Here is one that I know many people have been waiting anxiously to read, AOL TV’s Maureen Ryan has posted her review for Game of Thrones. Is it positive? Negative? I’d say it’s more positive than negative, but she does have a few criticisms of the series.
As a television series, ‘Game of Thrones’ is frequently handsome, even gorgeous at times. This tale of knights, kings and spectral threats is, in general, well-acted by an able cast, and once the Medieval-flavored story of courtly maneuvering and moral ambiguity gets into gear midway through the season, much of what works about the novels begins to work in the show.
Yet at various junctures, the TV show lacks the boldness on display in Martin’s fiction.
The show is faithful to the events of the novel, but, especially in the early going, it’s only fitfully faithful to the novel’s emotional depth and thematic complexity.
While a desire to diligently depict the incidents in Martin’s 807-page book (the first in his seven-novel ‘Song of Ice and Fire’ series) is admirable and even understandable, ‘Game of Thrones’ needed to be shaped more aggressively to fit the needs of a television drama. Each hour needed to have its own beginning, middle and end; more elements should have been rearranged, given additional context, amplified or eliminated.
Winter Is Coming: It’s great to get Mo’s take on the show. As someone who has seen the first six episodes, I can definitely see where she is coming from with her criticisms of the show. She is looking at it as a television series first and foremost and as a TV critic that is to be expected. As for me, I enjoyed every minute of the show, but that is because I was just so excited to see the book come to life. If you are like me, I think some of the issues she raises might not bother you as much.
UPDATE: Alan Sepinwall has also posted his review of the show. And, as expected, it is quite positive. Encouraging to read from someone who hasn’t read the books.
There’s so much going on in this series – so many people and places and rules to learn – that I feared I would be completely lost without the books as a roadmap. But as with the cream of the HBO crop, “Game of Thrones” deposits me in a world I never expected to visit and doesn’t leave me feeling stranded and adrift, but eager to immerse myself in the local culture.
Loading ...
198 Comments
Methinks she’s more negative than positive and incidentally she’s the second person to complain about the second episode, so that could clearly be a problem.
garik16Quote Reply
A very negative review, and quite confusing because she does actually seem to like the show! She’s just taken the slightly strange path of only pointing out what she didn’t like.
I look forward to reading more from her, each reviewer has a slightly different take on things and makes note of elements that another critic won’t even touch upon.
Matt NQuote Reply
I think she has made the same mistake as McGee, she has written a review for the fans. Both of them want people to watch the show, but none of what they are saying is going to get non-fans to tune in. Neither bothered to go into what the show was actually about, nor any of the positives baring “the sets are nice” and “the acting is good”. 90% of the people who read these reviews aren’t going to know what the hell they’re on about.
NickQuote Reply
I think a part of the problem is that so many of the early reviews were so glowingly positive that there is a little bit of pushback going on. Do I think Mo Ryan and Ryan McGee are being honest in their reviews? Absolutely. But I also think that they may be a little hyper-sensitive to certain negative aspects that they might not have been otherwise if they had been the first person to publish a review on the show.
Of course, it’s also possible that the first people were just so excited that they didn’t take enough time to consider things thorougly. We’ll find out soon, either way.
And I also agree that both these critics are writing to an audience, but I don’t think they’re writing to the fans. I think they’re writing to the audience that has already been hearing glowing reviews about the show. Therefore, since the show has been talked about so much, instead of focusing on the basics of acting, plot, visuals, etc., they are focusing on the small negatives because they feel the basics that are good have already been heavily covered. Their reviews are working not as if they are the only thing a reader is going their readers are going to read or hear about Thrones (which is how it should be) but instead as if it is one piece of the whole critical mosaic that exists already about Thrones.
RoQuote Reply
Also, a very surprising comment from her was that Peter Dinklage was the low point of the cast. I do agree his English accent seems a bit over-the-top from the clips I’ve seen.
