I know we have a continually updated review post, and that one will continue to get updates with all of the various and sundry reviews. But these two were noteworthy enough to get their own post, I believe.
First, James Poniewozik of TIME gives Game of Thrones an expertly-written, glowing review.
As did HBO’s western Deadwood and historical drama Rome, Thrones takes a familiar, oft-romanticized genre–epic fantasy–dirties it up and blurs the moral lines. Based on a millions-selling series of novels by George R.R. Martin (whom TIME’s Lev Grossman called “the American Tolkien”), Thrones is unsentimental and often brutal. It’s also shaping up to be the most immersive grownup adventure TV has produced since Lost.
And then, from the other side of the coin, comes this lazy, poorly-written, offensive review from New York Times writer Ginia Bellafante. Not only does she manage to insult fans of fantasy, as several reviews have done already, but she throws in insults to women as well!
The true perversion, though, is the sense you get that all of this illicitness has been tossed in as a little something for the ladies, out of a justifiable fear, perhaps, that no woman alive would watch otherwise. While I do not doubt that there are women in the world who read books like Mr. Martin’s, I can honestly say that I have never met a single woman who has stood up in indignation at her book club and refused to read the latest from Lorrie Moore unless everyone agreed to “The Hobbit” first. “Game of Thrones” is boy fiction patronizingly turned out to reach the population’s other half.
Winter Is Coming: Could there have been two more polar opposite reviews from two generally well-respected publications? One can only hope that Poniewozik’s excellent review (which will appear in the print version of TIME) will have more of an impact than Bellafante’s drivel.
UPDATE: Ginia Bellafante’s piece and another “review” by Troy Patterson at Slate have caused a flurry of indignation first all over Twitter, and then on several blogs: Geek With Curves (Amy Ratcliffe), Violet Blue, News-a-rama (Alan Kistler), io9 (Annalee Newitz). Most recent are two very thoughtful and eloquent rebuttals, written by Matt Zoller Seitz from Salon.com and by science fiction and fantasy author Daniel Abraham. Reading these is a must.
433 Comments
First!
I have always hated reviews from NYC. I don’t know why, but New York reviewers always come off like effete, pretentious asshats too busy trying to look ahead of the curve to admit they like anything that isn’t obscure or from that ‘really great off-off Broadway show’.
Shawn Edward CantuQuote Reply
Wow! I’m really insulted by the NYT review! Women aren’t allowed to enjoy something that isn’t directly aimed at them? I’ve never liked Chick Lit; I’ve never been a diehard fan of Sex and the City though I admit to watching it on occasion and getting a kick out of it. I didn’t even find the sex scenes in AGoT all that explicit. I mean, sure, we all know what’s happening but there aren’t any ‘throbbing manhoods’ or ‘rosebud nipples’.
Why such blatant sexist remarks? Ugh! I’m disgusted that this was even published. She didn’t even MENTION the acting, or the plots…
Amanda C.Quote Reply
Posted this also in the other thread, but even Ryan McGee feels embarassed by the NYT-review.
KnurkQuote Reply
It’s interesting that the NYTs review got the same metacritic score (40) as the WSJ article eventhough the NYT one reads a lot worse. I guess the people at metacritic realises that it is a poorly written review that isn’t really fair in it’s criticism. To get a lower score I guess an article would have to point out specific things about the show that are bad which the NYT article fails to do completely.
Ingemar SvenssonQuote Reply
Like Rabbit has already said, I am not offended as a GoT fan, I am offended as a woman. What the hell?!
The response of geek with curves is great though and I fully support it!
Leene RasumQuote Reply
Wow, that’s perhaps the most condesending paragraph I’ve ever read in a review. I get that it’s not this “Lady’s” cup of tea but damn. The women who follow this site should be offended by that. In the NY times no less the “bastion of journalistic integrity”.
dizzy_34Quote Reply
WiC,
Perhaps it’s time to start updating the Episode Guide with reviews? Or create a separate reviews page altogether? With that sort of consensus/summary paragraph like they have on Rotten Tomatoes..
GormryjkQuote Reply
I’ve decided that the woman is an idiot (she evidently doesn’t like complexity) who enjoys evenings curled up on the sofa with a bottle of red wine and sex in the city playing on the tv whilst she flicks casually through the latest edition of ‘Vogue’ because she’s incapable of reading something more intricate then the last Jilly Cooper novel. (please excuse the chick lit ref, I don’t read it, don’t know any authors and have no intention to – and yes, I am a woman! oh the horror!)
SarahQuote Reply
See, this is what gives me hope that GoT will explode with popularity. The only reviews so far that seem to diss it, minus Jon Weisman’s review, which, although I hope he’s wrong, was actually a review and not an attack piece, all attack it on the premise that they hate fantasy and all fantasy is bad. This one throws a quasi-feminist hook (read: the exact opposite of real feminism) into it.
These people don’t even realize how silly they look, and how much sillier they’ll look still when GoT becomes THE big hit of the 10′s.
Josh ParkerQuote Reply
Don’t worry, this is my last post today (before WiC starts deleting me). I’m just going to inject that the NYT review has humor in it. You can’t see it because it rubs you the wrong way. If you consider that it’s meant to be funny, it makes more sense. Other readers out there who don’t know jack about Game of Thrones will get that humor. If you take that into account you begin to realize you are arguing against something you are not fully understanding. It’s worse than you think.
ReggieQuote Reply
dizzy_34,
Yeah, according to that person, every one of us “geek” girls are freaks?
WTF!
I am always for the nice talk and without use of harsh and rude words…but this time around I am really pissed off!
The_Rabbit01Quote Reply
I really appreciated Ryan McGee’s critical but well thought out review. I think some of these “critics” are just trolling for traffic.
digtastikQuote Reply
I read the Times review via the Twitter …
It doesn’t suprise me really.
The NY Times has fallen to opinion mostly and the more people ignore it, the more they hired “Crack” writers.
Got to remember these people are the same writers who think the Muslim Brotherhood is mostly secular …
So …
Phantomwriter05Quote Reply
She is a gender-bias cheerleader. Too bad her team left the field a generation ago.
I don’t doubt Bellafante is trying to shock, to stand out, to be noted for her viper-bites over her content. Sorry Ms. B, that didn’t turn out well for Sarah Palin, it’s not turning out well for Charlie Sheen, and it won’t turn out well for you either.
I can accept a negative review on a show, but what she’s done is give US all a thumbs-down (and taken a shot at we women in particular). However, when you spit in the air, it lands on your face. *passes her a handkerchief*
Franny BeeQuote Reply
(from nyt review) that made me laugh
While reading the books, I was thinking about a lot of stuff, but NEVER EVER about global warming XD
…or did I miss something?
as for the rest of the review…oaaah, so poorly written, it kinda hurts …
ThisisQuote Reply
Wow, with a review like that Bellafante should work for Fox News.
CyanQuote Reply
This. And you forgot to add that Oprah tells her how to live and how to function, and it is SO.
Franny BeeQuote Reply
Cyan,
Is it not possible to talk about a bad review without marginalizing the opposite political side from your own? It’s obvious from the way she writes about women that she thinks of herself as a feminist (even if she has no idea what real feminism is) so that would make her a liberal. Yes, liberals can be stupid, too.
Now, with that out of the way, I resolve to make no more political comments. I hope my fellow WiC’ers can do the same.
Josh ParkerQuote Reply
OMG! how could I forget Oprah!?!?!?!
SarahQuote Reply
See, I don’t think this is actually an accurate representation of her beef with fantasy in general – Lorrie Moore whom she namechecks in the article has won the National Book Award and is a fantastic short-story writer (though I found her novel lacking) and should not be dismissed as a chick-lit writer (and I don’t like the idea of dismissing chick-lit as unworthy either since … hey, I’ve read and liked some of that too!). I think the articles fallacies lie in a) assuming that women don’t like fantasy fiction (or only a certain weird type of woman whom the author has never encountered like fantasy fiction); b) that it’s impossible to like “literary” fiction and fantasy or other genre fiction as well; and c) that HBO likes to insert lots of sex scenes and nudity in order to attract a female audience (I have to say that as a straight woman, bare breasts have never drawn me into a tv show, so if that is HBO’s intention they’re failing quite badly, at least in my case.)
Regina ThorneQuote Reply
Another review from the NYTimes
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/17/magazine/mag-17Riff-t.html
SuperdeluxeQuote Reply
Way to completely miss the point Heather!
SuperdeluxeQuote Reply
I hated that NYT review, not because it was negative, but because it was insulting to woman fans of the books (of which there are plenty!)
Just saw this, posted to EOnline. A nice Q&A with one of their TV bloggers, who saw the first 6 episodes and loved them. Another positive perspective from someone who hasn’t read the books, which is great!
http://www.eonline.com/uberblog/watch_with_kristin/b236288_game_of_thrones_review_what_does_book.html
CKF82Quote Reply
God that review is annoying.
basically slamming on GoT because it is suppose to be a ‘fantasy’ and it just feels like real life.
UGH
SuperdeluxeQuote Reply
Superdeluxe,
Anyone else get the feeling that HBO failed to buy advertising space in the NYTimes, and this is payback o_O ??
Franny BeeQuote Reply
In don’t think there is a better contrast between the two reviews than these two parts, where they both seem to be picking up on the same point.
Bellafante sees the wacky seasons as failed bid for contemporary relevance by way of a clunky and superficial allegory to climate change. She dismisses any pretense of contemporary relevance in this bout of self-indulgent, rhetorical masturbation, snottily pontificating about how it is all so silly, she can’t make any sense out of it:
Meanwhile, Poniewozik can, in a single sentence and with far fewer words, tell us exactly how the seasons and politics fit into a broader thematic context with contemporary relevance, without mistaking it for an allegory of anything:
JRQQuote Reply
There are 2 negative NYTimes review now.
SuperdeluxeQuote Reply
Franny Bee,
That is what I am thinking. Maybe they think because they are from the Times, they are suppose to look down on ‘fantasy?’ who knows.
SuperdeluxeQuote Reply
Another Positive review from Eric Deegans from Tampa Bay.com
http://www.tampabay.com/blogs/media/content/hbos-game-thrones-brings-lord-rings-level-sword-and-sorcery-tale-small-screen-video
SuperdeluxeQuote Reply
That is a rather arbitrary and unfair quotation from Mrs Havrilesky’s article.
Herr FickQuote Reply
OK, for whatever reason I can’t edit my previous comment, but I just want to say that I think it’s a little strange to critique Ms. Bellafante’s review by impugning her own taste in reading. First of all, Lorrie Moore isn’t a “chick-lit” writer, she’s a really fine writer of short stories and an example of “literary” fiction, and secondly, even if she were (or even if Ms. Bellafante HAD mentioned Jilly Cooper or Sophie Kinsella), that would simply evince the same literary snobbery that Ms. Bellafante is showing here. It is actually possible to enjoy ALL those genres of fiction, you know.
Regina ThorneQuote Reply
Earth to reviewers: People have sex.
JRQQuote Reply
Another critic who needs to stop living in the 80s and realise that the stereotype of fantasy fans as socially stunted D&D-playing teenage boys living in the basement is outdated and offensive bullshit.
Throw a stone and you’ll hit a fantasy franchise or author beloved of women: The Lord of the Rings, True Blood, Buffy, Supernatural, Dr Who, Harry Potter, Neil Gaiman, Terry Pratchett, and yes, Game of Thrones. That anyone still dismisses anything with a bit of a fantastical bent as “boy fiction” when there’s myriad evidence of the opposite is simply mind-boggling.
Pretty rich to have a dig at The Hobbit when more women have read (and watched) Tolkien than have even heard of Lorrie Cooper.
Fate’s BitchQuote Reply
Wow!
“It’s dark, it’s bleak, it’s dark, it’s bleak, it’s dark, it’s bleak. The end.”
sjweningsQuote Reply
I don’t think she’s actually disliking “Game of Thrones” at all, to be honest. (Although the third page of the review sort of went off into this weird “why can’t these stories have happy uplifting endings?” riff, the bulk of it was pretty positive about the realism of the show and its allegorical implications for contemporary life.
(Though I think a lot of people are forgetting that the first book of the series came out in …. 1996? And was written long before that? So if they’re looking for allegories to the Iraq war or whatever, they’re kind of reaching :P)
Regina ThorneQuote Reply
The woman is a complete moron: she needs to get out more and meet a wider variety of people!
I’m a 44yr old englishwoman and I have always loved fantasy, sci-fi & medieval/historical drama (whether it’s books or TV/Movies) and I loathe most chick-Lit with a passion (Mills & Boon Snore Zzzz) but that’s not exclusive; it IS possible to like Bridget Jones & Romantic comedies at the same time – which I do.
I’ve always been a girly girl in appearance and never been short of male attention (happily married with 3 kids now tho!)…but if loving fantasy & sci-fi makes me a geek girl, I’m 100% PROUD to be a geek!!
I never post, usually just lurk but HAD to say my two penneth worth in this instance grrr.
SilverstormmQuote Reply
Wow Ginia Bellafarty. That review is quite something. I am female and I dont think for a minute this is boys fiction. What a load of old bull. For start there are a lot of main characters in this book who are children. Most of the book is to do with families good and bad or out for themselves I dont think these are particularly masculine themes possibly the opposite and I only need to mention Briene who is a character that women, especially, would identify with. What an annoying review. You know nothing Ginia Belephanty.
anna howardQuote Reply
What you don’t realize, Reggie, is that we’re not all idiots here. Take your high-brow BS somewhere else. Your first two sarcastic comments were worse, but at least you attempt to actually enter the conversation here.
First, I’d like to say that there is nothing profound about the NYT review that we’re “missing” on first read. There may be jokes interspersed into the review, but what YOU are not understanding is that whether or not they are funny, the article is meant to be a REVIEW, not a humor piece. A review can be funny but its purpose is to inform the reader about the subject being reviewed, and as such, should outline the basic characters, plot, and premise of the story for the benefit of the readers. It should critique the writing, acting, and production.
As Daniel Feinberg, another critic, pointed out, this NYT “review” doesn’t mention a single character, actor, or plot point. Furthermore, she infers that the only reason a woman would watch or be interested in such fantasy is because there is gratuitous sex involved (one of the few times I’ve heard that particular accusation). There’s a reason this NYT review is being universally attacked, not by fans, but by fellow television critics, including James Poniewozik, Linda Holmes (NPR), Jennifer Arrow (E! Online), Myles McNutt (AV Club), Todd VanDerWerff (AV Club), Alan Sepinwall (HitFix), the aforementioned Daniel Feinberg (HitFix), and many more.
Now, I urge you to reconsider whether YOU’RE the one who fully understands the review or not, because guess what, you’re pretty much on your own.
RoQuote Reply
Herr Fick,
How is it unfair?
SuperdeluxeQuote Reply
Interesting. My work book club — comprised of six women of differing ages from differing fields (marketing, sales, engineering), none of which had ever read fantasy before, aside from myself — left off reading airport best seller books such as “The Lovely Bones” and “The Time Traveler’s Wife” and is now on “A Feast for Crows” after having already read the other 3 in the book club. Odd, isn’t it? We must be the only women on EARTH that would do such a thing! *rolls eyes*
For the record, I have thus created 5 new die-hard Ice & Fire fans, who are rapidly spreading the word to all of their other female friends.
This might be a harsh reaction, but I’d really like to smack Ginia Bellafante.
sarahQuote Reply
Silverstormm
Your comment could have been written about me. Geek and proud!
anna howardQuote Reply
Well at least is reads more like a review. I’d put it in as a mixed review, as it is not all negative.
fuelpaganQuote Reply
I agree with Regina..she is not as bad as Bellafante, but that last 3rd page was just annoying..its dark..its depressing..it is suppose to be a fantasy with rainbows and milk and honey!!
But it just feels like real life :(
SuperdeluxeQuote Reply
the positive reviews keep flowing in, heres 3 more
http://tvguide.ca/Interviews/Features/Articles/110415_game_of_thrones_AD.htm
http://www.tvthrong.co.uk/game-thrones/game-thrones-review
http://blog.timesunion.com/television/game-of-thrones-a-well-played-choice-by-hbo/3176/?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter
JamesQuote Reply
The 2nd Time review (The magazine one) is acceptable. It’s not really a review for an audience per se, but it seems more to be an attempt at critical analysis – you see this if you take a film class in college – though it seems to be using the show to make a case about the genre in general (Notably, however, the author seems to not consider Harry Potter in the fantasy genre, given how it’s a pretty clear counter-example to her “where’s the optimism” bit).
It’s not a particularly helpful review to anyone who wants to know how good the show is, but that’s why it’s in the magazine, where such analysis takes place. The paper version of the review (the horrible one) should be giving that analysis, but fails anyhow.
garik16Quote Reply
First off, from the TIME review, anyone catch the badass quote (which I don’t believe is in the books)? Obviously Bronn:
(In one duel, a knight is slain by a street-brawling mercenary. “You don’t fight with honor!” complains an onlooker. “No,” the mercenary agrees dryly, indicating the corpse. “He did.”)
Also, OT, but cool. New Sky Atlantic TRAILER. We’re seen it all before, but it’s mixed together into a new, up beat, rocking out version:
http://skyatlantic.sky.com/game-of-thrones-teaser-trailer
OKENOQuote Reply
I like to think of myself as a woman. I mean, I’ve borne two children at least, and stay at home looking after them. I read many more books than the average American every year, too. But now I have to ask…so, uh, who is Lorrie Moore? Can we read the Hobbit?
SlyQuote Reply
OKENO,
My bad, I meant to post this link:
http://skyatlantic.sky.com/game-of-thrones/game-of-thrones-new-trailer
OKENOQuote Reply
sjwenings,
Actually, the jest of the article, from my perspective, is she loved the show. It is the articles ending where she wishes that there was a more upbeat character in the story and she has reservations that Games will last if they don’t include something positive that occurs in the episodes now and then. Arya’s arc is depressing at times, same with Sansa’s and the rest, with only the Nightwatch arc and sometimes Dany’s having some uplifting elements. We the fans love this story for what it is, but many will be turned off by this. We realize the ending will be bittersweet (hopefully upbeat too), it is the intriquing characters, awesome plot twists, brutal world, emotional dynamics that have hooked me to this epic till its conclusion.
TysnowQuote Reply
I actually really like the second NYTimes review. It’s more critical analysis than a review, analyzing themes and metaphors. I think she jumps to a few wrong conclusions and I also think her language does not make it clear that she’s reviewing only 6 episodes of an 80+ episode work. The story that she’s seen so far IS bleak, but the problem is that she’s concluding that it will REMAIN bleak. She hasn’t seen the rest of the series, so her conclusion is premature.
The truth is that by the end of this series, I have no doubt that Martin will pull it off in such a way that the good in people triumphs. He is a romantic at heart and that is the way his opus will end. There will be plenty of sunshine in the end, but this reviewer just needs to stick around to see it.
RoQuote Reply
Because it implies that Mrs Havrilesky’s judgement boils down to “Game of Thrones is Dungeons and Dragons porn fantasy” – which it clearly doesn’t.
I may not share her opinion that fantasy isn’t supposed to be all dark, depressing and nihilistic. Additionally, I would argue that Mr Martin’s novels, tough sometimes depressingly dark, are not nihilistic. But Mrs Havrilesky, from her point of view, gives a proper argument as to why the series doesn’t appeal to her. She is neither ridiculously prejudiced nor condecending towards the genre. I would argue that hers is a rather positive stance towards the genre’s possibilities – even if I don’t share her preferences.
Furthermore, the story’s and characters’ future developments might very well change her opinion yet; at least, she seems to keep an open mind.
