jack merridew said:

I'm going to comment off this post, but several other posts (here and elsewheres) all speak to this on some level and I have always had the same question... why should they? I mean when you start reading the book there is no prologue that explains the history, it unfolds slowly through scenes and dialogue, and yes, inner-narrative, but it does so through the course of the novels. Why deny the new viewers that same pleasure of slowly pulling back the tapestry and revealing the richness of Westeros' history?

Obviously the inner-narrative will need to be switched up and presented in a different format, but there is no real reason why the history needs to be filled in before it is particularly relevant to what the viewers are seeing.

Saturnine said:

This change and the post Dany wedding change I think were done for consistency. New viewers are trying to get to know all these characters in an hour, so to have Catelyn push Ned to go, then change her mind after the letter in the limited screen time she gets probably didn't come across as convincing. Likewise setting all the limited screen time Dany gets to show how terrified and unwilling she is to go thru with this wedding, only to have her say "yes" could come across as even more comical without a lot more time spent on the scene that they didn't have (especially if following the books accurately have the gentleness go backwords to the point in chapter 23 where Drogo is forcing her into painful sex nightly against her will to the point she is considering suicide, then have that turn into love without the benefit of Dany's internal thoughts.). The changes I think were done for the sake of developing consistency when new viewers are still trying to figure out who is who.

I imagine in future episodes we will still get to the same point as the books, just by a different path. Not to say that I don't prefer the way the book played out, but I understand how the changes could be necessary for new viewers with the time restraints they were working with.

Saturnine said:

The music didn't impress me, but it didn't distract me in a negative way either. I liked the opening sequence though. The symbolism of wheels within wheels and a sort of game board, and from what I have read from critics the opening changes depending on what locations the episode is focusing on. I liked the Stag Lion and Wolf fighting the Dragon and then them bowing to the Stag on the tapestry.

LaughingTree said:

LaughingTree said:

TTwo friends of mine had not watched any of the previews, nor read any of the books. They are only aware of it because I mentioned I played the game and it was based on my favorite novels, about a year later I mentioned it was being made into a TV series on HBO.

They really liked it. Both of them are women with only passing interest in fantasy and sci-fi stuff, neither of them are gamers. If it can reach a twenty something and thrity something super casual fan of the genre (if you can say that much of them) it is doing something right. Sure they were not quite up to speed on every nuance was put in that first episode, but they didn't need to be. They have "season passed" the series on their dvr and one is know planning on reading the books.

All without any encouragement from me.

~ Sorry your friends are lame.

Seriously though, this is just the way of things sometime. People react positively or negatively to all sorts of things, and figuring out what is going to get the positive reaction from the most people is hard. I think a lot of people forget that the strength of this series is that it is a character driven drama that happens to have sword fighting and dragons, not a series of sword fighting and dragons that have dramatic characters.

Anyone wondered why Will was not killed by white walker? I hate when filmmakers change facts. (and "white walker" term - was it in the book? I read translation, so I don't know)

Rogue30 said:

Well it was mentioned in one of the interviews with Martin that Will would not be killed by the Others. So I was expecting it and therefore not taken off guard. They are the Others in the book. There is no official response as to why it was changed to the White Walkers. Some speculate that it is because they of the ABC show Lost and their use of the Others.

I don't recall if the term "White Walker" is used so early in the book series, but I could have sworn it's an actual term that is used at some point.

Its both I think. They dont want to have any confusion/unintentional comparison to Lost and also White Walkers is mentioned in the books a few times. Its common in the books that something has lots of titles isnt it?

And there has been ongoing speculation that Will was in fact the exact same deserter that Ned kills. Don't ask me to explain it, just passing on random chatter from other boards and fans of the series.

Nan called them White Walkers in the first book, so there is definitely precedent.

Penfold said:

I thought this has been commonly accepted? It makes sense anyhow, I think. The tv show is simply making it explicit.

And yes, Old Nan calls them White Walkers, and I believe some Wildlings use than name as well.

I haven't read the first book in about six months so I wasn't sure one way or another. Wasn't a detail I focused on.

The best speculation I have read on why they changed it to Will is because he has the most face time and dialogue in the TV prologue and they wanted to make it as recognizeable as possible who it was that was getting executed for dessertion after the break in action that the opening credits provides.

The only thing I didn't like about the prologue change was Will coming face to face with the white walkers and mysteriously escaping. I would have prefered if they showed him mounted or at least had him running rather than sink to his knees within short throwing distance. I guess you could speculate that perhaps Cold Hands saved him, or the Others let him live for some reason, but that was the only logic point that one of my non-reader friends questioned me about that I couldn't give a good explanation for.

