"A reader lives a thousands lives before he dies. The man who never reads lives only one."
- George R.R. Martin
It has been widely reported that the fantasy novel series, "A Song of Fire and Ice" will end with seven books. Apparently, so will the show. At least, that is the plan. I find it hard to believe that 70 hours of television is enough to tell the massive story that is Game of Thrones. I'm not the only pessimist. The author of those books, Mr. Martin was recently quoted on this topic. "As I've been saying for years, I wish they had more hours. Every time I see another HBO show I wonder why we only have ten and they have 13 episodes per season. I don't think it will be enough to tell the story we're telling in the books."
Still, Thrones has now been confirmed to be the most watched show on HBO ever (Average of 18.4 million viewers per episode). With news like that, why ask for more? On a tight budget with grandiose subject material, why aren't there more episodes and/or longer episodes?
Other critically acclaimed shows such as "Mad Men" and "Breaking Bad" have delivered for there audience in a way Thrones is apparently incapable of doing. Mad Men has had 2 hour season premieres, while Breaking Bad extended its final two episodes by 15 minutes. The sheer size in budget of both stories from the AMC shows pale in comparison to that of Game of Thrones.
The show runners of Game of Thrones are well aware of the criticisms for the gratuitous nude scenes and excess of deviations, particularly in this season. However the case may be we must understand how monumental of a task it is to adapt such a complex story from these thick novels, on to the small screen. The actors are phenomenal, the locations are beautiful, the stunts are glorious, the sex, nudity, wow moments and deaths are what make this show infamous.
Can it simply be a matter of human nature that we just want more? Is our desire for more Thrones is utterly insatiable? Or is it the fact that the books exist and therefore we have a platform to compare and contrast the two separate narratives? The answer to all questions is a resounding YES!
As happy as I am to watch Game of Thrones, I know through reading the books, that it can still be better. Sure, some battles must obviously be left out due to budget constraints and not every single bloody character can be introduced. Some story lines, for example the Reek and Ramsay one, are not as convincing on screen as they are in the books because well, it is simply too difficult to make an actor look like he's been tortured, flayed and starved. The bath scene with Reek was both puzzling and predictable, because one, we saw Reek's nakedness (He had not changed much from seasons 2 and 3 when he was Theon) and aside from the dialogue, the tension in the bath scene was not felt by the likes of me or friends who have not reached book five yet.
Perhaps it is because we as a people are far too smart for television. We've watched too many shows, so it is quite difficult for us to be surprised. Our television intelligence is so high that any scene that is not touching, violent, witty, or just flat out awesome is a disappointment.
Which leads me to this. If you complain about the show and do not wish to read the books, why bother complaining? If you've read the books, yet complain each time the show diverges from the book material - why bother watching? The books and the show exist for a reason: so people can get the best of both worlds. It's a win, win for us.
Of course the famous complaint of the show is that some minor book characters get more screen time on the show...well it is a valid point, but honestly you just need to deal with that.
The show does have its advantages over the books, in that it can peal away some of the less exciting portions of the story. It is both an advantage and a weakness, because a story is like a stew: you need all the ingredients to make it right. The show has some missing parts. It still tastes great, but well, you get the point. Why do I yammer on about food? Perhaps it is because lunch time is drawing near.
One tidbit. The show has even influenced Mr. Martin. Characters with small roles on the show, like "Osha," the wildling who takes Rickon and Shaggydog away to... (well, I won't say because that is a spoiler) may be getting a bigger role in subsequent novels due to the performance of the actress.
Neither the books nor the show is perfect. Whenever a human being is writing a very long story which average span is over a thousands pages long, there will be parts of the plot that meander. There will be instances when you reach a boring part, especially the way Mr. Martin has formatted his novels, through character POV chapters. You may find yourself favoring one character's POV chapter over another.
Once again. The show is not perfect. We want it to be longer, fuller and a little more consistent, but then again the question can asked, "IF you do not think the show is that good, why not try launching your own version?" The show is great. It has its shortcomings but you cannot take anything away from it.
Game of Thrones (The show) is like a slim model you can enjoy once a week, or multiple times a day if you prefer binge watching. A marathon of pleasurable viewing at your leisure is an incredibly intoxicating feeling.
The books are like thick juicy steaks or huge bowls of oatmeal depending on how you look at them. Chapter after chapter is a big bite of titillation or anguish.
It really comes down to that folks. Take your pick. Get the full story from the books or the reader's digest version that is the show. Since neither story is complete, it is still technically a toss up. The Show will have caught up to the books by season 5. So, when the books and show are complete, we can come back and review this debate.
I know which one I prefer now: the books. Although, like many others, I was first introduced to this fantasy epic, via the show. Oh the irony.
No comments:
Post a Comment