The Official Geek Thread

[JB5]

I would rather see no battle at all than one done on the cheap. That said, the Whispering Wood/Battle of the Camps could have been shot as a series of small-scale fights among the trees without having to depict large armies maneuvering.

I did think the final scene was very well done. Especially good acting from the kids.

One question for those who remember the book better than I: Did Miri Maez whatsername try to heal Khal Drogo or give him something to make him worse? In this week's episode, it looked like the latter as a relatively clean cut went bad mighty quickly.

[hoopsmccan]

Jun 14, 2011 11:23:44 GMT -5 rosslynhoya said:

Jun 14, 2011 10:32:47 GMT -5 Boz said:

Never mind that we don't get to see ANY of that battle, nor ANY of the Battle of the Whispering Wood (where Jaime was captured for non-book readers).

I haven't read any of the reviews of Ep. 9 yet, but I sure hope some people are complaining about that. This is really my first non-minor quibble with this show. You HAVE to show some of the fighting. And don't tell me you don't have the budget for it. You are HBO.

The HBO production has some kind of weird problem with showing crowd scenes that I just don't understand. Remember the Vaes Dothrak debacle? There should have been 30,000 dothraki going nuts over Danaerys eating the heart successfully, instead of thirty.

I think this alone is why we're not getting to see any battles (we know they're not blood-shy). The scene at the Sept of Baelor this week was the first that I can remember where they actually tried to show thousands of people gathered in one place.

Is it just a question of investing some money in this technology during the off-season?

Rosslyn - I hope they do. Just about any scene that is large scale has been cut down. The tournament for the hand was sad looking; without ever attending one, I imagine most renaissance fairs have more people in attendance. And there were more people on horseback in any one scene in Young Guns than in the Dothraki traveling scenes. They mention the amount of Dothraki several times, but this is TV, show it…even once, just to give some perspective. Maybe my recollection is off, but I thought they CGI’d large scale scenes for Rome…but then again, that show was cut due to budget reasons, so maybe I should be careful what I wish for. I do think that they can avoid a Braveheart battle scene that may be too expensive, but still show some individual battles to give a sense of things. Jamie getting captured would have been the perfect vehicle for this – it was an important moment, could have shown him getting caught with his pants down (please, not literally HBO) and demonstrated how good a fighter he is.

Somewhat minor quibbles though – I obviously love the show and thought the last episode was great.

hm

[rosslynhoya]

Jun 14, 2011 12:29:34 GMT -5 JB5 said:

One question for those who remember the book better than I: Did Miri Maez whatsername try to heal Khal Drogo or give him something to make him worse? In this week's episode, it looked like the latter as a relatively clean cut went bad mighty quickly.

In my opinion they didn't show the time lapse very well. Without having the book in front of me, I want to say a couple weeks or so elapsed between the sacking of the lamb men's city and the Khal getting so weak that he couldn't sit his horse.

The next episode should answer your question.

[Boz]

Yes, I think they easily could have shown Tyrion fighting without necessarily showing an entire battle of 30,000 vs. 2,000.

It's definitely not fair to his character. Because as much as Tyrion protests about being a coward, and does act so at times, there are many occasions throughout the series of books where he (even if reluctantly) performs some rather daring deeds. This was definitely one of them.

And it also sets up how, though he publicly and privately disdains his father, he really DOES want his father's approval, which definitely comes into play later.

HBO's cop out was really wrong on a character level, at least in his case. But also a bit with Robb and Jaime in their battle.

EDIT: Yes, I am definitely challenging Patrick Ewing for most use of the word "definitely" in a single thought. ;D

[SFHoya99]

Rosslyn,

All the time lapses have been problematic. Catelyn goes from the Eyrie to Robb's camp - a multipel week journey -- in seconds, for example.

Re: the Battles

I'm generally in agreement that they could have done better with the battles and scale on a variety of the scenes.

There is the production cost issue, and I get it. Rome was widely criticized for it's crappy battles and actually basically skipped its last one completely. But we've come a long way from Rome and there are in between ways to do it. And it's not just the battles, it's the scale of things, like the tourney (they did a better job with Ned's execution).

Some of that is editing, though. For example, I know the tourney scene took SEVEN days to shoot -- very expensive. The fight shot footage for a scene lasting 3-4x as long between the Hound and the Mountain -- this from the actor who played the Mountain. I've seen footage from cut elements -- interaction between Sansa and Arya, etc. Teh money was spent.

But it was cut. I know I'm never going to exactly agree with an editorial slant, but I'd argue two things: one, aside from a production cost issue, there's been a consistent editorial slant towards character and reactions than from actual action; and two, I've noticed the "added" scenes tend to be longer and less edited than the original content.