Matt NQuote Reply
it amazes me that people can read an article like this, and come away with only the negative. She very clearly outlines many parts about the series that are well done. In multiple paragraphs.
tekQuote Reply
garik16,
She does clearly like the show. She sums it up with a score for each of the episodes which seems to equate to perhaps 75. Which is good.
Still dissappointing to see that she only “liked it”, though.
And as i said in another post, i’m glad we’ve already had several glowing reviews before reading this one. And also – as Winter says – i don’t think these issues she mentiones will bother many of us that much.
sjweningsQuote Reply
tek, yeah, I thought there were a lot of positives in there. Her average score for the first 6 eps is 70/100. Which is good, but not great, and I think that is the vibe I get from her review. In her opinion, the show is good, but not great.
Winter Is ComingQuote Reply
I took it as a very negative review. Maybe it’s because she is so specific about the negative aspects and seems to just fly right over the positive pieces. That could just be my interpretation though.
YeremiahQuote Reply
I think for those of us who’ve read the books, we can see the series and flesh out what may be missing from our experiences in reading the novels. It could be that the non-reader may not see the emotional depth but I suspect will still appreciate the show on the merits of what is shown. Hopefully inspiring those who haven’t read the books to read them and see some of the scenes in their desired context
John KeadyQuote Reply
I think she put her uber-critic hat on for this one. Also the other thing that bothers me about all of these reviews (positive and negative) is that it’s only the first six episodes. I know that’s all that’s available but it’s like reviewing 3/5 of a movie without seeing the climax.
dizzy_34Quote Reply
Uh oh … This isn’t so great, although I have to say that my tastes tend to coincide more with Alan Sepinwall’s than Mo Ryan’s (for example, I absolutely hated the end of “Battlestar Galactica” and she seems to think that the only reason for hating it was the lack of “answers” to the mysteries, which I thoroughly disagree with.)
Each hour needed to have its own beginning, middle and end…
Hmmm, obviously I haven’t seen any episodes yet, but it strikes me that you could make this sort of criticism about “The Wire” or others of HBO’s heavily serialized shows. This isn’t a show that you can come into in mid-episode 5 and know what’s going on and “The Wire” was like that too. OTOH, “The Wire” survived on critical acclaim (and not being expensive) and so the fact that it was confusing and difficult to get into casually ultimately didn’t stop David Simon from getting five seasons, but I feel like this might be a huge problem for “Game of Thrones.”
Regina ThorneQuote Reply
I think her review was very well thought out. She’s not attacking the show and acknowledges the good points that she found pleasing. I know we are all fans here, and I believe that when our baby (GOT), so to speak, gets criticized we take offense. I good critic must be as objective as possible and she seems to be doing that here. For her, the show is good and she even suggests that people stick with the show, yet it’s not great. I appreciate her honesty.
David GriffinQuote Reply
Man, I’ve heard so many great things about Dinklage in the past few reviews. This is the first time I’ve read where he was considered to be the weak link.
The Atlantic also posted another write-up for those interested: ‘Game of Thrones’: Will Non-Fanboys Care That ‘Winter Is Coming’?
HannahQuote Reply
Off-topic, but of interest:
SciFiNow unexpectedly has another big article in the magazine for the 3rd month running. It’s based around two interviews, one with Nicolaj Coster-Waldau and the other with Jason Momoa, and is quite well-done. The article is also informed by the fact the writers have now seen the first two episodes and seem to be very positive and excited about it.
Interestingly, the article kicks off by contrasting how GoT and the LotR movies open: the movies with a long, involved prologue sequence and GoT with its cold open (pun intended) at the Wall. Jason Momoa goes on to discuss how his character initially comes across negatively due to his treatment of Dany, but she then earns his respect and he in turn softens and the relationship equalises out. NCW notes something similar about how people will hate Jaime at first (because of the end of Episode 1) but will see other sides of him later. Intriguingly, he suggests that Jaime will rationalise the act more for the fear of the life of his sister and her children a little bit more than in the book and that Jaime will be a little bit more sympathetic.
