The Game of Thrones thread- SPOILERS/TRIGGER WARNING

[HamsterRage]

SPOILERS AHOY and TRIGGER WARNING... lots of unpleasant subjects below


Okay so I've just finished watching the first two seasons of Game of Thrones (henceforth I'll refer to it as GoT)...

Usually the fantasy genre does next to NOTHING for me. I like the LOTR movies fine, and Legend, Labrynth and a select few others but aside from He-Man (which I really love) I could care less about D&D and the like. I'm personally more of a sci-fi superhero guy...

BUT GoT is very different.
Here's what I like:
-The fantasy elements live (thus far) on the periphery.
-The art direction on the show is amazing, everything looks like an NC Wyeth painting.

Here's the stuff I love:
-The political intrigue, the scheming and plotting to outwit each other.
-The complexity of the characters... lots of dimension. Lots of thought into how they behave, how they relate to each other and what code of conduct they carry.
-Strong women who overcome abuse and torment. Danaeris, Lady Briane, Arya, Cersie, Cat Stark, Oosha, even poor Roz
-Vulnerable men... how often in a show do we have large powerful men taken down so regularly and not always shown in positions of power?

Stuff that troubles me (but I understand this is part of the "historical" reality and adds texture to the show)
-Some of the gore and grossness is a little too much
-the rape and incest elements are deeply disturbing and for the most part are qualities of the villainous


My favorite characters are Danaeris, Rob Stark, Snow, Oosha and Tyrion... I'm hoping eventually they all get together to take down the assholes occupying King's Landing.

So thoughts?

Am I alone in thinking we're getting something really special here in regards to strong women characters?

[BnL]

Am I alone in thinking we're getting something really special here in regards to strong women characters?

In the beginning, not so much. In fact, I found the treatment of the female characters extremely off putting in the early episodes. But since then, the roles of the women on the show have gotten much stronger.

Another thing I appreciate about this show is that, aside from Jon Snow's storyline, I'm interested in all the subplots. And with as many subplots as this show has going, that's really significant.

[FanboyStranger]

It's hard for me to separate the show from the books, but the female characters are generally among the most empowered in both, even if they don't seem like it on the surface. Danaeris and Arya take very different directions from what you'd expect in fantasy literature, Cersei plays with those conventions through both the show (so far) and the books, and Catelyn pretty much embodies the protective mother. Briene sort of lies on the outskirts of this, taking the traditional "tomboy" to extremes, but she's probably the "truest" character in the books (at least in so far as her belief in her actions). A lot of people rag on Danaeris as the story in the books unfolds, but I attribute that more to the fact that she's the point of view character for so much of the worldbuilding in the first three books, then becomes the epitome of realpolitik in the fifth (she does not appear in the fourth.) Sansa is the most traditional female fantasy character (the princess waiting for her hero), but Martin generally plays that against type, making her naive at best.

Then there's Tyrion, Davos, and Jon Snow (grotesque, criminal, and bastard), all so far from the usual fantasy character types. Snow fits the usual "noble hero" mold, but Martin emphazes that he "knows nothing", which pushes his character arc. Davos is faithful to a fault with Stannis because loyalty is his ultimate virtue, but he's also cynical and questions authority. Tyrion may actually be the greatest character in fantasy despite being so far from its tropes-- he's the embodiment of brains over brawn, wit over warfare-- just because glory is the one of the last things he's looking for (unless it gets him laid). I think you can make the argument that even Jaime Lannister, that perfect, invincible knight, is played against type as character develops, something that should become more apparent as the show progresses, although I'm sincerely avoiding spoils, which is why I'm going to leave it at that.

