne? I've had a block on that one because I always worry he simply has Jordan's huge following (The Wheel of Time was hands down the most popular series back in the day. It's online fandom created the template for some of the other fan sites dedicated to lengthy and unfinished series like GoT.).

I'm a bit more than halfway through the first of the Liveship Traders books and understand your complaints. It is definitely slower in developing the action than Farseer books did. I enjoy her writing though and will stick it through.

The Mistborn trilogy is interesting. While it contains the typical "boy/girl comes from nowhere to become a great hero" plotline, he creates a very different and unique world. In this world, certain people can ingest certain elements that give them specific powers. Keeping track of what element gives off what effect took me a while to nail down, but I thought it was well done and worthwhile.

One more to check out is the Demon Cycle series by Peter Brett. I've read the first three of the five books in the series and have enjoyed it. My plan is to get back to them after I finish the Liveship Traders.

 

[ZooCougar]

HBO is killing it so far.

The show has improved on the Dany storyline, and one a really good job of showing how badly Danny is screwing the pooch as ruler. She is lost and she is not listening to her advisors.

Overall, the show has done a good job in cutting down on the number of characters from the books. Bringing Jaqen back made sense, instead of introducing us to a whole new crew from the Black/White place. Intersecting Brienne and Sansa also made sense. The show may have the same problem with Brienne that Martin does. She is an interesting character, but they can't seem to figure out what to do with her.

I feel kind of icky because I have grown to like Jamie Lannister so much. Looking forward to that storyline.

 

[SAMCRO]

Liked episode 2 a lot, and agree with Nelson that the series is going down all the right paths so far in regards to "editing" from the book. It's still building and setting up some key storylines.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

I do think that Emelia Clarke is the weakest actor/actress among the major characters, and she is having trouble pulling off Dany's inner conflicts as ruler. Instead of a young woman put in a position of authority beyond her experience, she comes across as an idiot. She seems like a more likable version of Joffrey at times, which I don't think is intended. Overall, the show has hit the cover off the ball with its original casting, but in a cast this large, there are bound to be some mistakes.

 

[August_West]

She seems like a more likable version of Joffrey at times, which I don't think is intended. .

I think it actually may be intended. Also, I don't have an issue with her casting, she seems up to the part. One thing to keep in mind with GoT is that unlike LoTR the lines between good and bad are not so distinctively drawn. Dany may not end up being the heroine she has up until this point been portraying. I think the shows this season so far are starting to point that out.


On another note, not really a casting issue but a show handling of a character: While I love the show and their decisions for the most part, they have majorly messed up with Loras Tyrell. He is absolutely useless on the show.