On the former issue, it's a matter of taste. And it's totally in line with The Wire or Rome. It's less in line with the Sopranos or Deadwood. I'd put more action in, but that's to my taste and if the fanbase is any indication, there's a strong element that really doesn't mind (my friend's wife hates the gore, for example).

On the latter, I suspect the showrunners, who are the writers of most of that, are playing too much in the edit. All directors and writers have trouble cutting their babies unbiasedly, and I suspect D&D are the same. Ros the red-headed whore is the most prominent example. So is the drinking game before the Tysha story. It's nice, it shows nice character development and man is it cut more generously than the previous scene with Dany and Khal Drogo and Jorah.

There's no lingering shots of Dany going into labor -- no clarification. No time to send someone from the midwives or to demonstrate that the Khalasar has turned on her. It's like four straight lines of dialogue delivering bluntly the message. No build-up.

Then we get Bronn backstory? Made-up Bronn backstory like he's been beyond the wall? It's not that I don't like it, but if we're making choices, let's not cut 30 seconds in the Whispering Woods for Theon and Ros.

So I think it's a combo of: 1) Production Costs 2) Intentional Creative Editing and 3) A little bit of people protecting their babies.

And 4) the critics (us) having different babies than the showmakers.

[SFHoya99]

Re: MMD

I don't remember if she every cops to poisoning the Khal. There is definitely talk of him removing the poultice several times before the blood magic scene. And MMD definitely admits to saying she didn't tell Dany of the consequences because really, she should feel loyal to Dany because she saved her from the 19th rape in the row, ignoring the previous 18?

She had motive. I'm not sure if she directly admits it. I hope they make it so in the TV show -- this is (one of) Dany's Ned moment(s).

[thebin]

I'll give my two cents as a non-reader....I'm NOT itching for a lot of battle scenes, which I admit I generally find as tedious as car chases in films/TV....just not my cup of tea. BUT.... I could use some well-done overhead establishing shots (which shouldn't be very expensive) of thousands of men in formation, marching etc. to enhance the dramatic effect of the battles- show me some scope which which to measure the characters action and bravery and fear....I don't need they to actually spend millions on a thousand actual human extras chopping each other's heads off in expensive costumes. Does nothing for me. But there certainly is a sense when watching this that it is very good TV...but it is TV. You don't confuse it for Lord of the Rings. That was a massive budget film- but I would think with improvements in technology and software over the last almost decade since that film was made.... wellI guess I'm a bit disappointed that by 2011 it isn't more common for very high quality outfits like HBO to succesfully CGI me some high shots of many thousands of people in battle scenes, etc. I say that as someone who frankly is generally bored stiff by protracted combat scenes in movies like I said. I actually much prefer the exposition and resolution and don't need to see much hacking in between- but I would expect by now to get a minute or two of awe-inspiring overheads (even if they are WAY overhead) to show me more than a hundred or so extras and remind me this is in fact HBO.

Along these same lines, I was IMMENSLEY disappointed in the Ridley/Tony Scott production of Gettysburg which History channel allegedly put so much money into.....I can't express how badly this doc missed the mark. I expect crap from History Channel when they do battle re-enactments at all or Civil War history generally - which is far too populist and dumbed down for my taste. But expected much more from the Scott brothers. And please History Channel...stop democratizing my military history. No...I don't actually care to see how the common soldier suffered for the same amount of minutes as you dedicate to the decisions of the high command/political leadership. I'm afraid Civil War history has been totally taken over by the dorks who care more about the uniforms and weapons being accurate than about saying anything remotely controversial about say...the wrongness of the Southern cause which might send a large chunk of the built-in audience scrambling for tired platitudes about states rights and Lincoln the tyrant and the NY draft riots which I think we all know don't come close to vindicating confederate aims.

[Bando]

Obviously, what GoT needs more than anything are battle scenes full of quick edits, dirt flying in slow-motion, and angst-ridden screaming.

[Boz]

I am by no means writing this series off for this, I am still very much loving most of it, but I really have to hope they have some bigger plans for subsequent seasons.

What are they gonna' do for the Battle of Blackwater Bay, huh? That is a hugely pivotal series of events, for many characters.

Are they gonna' have someone looking out a window telling us what's going on, like South Park? Is Tyrion gonna' slip on a gangplank and hit his nose on an anchor?

I don't think I'm being nerdy fanboy on this one. This is potentially a pretty big flaw if they don't do better in the future.

[Bando]

If it's like Rome, they'll get the budget for battles they didn't have in the first season. I think it's much more important that Tyrion fights at Blackwater Bay than he fought here.