Herr FickQuote Reply
New York Post btw has a 3.5 out of 4 star review:
http://www.nypost.com/p/entertainment/tv/fantasy_land_mq7KI0k8naC8JhUQWPvGXM
garik16Quote Reply
i don’t find this review all that negative. it’s basically a critique of some issues the entire genre has. it’s not a “i hate game of thrones because i hate fantasy” like the majority of the few negative reviews out there. it’s not just full of ungrounded cheap shots and bashing.
the writer actually seems to be intrigued by the show and hopeful that it will pull her in a bit more. but it’s really 90% fantasy genre critiquing, 10% GoT.
feyrbandQuote Reply
Herr Fick,
I certainly don’t have a problem with the fact that she thinks it’s too depressing. But thats literally ALL she talks about here. This isn’t even a review!
sjweningsQuote Reply
BTW, the New York Post review (link above) is also pretty terribly written and not particularly good at explaining why the show is good….though it gives the show a good rating (3.5 out of 4 stars).
Really not sure what’s up with that.
garik16Quote Reply
Eh, the New York Times has become a joke anyway. Most of the people who read it are all equally pretentious and closed minded groupthinkers as Bellafante. This is actually an appropriate review for the majority of their reader base.
Convivial EddQuote Reply
sjwenings,
I’m pretty sure it’s not meant as a review, but as others have said, a critical analysis. There is a difference – this isn’t meant to persuade others to watch or not to watch the show, but to critique the show and the genre.
Unfortunately, the NY Times’ actual review is the one at the top of this post.
garik16Quote Reply
And it’s not supposed to be one – or does it say “standard television review” anywhere above or below the piece?
Her article is, in fact, quite interesting and offers an open-minded and informed perspective on the series. She has her own preferences and contrasts them with what she saw in the first few episodes. What’s not to like about engaging articles like this?
Herr FickQuote Reply
Herr Fick,
I guess I just disagreed with her usage of the Dungeon and Dragons Porn Fantasy.
SuperdeluxeQuote Reply
So the way to puncture overblown stereotypes in a review is to … state another overblown stereotype?
I’m one of those ‘pretentious, close-minded groupthinkers’ who reads the New York Times and *gasp* loves George R. R. Martin’s books, is dying for the series to start already, and *doublegasp* is a woman. Imagine that!
Regina ThorneQuote Reply
Ooohh.. ok. Guess not. I was just in reviews-mode or whatever. Since thats all we talk about these days.
sjweningsQuote Reply
I roll my eyes at the NYT reviews. Friggin’ elitist snobs, sheesh.
Gabe K.Quote Reply
What surprised me about Mrs Havrilesky’s dislike of the bleak fantasy genre was that according to previous articles she actually liked “Six Feet Under”…
And the review is bad in the same sense that Mo Ryan’s review is bad. It fails to communicate to the reader whether she actually liked the show or not.
And did she really suggest that GoT would have benefited from an ADHD princess?!
Amir MishaliQuote Reply
Sounds like a lot of the negative reviewers don’t like the “Dothraki way”…it almost sounds like many of them think it’s a creation of HBO as an excuse to toss more boobs/sex into the mix.
Lord of FangsQuote Reply
Glad I’m not the only one who was disgusted by this! I read a WIDE variety of genres (and yes, have read a touch of chick lit even if it wasn’t my thing) – everything from sci-fi/fantasy to Tom Clancy to Will Christopher Baer and Chuck Palahniuk. Why is she trying fit all women into her image of them?
I’m a twenty-something tattooed stay-at-home mother of 3 and though I don’t consider myself a true feminist, this whole article just rubbed me the wrong way!
Amanda C.Quote Reply
It’s interesting several ‘liberal media’ outlets connect the phrase ‘winter is coming’ with a modern day ecological disaster like global warming/pending ice age. I wonder if HBO marketing had something to do with injecting that ideas in reviewer’s minds to make the show seem more relevant to non-fantasy fans. If they did, I think it was a mistake. This show is pure escapism; and the reviewers can see that. It seems reviewers are reacting to the preposterous suggestion that this show has a single modern day allegory. http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/17/magazine/mag-17Riff-t.html?_r=1
Pucinette FUQuote Reply
The Washington Post reviewer obviously didn’t think much of the genre or the people who are it’s fans.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/entertainment/television/hbos-game-of-thrones-a-lot-to-sword-out/2011/04/11/AFIbEYdD_story.html
LanternjmkQuote Reply
The good first:
Thank you, James Poniewozik! He wrote a really good, positive review, but he also pointed out a few things he felt might not be mind-blowingly awesome. Honest and well-written.
The above stuck out for me, because I think it went along with what Maureen Ryan and Ryan McGee were getting at. Alan Sepinwall mentioned it as well. Poniewozik seems to approach pacing issues as a matter of fact: Exposition is needed in the pilot.
He also mentioned overuse of “’have some guy explain the backstory while nailing a whore’ device.” I think this probably falls into the same category as the “people standing around in rooms talking” concept some of us had worried about since the beginning. But these are things that we hopefully won’t have to worry about if we get through the first season.
I like this paragraph a lot, because it does the complete opposite of what some other reviewers (mainly Caryn James and Kate O’Hare) tried to do. Those two drew deep distinctions between “nerds” and non-nerds and implied that Game of Thrones was only for the former. Poniewozik unifies the fanboys and newcomers and says that there’s something for everyone.
As a huge Lost fan, I love this!
Dinklage rules, but I was just waiting for the Maisie praise! At this point, it almost feels like there’s something wrong with an article if they don’t give her a nod. :)
LinaQuote Reply
That second NYT article definitely should not be lumped in with the Bellafante review. As an attempt at critical analysis, it is well-written and thought-provoking even if you don’t agree with all of it.
JRQQuote Reply
The women here are awesome!!!! You girls rock!!!!!!!!!
CajunmanQuote Reply
That NYT review was hilarious. Seriously. I loled while reading it.
Lord Ned’s HeadQuote Reply
I have written a letter to the NYT complaining about this review – it is so badly researched.
Anybody who ever read ASOIAF will find that it has a very feminist approach. How many times does Cat speak like Homer’s Cassandra? Ignored by men although her advice would really have been the one to follow.
How many times does Dany have to overcome machoism in the free cities?
Even Cersei, as brain-damaged as she is, has constantly been overruled by her father and feels the oppression.
Think of Arya who’s a murdering eight-year-old.
And think of Sansa who comes to realise her girlish dreams go all to shatters and realises the only true knight she ever found was not anointed but a cruel brute.
All those are very complex feminist subjects.
There is female sexuality, there are female politics, there are the burdons of all womenkind openly denounced!
This Bellafante gets it so completely wrong it’s insane.
JennyQuote Reply
garik16,
Anything in the Post that is not the front page or the sports section doesn’t get read by anyone.
Pucinette FUQuote Reply
Yeah, sure. Pity I stopped reading after >>HBO’s forgettable “Rome”<<.
fungusQuote Reply
Sarah,
Yeah, just so we’re all clear- it’s not appropriate to counter accusations of anti-woman bias with more anti-woman bias. The times review is not really a review of the show and makes a lot of assertions that are empirically incorrect but let’s not attack the writer with loads of highly gendered slurs. I enjoy sitting on the sofa with wine and Sex and the City and Vogue, what of it? That fact alone doesn’t make me incapable of critical response, any more than the genre or style of Game of Thrones makes it automatically irrelevant to women.
People, Game of Thrones is not our collective girlfriend (or boyfriend in this case) it is absolutely fine for people not to like it. Some reviewers have made the mistake of getting personal in their comments about the fan-base of the books. Best not to hit back with more of the same.
OdradeQuote Reply
Wow, the NYT review actually IS insulting.
There’s a common theme in all the negative reviews, I’ve noticed: a complete unwillingness to accept the fact that this is a fantasy. They all seem totally preoccupied by the fact that there are certain givens in this world (such as the length of the seasons) that they do not have an explanation for. And instead of giving the show a chance, and waiting for the answers to these questions, instead they write reactionary, damaging reviews that wind up sounding petty.
I don’t really remember “Lost” getting this treatment. There were some really strange things going on in that show, some of which weren’t explained until the final season (and some of which NEVER explained). Why does Lost get a free pass (side note: I checked Ginia Bellafante’s history with “Lost,” and while she was disappointed in the last 2 seasons, she seemed to find the show very intriguing and likable), but GoT doesn’t?
Maybe, somewhere in the next 3 books, we’ll find out about the seasons. Or we’ll find out about the dragons. Or the “White Walkers.” Or maybe we won’t, and they’ll just be givens. And I’ll be happy either way, because not everything has to be tied up in a neat little package. You know those shows that try too hard to explain everything too easily in the first five minutes? The ones that force characters to call each other “Uncle” and “Grandfather” so you know exactly what the relationship is right off the bat? The ones where some character starts going into a mini-history lesson for no reason other to let the audience know why they’re watching?
Those shows suck.
davebQuote Reply
Well, you can’t please all of the people all the time. D&D could have downplayed the sex and violence of the series, and they could have added more upbeat, optimistic characters or plot threads. I, for one, am happy that they decided not to sacrifice the gritty realism of the series to please the Nancy Direwolf Smiths and Gina Bellafontes of the world.
Sam DeGreeQuote Reply
Pucinette FU,
Eh, I tend to read the entertainment section as well as the Sports….to get to the sports you end up having to pass by the TV section, so I end up reading it. I suspect I’m not the only one.
Also, I find that if you want to know if something is good, see what the Post and the Daily News think. If they agree, you can trust them that it’s very good/bad. If they don’t agree, well then it’s probably in the middle.
garik16Quote Reply
Yeah, that seems to be the general tone of the review. She’s, as far as I understood, thinks that why bother inventing the imaginary world just to place there the familiar stories from our world? Looks like she just doesn’t understand the appeal of “realistic” fantasy.
This is actually a far better written mixed review than the other negative ones that were mentioned here. However, some things from her review make me wonder whether the things she mentions are the same that I’ve seen:
“Rome” is hardly forgettable and if the things that happened there are predictable, it’s because it’s based, sort of, on an ancient history. Julius Ceasar was indeed betrayed and murdered, Marc Antony quarreled with Octavian and he indeed died in Egypt after being defeated at Actium.
“The Tudors” was hardly a a soft porn. Yeah, there were lots of sex scenes, especially in the first few episodes, but they were not the main point of the show. There were many great dramatic scenes played by great actors, both young and old. I loved this show. And this show was beautiful.
“Borgias” had 3 aired episodes, where the total naked or semi-naked women count is about 2 or 3. So if showing some skin automatically turns a series into soft porn, than it’s probably better for Ms. Havrilesky not to watch anything on cable.
Alexander DubrovskyQuote Reply
Game Of Thrones is about global warming.
Enough said.
Dolorous DaveQuote Reply
Personally I never considered GoT to be anything than a typical male fantasy book (plot-driven, relatively few female characters, Nymeria is long long dead, other women get ahead by ‘doing it’) written in a very accessible style (the POV is like a camera in a soap opera) (so that women and non-fantasy fans could have something to grab onto). And, it has incest and terrible violence which means it’s not for little children. That’s why I love SoIaF!
Pucinette FUQuote Reply
The NYT review was laughable at best. It is one thing to say that the plot is too complicated for your little head, but to complain about the length of the seasons? That’s why it’s fantasy – it doesn’t have to conform to the rigid guidelines of our world. If people are going to be interested in the show, they’re not going to get all hot and bothered by the length of the seasons.
Also, the idea that no woman would ever watch the show is completely fallacious. Sure, the realm of fantasy readership is typically populated by adolescent boys, but I introduced the first book to my GRANDMOTHER in November, and she’s already into Feast for Crows – she can’t get enough. She will definitely be watching on Sunday night. I hope in the future NYT will leave the reviewing to someone who doesn’t have a personal vendetta against the fantasy genre.
EPNQuote Reply
The second NYT review (by Heather Havrilesky) is acctually positive, if you read what she acctually thinks. She praises the series for scope, plot and political commentary. She does, however, end on a down note because she feels that the whole thing might be a bit too depressing and bleak, which is a valid critisism of the narrative, and one I hear many fans make as well. I would not call that review negative at all, in fact, she compares the series with Sopranos!
As for the first review, what can I say. Some people are like that, narrow minded and unable to widen their reading. It is sad that she is a critic, because if there is something a critic should endavour to do it is to have wide taste and an open mind. And her blatant attack on her own gender is just a tragic read.
BUT, this is not a good reason to fall into her trap. We should be better than that, we should be able to understand that all genres have merit, and not assign people characterisitcs based on their love of certain books. As have been mentioned, Moore is an excellent read, and so is a fair amount of chick-lit writers. Remember Sturgeon’s Law, and widen your taste.
SkyweirQuote Reply
EPNQuote Reply
Convivial Edd,
I read the Times everyday. It’s a good paper. It’s certainly better than getting all of your news from Fox News.
SteveQuote Reply
WTF? I agree with Rabbit and others – that first NYTimes review doesn’t offend me as a fan, it offends me as a woman! Female SFF fans are not only NOT rare, we’re pretty much single-handedly responsible for the survival of quite a few SFF shows and franchises.
Geek With Curves linked this MSNBC article in her response to Bellafonte’s review and it’s a much more accurate portrait of female GoT fans, imho:
http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/42560281/ns/today-entertainment
In fact, I personally know a lot more female fans than male fans of the series, and most of the male fans I do know – including my husband, father, and brother-in-law – were introduced to the series by me. :P
KerryQuote Reply
Heh, just went to check Metacritic. Game of Thrones went up 1 in score, which means we’re now on a 81 rated average, just enough to push the series into the “Universal Acclaim” bracket ;)
Let’s hope it stays this way!
MortQuote Reply
LOL
Yihhhaaa chuckle snicker
JennyQuote Reply
Amir Mishali,
No, she suggested it would benefit from an ADHD Dwarf or an OCD princess.
Mo Ryan’s review was not bad. It explicitly stated her concerns, as a book fan, with they way the fist 6 episodes played out versus her expectations (she even scored each episode, some with 1 sentence, non-spoilerish explainations of why she scored it that way.
The 2nd NYT review was 10X better (written and informative) than the first, and clearly showed she actually watched most of the screeners.
ingrinQuote Reply
The NYT review basically says if you are stupid, you won’t like GoT. I agree. She obviously likes lowest common denominator television – so I would encourage her to tune into TBS latest Cop/Hospital/Lawyer drama and let people with half a brain actually enjoy HBOs original series’.
These reviews just boggle the mind that someone can automatically see a sword and an english accent and jump on the the “geek” stereo type and not see the story for what it is. Yes it’s complicated, yes there’s history there that needs to be spelled out at times, that’s why we like it and that’s why it’s a compelling story.
I’m glad there are plenty of reviews that are positive and willing to see the work for what it is.
The ReaderQuote Reply
Heather Havrilesky’s review at least flirts with turning in a genuine attempt to review the show. While much of her piece is, once more, a review of the genre itself, she at least attempts to do so within the context of a geniune review of the show. Not to my preferences, but then again, the show clearly wasn’t to her’s, either. Fair enough.
Not everybody’s going to like it. While GoT is clearly not Hevrilesky’s cuppa tea, not everything Havrilesky says is wrong — and some of her criticisms contain a kernel of truth or are at least defenceably valid. Fair is fair.
If all we got from the NY Times was Havrilesky’s piece, it would have been acceptable. Can’t win ‘em all.
Alas, the NY Times didn’t stop there and we got Bellafante’s “review” as well. FWIW, it does seem interesting to note that the editors of the NY Times clearly assigned the review to someone else on staff in addition to Bellafante. I expect the editor who read Bellafante’s piece wasn’t terribly happy with it — or suspected strongly what kind of review Bellafante would probably turn in and herefore decided to hedge their bets.
Whatever the case, a negative review which attempts to cogently set out the reviewer’s complaints is one thing; an outright insulting review of the genre, simpliciter is another.
Steel_WindQuote Reply
And now the bad…
I will be straight up honest: I LOVE the New York Times. I’m probably biased, as I grew up in NJ and work in Manhattan. But it’s my newspaper of record, it provides excellent international coverage, and it offers fantastic multimedia work.
That said, this article is offensive on so many levels: as a NYT reader, as someone who studied journalism, as a woman, and of course, as a fantasy fan. I expected much more than this poorly written, sloppy assessment.
Maybe I’m being hypersensitive, but Gina just comes across as insulting. She’s essentially saying the show will only possibly appeal to “smart” people. The reference to Sex and the City also seems implicitly aimed at women, namely the dumb/superficial woman stereotype. It’s a valid argument to say the show may try to tackle too much and that the narrative may be confusing for people who haven’t read the books. But Gina makes it sound like the reason for this is that people are too dumb or concerned with Manolo Blahniks and cosmos. This is just untrue.
??? This doesn’t even make sense, but if anything, I would say a global-cooling horror story. Winter is Coming, not Summer is Coming!
I don’t even understand this paragraph. First, what do the seasons have to do with anything? How does mentioning HVAC even make sense? The note about violence/gore is sloppily thrown in to justify her use of “bloody disputes.” Palm Beach? Is she saying she doesn’t understand why everyone’s hyped for the show considering it has seasons that don’t make sense? Does anyone understand this?! If you do, please explain.
GAH! 1. I have no idea who Lorrie Moore is (though I’ve also never met Ms. Bellafante, so I can’t personally invalidate her statement ;)). 2. I don’t want to get involved in the gender debate that’s been circulating for a few days because I think it’s pointless. But if I had to, I would say the sex is moreso for the men. The notes for women are Arya, Daenerys, Catelyn, Cersei, Sansa, etc.- all complex WOMEN characters who represent a range of female archetypes and who do far more than just sit around or, considering what Gina thinks appeals to women, skank around.
I can’t speak for the show, but I think the text in no way sends out the message that power is “hot.” Our chief protagonist, our most morally upstanding character, doesn’t want anything to do with power. The characters lusting after power are the ones that most people generally paint as villains (Cersei, Littlefinger, Lord Tywin). Some characters may appear to be chasing power but actually have more complex motivations: Tyrion (acceptance), Dany (righteousness, honoring the idea of her family, and in a way, assuming a more complete identity). If what they say about the adaptation is true, I expect the show to promote the same.
I have to give her this: Her article definitely came full circle. When she says the last line about the dictionary, my mind immediately bounced back to the first paragraph where she was harping on how some people might just not be smart enough to handle Game of Thrones (She said it, not me!)
LinaQuote Reply
Unbelievable! I’m a boobalicious female. I’ve been reading fantasy since I was a wee young thing, thanks to my Mum who loved it before me! I know at least as many women that have read the books as men, and certainly as many who are as obsessive about it. Sure there are issues with the odd gendered elements in the books but that doesn’t stop them being among the best fantasy books ever written and it sure as hell doesn’t stop me from being a female geek. I for one have been an on-and-off poster on here since the beginning (originally called ‘Lurker De-lurks or some such nonsense) and I am pretty sure that make me a rampant fangirl!
Not only is her writing about female fantasy readers offensive, but I also find her take on ‘dwarves’ offensive. Tyrion is the only dwarf in the book/show and that is because he is born that way, not some part of a different race. The fact that the book/show demonstrates how victimized Tyrion has been because of his stature is a significant plot-point, and the fact that the writer is actually belittling this is more than a little offensive! She is perpetuating the bigotry on so many levels. Awful review.
dimensionallyTQuote Reply
On the negative review, I find it interesting that she thinks the long seasons are some sort of vague global warming horror story. Everyone’s worried about Winter coming, not Summer, so people are worried about the cold. Shouldn’t it be a vague global COOLING horror story? It’s odd that negative reviewers are latching on to the weather so much. Of all the things I thought might bother or upset people, the strangely long seasons were never one of them.. As an aside note, I always thought the words ‘Winter is Coming’ were sort of dullish house words.. I mean there are three other seasons that are always coming too, and no other house seems to worry about spring, summer, or autumn coming..
And here’s yet another person who jumps on the Dothraki “Playboy-TV-style plot points” as a starting point for anger and vitriol about the series. I am thinking that the first few episodes with Dany are just not playing out properly on screen. The sex parts are standing out too much, and instantly starting to cause contempt and derision in some female reviewers, while the male reviewers are going ‘random boob shots! Yeah! Bring it on!’