[HamsterRage]

It's hard for me to separate the show from the books, but the female characters are generally among the most empowered in both, even if they don't seem like it on the surface. Danaeris and Arya take very different directions from what you'd expect in fantasy literature, Cersei plays with those conventions through both the show (so far) and the books, and Catelyn pretty much embodies the protective mother. Briene sort of lies on the outskirts of this, taking the traditional "tomboy" to extremes, but she's probably the "truest" character in the books (at least in so far as her belief in her actions). A lot of people rag on Danaeris as the story in the books unfolds, but I attribute that more to the fact that she's the point of view character for so much of the worldbuilding in the first three books, then becomes the epitome of realpolitik in the fifth (she does not appear in the fourth.) Sansa is the most traditional female fantasy character (the princess waiting for her hero), but Martin generally plays that against type, making her naive at best.

Then there's Tyrion, Davos, and Jon Snow (grotesque, criminal, and bastard), all so far from the usual fantasy character types. Snow fits the usual "noble hero" mold, but Martin emphazes that he "knows nothing", which pushes his character arc. Davos is faithful to a fault with Stannis because loyalty is his ultimate virtue, but he's also cynical and questions authority. Tyrion may actually be the greatest character in fantasy despite being so far from its tropes-- he's the embodiment of brains over brawn, wit over warfare-- just because glory is the one of the last things he's looking for (unless it gets him laid). I think you can make the argument that even Jaime Lannister, that perfect, invincible knight, is played against type as character develops, something that should become more apparent as the show progresses, although I'm sincerely avoiding spoils, which is why I'm going to leave it at that.

I read stuff about Tyrion and... Wow. That going to be wrenching when it finally gets around to happening on the show. That poor little guy can't catch a break.

[FanboyStranger]

I read stuff about Tyrion and... Wow. That going to be wrenching when it finally gets around to happening on the show. That poor little guy can't catch a break.

Yeah, but he rolls with it, usually with black humor, which is what makes him so great.

[DarkKnightJared]

I'm with HamsterRage--normally I don't get into the fantasy genre much (I HATED reading the LOTR trilogy), but Game of Thrones defies a lot of the shitty genre troupes and actually has a lot of intriguing and messed-up characters and worlds. In fact, it might almost have too much of that--I know especially in the second season, even though I watched it in one go, I was still having problems remembering what was going on with each subplot, and the names? Forget it.

[Tobias M]

What astonished me about the books is that I began to really like Sansa and Cersei after a couple of years. I would consider that a testimony to GRRM's abilities as a writer, that he can introduce someone we dislike and then work us around the wheel of moral indignation, all the way to wary respect.

Although in Cersei's case, she's generally on the cusp of sliding back into megalomaniac at any given moment. Six of one, half dozen of the other.

[BnL]

What astonished me about the books is that I began to really like Sansa and Cersei after a couple of years. I would consider that a testimony to GRRM's abilities as a writer, that he can introduce someone we dislike and then work us around the wheel of moral indignation, all the way to wary respect.

Although in Cersei's case, she's generally on the cusp of sliding back into megalomaniac at any given moment. Six of one, half dozen of the other.

I haven't read the books, but I find Sansa to be one of the most sympathetic characters in the series. I don't get why so many people seem to hate her. She's trapped in a horrible situation, and is trying to survive with the limited tools she has.

[Tobias M]

I haven't read the books, but I find Sansa to be one of the most sympathetic characters in the series. I don't get why so many people seem to hate her. She's trapped in a horrible situation, and is trying to survive with the limited tools she has.

It's a follow on from the books. She initially comes across as oblivious to what is happening, as well as unsympathetic to Arya's plight. Seeing as readers were treated to the younger Stark's perspective more, that introduced a sense of resentment to the character. However, later when we see her, as you saying, struggling to survive in a hostile court - later still when her situation becomes even more perilous - it's hard not to feel for her and understand what a horrific situation she is trapped in.

[dmh3000]

I'm usually not a fan of adaptations, I cannot get into them because I can't stop comparing them to the source material if I'm familiar with it. Game of Thrones doesn't have that problem, I love it. I also managed to get my family into the books because they love the series so much. Now we have something to talk about that I actually like.