[SFHoya99]

Jun 14, 2011 17:36:19 GMT -5 Boz said:

I am by no means writing this series off for this, I am still very much loving most of it, but I really have to hope they have some bigger plans for subsequent seasons.

What are they gonna' do for the Battle of Blackwater Bay, huh? That is a hugely pivotal series of events, for many characters.

Are they gonna' have someone looking out a window telling us what's going on, like South Park? Is Tyrion gonna' slip on a gangplank and hit his nose on an anchor?

I don't think I'm being nerdy fanboy on this one. This is potentially a pretty big flaw if they don't do better in the future.

HERE BE SOME IMPLICIT SPOILERS:

Regarding the Battle of the Blackwater, there's three good reasons to hope, in ascending order of importance:

1. There should be some additional budget for next year relative to this year. I say this only in terms of pre-production items -- we don't need to redesign and rebuild Winterfell, for example. Plus, Sean Bean.

On the other hand, maybe that's all going to CGI direwolves (which is the expectation for next season) and other CGI.

2. Martin is writing the Blackwater Episode next year (Ep 9, if you are interested). Now, that doesn't mean he has full control of the production budget or the edit -- he apparently had a very involved and awesome gathering of Robb's bannermen in "The Pointy End" this year that got consolidated to a short scene of Ravens leaving Winterfell, but you know he's going to push for something rather than a straight "Green Fork"-esque cop-out.

3. The Blackwater is the climax of CoK. There are other storylines with some climaxes, but where aGoT legitimately has at least awesome storyline climaxes (the ends of episode 9 and 10), a CoK really only has one. (Digression: there's gotta be changes next year or we won't see whole characters for practically the entire book).

Each storyline has something, of course, but just like there isn't a big a-ha moment in Ep 10 for say, Arya's storyline that you'd close a season with, the Blackwater is IT for aCoK.

I don't expect Helm's Deep. But I do expect it to take up most of the episode, hit Davos/Stannis, the Chain, Tyrion, the Hound and Cersei and Sansa. I mean, almost everyone is there anyway -- and the other plotlines (aside from Bran and Catelyn) are pretty stagnant.

I don't think the Green Fork is a good analogue. It's like if they had gone cheap on the execution scene. (Of course, that's not a great analogue either cause it's not nearly as expensive). Perhaps the end scene of Ep 10 will be a better comparison? Expensive per minute, vitally important, and really easy to screw up?

[SFHoya99]

SPOILERS: LA Times interview with Producers

Season 1 was so true to the books, but it's fairly obvious Season 2 is going to change. One major character spends all the book in prison; another is rarely seen but active, and frankly Dany's storyline is pretty boring.

Looks like they will pull some from aSoS (perhaps the whole Jaime escape storyline? But without Brienne? Or will that happen really early so we move it up?). And it sounds like we may get some Robb/Westerling action.

[JB5]

I read an interview with Martin (can't find the link) in which he was worrying about how the Battle of the Blackwater could be filmed, even with a massive budget and lots of CGI.

HBO could save money by dropping Dany's storyline completely for book 2 and most of book 3 as it's irrelevant to the main action in Westeros. Put the money into more direwolves.

I hope they get moving on seasons 2 and 3 before the actors playing Arya and Bran grow too old for their characters.

[SFHoya99]

Jun 16, 2011 13:21:27 GMT -5 JB5 said:

I read an interview with Martin (can't find the link) in which he was worrying about how the Battle of the Blackwater could be filmed, even with a massive budget and lots of CGI.

HBO could save money by dropping Dany's storyline completely for book 2 and most of book 3 as it's irrelevant to the main action in Westeros. Put the money into more direwolves.

I hope they get moving on seasons 2 and 3 before the actors playing Arya and Bran grow too old for their characters.

Season starts filming in about a month.

They could drop Dany's storyline, just like Jaime isn't in aCoK at all... but they aren't.

Yes, The Wire basically marginalized McNulty and other "main" characters at points, but I can't see them losing Bean and others and marginalizing half the remaining cast (Jaime, Dany, Jon are all pretty much treading water).

For one, no one was watching The Wire. Which could work because it didn't cost much. But GoT can't afford declining ratings -- it can't Treme it's way through with 600,000 viewers.

I think the interview simply highlighted that they are looking at how to keep the main cost incorporated, get the new characters in and keep it whole. Bringing plot points forward as much as possible from a ridiculously jam-packed ASOS could work.

[rosslynhoya]

Jun 16, 2011 13:21:27 GMT -5 JB5 said:

I hope they get moving on seasons 2 and 3 before the actors playing Arya and Bran grow too old for their characters.