What I find truly odd is that while she is ranting about how eroticism is past tense in most series, the Dothraki are the “Playboy-TV-style plot points”, and the fake world allows for unhindered bed-jumping, she then jumps to the conclusion that “all of this illicitness has been tossed in as a little something for the ladies”. When actually, the things she rants about earlier are things I feel would ANNOY the ladies, and demean them. I mean, how many women are going to feel comfortable watching Dany cry as she suffers through her arranged marriage wedding night? Or as she deals with the ‘Stockholm Syndrome’, as another reviewer suggests, by learning to turn the tables on her nightly assaulter and try to make him happy? Or watch as Tyrion has an orgy with four girls? This is not the kind of romantic TV that most girls dream about. These are not things women will fantasize about happening to them. (Oh, if only I could grow up and be one of the four whores in an orgy with a smartass little dwarf!) This is the stuff that make ladies NOT watch. So I am not understanding what she is talking about when she thinks the sex in there is ‘for the ladies’, for fear they might not watch, otherwise.
purplejillyQuote Reply
but it’s not ok for me to voice my opinion??
That is exactly the impression, from her article, that I got of her. And I don’t doubt that she, along with many other women, do exactly that. And I don’t think that I mentioned at any point there being anything wrong with that!
SarahQuote Reply
I hate to post right after I just posted but I read another review and they keep harping on “the dwarf” as a reason to be snarky about the show.
“The dwarf” happens to be Peter Dinklage, an acclaimed actor and human being. Sneering that there is a dwarf in the show (thus not worth anyone’s attention) is just unseemly and should be left out of any article.
Watch “The Station Agent” and then try sneering.
The ReaderQuote Reply
Steel_Wind,
To me, Havrilesky reads like the exact opposite of the first NYT crackpot reviewer, a cogent person with an actual liking for fantasy. Unfortunately Game of thrones isn’t really pure fantasy. Havrilesky seems to like the frilly and frivolous, perhaps something more akin to Nanny McPhee or MyLittlePony. What we have here seems to be a mildly ignorant airhead, someone requiring fantasy with princesses and cloudcastles. Basically the reviewer IS Sansa. She’s protesting that the whole message of the game of thrones is hurtful to her personal fantasy. It’s another version of protesting the existence of the series rather than any quality or substance within the series.
Just for kicks I’d like to draw attention to that she’s critiqueing geeks for not having a gameful attitude.
That NYT publishes two articles on the series attacking its very existence from two opposite perspectives while managing to avoid confronting its substance and analyzing it as what it is. Even for NYT this is pathetic.
I would be interested in reading what, if any common ground the two reviewers would find if they were forced to write a combined piece. … Though it would probably read like: “Game of thrones – We hateses it. Just because.”
MimsyQuote Reply
Franny Bee,
Exactly THIS! I admire you so much, m’lady!
Rinoa de la PicaQuote Reply
Some of the them, at least. But not me.
Dolorous EddQuote Reply
That’s not how global warming works…at least long term.
The fear is that greenhouse gases will cause the ice at the poles to melt, which will raise the ocean level and alter its temperature, in turn drastically affecting ocean currents. This would lead to sharpening of weather extremes…colder cold areas, hotter hot places. It’s difficult to summarize but a lot of people act like a cold winter is enough to debunk the idea, which isn’t the case. None of that makes the writer’s claim that the story is meant to stoke global warming fears any less silly, however.
ZackQuote Reply
Just for the statistics: I’m a woman, and I rarely approach literature on a gender basis. Among my faves are Jane Austen, Stephen King, JK Rowling and lately GRRM. Likewise, my reaction to what I read is not consciously gender-based (unconsciously… well, I don’t know, duh), unless there’s some in-your-face bias. Heck, I don’t even follow a genre basis – GRRM being fantasy is purely incidental, I usually don’t like fantasy.
Very seldom, while reading ASOIAF, was I reminded of the genre, or of the gender of myself, the author, the characters. (One rare example is the end of AFFC, when the women seem to be especially targeted for maiming and/or disfigurement, but the men don’t fare much better). I was just a person reading a book and enjoying it. What part of this is so hard to comprehend for certain critics?
I don’t agree with the “an eye for an eye” approach, when a critic who belittles us and our saga is in his or her turn belittled by us, not to mention when politics are dragged in. Please don’t. But I do have a very low opinion of critics in general, especially movie or TV critics. It seems that because they are writing about a popular medium (more than literature, say) they are give a free pass to be witty and hip and in general they like to hear themselves talk, instead of providing an objective review. I base this opinion on thousands of reviews I’ve hated along the years, no matter whether they were positive or negative.
In our case, it seems there have been badly written positive reviews and well-written negative reviews. I won’t fall into the trap of judging positively only those critics who liked GOT. There’s professionalism, and there’s hackery. Bellafante is probably a wonderful person in real life, but professionally she’s a hack. When a review is for 3/4 or more the author talking about herself, making weak witticisms and scorning everybody who doesn’t think the same, that’s hackery.
Unfortunately I feel it’s a widely approved and encouraged practice, judging by what I read everyday – I have no idea why.
Blackfish BluesQuote Reply
Exactly! If I am honest I am a little worried about how the sex scenes are going to play out on screen and this kind of review doesn’t help much. Her viewpoint does seem ever so confused though, a bit like she was forced to write a review and wrote it with some friends while drinking too much.
dimensionallyTQuote Reply
You Americans are funny peoples!!
nixteridaQuote Reply
I enjoyed Havrilesky’s review too – it’s a decent read, is not all bad and like other mixed reviews, leaves the door open for the series to grow and mature further
Nick LarterQuote Reply
ingrin,
Mo Ryan’s review fails to communicate her actually liking the show, as she later states in the comments. Therefore, it’s a bad review, as the reader cannot understand her true stance towards the show.
Amir MishaliQuote Reply
Also offensive – the fact that she finds Tyrion’s size to be a fantastical element. Ginia, he’s not a member of a fantastic race of miners who live under a mountain and get +1 in the constitution column. He’s a little person. But nice try sensationalizing!
davebQuote Reply
Franny Bee,
heh heh, Franny, excellent idea! Roughin’ em up old style for not buying ad space.. heh..
purplejillyQuote Reply
Thanks for pointing that out Zack, I was going to say that ‘global warming’ is a bit of a shorthand and misnomer for the climate phenomenon of more extreme weather (including violent temperature swings and desertification of certain areas) that’s already underway.
Actually when I first read GoT, I thought that the “Doom of Valyria” was some big-ass volcano and the winter/extreme climate stuff had to do with the aftereffects of that volcanic eruption, but I believe Martin has since said that there’s magic involved, so there goes my theory!
Regina ThorneQuote Reply
I saw the word “llicitness” and knew I was reading an articule from a very bad writer. But the funny thing is as I read it the thought poped in my head that I can imagine Sansa reviewing a show in this manner
HouseUmberQuote Reply
Regina Thorne,
*nods to Regina*
Yep. Well put.
purplejillyQuote Reply
Vanity Fair with a positive? preview:
http://www.vanityfair.com/online/oscars/2011/04/game-of-thrones.html?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter
SuperdeluxeQuote Reply
2 rave reviews
http://www.tvguide.com/News/Roush-Review-Thrones-1031879.aspx
http://www.vanityfair.com/online/oscars/2011/04/game-of-thrones.html
JamesQuote Reply
Interesting take, Highly cynical:
SuperdeluxeQuote Reply
NICE. I’ve been waiting for the Matt Roush review.
SuperdeluxeQuote Reply
Should we spoil it for her and tell her how the Unicorns and fairies fly in at the end and save the day? :)
MetalgoddessAMBQuote Reply
Wait, is the third season out already?!? : )
MikeFromBraavosQuote Reply
Okay two things are certain:
1)Peter Dinklage should get emmy/golden globe nods
2)Maisie Williams will also get emmy/golden globe nods
SuperdeluxeQuote Reply
Matt Roush is a very important review and I’m glad that one came out glowing. Really, at this point, this show should definitely be now considered critically acclaimed, no two ways around it.
RoQuote Reply
petertravers Best movie this weekend? HBO’s Game of Thrones. OK, it’s TV, but I take spectacular where I find it. Peter Dinklage is an acting rock star.
Twitter – 7 minutes ago
SuperdeluxeQuote Reply
MikeFromBraavos,
lol, you two just summed up SoS in two sentences.
TysnowQuote Reply
Regina Thorne,
Hey, that’s a pretty cool interpretation of the Doom of Valyria, though! I had never pondered too much on it..
purplejillyQuote Reply
purplejilly,
I am thinking that the first few episodes with Dany are just not playing out properly on screen. The sex parts are standing out too much, and instantly starting to cause contempt and derision in some female reviewers, while the male reviewers are going ‘random boob shots! Yeah! Bring it on!’
I’ve been a little worried about that too. The early Dothraki scenes are probably the most alienating part of the entire series, and have a high potential for cheesiness to boot. While everyone here is harping on the failings of the reviewer, I’ve got to think that to some degree its the fault of the filmmakers as well. And Martin, frankly.
That’s not to say that she’s right or that the series will be bad – I’m pretty confident it will be good. But I can see how those early sections could easily come off as, well, Spartacus-like.
Maxwell JamesQuote Reply
You sir (or madam?) are a genius. (only you’re missing the Ehh? at the end)
dizzy_34Quote Reply
I hope that every woman here did what I did and dropped dear Ginia an email to tell her how offensive she was!
SekhmetQuote Reply
Tysnow,
You need one more sentence –
It’s dark.
It’s bleak.
It’s Red.
oh, the horror of S.3! They think they feel bleak NOW! lol.
purplejillyQuote Reply
Question: it must be good for HBO that we are getting so freaking MANY reviews right? I think I’ve read like 50 of them the last couple of days, and even the bad reviews will trigger reader’s interests. I think a lot of shows would be glad to get this number no matter if they get panned in them.
KnurkQuote Reply
I think it was some subconscious thing for me with identifying Valyria with Atlantis which legend might be based on a giant volcanic eruption/tsunami in the Mediterranean before the Bronze Age. And the dragonglass sounded like obsidian which is a byproduct of volcanic eruptions and dragons=Valyria. (It sounds more plausible in my head, of course!)
Regina ThorneQuote Reply
Bellafante, you don’t want to wake the Rabbit! Oh oh, too late.
OldGranQuote Reply
I like the quote of Jaime being played with “malevolent charisma.”
EnterilQuote Reply
purplejilly,
Any fear that the events of season 3 might cause people to bail from the HBO series? or by that time people are too invested to jump ship and will keep on watching to see what happens?
SuperdeluxeQuote Reply
great review from someone who was very skeptical of the show and never heard of the books
http://www.thetvaddict.com/2011/04/15/review-game-of-thrones/
JamesQuote Reply
To be fair,the first half of Ginia Bellafante’s review was quite good (!), a light-hearted take on the series, which I haven’t seen too much of, but then all objectivity appeared to go out the window :) Well I’ve seen plenty of crap programmes where Germans or Romans speak in American/English accents, it’s details like this that tell a programmes true quality surely? And then we have some sanctimonious “Daily Mail reader style” outburst, and then an amusing comparison of A Song of Ice and Fire to a teen Vampire flick and D&D! Where did this potentially GOOD piece of criticism go wrong?!!
Khal NicQuote Reply
Amir Mishali,
not only that but both Ryan and Ryan fail to stay consistent from review to review. they review a show like Camelot (also on a premium cable channel) and despite it being pretty obviously flawed, cheesy, bad visually, poorly written and not very well acted they both go out of their way to only lightly criticize and seek out positive things to say. Mo’s metacritc score for Camelot is 60 and GoT is 70? i mean seriously is she trying to say that GoT is really only marginally better than Camelot? because if so i am worried as Camelot sucks pretty bad. i think this tendency to be less harsh than other critics and try and find positive things to say about a show that is moderately poor and being reviewed as such may also cause them to be prone to doing the opposite which is to be more harsh/critical of a show that is getting a lot of praise. maybe they feel they need to keep their critic cred, maybe they are just naturally contrarian, or they just don’t have a problem being inconsistent in their reviews and grading things on a curve (kinder for shows with low expectations and harsher for shows with higher expectations).
honestly Mo’s review is about 50/50 … still not the balance you’d expect to find in a review for a show somebody thought was “good” but not “great” and that they “liked” but didn’t “love”. Ryan’s review is just bamboozling. the balance of praise/criticism is about 25/75 and yet he is amazed that people are walking away from his review with the impression the show is no good and that he doesn’t like it. hey! earth to Ryan! if you spend the vast majority of your review talking about what you don’t like about the show don’t be surprised if people think you don’t like the show!
anyway i am very disappointed not in their particular criticisms of the show, which may or may not be valid but their choice to skew the balance of their reviews to focusing on the negative when they both theoretically think the show is “good” and they “like” it. at least without saying up front that they are judging the show by a higher standard and that they are going to focus mainly on their issues with the show but that overall the show is good and better than the contemporary alternatives like Legend of The Seeker, Merlin, Camelot, Borgias, Tudors etc. i think it is their responsibility as critics and supposedly fans of genre television and this project in general to at least couch their very critical reviews by making it clear that the show isn’t as bad or disliked by them as the balance in their reviews might suggest.
Who Is Jacopo Belbo?Quote Reply
Superdeluxe,
Actually, this is a decent review. And I don’t get the impression the reviewer dislikes GoT – rather that he wishes it took itself a bit less seriously (too many dour faces and dialogue). He says things like “an apt allegory for our times” and has some thoughtful things to say.
userjQuote Reply
A week from now I’ll probably still be scratching my head at the notion that women take their clothes off in TV shows… to draw in the women.
If she had suggested that the puppies, or Sansa’s gentle dreams of womanhood, or Arya’s adorable rebellion against gender roles, were put in just to attract women to the show, that would at least make sense. It’d be based on stereotypes and would still offend genuine fantasy fans like myself, but it would at least fit.
Whereas this? Extra whore-bosom and Daenerys in the bath just for the ladies? Where is that coming from?
EleanorQuote Reply
I already shared most of my thoughts yesterday, in the other thread. What else can be said?
The TIME article is a well-written, thoughtful piece that successfully summarizes and analyzes the show. It is an informative and helpful read for both book fans and non-fans alike.
The NYTimes article is a piece of garbage that doesn’t mention a single helpful point, and makes several erroneous conclusions. It sickens me that Ginia Bellafante was probably paid very good money to “write” such trash.
LexQuote Reply
Yes I hadn’t thought about that, but you make a good point. She makes it sound like dwarves are some type of fictional creature. I also don’t get how braids fit into what she’s trying to say. I guess she’s referring to the Dothraki, but a braid isn’t that medieval/fantastical of a concept.
Oops, I think I referred to her as “Gina” in my previous post. Hope that doesn’t fit me into the stupid female SatC fan category. :( (I apologize for the snarkyness, but I had to.)
LinaQuote Reply
Just wanted to let people know that if your like me and cant afford HBO, but want to watch the Premiere. Guess what you can for free. I have Direct TV and starting today and Ending monday evry customer has HBO for free, presumably to get us hooked on Game Of Thrones so we will subscribe to HBO. Checked online and also Dish network is too
Chad
Chad WelshQuote Reply
um. dwarves get +2 to constitution and -2 to charisma ….
oh, holy nerd batman i can’t believe i remember that … :P
Who Is Jacopo Belbo?Quote Reply
These reviews are disheartening. I don’t really trust New York Times but when Wall Street Journal basically says the same thing, that’s not good. I was planning on buying a new TV for this weekend but now I don’t think I’m going to invest in that. I’m still going to watch the show, but the bad reviews definitely warn against it. I don’t want to look like an idiot when I buy a new TV and the show is offensive to people in my family. The good news is that HBO is free this week. So I can see it for myself without making any investments. Ideally I would like to see the second episode before deciding if I am going to get HBO.
Jack DorseyQuote Reply
As a true 1960s, marching, protesting, pro-choice feminist, I am pleased to inform you that, if you are anti-stereotypical, gender-based bullshit of any kind, you are a true feminist. Greetings, sister!
DH87Quote Reply
Jack Dorsey,
You know you are supposed to end sarcastic comments with a wink.
SuperdeluxeQuote Reply
Bellafante…seems a bit like a feminist….yeah
WolfheartQuote Reply
This has to be the dumbest comment made in years:
IkertzekeQuote Reply
Josh Parker,
Hey Josh, and All: I agree with all of you in that, like the other negative reviews, this woman for NYT clearly doesn’t like fantasy. On a lighter note, all of the “big boys,” like Time, USA Today, The Washington Post, The Boston Globe, and other major papers have given Game of Thrones great reviews, so it’s probably an 80/20 ratio in terms of good reviews to bad reviews. If any on you guys and gals has time to read the LA Times review from yesterday, it’s very good and very supportive.
David GriffinQuote Reply
I think we moved toward an answer to that earlier. It seems to be coming from the reviewer. The rest of us seem to be dumbfounded.
Not that there is anything wrong with a panoply of predilections.
DH87Quote Reply
Amir Mishali,
But nobody reads that sort of article to find out whether the author likes a show or not. The people on this board could give a fuck whether a critic likes something or not—which we’ve all made pretty abundantly clear. The author’s point is to analyze the thematic qualities of the show, not to give it a thumbs-up or thumbs-down.
Notmy RealnameQuote Reply
It never ceases to amaze me how some journalists keep their job.
Christopher J. GillQuote Reply
Brilliant. Best comment yet!
EleanorQuote Reply
God… sorry guys. I didn’t realize that my boobs and hoo-haa made me incapable of liking well written, engaging fiction with three dimensional characters, set in a near-historical landscape.
Yeaaaah. My bad. Didn’t get that memo. Sorry… I’ll look for the books with the pink covers next time. Those are the ‘ok for girls to like’ ones, right? But I better not see you boys reading them!
*eyeroll*
On a more serious note, this is an awesome project for all the chicks who dig ASoIaF – http://www.hbowatch.com/Forum/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=496
I think it’ll be an interesting article when it’s done! Give your feedback :)
Becky WilsonQuote Reply
I think the reviews by the NYT/WSJ should only be a little worrisome at most. Those publications certainly have big voices and large audiences, but they probably aren’t most people’s first stops for television reviews. Coverage of Libya, business news, yes. But not so much TV.
Try out the pilot, and then decide if you want HBO/new TV!
LinaQuote Reply
Superdeluxe,
I think if they make it to S.3 they’ll be too invested to jump ship, even if their favorite characters have some serious, serious problems then. I remember being completely stunned and wanting to toss the book out a window after a certain Red scene. I gave it a few days then I could soldier bravely on..
purplejillyQuote Reply
Not sure I agree.
There is a great difference between objectification of women for prurient gratification and depiction of women in sexually submissive roles in the context of societal norms. The sexual exploitation visited upon GRRM’s women is done so within the context of a violent, often lawless, society. In most cases, it’s as arousing as watching a sixteen-year-old HIV-positive widow troll the highways in Africa, turning tricks with truckers so she can feed her family. It is more about oppression than sexual pleasure.
Bellafonte seems to think they are the same. If she had made her case that the handling of the sex scenes was clumsy or didn’t communicate the underlying depravity in Westeros (at least as judged by western society), I could have valued her opinion more.
Then again, none of us have seen these scenes. Perhaps she’s right and we’re wrong. But then, what’s the chance of that?
DH87Quote Reply
I reckon Ginia Bellafante is family of Sarah Palin or Michele Bachman and votes for the Tea-Party…..
BalerionQuote Reply
Just an FYI Ed Bark has one of the mixed reviews up on Metacritic this is what he said in his comments
I’m betting he’ll change his mind by the end of the season.
dizzy_34Quote Reply
Eleanor,
Exactly.. I am completely baffled by her logic there..
purplejillyQuote Reply
o.o
you are making a much better case against GoT than Vaginia. Maybe you should get a job at NYT.
Pucinette FUQuote Reply
Wow, great. Let’s split up the fanbase into party lines.