Both Momoa and NCW have read the books (or at least the first one) by this point and really enjoyed them. The interview ends with a nice quote from Momoa:
“The dragons are sleeping now, but don’t worry, they’ll be along.”
And a great quote from NCW, this time in TV & Satellite Week:
“Jaime’s not all bad, but a friend of mine watched the scene where I have sex with my sister and then try to kill a child who was spying on us and said, ‘Urgh! What are you doing?’”
Adam WhiteheadQuote Reply
I’m not too worried by people saying episodes 2 and 3 are a bit slow. Having to slow down and explain things with talky asides is a problem that should become less and less as the show progresses and viewers get more familiar with who’s who. With all the potential problems facing a new show (bad performance out of a lead actor, poor production quality, lousy script), that one’s not so bad.
Hopefully the sheer awesomeness of the last four episodes will make people forget about the earlier pacing and really build up momentum as we slingshot into Season 2. I thought Boardwalk Empire had nightmarishly slow episodes following its premier, but the second half of the first season really won me over. You have to get all the pins in the air before you can really start juggling.
Also, it is so wonderful to see the near universal praise for Maisie Williams.
maledictaQuote Reply
Atlantic with their 3rd piece out of 5, whether non-fans will flock to this series:
http://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2011/04/game-of-thrones-will-non-fanboys-care-that-winter-is-coming/237250/
I worry that many folks who haven’t read the books, or don’t read fantasy generally, won’t find the moral ambiguity and general brutality of Martin’s world particularly appealing. Part of the draw of Game of Thrones for fantasy readers is how different it is from the rest of the genre. But if you don’t read fantasy, you might not care about that. Variety’s Jon Weisman complains about the “complete joylessness in this world,” and he’s only seen the first three episodes. It doesn’t get any more joyful—but, as The Wire proved, and Weisman acknowledges, a great story can make up for a lot of joylessness. The story picks up as the series goes along—especially as the characters spread out across their world. But by then, it might be too late for some folks.
SuperdeluxeQuote Reply
Yeah, and people that have stayed with the show that far, should drag back some people that gave up on the show too early, i would think.
sjweningsQuote Reply
Although her review is well-written and her criticism surely has some merit, I too feel that she’s adressing the fanbase of ASOIAF too much in that interview.
If she had just written a review intended for people who’ve never heard of the thing before, I have a feeling it would’ve been both more positive and more useful for the majority of people.
RistoQuote Reply
It sounds as though she really didn’t like it, even though it was “gorgeous”. she mentions that some of the scenes are “stilted” which is something that we have noted on this site from some of the clips we’ve seen. It may be that we have our hopes way too high.
OldGranQuote Reply
Adam Whitehead,
Thanks MoRy! THIS is how a show should be critiqued, with intellect and with heart. No fan-bashing!
I’m dying to see it more and more and more, esp since I will be able to agree/disagree/rail at/with everything I’ve heard so far.
Franny BeeQuote Reply
The way I look at it is like this…maybe some are right..that this might lower our expectations a bit…if it does..so what? It just gives the show a chance to blow our expectations a little easier now :)
SuperdeluxeQuote Reply
Luke likely,
just put the link the text box, I tried to use the link feature as well, and it wasn’t working out for me earlier lol
SuperdeluxeQuote Reply
I like Mo and I like her reviews. Valuable insights and thoughtful criticism. She loves the books. I believe that the criticism is grounded in real problems the show has (and hopefully deals with in the rest of the season). In terms of number grades, she seems extra harsh with the show she would love to love, though: a 70 is the same as The Borgias got from her, and only 10 more that Camelot.
Hear Me RoarQuote Reply
don’t know why its not working
Luke likelyQuote Reply
ah well, was there ever a show that had universally positive reviews? These are just the opinions of random people, everyone should probably judge the show for themselves (I am very much looking forward to that!)
VoidQuote Reply
Hear Me Roar,
Maybe she is being harder on the show because she really wants to like it, and thinks it should have done better? The problem is..the filming is already done correct? so it is not like they can work any of her issues..?