If there's one series where this won't be a problem, it's this one. As someone alluded much earlier in this thread, it will be much more comfortable for a general audience if Arya, Bran, and Sansa project as more mature than their real ages as given in the novels. To put it plainly, the children of Ned Stark "grow up real fast" over the course of a couple years. It's not like we're going to have a Beverly Hills 90210 problem where the cast is in their mid-30s and are still seniors in high school.

As a tangent, I think this tension is why filming an Ender's Game movie has such dismal prospects. How do you get any child actor to portray a preternaturally mature character without being overdramatic or really creepy?

[SFHoya99]

Has any movie been rumored more (now that they've made a live-action LOTR) than Ender's Game?

As for the kids:

Dany - no worries - she's 21 and I don't think she's changing much
Sansa - acceptable in story terms to mature and change

Bran, Rickon and Arya are in the danger zone, especially Arya. They are all a couple years older than character ages, which can lead to some awkward "Bran's 12, why does he look 17" if he matures early. And there's always the "Cute got ugly fast" (and Sansa must deal with that as well).

But Arya's the worst of the three. She's supposed to pose as a boy for a good deal longer and that may not be possible for long. It's not a huge deal plot-wise, but that Bran awkwardness may play out with Maisie Williams.

But the biggest may be Jon, Theon and Robb. They are all in that early-twenties playing late teens. Once you hit the late twenties, people can start losing hair, looking like they are 30+ etc.

[rosslynhoya]

Jun 16, 2011 14:14:15 GMT -5 SFHoya99 said:

Sansa - acceptable in story terms to mature and change

Bran, Rickon and Arya are in the danger zone, especially Arya. They are all a couple years older than character ages, which can lead to some awkward "Bran's 12, why does he look 17" if he matures early. And there's always the "Cute got ugly fast" (and Sansa must deal with that as well).

But Arya's the worst of the three. She's supposed to pose as a boy for a good deal longer and that may not be possible for long. It's not a huge deal plot-wise, but that Bran awkwardness may play out with Maisie Williams.

Just so we're all on the same page, at the opening of the first novel, Bran is 7, Arya is 9, and Sansa is 11. A year elapses over the course of Game of Thrones, and then another year over the course of aCoK and aSoS. I don't think it'll be plot-relevent whether Bran is 9 or 11 or even 13 by the time aSoS finishes filming however, the point is that he's still absurdly young.

Maisie Williams should be able to pass for a boy in two calendar years as well as she does now anyway, and then I think we're far enough in the plot (end of aSoS) that that doesn't matter any more either.

I agree that if Isaac Hempstead-Wright is looking 17 when his character Bran is still supposed to be 9, then HBO has apparently taken the George R.R. Martin approach to delivering content.

[hoopsmccan]

Are those their ages on the show too? I feel like many people have been bumped up a few years on the show, especially in the Stark clan. Anyway, I think eventually it will be an issue if the show has a successful run (even without Sopranos-like gaps in airing). It really highlights how fast things happen in the story - what would happen over 4 or so years of TV really happens in a relatively brief time.

EDIT: though admittedly sometimes its hard to tell the passage of time in GoT because of the virtual lack of seasons and little discussion of dates, so maybe I'm underestimating things. even with ravens, something like calling the banners had to take, at minimum, a month, probably longer and travel would take a considerable amount of time.

[SFHoya99]

Everyone got aged up. For the children it's about 2 years. For the adults, it's more like whatever age they look -- Ned and company are really supposed to be in their mid-thirties but everyone's well into their forties and further.

[Boz]

Non-Game of Thrones note:

For those, like me, who loved Battlestar Galactica, but are too lazy to go out and get the DVDs, BBC America has started BSG reruns on Saturday nights. (Why BBC America is doing this and SyFy is making us sit through Ghost Hunters is beyond me, but there it is).

As for the Game of Thrones finale, I have no complaints. It was all very well done.

And despite some of my quibbles, mostly related to Tyrion, the entire season was very well done. Just work on those battle scenes, because there are some really important ones -- mostly smaller conflicts, but one epic one -- coming up in A Clash of Kings.

(BTW, side note, does anyone know if they are going to re-name the TV series after each book, or are they going to stick with Game of Thrones throughout? I guess I'm OK with either choice, just curious).


And finally, I did watch Falling Skies, because hey, it is Senor Spielbergo after all. Fairly unimpressed, but will probably give it a few more episodes before deciding whether or not to stick with it. I've always found Noah Wylie to be pretty entertaining, but other than that, nothing to write home about.