By the way, Time magazine called George W Bush man of the year twice (2000 and 2004), and in 1990 named “The Two George Bushes” man of the year. Only FDR got more man of the years than old Dubyah. Oh yes, and Hitler back in 1938 was Man of the Year in Time magazine.
Pucinette FUQuote Reply
omg I am so looking forward to when we can all stop reviewing the reviewers and can start actually talking about a show that we’ve seen with our very own eyes!
DanteQuote Reply
Does anyone of a repository of reviews anywhere?
I’d like to see reviews broken up maybe by if it is a ‘major’ critic/blog critic/ if it was a negative/positive/mixed review.
SuperdeluxeQuote Reply
Another mini-review:
http://herocomplex.latimes.com/2011/04/15/game-of-thrones-review-hbo-delivers-thundering-pyschological-intrigue/
SuperdeluxeQuote Reply
You really think her attempt at humor is so subtle that people can’t see it? It’s blatantly obvious she’s trying to be funny (emphasis on trying). I “get” the humor, I just find it butt stupid, regardless of what she’s talking about. If the review was about anything else I’d have gotten maybe a paragraph in, thought “Oh, this is some stuck-up trying-to-be-funny bitch” and stopped right there. Only thing that kept me reading was the subject matter, and she pretty much lived up to my initial impression.
Steven SwansonQuote Reply
Really? Come on…
Christopher J. GillQuote Reply
Balerion,
Get that political BS out of here.
SuperdeluxeQuote Reply
Notmy Realname,
Well, I for one do care if a critic likes GoT or not. So do the many people who are not already fans and want to know if the show is worth watching.
Amir MishaliQuote Reply
Now I like this, the NYMAG.com has 2 ‘reviews’
One for the ‘Experts’ and one for the ‘Newbies”
Experts:
http://nymag.com/daily/entertainment/2011/04/game_of_thrones.html
Newbies:
http://nymag.com/daily/entertainment/2011/04/game_of_thrones_familiar.html
Well done
SuperdeluxeQuote Reply
I wholeheartedly believe that Ms. Ginia Bellafante is in need of some cock.
Maester IvoQuote Reply
That first NY times review is pretty offensive. I introduced my wife to the series, and she loved it, but nobody would normally call her a geek.
Heck, I introduced the series to my older female accountant who also loved it. And she’s not at ALL a geek (although she’s a very funny lady)
That NY times author obviously just has an emotional block in her head of some sort regarding these sorts of things.
bgrahamboQuote Reply
SuperdeluxeQuote Reply
I really don’t care what the reviewers say, good or bad. Yes its nice to have my hopes being bolstered by a person who has the same interests giving a glowing “you’re gonna love it!” review. However, I know the entire world doesn’t like fantasy and/or science fiction. I know that it may be too challenging for some or too simplistic for others. No biggie. It’s the stigma I’ve grown up with. Book reports on Ender’s Game and Dune don’t exactly bring on the cool factor in high school.
I do get annoyed at the reviewers who didn’t give it a fair chance, but they clearly are the target audience for shows I refuse to watch and dismiss as insipid. I despise 95% of what’s on TV these days, with a special hatred for so-called reality TV. If you asked me to review the latest formulaic sitcom with a washed up actor or the upcoming game show where 10 people are, I don’t know, sent to North Dakota with a loincloth and a bow & arrow to live like native Americans… could call it Siouxvivor (I should copyright that now)… you’d likely get just as snarky commentary as they give.
In the meantime, I’m gonna have my viewing party tomorrow night with my wife, our best friends (several of which are female fans) and we’re going to enjoy the hell out of it.
Rik TaylorQuote Reply
Matt Roush review is out:
LINK.
TastesLikeTheSeaQuote Reply
Hoo-haa!!
Lol
The DarkstarQuote Reply
What the hell are you talking about? DH87 makes one of the most important points about the depiction of sexuality in Mr Martin’s novels.
In discussions, especially at westeros.org, many first-time readers complain about the often violent and off-putting sex scenes in A Song of Ice and Fire. Well, guess what: Those scenes are supposed to be off-putting and certainly not meant to arouse anyone. There are very few consensual, loving sexual encounters in the novels (for example between Jon and Ygritte, Sam and Gilly, Eddard and Catelyn – the latter implied only). Most sexual acts are acts of oppression, coercion or rape. And judging from readers’ reactions, Mr Martin handles them in a very responsible, appropriate way. One can only hope, that HBO does the same in this series.
Herr FickQuote Reply
Well, at least this reviewer doesn’t make fun of fantasy.
Pucinette FUQuote Reply
Maybe the Bellafante hack piece might be good for GoT?
I’ve seen several tweets from women saying they weren’t even planning on watching GoT, but now will at least try it out.
SuperdeluxeQuote Reply
LOL!
MetalgoddessAMBQuote Reply
I just tweetet this but I still feel a bit insulted by the NYT review.
It was a woman that made me read the series in the first place. And still I just know two guys in person who read em’ but 5 girls…. Wait make that 7!
So if Gina wants to walk down this road she should put it the other way around. It’s a girl’s show that no guy will ever watch. Like Sex and the City in the middle ages… Yeah!
Juju BudkesonQuote Reply
Maester Ivo,
This is not a very classy comment…
Amir MishaliQuote Reply
but the real magical wizardry here lies in the rich storytelling, embroiling a bounty of memorable characters young and old in a fatalistic free-for-all of dynastic mayhem.
Now that’s more like it!
The DarkstarQuote Reply
Well.. I think that’s the problem that all bad reviews touch on. The most poignant example is when Jon Weisman updates his negative review on his Variety.com blog about a rape scene in ep 2:
I guess what I wrote wasn’t clear: I was appalled by the producers’ depiction of the event, which I thought was irresponsibly executed. I don’t think one should assume that I’m anti-feeling or that I don’t accept that bad things happen to good people, etc.
Pucinette FUQuote Reply
Wow… okay,yeah that review by Ginia Bellafonte was just a tad offensive to me. Like, to the point where I emailed her and gave her a piece of my mind. I hate when people make sweeping generalizations and assumptions about things they clearly know nothing about. I have always been a fantasy lover. I am not into chick lit and rom-coms. So does that somehow make me flawed or otherwise not feminine? It’s something I do not enjoy and while I understand and respect that there are plenty of women who enjoy those things, I don’t think it’s fair to assume that no woman would prefer those things to fantasy. It was such a poorly written and offensive piece. She didn’t even specify what she didn’t like. She essentially just said “This is fantasy. Fantasy is for boys. I’m a girl. Girls don’t like fantasy. This show has sex. It’s clearly just aimed at fanboys who want to watch wenches have sex” >_<; How do people like that get work in the journalism industry?
The Winter RoseQuote Reply
i think someone should add the other NYTimes review to the original post, while it’s not all praise i think it’s one of the best reviews in terms of being objective and critiquing something without making blanket statements about fans/women/fantsy.
Mirri MazQuote Reply
Pucinette FU,
Indeed. And some feel that GRRM DOESNT handle them in a good way. Put it this way guys: Drogo initially rapes Dany though she eventually comes to love it. That’s something that can and will (and perhaps should) offend some people. Dany rises beyond the point (honesty, it’s a good thing that Drogo dies, which makes this hard to ignore ) but it’s something that may drive people away and WILL gain criticism.
The series needs to make it clear that there is no possible positive connotation of rape. And in all honesty with regards to Dany, the source material can be problematic in that regard.
garik16Quote Reply
Pucinette FU,
I dunno. I think “A gladitorial rape contest” sounds worse.
Katrina Before & AftQuote Reply
Ok, maybe feminist was to far of a descriptor, maybe even off. But thats what it felt with what drivel I read of hers. I guess it would be more apt to say she is gender stereotyping…hmm
WolfheartQuote Reply
WiJB – I was such a nerd that I could find anybody to play D&D with me :)
davebQuote Reply
I was so upset by this review that I couldn’t even put into words my frustration and fury. Luckily, one of my good friends was able to do it for me.
Oh, and I am totally a gamer chic from way back. I still remember why Shadowrun v 1 was known as the RPG that would allow a character to take a panther assault cannon round to the chest and live. ;)
McSherrieQuote Reply
Why stop there? Perhaps a closing scrawl should accompany each episode.
Throwing children from rooftops is not okay. Not even to cover your illicit love affair.
Tears of Lys are not acceptable as a means to break a budget impasse.
Sewing a dog’s head to body of your defeated political rivals, also not cool.
fafhrdQuote Reply
;) I notice Matt Roush ( bless ‘im ), in his very nice review, mistakenly calls the Night’s Watch the Black Watch. I wonder if anyone will be tuning in hoping to see Kit Harington in a kilt ?
So far in the review count , the good outweigh the bad, and if you narrowed it down to only the well written and /or thoughtful reviews , the column for negative points made shrinks considerably. I think we’re in good shape.
obsidianQuote Reply
OT, but a nice review/blurb about the series showed up in my local newspaper today, and I found the author’s description of Cersei particularly amusing:
“…he has married Cersei Lannister (Lena Headey), a ruthless beauty whose lust for power makes Lady Macbeth look like Betty White.”
Haha. :)
KangaQuote Reply
Well I never agree with anything a reviewer from New York says, and also, who the heck is Lorrie Moore? I read tons of books and not all fantasy or whatever, and I never heard of her name before.
If you don’t like something, or it isn’t for you, there is a tactful way to say that, instead of just bashing it and I feel like women who enjoyed the books.
JennyQuote Reply
garik16,
Really great point.
Pucinette FUQuote Reply
fafhrd,
It’s not quite the same thing….rape is a really really touchy subject with people, due to the severe trauma it leaves on people afterwards. Thus while a show can be less touchy about murders and the like (no one really believes the show is advocating murder), rape is another matter.
No one should think GoT or SoIaF or GRRM think rape is okay. But the Dany scenes can be seen, and WILL be seen by some, to little the horror of rape because she comes to like him.
garik16Quote Reply
I like that the second NY Times review uses the word ‘porn’ three times, when referring to three different TV series. The Time has become a joke in the last few years, so I don’t think anyone really pays attention to their opinions on popular culture. I honestly would’ve been more concerned about the ratings and the audience if E!, USA Today, or Time had hated it.
Steve the PirateQuote Reply
garik16,
That should say “belittle”
garik16Quote Reply
Seriously. If someone who claims NEVER having read the books is able to put this into a review just by seeing the first episode, D & D are TV gurus in my book.
Dolorous EddQuote Reply
We touched upon this yesterday. She is a Wisconsin professor of English, author of A Gate at the Stairs, Birds of America, Self-Help, etc. She has been a Penn/Faulkner Award, National Book Award, and Orange Prize finalist.
DH87Quote Reply
McSherrie,
oh man. i don’t like sci-fi all that much but Shadowrun was an awesome and underated RPG (along with the TMNT RPG) … i could never resist making a character that had about a .1 humanity and was teched and cyborged out … man those were the days.
Who Is Jacopo Belbo?Quote Reply
DH87,
I suppose I do fit in there then! I’ve always been the girl who will do what everyone says I can’t! It seems true for every aspect of my life. I am woman, hear me roar! LOL!
Amanda C.Quote Reply
No they don’t. Fu&5k ‘em. If they don’t like it, don’t watch.
EdQuote Reply
http://www.wired.com/underwire/2011/04/game-of-thrones-review/?pid=3366&pageid=65381
Here’s another review from a reader and fan, whose comments are slightly confusing in that he wanted it to be faithful but still wanted it to cut more characters/storylines? Sounds slightly similar to Mo Ryan. Gave it a 7/10.
RoQuote Reply
Good thing losing children to violence isn’t like that.
fafhrdQuote Reply
For any interested, my response to Ms. Bellafonte’s article can be found here.
The Winter RoseQuote Reply
Amir Mishali,
So sue me.. My country had a terrible day today, I am depressed and I am not in the mood to be politically correct towards upstart airheads like her… She just pissed on something I love and I am pissing back. And she definitely needs to get layed!
Maester IvoQuote Reply
garik16,
Daenerys was not forcibly raped. She was seduced. She said “yes.” Here’s the text:
GoT: Daenerys II.
Sure. Sure. Text says she was 13. Emilia is not. The characters are aged up. Plus, who knows how long a year is in Westeros, anyway? Could be 12 months. Could be 18 months. If it’s 18 of our months, then she’s 19 1/2 – 20 by our years.
Now, can we please get back to the character assassination of Ms. Bellafante?
Mike ChairQuote Reply
http://www.medialifemagazine.com/artman2/publish/TV_Reviews_21/-Game-of-Thrones-and-lots-to-play-with.asp
Here’s another review which is kind of funny in that the author doesn’t like BSG, Lost, X-Files, but apprently likes GoT.
RoQuote Reply
You seem to have recovered your equanimity after being cut from S2. :)
DH87Quote Reply
She’s a pretty well-known writer who’s won MacArthur and Guggenheim Fellowships and has pieces in the New Yorker. Her most famous book is probably Birds of America and her latest, a novel called A Gate at the Stairs was short-listed for the Orange Prize.
Regina ThorneQuote Reply
Belarussian?
fafhrdQuote Reply
fafhrd,
Still off. There’s pretty much no way to belittle the act of killing children. Nor does the series do so – the two “children” killed in the series are portrayed quite clearly as adults – Viserys and Joffrey – and their murders are hardly considered positive acts, even if it’s clear that both are horrible people. Moreover, as seen by the thoughts toward Theon’s actions at the end of book 2, such killings are deplored.
The same cannot be said for rape – Dany’s eventual love of Drogo CAN be seen as belittling the horror of rape, by suggesting that the crime is not that bad and that victims should simply come to accept it.
The fact that she IS raped by Drogo is NOT a problem. The book makes it quite clear as it begins that this is a horrible reality of bad circumstances and is not endorsing this at all. But her reaction IS a problem, at least in the eyes of some people. And you really should respect that. .
@Ed , yeah that’s the wrong answer. These people will not watch after that point, most likely. But you shouldn’t be condescending.
Listen there’s some criticisms that I find beyond silly One person on a message board refused to read futher from Dany’s sex scene because of the age issue, which is just silly when considering the setting and circumstances, and the fact that the book does NOT endorse such early sex NOW. But the points above will be seen negatively by people….and your reaction should not be to shun them but to understand the point.
garik16Quote Reply
The really good news about Mary MacNamara’s LA Times piece is that it has been syndicated and is being published in local newspapers across the country. A quick glance at google news shows: Modesto Bee, Sun Herald, Kansas City Star, Macon Telegraph, Boulder Weekly, Lexington Herald, Charlotte Observer, Myrtle Beach Sun News, etc.
We could do much worse than that article being spread so widely.
RoQuote Reply
Mike Chair,
Yeah…not gonna work. That’s gonna be labeled rape, given how she didn’t want to at first (the clear connotation of the whole scene).
garik16Quote Reply
I’ve just read Bellafante’s review.
Yes it’s a bad review of GoT. But not that bad.
It is mostly a bad review of HBO, everything related to geekness and American Tv trends in recent years. Only about half of the of the text talked about GoT the rest is a rant about other things.
But she does say that GoT is better than previous shows.
She probably just need a Drogo in her life.
KelfkaQuote Reply
positive review of just the pilot
http://screenrant.com/game-of-thrones-reviews-mcrid-110824/
JamesQuote Reply
Well said! Good job!
davebQuote Reply
Ro,
As is that Melissa Ryan piece from the Philly.com I believe. I saw that pop up a bunch over the last few days.
SuperdeluxeQuote Reply
First of all, rape is obviously an extremely touchy subject and one of the most inhuman acts someone can endure. Having said that, I feel that this scene isn’t quite the same as people make it out to be. Are some people going to be outraged? Of course, but I think many forget that marriage has only recently (in terms of human civilization) become an institution of love, devotion, family, etc. People forget about things like political/socio-economic marriages that took place ALL the time– with many women being stuck in miserable unions to people they hated for their entire lives. Unfortunately, this was the reality for many women at the time. I posit that it’s extremely likely that, while some of these marriages started off in similar situations as the scene in question, they also ended up where the books take Dany. I feel the scene is viewed a bit too much through the lens of modernity. Does this diminish the reality of what is happening in the scene in question? No. But I think it at least tempers it a bit. These things happened between Kings and Queens and Commonfolk alike.
MPQuote Reply
The Winter Rose,
This line sums it all up perfectly for me:
“I’ll have my sword AND my tiara, thank you very much!”
No reason why us girls have to be Dany, or Arya. We’ll take both!!
purplejillyQuote Reply
I yield. I yield.
No, not really. Stockholm syndrome happens. Unjust, unremediated horror happens, and I’d prefer to keep the material free of your selective moralizing.
fafhrdQuote Reply
Wow, as much as I found Ginia Bellafante’s review offensive in her stereotyping of female tv viewers and readers of fantasy, I find the suggestions I’ve seen here that all she needs is “a cock”, “to get laid” or a “Khal Drogo in her life” completely mind-boggling. It’s exactly that kind of witty repartee that gives fantasy fandom its reputation of being a boys’ club, particularly since I haven’t seen anyone suggest that the male Slate reviewer just needs to get laid or needs a Doreah in his life.
And to address the issue of Dany and Drogo she’s SOLD INTO MARRIAGE by her brother, so yes, I guess she did know what she was getting into, but it’s not as though she actually had any choice in the matter. Marital rape is a real thing, and it exists even in Westeros considering that Jaime remembers overhearing Danaerys’s conception after Aerys burned his Hand to death in what definitely sounds like violent rape. It’s an uncomfortable scene for me in the books (actually a whole lot of that storyline makes me deeply uncomfortable since Drogo is no stranger to rape and pillage given his undefeated Dothraki street cred) and I shed no tears when he died and it sounds as though it translates onscreen as deeply uncomfortable too, as it should.
Regina ThorneQuote Reply
I looked up this NYT review of the pilot episode for The Wire: http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9A00E0DF163AF932A05756C0A9649C8B63
Highlights are “choppy and confusing,” unintelligible dialog, “unappetizing subject matter,” and the classic “who cares?”
Obviously GoT costs immensely more to make than The Wire, but the point is that this reviewer pointed out some actual issues with the show (I won’t call them flaws) but was still wrong about the overall quality.
What’s the point in getting bent out of shape over what some reviewer says? A reviewer isn’t a crystal ball, just one member of a viewing public. Let them voice their negative opinions…they’re going to be the ones with egg on their faces in the end ^_^
ElaineQuote Reply
fafhrd,
Nah, Croatia… I won’t go into details, suffice to say that Americans, British and French would feel this way if Roosevelt, Churchill and De Gaulle were charged for war crimes against Germany in WWII…
Anyway I think I will turn in, glad that the GoT is getting (mostly) good reviews.
Maester IvoQuote Reply
New York City was via Palm Beach on April 14, 2011. Ginia thought her heinous green, black and white swirl nightmare was a dress. Pottery Barn had furnished the dimly lit dining room. The compact fluorescent light bulbs were kind, as she was well on her way from Rachel Maddow to Justice Ginsburg. The only compromise to the pristine layout was a single red white and blue banner on the wall. It read, “Malia ’34.” The phone rang. Ginia answered, “Hello. … No, I haven’t watched it. … No, I haven’t read it. … Yes, I’ve written it. … About ten minutes. Oh, you’re just awful! … Is it too late? … Oh, you don’t plan to edit it. … Great. I’ll send it right now.” The mouse went click. She retired to the similarly furnished living room for Sex and The City reruns. After all, she was no card counter.
Mike ChairQuote Reply
I don’t think belittle is strong enough. Belittling rape is one thing, but making it erotic on film where all nuances of the experience from the text are stripped away, it simply makes sense. The book is extremely offensive. The show has to somehow balance keeping the same offensive parts but making it less hard on the viewer.
Another way to think about it is there are types of people that will read a book with zombies and knights. A good number do. It’s big business as someone here complained. But still, most people don’t read books about zombies and knights and dragons. Add to that some seriously disturbing pedophilia, rape, incest, dwarves doing it with strippers…. the list goes on.