SuperdeluxeQuote Reply
Superdeluxe,
I thought ok just learned to copy and paste a link and figured out there was a link feature but it still isn’t working
Luke likelyQuote Reply
Luke likely, to post a link you can just drop the URL into the comment field and it will convert to a live link once you post.
Or you can use the “link” button, but remember (just like all the other buttons up there) you have select the text that you want to turn into a link for it to work.
Winter Is ComingQuote Reply
Wow, Ryan sounds very disappointed with the show. She was on board from the beginning, and as we got more glimpses she was one of the few to offer some minor critisisms (mainly concerns about the Targ scenes). It’s quite a detailed, well argued review, and the first “negative” one that concerns me.
I haven’t listened to her podcast: does she sound outright disappointed during it?
More Rice CooksQuote Reply
Hannah,
Badly done accents can be extremely distracting for some people (myself included) and don’t bother others nearly so much. Happily, if we take a look at a variety of reviews, myself and Maureen seem to be in the minority!
EleanorQuote Reply
I’m unable to point to any real flaws of logic in either this review or McGee’s. Both are really well-written explanations for a tepid response to what they’ve seen. Similarly, the response at westeros.org eloquently laid out a number of shortcomings.
And I’d like to believe I’m fair-minded enough that my response to the show could potentially mirror these kind of responses, though of course I’m hoping just to get lost in the world.
ZackQuote Reply
From the atlantic review:
A Dany scene? Perhaps they’re not going with Dothraki liking everything out in the open?
ShinyteapotQuote Reply
Yeremiah,
I also found it overwhelmingly negative. If I was wondering whether to watch the show or not and then read this article, I would immediately dismiss it as yet another poorly done cheesy fantasy (yes, I’m not a fan of the genre) and I wouldn’t go anywhere near it. Actually, even though aSoIaF is my favorite book series and there is no question whatsoever about me watching the series, I’m starting to wonder if I’ll enjoy it at all.
I’m left with the impression that the show is boring (doesn’t come alive) and incoherent, hard to follow and lacking in action. (On the positive side – it’s pretty… and that’s certainly not what I’m looking for in a TV show.)
Hopefully, it wouldn’t be so bad when I finally get the chance to form my own opinion.
raliaQuote Reply
As I said on the other thread, a Metacritic 70 from Mo Ryan, who has made no secret of being on board with the project from the get go, is a blow and makes Ms. WSJ’s 40 seem much less misdirected. If anyone was going to be sympathetic to D&D’s approach, from the books’ perspective, I think it was going to be MR. We’d better hope to god the Atlantic et al. are thinking “90″ not “70.”
It just reinforces the challenges of adaptations that we’ve been discussing for weeks. Too literal and you get a 70 from the astute Ms. Ryan; too outlandish and you have Alan Ball and True Blood, barreling along at the top of the heap.
DH87Quote Reply
Definitely a little concern creaping into my thoughts about if this is going to play to the non fantasy/HBO watcher.
I think the comment that stung the most was that she said this does not do for fanatasy what the Sopranos did for mob show and the Wire did for cop dramas. Having said that, it is fair to say that several shows take several episodes, sometimes seasons, to find their footing. If the casual fan agrees with her assesment, let’s hope it get that time to find it’s footing.
jdp13Quote Reply
I also think her review is more negative than positive, but still well-thought out.
Unfortunate, because she was one of the early critics who had so much anticipation for it.
HollyoakQuote Reply
Regina Thorne,
I tend to agree with Mo Ryan on a lot of points regarding other shows, though our opinions diverge somewhat, BSG being the big one. I hated the ending, and it had nothing to do with a lack of answers.
That said, I’m not going to read Mo’s review until I’ve seen all six episodes. I’m kicking myself for reading Ryan’s review now.
When I finally got the chance to see the first fifteen minutes, I spent a lot of time thinking things like, “Hmmm…the snow looks okay to me,” and “Winterfell’s flat roofs don’t bother me.” Instead of getting immersed in the story fully, my brain kept on checking off boxes about things that other people complained about on these boards.