Penfold said:

Because the small screen is a very different storytelling medium from a novel. A lot of background and clarifying information in the novels comes in form of narrative or inner-monologue and that has to be adjusted for the small screen. For example it was very clear in the early chapters just who Theon Greyjoy was and how he and why he was not a Stark but living with the Starks. This was not clear in the pilot where they chose to have no narrative and no inner monologue.

Husemann said:

Agreed, he came across more like a "naive schemer" but this may change as he gets more screen time and as Daenerys is more accepted and he becomes more ostracized.

Karazax said:

The idea that Coldhands saved him only works if you are assuming that Benjen is not Coldhands. I'm not 100% sold on this, but I understand it is a popular theory.

I thought Viserys was pretty vicious. He forced his sister to srtip, fondled her, and told her he'd let all of Drogo's Horde screw her if need be; in addition to threatening her that she better please Drogo...or else. That's a vicious and messed up brother if you ask me.

Skowza said:

Wow! I've never heard that theory before. Interesting...

My wife and I were thrilled with the first episode. I think they're doing a great job and the opening credits are spectactular. I wish they didn't need to put the entire book in to one season. It's a massive book with many, many subplots. However you could never get 10 hours for a movie theatre movie so no real complaint. Great casting and it's good to see Peter Dinklage in the role of a lifetime.

LaughingTree said:

LaughingTree said:

But what is the importance of that fact in the first episode? None as far as I can tell. We'll get all of that I'm sure as it becomes relevant.

Skowza said:

The Old Man said:

Spectacular, yes, that's the word I needed. I've heard it will be changing from time to time.

So far they put everything nearly as good as in the book, so I hope there will be little changes or missing scenes.

I'm worried though, that they don't use classic texts, e.g."That is the only time a man can be brave", "The king eats, they say, and the Hand takes the ****", "I learned long ago that it is considered rude to vomit on your brother" etc.

Penfold said:

It was one fact of many that could have been explained and made the episode less confusing to some non-readers.

PS. Back away from making insulting comments on the forums. Using a ~sarcasm does not really excuse it IMO.

Wait, are you really taking insult with my saying they were lame? If was trying to be insulting rather than teasing with sarcasm I wouldn't have bothered with the ~ and I would have used something much more clear than the word "lame" which by its very nature should be considered a two edged insult, because lets face it, the use of the word lame itself is, lame.

But my point still stands, were people actually confused about who Theon was, or did they note the name and just not wonder at all? And if they did assume he was a Stark, did they make the same guess about Hullen and Harwin? And does it matter in the first episode?

We mostly discover that Theon is an ass in the first ten chapters. I'm confident we have plenty of time to come to that conclusion.

Karazax said:

I recommend watching the whole. I had good laugh. Thanks for the link.

I think I agree with Stag and FATMOUSE. I mainly enjoyed watching the show just from a "fan art" perspective -- it was cool to see interpretations of various scenes from the book and hear certain lines be dramatized. All of the casting choices seemed great to me. Even when some aspects of the character was changed, the core of that character's motivations and personality seemed to be embodied well.

However, I feel like I would not have gotten much out of the show if I hadn't read the books though. It felt like so much was crammed in without much happening. That's just my impression though. The nudity and violence also bothered me. I know it's in the books, but there I mentally gloss over in a way that I can't on screen. Also, I think Ned and Cat's sex scene got axed when they aged Cat up....

This character cheat sheet is useful to send to new viewers: javascript:void(0);/*1303359266830*/

schrecklich said:

I don't think that the show should be viewed as "fan art." I am sure that David and Dan are indeed fans of the series, but this is a huge production composed of the efforts of hundreds of artists and craftsmen and craftswomen. I am sure that many actors, directors, artists, etc. are not fans of the book, and I think their art should be viewed upon its own merit.

By your own admission the cast is great, with clear motivations and personality. As to your opinion that not much happened, I feel like maybe I was watching a different show. Not only does the episode successfully embody variations of character in a huge lineup of actors, plot wise we had a pair of brutal murders, an execution, a pet adoption, a King's arrival, a promotion offered, a wedding, a promotion accepted, a HUGE secret relationship revealed, and a central character pushed from the top of a tower. And those were just the major plot points.

I felt that they balanced quite well the torrent of important plot points with the artistic and aesthetic quality of craft in each scene.

There was some criticism from another poster about the slow speed of Dany entering the tub. I would ask that poster to go back and watch Dany is all her scenes. She also approaches Drogo very slowly on the steps of Illyrio's manse. She walks slowly following her brother and Illyrio in the following scene. She walks slowly down the steps of the wedding platform to accept her horse from Drogo. She is a tentative, scared, perhaps even traumatized young girl from her first scene in the show. She is beautiful, but there is a numbness to her that is reflected in the way she walks. I think it is excellent direction at work coupled with excellent acting from Emilia. I look forward to seeing her movement and body language change as her character transforms.