There Will Be Blood. Any reviewer that is offended by the show and calls it irresponsible or puerile is entirely entitled to. That’s what our beloved ASoIaF is all about.
Dudeman BallsQuote Reply
I agree with Mike Chair. I dont remember Dany being raped. She was seduced. And my minds a little foggy on all the following sex scenes in the books between Drogo and Dany. But he does not rape her at the start.
I cant wait till people start discussing Gregors sociopathic baby killing. If its mentioned in the show, or his sociopathic behavior in following seasons. Its gonna really make people hate that man, and make a certain scene between The Viper and him even more potent!
WolfheartQuote Reply
Not being from America, the almost segregation and incessant labeling of ‘geekiness’ in these reviews is astounding me. It seems to be the most irrelevant point I’ve ever witnessed yet the the obsession in which it’s pointed out just screams this culture has some serious underlying issues. Grow up.
patQuote Reply
So by that logic, she was molested not raped. And by that standard, I’ve been molested (or raped) by my wife on multiple occasions… where I at first said ‘no’ and then she quickly ‘convinced’ me.
And as to the belittling of child murder what about the two poor lads to stood in for Bran & Rickon? Or Mycah? You could argue that the latter was not brushed over but the formers certainly were.
MikeFromBraavosQuote Reply
and I can even hear the Sarah Jessica Parker voice over with that…heh.
dizzy_34Quote Reply
That country reminds me of frogs and toads. I know, I’m pretty stupid.
Gordon GekkoQuote Reply
Interesting.
Deadline is reporting that HBO is in talks to acquire Neil Gaiman’s American Gods, to be developed into another fantasy series, with Tom Hanks attached. Its from Playtone, which delivered The Pacific, Band of Brothers, John Adams, Big Love, etc. to the HBO line up.
I’m not sure whether this is good or bad. It’s good in that it shows commitment to the genre; bad if it turns out to be more commercial/cheaper/better reviewed than GOT. It seems set in the present which = cheaper, but more CGI, which = expense. If it’s signed up, it has to be direct competition a couple of years down the road.
DH87Quote Reply
Just noticed we’re up to 82 on metacritic, with 15 positive and 3 mixed.
Amir MishaliQuote Reply
Mike Chair:
I don’t think it’s so much the initial wedding night that bothers people about the Dany/Drogo thing so much as the nights that follow. Yes, they’ve been married, it’s expected that they’ll consummate the union and she seems to accept that, even though she’s terrified of him.
Afterwards though, she makes it pretty clear that he’s relentless when it comes to…using her. He expects it every night, whether she’s into it or not. That is definitely rape and I think it was meant to be.
I think a lot of the dynamic of their relationship comes from the cultural barriers that separate them. To us – and to Dany – this is BAD. To Drogo and to the Dothraki it’s a way of life. Does it make it right? Nope. Is it meant to leave us uncomfortable? Yes. Does it lead to Dany having Stockholm Syndrome? Maybe. I didn’t read it that way the first time I read the book (but I was shockingly young to read a book such as this so many of the finer points went straight over my head) but as I’ve gotten older and reread, I can see it that way.
Not trying to start a huge debate, just felt the need to chime in.
Amanda C.Quote Reply
Mike Chair,
for the records, ASOIAF years are as long as our years
Elena AmiciQuote Reply
How great is this? The vast majority of the critics are raving about GOT, and the couple negative reviews are so poorly written and offensive that they’re receiving scorn across the internet/blogosphere! THIS IS AWESOME! :)
And now, thanks to TIME and TV Guide, we’re up to 82% and “universal acclaim” on Metacritic! Our dark, twisted little shadowbaby is out there… and the critics are loving it! It is a sweet day for fantasy fans.
Congrats to GRRM, Benioff, Weiss… and Maisie Williams! You all deserve it!
LexQuote Reply
Yeah, I lol’d at that too. It was a very glowing review too!
Here’s another positive review
National Post review
Raynette SchroederQuote Reply
Not sure if this has been posted, but there’s an article on GoT up over at afterellen.com:
http://www.afterellen.com/node/87162
It references the NYT article, but everyone in the comments seems to have collectively decided that Ginia Bellafante is insane. so good news there. :)
KangaQuote Reply
The stupid is so strong with that review that it could lift an X-Wing out of a swamp.
The thing is, it not only insults women, but fantasy fans (male) and fans of romance and chick flick (well, women). Basically, Ms. Bellafante says that women are too stupid to watch anything with a complex plot and must be lured in with sex. And she asserts that fantasy only for adolescent boys.
It’s a fail all around
P. KirbyQuote Reply
There are so many glowing and positive reviews for this show already I hardly think that those few who can’t sit with it are worth worrying about. This show is going to be a megaton hit and a couple of bad reviews won’t change that.
SnarkQuote Reply
Lex,
My dear Lex,
You make it sound like it’s a tide we can turn. No, we have lost this round completely (it only takes a couple of well placed blows to shatter the image).
But fear not! This is only the beginning of something huge that reviewers will be powerless over in a few weeks.
Dudeman BallsQuote Reply
From NYMAG’s write-up for newbies:
I lol’d sooooo hard.
@ Winter, I dunno if you already considered this, but once the show airs it would be nice to establish two separate threads for each episode: spoilerific one for readers and spoiler-free for newbies. That way there will be less risk that if someone doesn’t spoiler-tag something major our freshies will have their experience ruined. Also you could that way monitor the new traffic more easily.
Black LionQuote Reply
Amir Mishali,
Hmm. I thought Poniewozik would have been a bit higher than a 90. He clacks a bit about the Dothriki and Pier 1 but, dang, “Epic Win!” should merit a 95, at least.
DH87Quote Reply
Andrew Dansby at the Houston Chronicle has a good review up, with some interesting backstory about the novel as well…
http://blogs.chron.com/tubular/
ingrinQuote Reply
I just wrote a scathing e-mail to Ms. Bellafonte.
I would suggest that all women reading this – and are fans of Fire and Ice or of this genre in general – or are frankly just annoyed at being lumped into what are clearly her personal views and preferences – should do the same.
She should not be allowed to review ANYTHING in such a badly written and biased way.
Lis PearsonQuote Reply
And guys, it only HELPS Ginia’s cause when you dislike her reviews and her writing, and suggest that she needs a “Drogo” or ‘some cock’ or mock her name by turning it into a woman’s body part. This is exactly the sort of response that makes men look bad in women’s eyes. We can have legitimate complaints about her writing and what she said, but when you go off making sexist comments about her, she can point right to those comments and go “See? I was right!” Critique what she wrote, and how she wrote it, but don’t attack her personally, and definitely don’t ridicule her gender and suggest having more sex would improve her or her writing.
purplejillyQuote Reply
I don’t really get what most of the complaints against Ms Ginia are about. It’s as if you all live in a comic book store. You should get out more.
You guys say you don’t trust New York. That’s where DB is from, he’s a writer too. HBO hq is in NY. You guys are embarrassing the ‘highly educated’ segment of fantasy fans.
Just a guyQuote Reply
Do you have a citation? Does it matter? The characters are clearly aged up for the HBO series.
You must mean this:
GoT: Daenerys III.
Is it rape? Maybe. But not “definitely rape .” Anyway, he’s a Khal, a Dothraki. They definitely rape people. It’s part of the story. GRRM doesn’t make him out like some kind of hero for it. He’s only a hero to his own people who ritualistically practice rape. Justice? She does kill him, doesn’t she? I guess my point, in the context of this post, is the fact the the Dothraki rape people is not a valid criticism of the series. Jon Weisman’s critique that the story line that flows from the rape/might-be-rape of Dany does not come across as authentic could be a fair criticism of the TV series. I won’t know until I see it.
Mike ChairQuote Reply
Anyone who calls himself “highly educated” is unlikely to be very educated. You’re embarrassing yourself.
RoQuote Reply
It seems like a lot of the negative reviews are confused, shocked, or offended by the “doggy-style” love making which is apparently promininent in the show.
I would hate to see a review of their performance in the sack.
And we are the D and D nerds…
Larry DQuote Reply
David Poland from Movie City News, who has never read the books, offers up a well thought out, excellently written rave. This might be the best review I’ve read so far.
DiomedesQuote Reply
Actually there is no love making in the show, or the books. It’s either rape or prostitution. I am guessing most D & D nerds know the difference.
Dudeman BallsQuote Reply
Diomedes,
Care to link it?
SuperdeluxeQuote Reply
http://moviecitynews.com/2011/04/review-game-of-thrones/
Here’s the David Poland piece.
RoQuote Reply
This.
Mike ChairQuote Reply
Hey!
I am not you – you are not me!!
I keep wondering when I wrote those messages, until I finally realise I never did :D
It’s ok for me, as long as we don’t mess it up too much…
I’ve been posting as “Jenny” since 2009 I believe so don’t be surprised if people treat you in a certain way and ask you funny questions about future “Silent Sister” album coming out…
JennyQuote Reply
That is an overstatement. Who was raped between Jon and Ygritte? What about between Jamie and Cersei? Sam and Gilly? You lose any meaning by overstating your points.
RoQuote Reply
http://moviecitynews.com/2011/04/review-game-of-thrones/
Rave Reviews from David Poland (Major Critic)
I loved this:
And Dinklage:
SuperdeluxeQuote Reply
I get sort of confused by D&D referals now meaning both David and Dan as well as Dungeons and Dragons.
JennyQuote Reply
Uhg. Can we please stop with the mindless New York and NYTimes bashing?
So you have problem with this GoT review. Fine. It is absurd to extrapolate something further from that.
I may be in the minority here. I read NYT every day. I have read GoT several times and have re-read through currently existent ASOIAF books numerous times. I see no conflict between liking NYT and liking ASOIAF.
AlQuote Reply
In a way these negative reviews make me even more excited. Most fans, including myself, were worried GoT would be executed poorly (at least until WiC and trailers became available). None of the bad reviews really criticize the production or execution of the series. If anything, they begrudgingly admit that the series was produced exceptionally well. The brunt of the criticism focuses on the narrative and genre itself. We have nothing to fear there: we’re already fans of the story.
My only apprehension is will it garner enough uninitiated fans to stay on and become a hit. Who knows? As many have pointed out, if a large portion of the fan base tunes in, were probably already 2/3rds of the way there. Any one snobby enough to be turned off by a poorly constructed negative times review, was probably a lost cause anyway.
bingopajamaQuote Reply
Conserning the metacritic site, I have a question. Are there any written criterias for the different grades (from 1 to 100 that is)? I searched the site but didn’t find any. Since most reviews seem to get a metacritic score I would assume that is the case. To put it in others words my question is this: who decides what score a review adds, and how is this decided?
BobbenQuote Reply
That review is terribly written. It could use a pass on the grammar and spelling check. Followed with a pass for structure and organized thoughts. For example ” some kind of respect for women”…care to elaborate, bucky? or is it a general vague truth?
Interesting they sent a chart for the families. No wonder some reviewers complained about the complexity. They didn’t have to watch the show to know beforehand it was going to be complicated.
Dudeman BallsQuote Reply
WTF are you on about?
Is this Slate boy’s sock-puppet?
cardusQuote Reply
I have a stupid question: what means: “His beautiful brother, Nikolaj Coster-Waldau, is so chiseled that you don’t see his acting skill coming.” My english is on quite good level(I hope:p), but I do not understand this sentence:p
GregosQuote Reply
I need to rant before I start cursing and my poor roommate wonders if I have gone off the deep end.
“Here the term green carries double meaning as both visual descriptive and allegory. Embedded in the narrative is a vague global-warming horror story. ”
If you watched any of the dialogues regarding this change than you know it has nothing to do with environmental messups causing strange seasons, the long seasons, where one long season of summer follows with a long season of winter, is how it always has been and always will be. I have never heard any reference that Martin was trying to bring environmental awareness with his seasons. Correct me if I am wrong in this.
“Given the bizarre climate of the landmass at the center of the bloody disputes”
The climate has NOTHING to do with the disputes taking place at this time within the series. The only person in the 1st episode or any in what I imagine the 1st 6 episodes cover that could arguably be related to the climate is those from the Nights Watch due to Others and breaking of oaths.
“— and the series rejects no opportunity to showcase a beheading or to offer a slashed throat close-up —”
-because Rome, which she seemed to enjoy from later in the review, was so carefull to hide all the violence-
“We are not talking about Palm Beach.”
I have lived near Palm Beach, WTF does that even mean?
“did not suggest a writer with Middle Earth proclivities.”
1st off, apparently it is wrong for someone to have more than one interest.
Secondly, and I will return to this, LORD OF THE RINGS IS NOTHING LIKE GAME OF THRONES, except that they are both fantasy.
“forced to speak in subtitles”
I don’t always like subtitles eather, but it makes sense in context that these people would have their own language. I’m sorry they are forcing you to actually read.
“It says something about current American attitudes toward sex that with the exception of the lurid and awful “Californication,” nearly all eroticism on television is past tense.”
Again, you haven’t had a problem with this on past HBO shows, but now its a huge scandal?
“The true perversion, though, is the sense you get that all of this illicitness has been tossed in as a little something for the ladies, out of a justifiable fear, perhaps, that no woman alive would watch otherwise.”
Several things.
1) I actually assumed most of the illicitness was put in for those that enjoy illicit scenes, regardless of gender. I know several guy friends of mine that enjoy such scenes in movies and tv shows, while I couldn’t care less whether they were in or not (unless they are integral to the plot of course.)
2) I would have watched it 1000 times otherwise before watching your “Sex and the City”.
3)I probably should have brought this up earlier, but when writing a review in a big newspaper, it really isn’t a good method to insult those that will or do enjoy the thing you are reviewing. This goes doubly for singling out a single demographic that enjoys it and then insulting them.
4) This ties into 2, but apparently I am a white walker, because I can’t be alive according to this review. Thank god she didn’t say no woman in existence.
“While I do not doubt that there are women in the world who read books like Mr. Martin’s, I can honestly say that I have never met a single woman who has stood up in indignation at her book club and refused to read the latest from Lorrie Moore unless everyone agreed to “The Hobbit” first.”
1) What do you mean “books like Mr. Martin’s”? Fantasy, because there are many female fantasy readers, and even fantasy books written with females as the target demographic. Do you then mean books with your so called illicit scenes, because we know there is an entire genre for that that is mostly read by woman. Do you then mean political thriller/intrigue? Based upon the rest of your review I would guess not, but in case you did, there are books targeted specifically towards women in that genre as well.
2) I have never been to a book club, but I have done book exchanges with many friend in which we agree to trade, read, and discuss each-others favorite books, and you can be damn sure that while “The Hobbit” was not on the list, “The Fellowship of the Ring” and more recently “Game of Thrones” have been. Along with many interesting non-fiction books.
3) LORD OF THE RINGS AND GAME OF THRONES HAVE LITTLE IN COMMON BESIDES GENRE. In addition, The Hobbit was separately targeted towards children where GOT is obviously not, so there.
‘“Game of Thrones” is boy fiction patronizingly turned out to reach the population’s other half.’
1st off, there are many things that appeal to woman in this show. Strong female characters, political intrigue, inticate plot (the last to I am pretty sure apply to both genders), and yes attractive male leads.
This paragraph insults me as a female reader and the only reason I have not posted this entire thing on the NYT website it because I don’t want to endorse your behavior by making an account.
“Since the arrival of “The Sopranos” more than a decade ago, HBO has distinguished itself as a corporate auteur committed, when it is as its most intelligent and dazzling, to examining the way that institutions are made and how they are upheld or fall apart: the Mafia, municipal government (“The Wire”), the Roman empire (“Rome”), the American West (“Deadwood”), religious fundamentalism (“Big Love”). ”
I’m sorry, but I again have to wonder where you missed the sex and violence in some of these, and how the hell you consider them realistic. They are TV shows. Historical FICTION at best.
“When the network ventures away from its instincts for real-world sociology, as it has with the vampire saga “True Blood,” things start to feel cheap, and we feel as though we have been placed in the hands of cheaters.”
As far as I am aware True Blood is very successful, although I have not watched it so I can’t actually say much here.
““Game of Thrones” serves up a lot of confusion in the name of no larger or really relevant idea beyond sketchily fleshed-out notions that war is ugly, families are insidious and power is hot.”
O MY GOODNESS, some material that might ALMOST be an actual review. Too bad at this point only one family could have been shown as truly “insidious” and power is hot is something my 14 year old brother would use to sum up a series (maybe your just trying and failing to be scathing, aw well).
“If you are not averse to the Dungeons & Dragons aesthetic, the series might be worth the effort.”
If you are talking about the Dungeons & Dragons movie, the aesthetic would be the B grade film budget look, which would be stupid considering the one thing you complemented was the look of the show in the beginning.
If you are refferring to the game, there are several points such as a lack of elves, goblins, and little magic in the series. I could also point out Dungeon and Dragons Lawful to Chaotic, and Good to Evil morality that while not discouraging gray per say, does limit the ability of a character to do something outside their alignment in the strictest of players and games.
“If you are nearly anyone else, you will hunger for HBO to get back to the business of languages for which we already have a dictionary. ”
So if you are not a Dungeons and Dragons player you will not enjoy this show? Way to generalize. Let me draw a picture for you. Around 70% of the people I know enjoy fiction. Around 55% enjoy gritty fiction, 10% have done tabletop or LARP gaming before or would be willing to do it after I have described it to them. 7% have done it and enjoyed it, wanting to play again. 5% are consistent roleplayers, and 2% play Dungeons and Dragons. That means that in this generalization you have excluded around 53% of the people I know that would probably enjoy this series. (These are rough estimates, but I wouldn’t say the are too far off. Give them on average a 10% standard deviation.)
SJGIMQuote Reply
HBO SHOP update:
So I felt like perusing the shop there, being we are but two days from the premiere. And low and behold I see new items! PENDANTS, Keychains, and A sword letter opener.
Now the part that had me giggling for joy was that HBO actually listened to my suggestion, “making small letter opener replicas of the swords to smite my bills with”
Well that came true. JOOYYY!
http://store.hbo.com/game-of-thrones-sword-letter-opener/detail.php?p=298413&v=hbo_shows_game-of-thrones
Although, I hope they drop the price on some of those items. They seem quite overpriced for what they are. YEEESH!
Now we just wait on Banners…come on banners *rolls the dice*
WolfheartQuote Reply
Oh! Sorry I forgot to add to my list of Rape and Prostitution: Incest.
Isn’t Gilly the daughter of a man who then has sex with her to have another daughter? Because he has sex with all his daughters, some disturbed thing like that? I believe that is in a future season.
I don’t think we’re going to see Jon and Igritte in the first 6 episodes either.
Dudeman BallsQuote Reply
That the actor is so good looking, it’s hard to believe he can also be a good actor. It’s shocking when he turns out to actually be a good actor.
fuelpaganQuote Reply
Trolling FAIL, sucka….
cardusQuote Reply
Dudeman Balls,
You have a great moniker, but you need to chill out. For someone who seems to be concerned with accuracy, you are really painting with broad strokes there.
The reviews I read didn’t make a distinction, the position or frequency thereof was the target of their criticism… AND I WON’T STAND FOR CRITICS OF THE POSITION!
Larry DQuote Reply
I thought the Havrilesky piece was a great article. It wasn’t (and wasn’t meant to be) a review. It’s a shame whoever edited the review didn’t hold it up to as high a standard as Havrilesky was – but maybe Havrilesky is a good enough writer to not need that kind of touch.
Anyway, what it seems to boil down to, is that she thinks GoT is very well done for what it is, a bleak, realist fantasy, which focuses on a certain type of character and misses out on the variety of people you might find in a real life. Her comment about an ADHD princess points out that, while there are some character quirks, and there are a lot of interesting characters, it is missing something in the way of real variety. Also, her critique of the genre, is that if you are inventing a new world, why not invent a utopia in which people can be inherently good, and evil is clearly defined. She also says it’s a shame that people are still endlessly squabbling with each other over the prize of power that isn’t even worth it, and missing the big picture; which is really the main theme of GoT. Why DO people do that? GoT really shows the institutionalism of these actions, and how hard it is to break out of that cycle. The fact that she put that line in her “riff” (the article is called a RIFF aparently), tells me that the adaptation of GoT successfully conveys one of the most important message of the books. She may not have realized that that was exactly what it was asking, but the message was received nonetheless.