I don’t have a problem with Dinklage’s accent, but I’ll be danged if I’m not checking it out every single time thanks to people here who feel it brings them out of the story.
I can’t go back in time, but I can minimize the laundry lists of complaints that have already piled up.
paulgudeQuote Reply
I think many people here are over-reacting. Mo’s review is pretty fair. “Overwhelmingly negative”? Really? Did you skip over parts such as these?
The impression I get from this review, and from talking with Mo on the podcast, is that she thinks the series is good, as it is, but she thinks (being a huge fan of the books) it has the potential to be great. It has moments of greatness, but isn’t quite there yet. She does feel the episodes get stronger as the series goes on so I think once we see episodes 7-10 her overall opinion might change a bit as well.
Winter Is ComingQuote Reply
More Rice Cooks,
No, from the podcast she did I expected her to have a lot more positive to say.
Matt NQuote Reply
Ryan’s point about episodes needing a beginning, middle and an end is baffling to me. Many of the great shows like the Wire, Mad Men, and The Sopranos do not adhere to that formula. Instead, they present a serialized novel and trust in the viewer to be able to view each episode within the context of the season (or even the entire series) as a whole.
Tyrion’s distinct accent only further serves to show how different he is from the others in this story. He is more educated, more rarified than the others. His looks, wit, word choice and accent all serve to show him as being seperate and special. It doesn’t bother me.
shadallionQuote Reply
Further, the one thing that pretty much all HBO shows have in common – and Mo is clearly aware of this – you rarely love them from the start. The Sopranos did not grab me for a while. It wasn’t until the very end of The Wire’s first season before I finally became hooked. The opening episode of Treme was utterly confusing and a bit dull but I’m so glad I stuck with it because it’s become something magical. Even Boardwalk Empire’s pilot episode left me fairly underwhelmed, but it improved in leaps and bounds.
I’m sure the vast majority of HBO watchers know this too.
Matt NQuote Reply
Here is the thing I am not worried about at all: enjoying the show. Hell, I enjoy Camelot, Merlin and Caprica, all hit with bad reviews.
Just seeing the world of Westeros come to life will be enough for me. Also, it’s on HBO so it has to meet a certain high quality. Plus, I am not a nit-picking purist fan (no offense to those who are.)
So put it this way, even if the show was on the Sci-Fi channel with a crap budget, I’d still watch, just to see these characters on the screen.
So for me, not worried. I just hope enough people watch to make it a success.
HollyoakQuote Reply
as far as she criticizes that not enough changes were made, i can definetly live with that :)
it may not give viewers who didnt read the books the suspense theyd like in every single episode, but as a fan of the books id rather have it that way than a gorgeous tv-show that hastn much in common with the books.
BeneQuote Reply
Winter Is Coming,
I did not skip over these parts. They were a breath of fresh air since at some point I was beginning to wonder if there was a single thing about the show that she liked. But they all seemed to me as a prelude to a “…, but…”
If I haven’t read the books, this review definitely wouldn’t make me watch the series.
raliaQuote Reply
If I’m thinking of the same publication, Dinklage isn’t mentioned anywhere, for whatever reason. It struck me as odd, especially since a number of the “second-stringers” were given name-checks or inset pictures.
A. VisitorQuote Reply
This is why I think all these reviews of just the first 6 episodes is a little bothersome to me. I would have graded Boardwalk Empire very low if I had only seen the first half of the season. Same with the first season of True Blood. I hope the final four episodes have the same impact the last part of the book does.
dizzy_34Quote Reply
Winter Is Coming,
WiC, when American Idol gets a Metacritics cumulative of 77 and Ms. Ryan comes in at a 70, I think it is hard to think otherwise. HBO doesn’t need to spend 50 million trillion dollars on a series that scores a 70 (hypothetically) unless the ratings go through the roof. That’s the problem.
It’s either awards or ratings. Something has to come through to keep GOT on the express train of projects in the HBO pipeline. Mo has seen half the season; things only begin to cook at episode 6? Not soon enough.
DH87Quote Reply
I think a nice comparison with all the pre-hype for myself is Deadwood. All I’ve read about the show is how absolutely brilliant it is. I’ve watched the first 4 episodes and all I can say about the show is that it’s good, not brilliant. Have I got faith it will be brilliant in the upcoming episodes? Yes I do, and I have all the faith the problems for Ryan&Ryan will be solved in the last 4 episodes of the season.
I do think that R&R’s initial problems could have been solved if D&D were granted 2 more episodes by HBO to flesh out the characters a bit more and give us more insight in Westeros history via flashbacks instead of yapping it up via dialogue.
KnurkQuote Reply
The Boston Phoenix review (see WiC’s twitter feed) once again, based on the first 2 eps this time, has issues with the start.
This could be a problem….it sounds very much like the first 2 episodes do not do a great job at getting the non-fan understanding of who everyone is (a tough job, to be sure).
garik16Quote Reply
I have always preferred shows that weren’t about en episode summing up a single storyline or theme. Obviously, most TV does that and I still enjoy TV, but some of my absolute favorite shows, such as The Sopranos (as mentioned by others), really don’t have that perfect story flow in each episode – the tales are larger than one episode. That doesn’t bother me.
At the end of the day, I do think that HBO and the two D’s are probably the best fit this show could have had. I think the first season is about getting settled, and if HBO gives us a second season, I would bet pretty heavily that the show would get even better with the experience and critical feedback in tow.
Jonathan LeardQuote Reply
First episodes of Boardwalk Empire were boring. The Second half was marvelous, a ten out of ten. That’s all I have to say.
Eneko RuizQuote Reply
shadallion,
actually those series do always have thematic connections within the episodes that ties the plotlines together thematically even when the characters are not interacting with each other. Mad Men especially almost always juxtaposes different characters acting out of the same emotions in different contexts. Mo’s comments to me read that Game of Thrones failing on an episodic basis was this lack of a thematic connection between what the various characters are going through. In this sense it resembles more of HBO’s more recent programming with True Blood and Boardwalk Empire where the season functions more as a mini-series and the episodic content can suffer due to this. What she has identified is one of the perils of serialized story-telling, the sacrifice of the present story for the future and it is something that is a very valid critique
mratfinkQuote Reply
As a person who is watching The Wire for the first time, I’m about six episodes in, and I don’t know that I like it just yet. It’s interesting, but i’m going to give it an entire season before I decide whether or not to continue. And this show hasn’t had a single-episode arc yet.
Jonathan LeardQuote Reply
On a brighter note: here is is Alan Sepinwall’s review.
KnurkQuote Reply
This makes sense to me, but I remember my own response to the book was that it often seemed like not much was really happening early on. It’s just setup for the last third of the book, which is where I got hooked. That’s when things kick into high gear, and where I knew that I was a devotee of the series to the end.
Perhaps I will find my feelings toward the initial episodes quite familiar in that regard. I do expect that people who make it to episode 6 will stick around through the end of the series. I just hope people are patient…
ZackQuote Reply
This honestly is starting to sound like a problem with the directing and editing in that the show doesn’t have a cohesive feel to it.
JarmelQuote Reply
Knurk,
Awesome review by sepinwall:
There’s so much going on in this series – so many people and places and rules to learn – that I feared I would be completely lost without the books as a roadmap. But as with the cream of the HBO crop, “Game of Thrones” deposits me in a world I never expected to visit and doesn’t leave me feeling stranded and adrift, but eager to immerse myself in the local culture.
SuperdeluxeQuote Reply
Not surprised by her hesitancy to indulge GOT with a overwhelmingly positive review. Ryan and Ryan were my least favorite Lost writer’s. I found myself disagreeing with there critisism’s much of the time; to the point that I eventually stopped reading there opinions. So what negativity they have offered I am not taking seriously. Reading very positive reviews from Tim Goodman, Myles McNut, and Alan Sepinwal make a much bigger impact om me than what Ryan and Ryan have to say.