And metascore at 8.2 now! I think it is still missing some reviews that may count as mixed, but I don’t know which reviews will be added and which won’t. Many of the more positive reviews that have been posted are not likely to show up there either.
8.2 is a really great metascore.
salukQuote Reply
I don’t think I have said anything to offend anyone; As opposed to the majority of people here sending insults to any reviewer that doesn’t like your precious tv show you have not even seen yet.
Dudeman BallsQuote Reply
If anyone is tired of the negative reviews. The HBO GOT Viewers guide is NOW UP!
http://viewers-guide.hbo.com/game-of-thrones/#!/guide/houses/
Looks like they did make some fixes.
WolfheartQuote Reply
Dudeman Balls,
Neither of the things you just mentionned will be until season 2, and I doubt anyone would argue that the wildling (can’t remember his name) that fathers gilly is in anyway a good or likable or attractive character, so in writing him nothing is being encouraged. He sacrifices his sons to the Others for goodness sake. The only reason the watch leaves him alone is because he is usefull.
SJGIMQuote Reply
SJGIM,
Read again. All I said was that there is no lovemaking in the first 6 episodes. Any sex is rape, prostitution, or possibly incest.
Dudeman BallsQuote Reply
I also found the NYT review very insulting! I am a woman, and just finished reading A Game of Thrones, and am now well into the 2nd book, A Clash of Kings. Obviously, I am liking it, so I certainly don’t understand the sexist remarks about it being a “boy book!”
I would be more excited about it becoming a mini-series if I actually had HBO though. Does anybody know if this will come out on DVD? I understand that HBO refuses to allow any of it’s original “made-for-HBO” shows be broadcast via Streaming Netflix, so I am wondering if they will be stubborn about allowing Netflix to rent out the DVDs too (if they exist)???
Myra GatesQuote Reply
Myra Gates,
HBO always releases nice boxsets on DVD and Blu-Ray. It’s already in the works, but it may not be out until nearly a year from now.
LexQuote Reply
fuelpagan,
Remember the days of “Oh no, his nose is so big, he’s not good-looking enough to be Jaime”?
Familiarity and acceptance of the nose set in VERY soon…
EleanorQuote Reply
Nope, just an awesome one.
Steven SwansonQuote Reply
Have you actually seen the first six episodes, or are you basing this on the books? Because in a very early chapter of the books, Ned and Catelyn are shown in the aftermath of having had sexual relations that are neither rape, prostitution nor incest, though maybe you do not consider married-person-sex to be lovemaking?. It takes place just before they receive the message from Lysa Arryn so it’s very early on. I guess it’s just implied that this is what they’ve done, rather than an actual scene focusing on the act itself, but Catelyn is naked and thinking about how she’s young and can give Ned more children.
Regina ThorneQuote Reply
I think you’re right. Don’t feed the trolls.
fuelpaganQuote Reply
Dudeman Balls,
This is a site for discussion, and I do not have a problem with reviews against GOT.
There are 2 things in reviews that I do dislike though, and they get me unreasonably worked up as they are pet peeves of mine.
1) A reviewer that insults those that do enjoy a show. Insult the show if you feel it is justified, but not those that like the show.
2)A reviewer that does not write a review aka does not address the problems, give reasons, or explore the plots/characters. Only one paragraph mentioned the actual plot of the show, and it provide any justification/examples/reasons for the dislike.
If a professor had asked me to hand in a review of a book/movie/tv show like this, and I turned in Miss Ginia’s piece, I would have gotten a C- if the professor was being generous. More likely I would have gotten a D or F.
I didn’t see anyone call you a troll, and I think both you and those you have been arguing with have good points. Just remember that we are all interested in discussion here and try not to take anything anyone here says too deeply to heart.
I personally see Game of Thrones as an exploration of Characters, and do not see the book as encouraging or discouraging any certain lifestyle. Furthermore, those old enough to be enjoying such a book or show probably shouldn’t still be young enough to be influenced lifestyle wise by the actions of the characters.
SJGIMQuote Reply
Remember back when women had to fight to get jobs that were reserved for men; to get equal rights and the be treated as equals? To be able to VOTE. That was only several decades ago in the US. Some countries now don’t have those rights for women.
In contrast to:
I read a fantasy book…and I liked it…
and I’m a woman!
Shocking.
Dudeman BallsQuote Reply
False. You said there was no love making in the show or the books. Books plural. You were overstating your case and when called on it, you lie about what you said earlier instead of admitting a mistake.
Richmond72Quote Reply
The latest Piece from Atlantic, pretty good read:
http://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2011/04/game-of-thrones-premieres-just-in-time-for-easter/237399/
basically the author only likes escapist fantasy, I think in the end that ASOIAF will have a ‘good’ ending..but we can’t see that now.
SuperdeluxeQuote Reply
Eleanor,
LOL, true. Of course those who haven’t read the books don’t have preexisting mental images they are trying to match too. So they just enjoy the view they are given.
fuelpaganQuote Reply
The bottom line is that everyone here needs to go to these negative reviews and write thoughtful comments that talk about how great the books are and how the reviews are wrong in various ways.
We need this series to last about what, 10 years? :)
Austin ChandlerQuote Reply
” I didn’t see anyone call you a troll.”
Dudeman Balls,
*face palms*
And as a reply: I was reading that post as a continuous train of thought as opposed to two separate comments, in which case it seems like you are talking about the events you mentioned in book 2. Two different interpretations.
SJGIMQuote Reply
To add though..she thinks this is a worthwhile series..and she typically likes escapist fantasy. She compared it to the Bible. Go through some hardships is okay..because in the end its all good.
SuperdeluxeQuote Reply
Your point? Mine in my rant was that there are entire genres and demographics of woman that enjoy fantasy, not that I am a woman and thus one woman does enjoy fantasy. All of that is seperate from the female rights issue. It’s slightly offensive to contrast them like they are comparable as you have done above.
SJGIMQuote Reply
WOW! The David Poland review compares Maisie Williams to a “young Natalie Portman or Dakota Fanning.”
I think reading the praise for Maisie is my favourite part of all this. Ladies and gentlemen, we are seeing a star in the making, out of a complete unknown… and we were there from day one! So cool.
LexQuote Reply
Yeah, total facepalm moment. But I’ll stand by it.
fuelpaganQuote Reply
Who needs it to last 10 years? I guess we’re all assuming that it’s going to be a wonderful show. I hope so, but I don’t need it.
Katrina Before & AftQuote Reply
Lex,
I have to agree. From what I’ve seen of Maisie, she just acts so natural on the screen. Reminds me a lot of Dakota Fanning.
fuelpaganQuote Reply
Fuelpagan did a good job translating this for you but please don’t blame your English. It is a poorly constructed sentence. “You don’t see his acting skill coming,” is an awkward use of a slang expression that forces the reader to stop and go back to reread. “You don’t see it coming/I didn’t see that coming” is the more commonly used construction.
DH87Quote Reply
I am so confused about whether I should watch the show or not.
I am not a woman (last time I checked, anyway), so the sex will obviously not interest me in any way. On the other hand, I am concerned about global warming, and I’ve also been having some troubles with my HVAC system lately.
What to do, what to do?
JWestfallQuote Reply
If only this didn’t need to be said.
Can we stop with all this bashing of non-genre things with traditionally feminine readership/viewership?
I’m geek to the bone: devour SF and fantasy and even tried LARPing the other day, AND I like Sex and the City.
It can be done, folks. Open your minds. Equating poor reviewing skills with SatC-liking just isn’t cricket.
Now can we get back to being excited over the zoomable map of Westeros and Essos? Maybe?
EleanorQuote Reply
Regina Thorne,
I tend to think the same thing. The reviewers all call the show joyless, bleak, dark and unsentimental. And they all say it’s full of gratuitous sex. So I doubt any of the actual sex scenes are going to be the ones that are inspired by love.
I was worried about the joyless comments from Mo Ryan and now there are more comments that call it bleak. The books were lively and fun. That would have been nice, to get the same kind of feeling from a show.
Katrina Before & AftQuote Reply
JWestfall,
Run and hide under a rock until the awesomeness is over with and you are safe. ;-p
fuelpaganQuote Reply
Who asked about how the metacritic score is calculated?
Metascore, a weighted average of the most respected critics writing reviews online and in print.”
More here http://www.metacritic.com/about-metascores
DH87Quote Reply
And we will always remember her as not a boney pop singer!
The RabbitQuote Reply
Give GOT a try; if you are not happy, the new Upstairs/Downstairs is on at 9 PM on PBS; it has a Metacritic score of 100. Seriously.
DH87Quote Reply
Also from the David Poland review: “Women, as it turns out, are at the heart of Game of Thrones.”
Ha! Take that, Ginia Bellafante.
LexQuote Reply
JWestfall,
lol.
Eleanor,
I’m sorry if my Sex and the City comment in my long post insulted you. I haven’t watched the show, and make no claims as to whether it is good or bad. I only used it because she did in her article, and as I said earlier, I was ranting. I am also a girl geek and enjoy a lot of “girly” and geeky things. If this was not aimed at me, then I just posted this for no reason, but my apology stands. And that map is the next click of my mouse. (after I press post comment)
SJGIMQuote Reply
I for one did not find the books lively and fun. I found them bleak, depressing, and pretty joyless. And all the more gripping because of it. Perhaps in the process of adaptation these aspects have been emphasized, where the aspects that you saw were de-emphasized. A bright candle in a dark room is all the more dazzling, but you have to be looking at the candle to see it.
salukQuote Reply
SJGIM,
Heya. Don’t worry, you were only one among the many, many people to cite SatC lately! It was the quasi-fanfic about GB and her SatC reruns that drove me over the edge, not your long rant.
EleanorQuote Reply
Grim, dark, bleak, joyless, depressing… these are things I love!
Maybe I’m a damaged soul, but I’m in no way worried by those comments.
LexQuote Reply
The beginning of the first book is light and fun. It gets heavy. Maybe I am wrong to remember there are parts like Regina pointed out that are full of love. The pace of the book is what is especially light and fun and keeps you going–show has been hacked according to all reviews. What I am understanding from the reviews is that this fantasy show is as unsentimental (manly) as humanly possible, and as non-fantasy as possible (which according to non-fantasy fans, failed).
Katrina Before & AftQuote Reply
Katrina Before & Aft,
That is almost exactly what I mean. But I am finding out quickly I have no business arguing here without writing a complete system of logic. This is a place for everyone to agree that the show is perfect and nothing will ever change that, not even watching the show to find out. It’s no wonder anyone with dissenting ideas are probably not wasting their time on these boards.
Dudeman BallsQuote Reply
Anybody who would spend their time parsing out exactly what constitutes rape in a medieval/barbarian setting is probably not somebody who’s going to be attracted to this show in the first place. For the Dothraki sex and rape were pretty much co-equivalent. Daenerys shows Drogo otherwise. I’m sure some will interpret this as a bad thing rather than the act of both resignation and self-empowerment it’s meant to be.
Steven SwansonQuote Reply
i know somebody responded but i thought i’d elabourate that if you are unclear about the “is so chiseled” part it is a reference to the expression “chiseled good looks” which is to say the kind of muscular good looks that one would find in a classical Greek (chiseled) statue.
the rest was explained that often people assume that somebody exceedingly good looking is often put into films/tv not for their acting ability but for only their looks (and to be honest this happens a ton in mainstream US TV and Hollywood movies but as with most things even tho it happens quite a bit you still need to judge each actor case by case because sometimes there are exceptions to the rule).
Who Is Jacopo Belbo?Quote Reply
Guys,
Dudeman’s balls are hurt because HBO isn’t remaking Legend of the Seeker. Let it lie…
cardusQuote Reply
Good point, the Slate reviewer probably does need to get laid (Drogo or Doreah as the case may be, I make no assumptions).
Steven SwansonQuote Reply
Okayyyy.. so through rape, women can be empowered. It’s a lucky thing a man who met all his (both) girlfriends at comic book conventions was able to cut through all the sexual bs and show us an enlightened view of empowered sex through slavery.
Katrina Before & AftQuote Reply
You’re having a tough time here because you argue in overly broad generalizations and extremes. When called on your mistakes you play the victim card and put down everyone else as bullying fanboys.
Richmond72Quote Reply
Oh noes, Dudeman Balls (a name, by the way, that positively SCREAMS logic and deep discussion) is having trouble finding deep, soulful conversion on the internet tubes. Let us all help him through this trying time in his life.
And for the record, dissenting views are welcome. Buckets of stupid (such as your crying about the sinful lack of “lovemaking” in six episodes of television you haven’t yet seen) are not.
cardusQuote Reply
oh man. i still have the art work for the Silent Sisters album cover that i did … i ran across it just yesterday when i was looking for another pic in my picture folders … ah, that was good times!
Who Is Jacopo Belbo?Quote Reply
I think that balls guy said all the sex in the show is rape and prostitution. I don’t see why that angers people to argue so hard against him.
Just a guyQuote Reply
“according to all reviews”. Really? Every one? And failed to all non-fantasy fans? All those reviews I read that offered some version of “I don’t like fantasy, but this is compelling stuff” were products of my fevered. unsentimentally manish perceptions? I somehow don’t think your being entirely honest in this discussion…..
And how dare you besmirch an entire gender with your broad generalizations! (unsentimental = manly???) For shame, girlfriend. For your information, I’ve read Billie Letts and liked it. I stand behind no woman in sentimentality.
cardusQuote Reply
But I LOVE prostitution!
cardusQuote Reply
Right!
GBs review was just laughable, once I got over the initial “how rude” ;)
Liked the negative review from HEather though. It was a good, and witty read, though one could hope she’ll give it a further chance.
Commented (a novel length one..) and while it’s waiting to get moderated I thought I’d share it with you guys:
…………………………………………………………..
Thank you for that witty and professional take on Game of Thrones. I had fun reading it, even though it doesn’t echo my own feelings.
As has been mentioned, your collegue GB’s irritatingly bland try at trolling, has been seen as offensive on many, many levels – from ideas of womanhood to misconceptions that people aren’t complex and able to like more than one genre of writing. People have wondered at her being employed to write these types of reviews, in commentsections around.
So again, thanks for redeeming NYT in my eyes.
I will have to wait and see about the show, though the books were a big lovely surprise to me.
Fan of fantasy(and other genres), though never Tolkiens endless descriptions that failed to grasp me, and picked AGOT up thinking it was a run of the mill book, but still an enjoyable read.
By the end of the first book I was flabbergasted, it having turned all of my preconceptions on it’s head, and I read 2 and 3 in a much excited fangirl frenzie, while trying to make it last as long as I could.
This from a girl who has never been able to put a book down – good or bad – without finishing it. Though the sheer volume probably had soemthing to do with it, mostly it was because of all the unpredictable but still believable things going on in it. Sometimes I just had to get my head up from a chapter, literally gasping for air!
And walking past it on the sidetable, this is honestly the only book I’ve ever hovered my hand over, itching to know what happens next, dive into the so very real world, but resisted it – simply because I didn’t want to it to end.
It’s a book fans are made out of.
So. Looking forward on the tv-take. And I would very much recommend, even if you don’t like fantasy or plan to watch the show, that you pick up the books. Get past the initial admittedly a little drole beginning, and here and there uneven chapters because it’s a POV you just couldn’t care less about, waiting for next thing on the ones you do – and just read it. Give it at least 2 books, even if the ending of book 1 doesn’t hook you.
It really is a take on humanity, faults and the complexities of each person, and the consequences of our actions being unable to tell.
I would think one could actually make a philosopical class out of a study of it. And, to top it off, I can truthfully say that reading it has given me insights into humanity.
However pretentious or whatnot that may sound.
Looking forward to reading more reviews about this from you and what happens in the story, good or bad!
LH.
LivveHultQuote Reply
Dudeman Balls,
Actually, the last critic to post a bad review for the show had a good explanation of why he disliked it. I could see his points, and understand why he didn’t like the 1st episodes of the show. He even came onto the boards and posted a few comments. That was a good negative review, and someone with “dissenting ideas” that was “wasting their time on these boards.”
Yes, there are passionate people on these boards.
Yes, if someone feels strongly about a topic you will have to whip out sources, quotes, well reasoned arguments, etc. in order to refute them.
No, you will always not win. There are many times on this forum my own view of a book topic has changed after engaging in or reading a debate about said topic.
No, not all people on a forum will concede or agree with your points.
Rather than turning hostile, why not shift your focus, come up with another case in favor of your arguement, or simply move on rather than insulting the entire board?
SJGIMQuote Reply
I’m getting the feeling there’s one person using multiple pseudonyms in this thread.
RoQuote Reply
Eleanor,
Good :)
SJGIMQuote Reply
That’s very sweet, they let Sansa write an essay on GoT.
Steven SwansonQuote Reply
Who are you talking about and how does that relate in any way to what you quoted? Daenerys makes the choice to stop being raped and show Drogo there’s a better way, thus making the best of an unbelievably shitty situation. Are you hung up on the fact that Martin wrote it that way, or do you think that’s just an interpretation?
Steven SwansonQuote Reply
Steven Swanson,
I can’t speak for the show, but for me the bible was not the reason why I kept reading past all the grim parts in AGOT. I’ve never even opened a bible. Still, an interesting perspective from her, she sees it as worth watching when making it clear beforehand that she only watches tv with “happy endings”.
Arrogant BastardQuote Reply
I do find it very very strange that so many of the negative reviews have dedicated such time to the abnormal seasons of Westeros, like that’s the one part of the story they can’t get over. The 700 foot wall of ice, and the undead creatures beyond it, barely seem to raise an eyebrow, but a winter that lasts a few years is just beyond the pale.
To be honest I expected more negative reviews than we’ve gotten, and frankly I expected to be the one in these comment threads cooling people off and arguing that we don’t have to attack someone just because they didn’t like the show we’ve been obsessing over. The reality has been that the majority of the negative reviews have quite simply been indefensible: sloppily researched, lazily written, weirdly inconsistent, and insultingly glib.
This is the worst of the bunch, as it includes a healthy dose of weird and unexpected misogyny. It’s one thing to point out that most fantasy fans are male, which is true, but it blithely ignores the fact that compared to other fantasy titles, GRRM’s books actually attract a disproportionately large female readership, and it ups the ante with what comes perilously close to a “No True Scotsman” style dismissal of women that do enjoy it. I’m very, very rarely offended by a review, but this very much offended me (I’m a guy, but one that happens to love women that love fantasy).
And then there are the trolls that seem to be working very hard to pretend that the overall critical consensus for the show is anything but glowing. Good luck with that.
Ser_GQuote Reply
Years ago I gave my 65 year old non-fantasy reading mother the books. Years later she still asks quarterly when Dance of Dragons is coming so she can (hopefully) find out what happens to Brienne. Boy fiction to be sure.
Andrew GavinQuote Reply
Sorry to bust up the srs discussion, but this made my day:
Why would men ever want to watch Game of Thrones?
RidneyQuote Reply
I also find myself amused at the people who pompously comment that “you might as well not bother coming here with a dissenting opinion, you’ll get ripped to shreds here.” Actually, contrary to most places dedicated to a particular fandom, I’ve found that ASOIAF fans generally listen well to reasonable dissenting opinions, and participate in such discussions, albeit passionately, within the bounds of reason and respect.
It’s just that the majority of those who post such opinions vastly overestimate their ability to qualify for the “reasonable” part. The way such discussions thus actually turn out tends to go along the lines of:
1) Troll posts stupid, poorly-thought-out, often offensive opinion that just happens to be dissenting
2) Fandom rips said troll a new asshole, annihilating their argument with the dismissive nonchalance of a pimp’s backhand
3) Troll departs with parting shots of how the community doesn’t listen to reason and is all “groupthink.”
Ser_GQuote Reply
Ser G I think you will I am wrong for I don’t know reasons you will come up with. But here goes anyway, I don’t think any slightly negative opinion can be posted here without being mocked and ridiculed. This isnot the place for balanced discussion.
Just a guyQuote Reply
Just a guy,
Not the least bit true. I’ve made a great many comments here, and quite a few of them were more than a little negative. I’ve never been mocked nor ridiculed.
I think that some people cannot make negative comments without being mocked and ridiculed by the community, but I also think that says more about those people than it does about the community.
Ser_GQuote Reply
Just a guy,
If you honestly think that is true, then this must be your first fan forum you have browsed.
In general I find the tone of the average poster here to be rather reasonable and civil.
Rory PhillipsQuote Reply
Just a guy,
man you are way off base. i have probably gotten more flack on here for some of my more “excentric” views than anybody else and most everybody on here still treats me as a valued member of the board (there might be a few females out there who despise me as a barbaric misogynist-a claim i most vehemently reject mind you) and if/when i make a good point (i’m sure that is bound to happen eventually) they are accepted and engaged with seriously … and if i say something dumb or overly sarcastic without proper backup/evidence/support i am rightly (and quickly and incisively) called out for it.
if baby want’s his binky i suggest you might move along and find somewhere else to whinge about the unfairness of WiC’s lack of tolerance for stupidity, foolishness and trolling.
Who Is Jacopo Belbo?Quote Reply
LOL… “snot”.
LexQuote Reply
Isn’t it funny? The one criticism none of us ever even thought of.
I guess that shows how desperate they are to find something to criticize, in what’s sounding like a stellar TV show.
LexQuote Reply
I’d just like to observe that folks are going to begin to filter in here who may have a more casual, less cerebral approach to the material, and we’ll have to decide whether we want to run them off, let them post without necessarily countering their argument, or ease them into the discourse that has been established (that is enjoyable and enlightening to most of us, at least most of the time).
WiC is like a cozy neighborhood bar that never had a sign out front and suddenly has appeared in the local guidebooks and had a neon sign installed over the door. Some new folks are going to come in and change the dynamic.
If we agree that internet forums and blogs are integral to growing fan enthusiasm for GOT, we’ll either be a place to try out or not. I had my head handed to me a bit when I first showed up, then lurked a while, and tried coming back with a better attitude. I think this is a great site with a lot to offer even casual viewers but we have to cut folks some slack sometimes. [Int.: DH87 offers a virtual group hug.]
DH87Quote Reply
Can someone please confirm authoritatively this is not true? Would like to avoid wife aggro.
Sancho PanzaQuote Reply
Agreed! Clearly well read. But with hints like…”there’s no lovemaking in the first 6 episodes” it leaves me to believe he/she has actually seen the first 6 episodes. But any mention of the books looks like it’s been pulled off a wiki page. My guess is Troy from Slate. Obviously the person has an axe to grid with the fans and we should stop feeding it.
fuelpaganQuote Reply
Wow. I would be angry, but that review was just too pathetic for me to feel anything but pity for the author.
EmmaQuote Reply
Have you not read the book? I don’t think any of the sex in the first book could be called “love making”.
LexQuote Reply
fuelpagan,
Nice guess! I have a gut feeling you could be right. Are you out there, Troy? ;)
LexQuote Reply
I read the books when Feast of Crows came out. I learned more about the show and George RR Martin this week than in the last 4 years, including the fact that GRRM met all his gfs in conventions in the New Yorker article last week. I’ve been visiting this site for over a year. I don’t have a secret motive, and I’m not a reviewer who wants to ‘get’ fans by chatting with them on a board. I am not the kind of person who has thought about the books enough to develop a theory about Dany being empowered from getting raped daily and living in the company of female sex slaves. I really think the books were fun and lively to read, even now. Except maybe the last book and the red wedding. They were fun books to read, and I never read a fantasy book I liked before or after.
Katrina Before & AftQuote Reply
As much as I hate to admit it, Dudeman Balls has a point (and Lex).
Has anyone tried to list all the sex in the first book? I guess we can debate what constitutes “lovemaking”.
Jamie and Cersei (can incest be lovemaking?)
Drogo and Daenerys (if it isn’t rape is it lovemaking?)
The Dothraki at the wedding (definitely rape)
The flashback about Tyrion and Tysha which includes Tysha and Tywin’s guards (prostitution)
Tyrion and Shae (ibid)
Daenery’s saves a woman who is being raped in Lhazaareen (rape)
The only other thing that I recall that is close is this Eddard and Catelyn scene:
GoT: Catelyn II
So, this is post-coital. Lovemaking?
Am I missing something?
Seven Hells, Dudeman Balls may be right!
Someone please prove me and him wrong.
Mike ChairQuote Reply
Phantomwriter05,
I don’t think the TV writers are the same ones writing about the Muslim Brotherhood. Irrelevant.
Merret FreyQuote Reply
I’m trying to figure out what part of the books were lively and fun … the Others were having fun with Waymar Royce, but I sure didn’t. Then there’s the beheading that opens the book, Bran’s accident, etc. I love the books to pieces, but I’ve never thought they were a feel-good kind of read, and that’s entirely appropriate since civil wars aren’t exactly inspiring of good feelings.
So it sounds like the TV show got it spot-on. As for the bleakness of the world, there were parts of “The Wire” that were almost unbearably bleak but it was also joyful in the sense that I was joyful that I had something that good to watch on tv.
Regina ThorneQuote Reply
Mike Chair,
I mentioned the Ned/Cat scene waaaay upthread, but Mr. Balls ignored me. I don’t know whether they are actually going to show the “lovemaking” onscreen but I think it’s hard to deny that Ned and Cat have a loving relationship.
And for that matter, although Jaime/Cersei is incestuous and treasonous, it isn’t prostitution or rape so points for that!
Regina ThorneQuote Reply
Mike Chair,
Doreah and Dany? Neither rape nor prostitution.
fafhrdQuote Reply
fafhrd,
Doreah is Dany’s slave. You can call that what you want. I call it prostitution.
Maybe Rabbit or Ivan will tell us if all the sex scenes in the 6 episodes are indeed rape, prostitution and incest.
Jack DorseyQuote Reply
I found some very interesting reviews that shed light on the NY Times and their anti-fantasy bent.
In 2003, Caryn James of the NY Times wrote this absurd review of Return of the King:
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/12/21/movies/film-are-women-just-bored-of-the-rings.html
In 2011, the same Caryn James wrote this absurd review of Game of Thrones:
http://blogs.indiewire.com/carynjames/archives/gameofthrones/
To bash fantasy and reinforce gender roles in her stead, the NY Times gave the review to Ginia Bellafonte, who wrote the review we are discussing so much.
It seems as if there is an entire cadre of devoted fantasy-hating women who work at the NY Times.
SergioCQHQuote Reply
I call it slavery. Prostitution requires payment as part of its definition.
SergioCQHQuote Reply
Well this is certainly a more polite phrasing than the way I had been mulling it over. Personally the idea of an influx of people posting under pseudonyms like “Dudeman Balls” or leaving posts with the depth of rain puddles isn’t very a exciting thought, though it’s probably something to which we should resign ourselves. The silver lining to this, should it happen, is that any interest in the show, no matter from whom, only helps to ensure further seasons get produced…
ZackQuote Reply
SergioCQH,
Man.. hehe. I have never sat awake through an entire showing of any of the LOTR movies, even when I saw them at the theater. So I can relate.
Jack DorseyQuote Reply
Can’t say I agree with you pal, coz I haven’t seen the episodes yet. I can’t watch this show by myself, I want to watch tv with my family. Maybe I’m just getting too old for this shit.
Jack DorseyQuote Reply
Nope. Coz the person who sold the slave got payment. That girl is a sex slave, man. Stay with the beat.
Jack DorseyQuote Reply
She bashed Lord of the Rings (best film ever) and re-used a pun that’s at LEAST 30 years old? Ahahahahah… now I don’t feel nearly as bad about her review of GoT. Another hack.
LexQuote Reply
Ridney,
That was brilliant.
Steven SwansonQuote Reply
You’re totally wrong, go die in a fire.
Steven SwansonQuote Reply
So having sex while a slave makes one a whore. Got it.
fafhrdQuote Reply
Mike Chair,
Not that I’m a proponent of it or anything, but I think it’s unfair to call Jaime and Cersei’s sex “not lovemaking” just because it’s incest. It’s still two people who worship each other having sex simply because they want to.
Although the point is not far off, George doesn’t seem to have a strong tendency toward regular, happy couplings between people. There’s almost always something sour.
RistoQuote Reply
Not all of Dany’s encounters were rape. The first one wasn’t.
ScottsdaleSamQuote Reply
I’m not going to be swayed from the belief that, at the very least, their first sexual encounter is ‘lovemaking’. And that’s in the first episode! Subsequent occasions are more debatable, I suppose, though I don’t think the grounds for calling it ‘rape’ are very solid. Let’s go over the passage posted in the thread:
1) He wakes her for sex nightly. (Nothing is said about resistance on Dany’s part…)
2) It is primarily sex from behind. (So?)
3) It is rough sex, and as such is sometimes painful. (Is all rough sex ‘rape’ now? Is there not such a thing as ‘enjoyable pain?’ Do all well-endowed men ‘rape’ their wives because it is difficult to have sex comfortably?)
I guess point 3 is the trickiest, and calling it rape isn’t easily disprovable. But neither is the evidence for it all that damning either. And I always just extrapolated from the mutual understanding they had of each other from their first session that this was something Dany was okay with. That, for example when it said she was grateful her took her from behind so he couldn’t see her tears, it could have merely meant that she didn’t want to seem weak in front of him, unable to handle pain.)
ZackQuote Reply
Think of using Spoiler Tags.
EdQuote Reply
Here in America, we consider ANY sex before the age of consent to be rape, because we want to be sure that the person in question is old enough to be able to make an informed decision about whether they want to. So yes, by that definition, the first time and every subsequent time is “rape” by a modern definition. Even when she takes control. This definition may not be completely appropriate due to the circumstances. Also, the only time the DEFINITION of something really matters is in court. What matters to the person is not what it’s called, but how they feel. That first time, and the events leading up to it, for Dany, are NOT positive. I don’t care if you call it rape or not. But it’s not the beautiful thing sex can be, nor is it the kind of titillating scene put into a story to sell novels.
Also, by all accounts the film version of this event portrays it negatively, with Dany in tears as it is happening, and pleading beforehand that she doesn’t want to.
While saying that there are no “nice” sex in the novels (at least the first book) may not literally quite be true, it’s pretty close to the truth. Reports of the episodes seem to emphasize that it’s even more true in the show.
salukQuote Reply
Prostitution and sexual slavery aren’t exactly the same thing; arguably Doreah’s situation is worse than the women who work in Chataya’s brothel since her entire life depends on pleasing one person – her owner.
Regina ThorneQuote Reply
I encourage everyone here to email a letter to the editor concerning Bellafonte’s thoughtless review. Ignorance and laziness are no excuse for sexism. Make your thoughts heard and hopefully the world won’t have to suffer through this kind of irresponsible journalism again.
Here is a link with instructions on emailing a letter to the editor:
http://www.nytimes.com/content/help/site/editorial/letters/letters.html
Pierce VanderBentQuote Reply
Pierce VanderBent,
If you’re sending a letter, please get her name right at least. It’s BELLAFANTE, not Bellafonte. And it’s GINIA, not Gina.
LexQuote Reply
ScottsdaleSam,
Assuming it isn’t rape–what about the show? Can the show really convey all that first meeting? Would it be believable? It’s easier to make unbelievable things ‘work’ in novels than in mainstream film. Once you start making unbelievable leaps during character development people drop like flies.
Jack DorseyQuote Reply
Zack,
Hmm, I don’t think the fact that she’s crying from pain indicates that she’s OK with having sex with Drogo, nor does the fact that she doesn’t actually say “no”. Does she, in fact, have any sort of choice in the matter? Is there any indication that Dany believes she could refuse to have sex with Drogo (for whatever reason) and he would be OK with that/ I don’t think so. To me she is just as much sex slave as Doreah even if she is eventually able to please her master and enjoy their physical intimacy. Given the relative positions of power between Drogo and Dany, I think she has no choice but to submit to his desires, even if she doesn’t explicitly resist him and she is only truly “liberated” or grows up or is empowered once he’s dead.
Regina ThorneQuote Reply
Pierce VanderBent,
hehe .. man, no offence but my first thought was the editor looking at a dozen or so angry emails in his inbox tomorrow, mutting “Got nerdrage?” and deleting them all in one fell stroke. If I was going to write an angry letter I’d be posting it all over the internet. I haven’t seen anything impressive yet on the topic.
Jack DorseyQuote Reply
Lex,
Okay um yeah thanks for pointing that out, but if you’ll notice I didn’t call her “Gina”. In fact in my post I didn’t even use her first name at all.
Also you’re right it is “Bellafante”. That one was a typo, though I think I can be forgiven one tiny misplaced consonant don’t you? :P
I hope you write a letter as well if you feel the same way I do about her “review”.
Pierce VanderBentQuote Reply
Jack Dorsey,
Please don’t nerdrage. If you’re going to write a letter make it intelligent enough to carry some weight when they’re reading it over. Otherwise nothing will get accomplished…
Pierce VanderBentQuote Reply
Pierce VanderBent,
accomplished??? hehe okay.. so what you want to get this woman fired because she doesn’t care a bit about your show? Come on man, that’s not too smart. There are thousands more waiting in line to take the slot.
Jack DorseyQuote Reply
I’m pretty sure The Game of Thrones does not take place here in present day America.
ScottsdaleSamQuote Reply
I’m waiting for the episodes to air like all the other poor schmucks, but I’m pretty sure they’ll show exactly what happened in the books.
no?
yes
Cliche? Perhaps. But nothing unbelievable about that.
ScottsdaleSamQuote Reply
Jack Dorsey,
Wooooow slow down buddy. All I’m after is a little more journalistic responsibility in the New York Times. I’m definitely NOT trying to “get somebody fired” Here’s a little news flash for you: Yeah I happen to totally care when somebody writes a lazy, ignorant review of something I care about and I worry that non-fans will read it and decide not to watch because of it. So I’ll write an intelligent letter to the editor and let them know how I feel. Hopefully Bellafante will write a real review next time and that’s what I mean by “accomplished.” Hopefully now you get it.
Pierce VanderBentQuote Reply
Just for the record, I didn’t call Jamie and Cersei’s sex “not lovemaking”, I asked if incest can be lovemaking. I was availing myself of the wisdom of House Gatewatch. And the bottom was supported thusly:
Indeed, the Jamie/Cersie scene had passion:
GoT: Bran II
Arguably, much more passion than Eddard and Catelyn:
Gods, did he punch a clock?
Is Martin suggesting incest is more fun than marriage? Sure looks that way.
But, is either couple “making love” more than the other?
Each loves his or her partner and willingly expresses it through sex.
Of course, the Eddard/Catelyn scene is post-coital and Dudeman Balls did exclude incest so, I’m sorry to say, he may still be right.
I raised that earlier, quoted and cited the text, but encountered some valid debate. I did argue it wasn’t rape in the technical sense, excluding the issue of a minor being unable to consent.
I don’t recall those two having sex — only discussing it.
I can only find this:
GoT: Daenerys III.
Dany went so far as to take lessons … on how to be raped?
The bottom line is these are valid, complex issues. The sexuality in GoT is not “gratuitous”. It’s important to the story. It helps define the characters and drives some of the story line. Can you honestly say the story would be the same if you removed the sex? If your answer is “no” than the sex is not gratuitous and any criticism of it as such is not based on fact, at least as far as the books go.
Mike ChairQuote Reply
To specifically answer your last question,
He stopped then, and drew her down onto his lap. Dany was flushed and breathless, her heart fluttering in her chest. He cupped her face in his huge hands and looked into his eyes. “No?” he said, and she knew it was a question..
That last line is what did it for me. I don’t know why he’d go to the effort of making her comfortable the first time and then never care about her wants again, and to me the text doesn’t say enough that I could be sure of rape.
Is it statutory rape by modern standards? Sure. But IMO it’s problematic to assign modern cultural morality to other eras and places. Maybe that’s unenlightened of me (though I’ll certainly agree that such situations are not what I’d consider ideal), but it seems like it was common practice in Westeros to marry girls as soon as they’ve menstruated, as it was until fairly recently in our own world as well, when life expectancy was significantly lower than it is currently. Most states in the US today even have an age of consent of 16, younger if the age gap between the partners is small. If Dany were 15 and Drogo were 18, or 14 and 17, that would be legal in many states. How old is Drogo?
My point is that current law on the issue has only been recently established, so it hardly seems like a moral absolute.
ZackQuote Reply
You must have missed the rest of the comment. My point isn’t that it’s very clear that Dany’s first night is rape, but that there are some definite, purposeful, negative connotations to the scene, and that those are more important than what we call it.
Still, it’s not a clear scene, and can be interpreted in many ways. People react at every end of the spectrum from slave rape to the perfect honeymoon. Ok, so I haven’t actually seen someone say that last one. I’m sure there’s someone who thinks it.
salukQuote Reply
Regina Thorne,
Let’s look at the legal definition of slavery: A civil relationship in which one person has absolute power over the life, fortune, and liberty of another. (The Free Dictionary)
And the more general understanding: slavery is the condition of being owned or controlled by another. (WikiAnswers)
Absolute power over life must be considered the ultimate coercion, and there is a school of thought that says that no matter how “voluntary,” sexual relations between a master and a slave may seem, they are de facto involuntary. (Annette Gordon-Reid explores this issue quite thoroughly and persuasively in the context of Sally Hemings’s return with her master, Thomas Jefferson, to America from Europe when she might have remained in France as a free woman.) No matter how complex the physical or psychological relationship, so long as there is a government enforced and controlled requirement of obedience, nothing can be voluntary on the part of the enslaved individual. That takes care of everything Doreah does and is trained to do, no matter how charmingly she undertakes her duties,, since it is clear that the institution of slavery is recognized and enforced among the Dothraki.
Insofar as Dany and Drogo are concerned, Dany entered into the marriage as willingly as a young girl in a foreign land, without parents and protectors, entirely dependent upon a male relative (and pretender to the throne) can. Do we get the sense she could have refused or made her own alliance independent of her brother? No.
Did she reconcile herself to the inevitable? Yes.
Could she have refused to have sexual relations with her husband? No.
Was it advisable to try to change, bargain for, or ameliorate the ground rules governing her predicament? Yes.
What prevents Dany/Drogo from being a case of Stockholm Syndrome is the change in Drogo’s behavior. Dany did not learn to love being raped or to bond with her rapist or to justify his rape of her as necessary or deserved, rather, she renegotiated the terms under which they engaged in sexual relations as a married couple. He responded and changed. That made her change toward him.
DH87Quote Reply
Zack,
I’m not really talking about Dany’s age so much as I am about the utter imbalance in the power relationship between Drogo and Dany. Even if she were 18 or 20 or 30, is she really in a position to refuse him sex when he demands it? Does she feel herself to be able to do so? I don’t think she does, because the reality is that Drogo is the master of all he surveys, etc., etc., including his wife whom he bought and is willing to pay for. I’m not sure I’m expressing this very well, but to me, it’s like saying that just because a slave doesn’t say “no” to his/her master, he/she can’t possibly be being raped, when the entire situation is one in which there is no possibility for him/her to say “no.”
I’m not sure I’d categorize every encounter between Dany and Drogo as rape, but it’s certainly a story that makes me really, really uncomfortable every time I read it.
Regina ThorneQuote Reply
Okay, I’m fully on board with you in that whole post, especially this last bit. The ick factor is undeniable, due to the age and power dynamics. I wish GRRM had made Dany 3 or 4 years older from the start. Also, I haven’t read the first book recently enough to be certain about any of this, and it is possible my memory is flawed and I’m giving Drogo too much credit. I had just been assuming Dany could have refused him at any time and he would have accepted it, which I’m fully basing off that line I already quoted.
ZackQuote Reply
I thought that interlude was expanded on in the show. Dudeman’s initial claim was about both the episodes and the chapters. If we’re still including the show, even if there isn’t any girl play, we know Viserys and Doreah have roughly the same arrangement, “unforced” sex that doesn’t involve immediate remuneration .
fafhrdQuote Reply
Excellent point.
fafhrdQuote Reply
… Is anyone here talking about the GOOD review? Cause I’ve seen no comments on that. I found it very enlightening.
DekarQuote Reply
He only got a 90 on metacritic. Reviewers landing between 40 and 100 are dead to us.
fafhrdQuote Reply
Agreed.
DH87Quote Reply
First point.
You can’t use today’s moral compass on what the beliefs were in the dark ages, on which this fantasy draws inspiration from. Once a woman past puberty, she was considered a woman and ready to marry. That’s the context this must be viewed in.
Second point,
Now I have no idea how it is portrayed in the TV show, but when I read the book I saw the first night as a back and forth between Drogo and Dany. Drogo keeps asking and trying until Dany acceptingly says YES.
Third point,
They were married. Now regardless of how they where married, they were. This happened to millions on women in the past, and I’m sure many didn’t marry for love, so you can’t call their first night together lovemaking.
It’s not the type of sex you are having that is important to the story. Can you connect with the emotions that Dany is going through in that moment? She is terrified of this large man she was forced to marry and is now expected to perform as wife for him. It’s not going to be the happy beautiful moment we’ve come to expect in today’s society where we marry for love. If you feel her pain from the scene, then it does its job. Every experience, good and bad, shapes us into the individuals we are today. This is one experience the author feels shapes this character. Some may not agree with it, but we aren’t the authors, just the readers.
I’m not justifying it, nor condoning it. Simply saying it is what it is. Part of the story that’s been in the book for 15 years now.
fuelpaganQuote Reply
fuelpagan,
Just in case anyone thought I was criticizing the story, just because I view Dany + Drogo in a negative light, doesn’t mean I view that storyline in a negative light. I agree with your final point – it is what it is, and it forms Dany’s character. It illuminates this dark world with a very strong momentum of forces to keep the people in darkness, and violence, and oppression.
To your first point however, I don’t see why we shouldn’t use today’s moral compass to view this society. Just because it existed does not mean it was “ok”. There are cultures TODAY where it is acceptable to have multiple wives. Just because it is acceptable in those cultures, when viewed from their lens, I’m still going to think it’s wrong. Or at least, I would want to know more about the details of WHY their culture is this way, to be able to judge it fully. Not that it is my place to judge at all, but internally, I’m still going to take issue with it.
Even though it may have been considered acceptable in the middle ages to be married off by your mad brother to someone you don’t know at the age of 13, I’m still going to be appalled by that event. (Not appalled that it was written). Just as many other events in these books are appalling. Jaime’s act towards the beginning? Appalling! Hell, it is acceptable to kill people during the wedding in Dothraki culture. No, I don’t think that’s OK. Not even “back then”.
salukQuote Reply
I know this is my opinion, but I really think some people over-romanticize the Dany and Drogo story. It is an absolutely HORRIFIC situation from all angles. What she gets put through(by her own brother and the only relationship that she has) would traumatize a grown woman, let alone a 12 year old girl. I think it’s a moot point whether it fits a true definition of rape, it’s just an awful, awful situation, bordering on rape at best.
I think it is important because the fact that she not only makes it through it but also rises above it is a huge statement about the strength of character.
ChrisQuote Reply
Pierce VanderBent,
I absolutely feel the same way you do about the review. I’m just mentioning it because I’ve seen a lot of people misspelling Ginia Bellafante’s name on Twitter (both first and last name)… and I want to be sure people know exactly who we’re talking about. ;)
Man… this is pretty bizarre. I used to think it was weird that I knew the name of every cast and crew member… but now I know the names of at least a dozen critics as well!
LexQuote Reply
Has anyone seen Ginia Bellafante’s Wikipedia article? I LOL’d so hard!
Ginia Bellafante (born March 31, 1965) is an ill-informed and bizarrely sexist American writer and critic, for the New York Times,[1] New York Observer,[2] and Time (magazine).
It’s hard to believe her review went live just over 24 hours ago. I thought the outrage would remain confined to this site, but it has spread…and spread…and spread! TheOneRing.net just posted a piece about it, as have many other blogs. It’s a wonderful, heart-warming feeling to see the female half of the fan-base rise up and defend themselves against such moronic, pig-headed sexism!
It’s also funny to see all these mini-scandals (Bellafante, the LOST feud, etc.) just fuelling more and more publicity and hype for Game of Thrones! I’m starting to think we really will see some amazing ratings… IN LESS THAN TWO DAYS FROM NOW! :D :D :D
LexQuote Reply
When I read that review last night I was pissed. For women and the ridicule heaped on fantasy in general. Can’t believe this got by an editor. Tried to go to sleep and failed. Got up and wrote a blog. I was tired today but it was worth it.
(NY Times Getting Sexist On Game of Thrones) at http://wp.me/p1oAJG-xP (www.csdaley.com)
ChristopherQuote Reply
Lex,
LOL! Seems like Ginia Bellafante’s review will do more good for Thrones than bad.
sjweningsQuote Reply
Here’s a bizarre review from the Denver Post. I’d call it negative (based on her lack of recommendation for anyone who’s not a fan of the books)… but nearly every single thing she says about the show sounds like praise!
(scratching head)
LexQuote Reply
Looks like theonering.net picked up on the nyt article. That review has probably had a much better and more galvanizing effect than a glowing review would have.
ChrisQuote Reply
So, besides pacing/exposition issues, some of the negative/lukewarm reviews have commented on the characters being less than compelling, or lacking depth. Can anyone who’s seen the show comment on this?
I guess it’s hard for us book fans to be able to comment on the characters objectively. As we all know, the characters in the books are richly developed and deeply compelling. I’m wondering if this does not come across so well in the show, or if some of the character development was sacrificed in favour of cramming in all the plot?
LexQuote Reply
Chris,
Yes, the critic attacked female Hobbit fans and GOT fans. It energized the TORn Facebook page instantly.
And, I agree with you. All the attention the series will get because of that negative review is a very positive thing for the series. No amount of publicity could have stirred the potential female audience as well as that slap across the face did.
Larry D CurtisQuote Reply
Um, sorry to break the news to you but it’s likely that 75% of *all* the reviews you will ever read will be written by someone in NYC. Including the Time one, above.
Stop stereotyping people, you toothless hillbilly! :-)
CFQuote Reply
This is an interesting critic of the critics.
Amir MishaliQuote Reply
Amir Mishali,
Meh, I think he’s pretty off base. I don’t think that Bellafonte in particular was trashing the series from the point-of-view of someone attempting to defend “high culture” – she seems enamored with the idea that there are forms of lowbrow entertainment worthy of viewing (I don’t think her praise of “Sex in the City” for example is done in the spirit of elevating the show as highbrow) but only if you agree with her arbitrary tastes in genre and bizarrely reversed pseudo-feminism.
As for the Dany/Drogo dynamics.
The subject of the early days of the wedding between Dany and Drogo, and the copious use of the r-word, are delicate subjects that such arguments almost always, in my mind, oversimplify what’s actually going on. Yes, the base facts of the situation are undisputedly creepy, particularly from a modern perspective: a grown man marrying a thirteen-year-old girl is never going to quite sit right with the majority of readers, particularly when the girl is all but sold into that situation, in essence as a slave, and forced into a harsh and physically brutal situation, where part of that physical brutality includes very unwelcome sexual penetration from her husband, is going to make you uneasy. It’s supposed to make you uneasy.
Are those early sexual encounters rape? Apart from the wedding night (which clearly wasn’t, except in the statutory sense), from a modern perspective, clearly yes. But neither character is viewing their situation from a modern perspective, and neither, I think, would argue that it is. Dany’s willingness on her wedding night, if nothing else, surely indicates that sex with Drogo is something she is interested in, at least in the abstract; the problem is more that the days of hard riding are taking their toll on her, and that sex in that condition is very painful for Dany and something she would rather do without.
Drogo’s crime in these scenes is not the aggressive anger that is characteristic of rape, either; he is simply oblivious to the wrongness of the entire situation, oblivious to his wife’s pain, and sees it as only natural that he should be able to have sex with her when he desires is what, to him, is a significant aspect of marriage. I’m not denying that it’s rape from a modern context, but calling it rape and then assigning to the situation *all* of the meaning that we do to rape in the modern context is, in my opinion, making an error. Because Dany grows to love Drogo does not make her a classic abuse victim, nor does it make her a victim of Stockholm Syndrome, nor anything of the sort.
The key is intent. Drogo’s intent is not to rape Dany, and Dany’s intent is not to forgive what she sees as rape. The cultures the two have grown up in see this behavior as normal. It is one thing to view it as rape, it is another to expect Dany to behave toward Drogo as a victim behaves to her rapist. Neither sees it that way, Dany understands that Drogo is not so much trying to hurt her as he is oblivious to her pain, and she takes steps to correct that aspect of their arrangement.
I think people are overestimating the amount of time that that the unwelcome sex status quo of their relationship, anyway. Dany very quickly finds strength from her dragon eggs, and the scenes we have described to us from there on out tell a significantly different tale:
Again, lest I be labeled a misogynist pig, I’m not trying to argue that the situation isn’t creepy, or that it doesn’t involve what we would call rape from a modern context. I will say, though, that just because we call it rape doesn’t make the intent of all involved very different from what we ascribe to rape in the modern sense. Drogo’s intent is not to harm Dany, and he would rather see her happy. He is simply not acquainted with the idea that sex with his new wife isn’t something he can take whenever he wants. That’s the failing of his upbringing, in that the Dothraki culture does not lead to what we would call healthy sexual dynamics. That he and Daenerys are eventually able to rise above that dynamic and redefine the sexual politics of their marriage is precisely what makes their relationship among the most intricate and interesting of all the relationships in A Game of Thrones.
Ser_GQuote Reply
Regina Thorne,
A bit like saying Battlestar Galactica was first made before 9/11.
Khal NicQuote Reply
Amir Mishali,
I also posted a review here and there (and emailed the NYT editors). I am posting it here for support:
My dear New York Times New York liberal media people who hate fantasy to whom this may concern,
Please fire Ginia B immediately.
As you know, women have come a long way since being school teachers and able breeders. They now can keep steady jobs until they give birth and decide not to come back to work after sucking dry the company’s maternity leave policy. Great for them. here’s something you might not know. They also read geek books now. Some of them, the ones on the fringes of society. On Exhibit a I have the female character “Cramsey” of Party Down S01E05. Exhibit b showcases nerd-fave Kristen Bell of 2008 FANBOYS who prefers Star Wars over Star Trek too. Finally Exhibit c shows all the english school teachers that, out of a desperate need for expression and escape, are a workforce for romance and fantasy novels that can be purchased over at Fictionwise.com. The latter you will find can be vocal when unequivocally offended by the likes of your Ginia B.
But let’s get to the real issue, shall we? Ginia B doesn’t even look cool. Next time hire someone cool, like someone who loves to put children’s action figures on their desk instead of … I don’t know, flower pots or whatever silly useless things. We, a force of online geeks and a few dozen nerdettes, can help you pick out who is cool. The pre-req is someone who understands that old argument from 10 years ago, that there is nothing more important than hobbits. According to dozens of in-depth game of thrones fan analysts, that the world culture of fantasy/sci-fi culture is departing from silly Eragon type dragons that fail at the box office and towards Belarion type dragons which are way cooler because they suckle on 13 year nipples when they are babies, and its way cooler. You should know that! It is mind blodding you do not know this!
After you are done firing Ginia B (and I believe you should fire her a few times to get the message clear), you should fire yourselves for hiring her. Then, jump off a bridge and kill yourselves for being extremely stupid. Sure you cover more ‘serious’ news and you have a million copies in circulation every day. But you effed up hard when you totally missed the point of Game of Thrones starring Sean Bean. What we nerds would then respond by saying “total facepalm” and “fail” (expressions birthed out of World of Warcraft chatboxes).
Not only have you offended exhibit c and a few nerds’ convention girlfriends, but you also have offended me.
And I am a man.
I may have an extra layer of padding from playing video games and reading lots of fantasy novels and watching a lot of fantasy tv, but my fingers are nimble and swift. They shall smite you. You shall know their terrible grubby wrath. And I am not alone, to be sure. Our collected digits shall spread over the net like a black cloud foreshadowing your dooms!
Sancho PanzaQuote Reply
Sancho Panza,
Something tells me you don’t get laid enough.
Ser_GQuote Reply
Ser_G,
:D that’s not very supportive.
But yeah, geek stereotypes need to get laid more.
Sent from my iPhoneQuote Reply
Uh, I think it’s quite obvious that the REMAKE of “Battlestar Galactica” (the miniseries that was made in 2003) used the visual shorthand of 9/11 (the memorial wall, the pilots touching the photo that was reminiscent of one of a firefighter) in order to evoke a similar set of emotions in the viewer. (The remade version also differed significantly from the original in many other aspects such as the Cylons looking human, and Starbuck being a woman, etc.)
This is not at all analogous to George R. R. Martin writing a novel in 1996 and this somehow being an allegory for George Bush going to war with Saddam Hussein in 2003. I don’t think that GRRM includes prophecy among his many undoubted talents!
Sancho Panza, I think the io9 parody was a lot better, sorry!
Regina ThorneQuote Reply
Your show?
It’s not your show too? Then why are you here, fool?
cardusQuote Reply
Ahh, considering I wrote that with my thumbs and toes before 2nd cup of coffee, your comparison doesn’t hurt (as much). Still, I shall redouble my efforts to get Ginia B. fired.
Sancho PanzaQuote Reply
Sancho Panza,
photoshop her picture with a little boy with pink toenails, that’ll get her fired.
KnurkQuote Reply
The reviews of the reviews are awesome! ;D
they deserve there own thread!
N E X TQuote Reply
Gina is an object of pity.
AndrewQuote Reply
Gheghe, George defines his female fans now as boys with boobs, congratulation girls!
KnurkQuote Reply
GRRM himself has responded.
http://grrm.livejournal.com/210874.html?view=12981690#t12981690
I added my own comment to his post:
Geeks and nerds of the world…UNITE!
I had wondered what your reaction might have been to that particular review. I completely understand the idea of avoiding reviewing the reviews, that’s sort of an unspoken and sacred rule among writers and critics. That said, Ginia Bellafante HAD to know her piece was going to induce reaction, if not backlash. The NYT did themselves a serious disservice to their readers, I can only hope they learn from this.
I also hope Ms. Bellafante enjoys her rather large slice of humble pie with her foot baked into it.
Gabe K.Quote Reply
Knurk,
Way of misinterpret his statement. lol.
N E X TQuote Reply
Well, consider this: on average, Ginia Bellefante grades the shows she reviews 4.7 points below other critics; on GOT her review was 42 points below the average (40 vs. 82). For Season 1 shows (by was of closest comparison), she “gave” Modern Family a 90; Samantha Who, The Sarah Connor Chronicles, Miss Guided, The Vampire Diaries an 80….double the rating of GOT. She gave Spartacus Season 1 a 50, so she’s not adverse to some gratuitous LSNV when it comes her way.
Such a strange take she has on things.
DH87Quote Reply
Knurk,
I think you misunderstood George’s comment.
LexQuote Reply
It’s pretty clear at this point that she’s an inconsistent, shitty critic.
LexQuote Reply
Anyone else offended by GRRM’s quote?
“who are all those boys with breasts who keep turning up by the hundreds at my signings and readings?”
We’re not all that fat, you know.
I’m a man!Quote Reply
Dany’s plight is not much different than any woman of her day. What makes it worse for her is that the Dothraki are a foreign culture and somewhat more “barbaric” than her home culture. But look at the other married women, Tywin deterimined that Cersei was going to be Queen and married her off to the King du jour who happend to be Robert. Catelyn was supposed to marry Ned’s brother. No woman had any say in who or when she married. At least not in the Noble Class. We don’t know too much about marriage among the small folk. We do know that life was hard.
Has it been all that long ago when marriage was proposed as a contract between virtual strangers in our culture? Dowry’s were paid, if for whatever reason the marriage did not take place one could be sued for breach of contract. I think those laws are still on the books.
Marriage for love is only a relatively recent thing within the last 100 years or so. And even then the attitude toward sex was very different. When we got married in 1960 someone gave me a book written by a Doctor in about the 1930′s who said that a wife must never refuse her husband sex unless she was unble to perform her other wifely duties, such as cooking, cleaning, laundry etc. In other words she had to be seriously incapacitated, no ” not tonight dear I have a headache “. It was funny.I don’t know what would be attractive about someone coughing up a spleen or throwing up, but such was the attitude. The doc made sex to be just another chore like taking out the garbage.
OldGranQuote Reply
Eh.. I think he’s talking about the handsome women. Either that or the local Best Buy Geek Squad from around the corner of the book store.
only …29 hours
SteveQuote Reply
Knurk,
I know, right! And as if his odd androgynous fetishes weren’t creepy enough, he even goes as far as to make the claim that he’s romantically lusting over all of his female readers!
JWestfallQuote Reply
I’m a man!,
Martin isn’t claiming his male readership is fat. He is commenting on the notion put forth in the NY Times review that girls don’t read D&D type fantasy. He’s pointing out that if his story only appeals to boys, then he finds it remarkable the number of “boys with breasts,( ie, girls)” that show up for book signings and readings.
He is NOT insulting his readership.
Dale RippkeQuote Reply
N E X T,
Lex,
I think my comment missed my intended irony.
KnurkQuote Reply
Knurk,
Don’t worry, I was with ya, irony is my native tongue…
JWestfallQuote Reply
Knurk,
Thought so, but just wanted to be sure. With all this offensiveness being thrown back and forth across the internet, didn’t want anyone to get confused. :)
LexQuote Reply
I may be reaching, but I think that was irony, Dale.
Fire And BloodQuote Reply
Detroit Free Press/Metromix
KGQuote Reply
Ilana Teitelbaum at Hufingtonpost slams Ginia Bellafante:
She goes on:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ilana-teitelbaum/game-of-thrones-hbo_b_850014.html
Mike ChairQuote Reply
They’re also discussing The WSJ review on TORN:
http://www.theonering.net/torwp/2011/04/16/43557-do-women-love-the-hobbit-nytimes-says-no/
afterall, The Hobbit was slighted by her also.
MetalgoddessAMBQuote Reply
As a woman, I find Ms. Bellafante’s review incredibly arrogant. She presumes to speak for her entire gender and presents her personal taste as if it were universal (and those who don’t conform to it are obviously odd). That having been said, it’s completely unfair to characterize her critique as ‘lazy’ and ‘poorly written’. I don’t agree with her assessment, nor with her high-handed, almost arrogant perspective (especially since she decided to frame it as a gender issue). But the prose were fine, and there’s nothing to show she put less effort into her review than someone who liked the show. I’ve noticed that virtually ANY critic who gives a poor review of the show gets these negative descriptions of their work on WiC. I appreciate that you’re reporting even the negative reviews, but is it really necessary to use such highly charged words to describe the negative critiques?
MasterCatQuote Reply
Your post is lazy and poorly written.
LexQuote Reply
It seems Bellafante has a thing for putting ‘HVAC’ (Heating, Ventilating, and Air Conditioning) in her reviews…
From her GOT review:
From her ‘Supernatural’ review:
From her review about a bunch of reality shows:
Meh. Didn’t mean to nitpick; just an observation.
hmm…Quote Reply
Lex,
Your post points out the obvious and is slightly mean-spirited.
Since we’re describing people’s posts, I might as well…
P.S. This is the Internet, btw.
JimQuote Reply