NeolokiQuote Reply
Unlike GOT, I had absolutely no investment in BE; I watched the first ten minutes; tried a couple of weeks later for another 20 minutes and turned it off for good. SAG awards, Emmys, Metacritics….nothing made me go back and nothing could. I’d rather sit and look out the window than watch it. That’s the kind of viewer we could see with GOT.
Someone who’s opinion I would be interested in is Richard Lawson of Gawker.com. He disliked both True Blood Season 3 and BE Season 1. His taste and mine seem to coincide. I’m going to love GOT no matter what, but I’d like to see what he comes up with.
DH87Quote Reply
Ha! Yes, I think I seem to coincide in my views with Alan Sepinwall almost all the time (for the shows that I watch, granted, since I stopped watching “Lost” way back in season 1) far more than with Maureen Ryan. And I concur with you completely about the ending of “Battlestar Galactica” (which, to take a note from the other Ryan’s criticism of “Game of Thrones” seemed to force characters into weird little boxes just so that the plot could come out the way the creator wanted it to!)
Anyway … I think it’s wise not to read any more reviews. I may not be able to resist, I’m afraid, though now I’m starting to worry that I will like “Game of Thrones” less than I like “The Borgias” :(
Regina ThorneQuote Reply
Knurk,
Much better review imo. He notes some of the same problems as Mo but doesn’t make the whole review about them, making it much more positive sounding.
NickQuote Reply
I disagree, those shows certainly did (usually) have a beginning/middle/end to each episode. She’s not talking about a CONCLUSION – that is something those shows didn’t have. But still, with an episodic format, for the show to be good, each episode has to flow to a certain extent. If you took season One of the Wire, and made it into one long 10 hour episode, and then just randomly divided that into episodes, do you think it would watch the same? Of course not, because each episode has a start & and end.
It sounds like GoT struggles with that a bit, in her view. I can easily see how that would be a problem given the format of the book.
MikeFromBraavosQuote Reply
I enjoyed Alan Sepinwall’s review too, especially considering the fact that he hasn’t read the books (his review definitely would make me eager to watch GoT), but we can’t just (search for reasons to) ignore the negative reviews and assume that they’re unfounded. Not when they are so well written and we haven’t watched a single episode of the show yet.
raliaQuote Reply
It’s another “bad” review that isn’t really all that bad. She likes the acting, the production values, the story… she just feels it has some pacing issues early on and doesn’t get as deep into the emotional core of the story as she would like. I honestly can’t think of a show that I like that I didn’t have reservations about after the first few episodes. What matters is the word of mouth it gets from ordinary people and whether that generates a wider audience like it did with True Blood.
It’s been more than four years since the Esquire piece; don’t spend the last few days before the premiere fretting about a lukewarm review from someone who actually encouraged people to watch the show. We’re close enough to the zero hour now where I’m really trying to block out what the critics say. 103.5 hours left… Aron Ralston spent more time stuck under that rock than we have left until the premiere.
maledictaQuote Reply
Well, in the book “shit really hits the fan”, so to say, somewhere in the middle, when Ned discovers Cercei’s secret and Robert gets killed. Up to that point it’s mostly a build-up, with the exception of Tyrion’s kidnapping by Catelyn. Dany’s story doesn’t get any “action” until the assassination attempt, and it’s at about 2/3 of the book.
Look at Dexter, for example – the first half, or even more, of each season is a build-up and seems like the viewers have no problem with that, because this show is almost universally praised.
Alexander DubrovskyQuote Reply
It’s kind of a letdown that Mo Ryan didn’t love it. I know her review isn’t 100% negative, but I definitely came away from it with the sense that she was disappointed.
Which is fine – she’s just being honest. But still, I was hoping she’d be doing cartwheels of joy over the series.
That’s okay though, I think ho-hum reviews can be a good thing, especially when SO many critics are raving about how great it is. It’ll help keep my expectations down a slight bit, heh. :) And of course we all know that critics are one thing — the true test will be this sunday night, when the masses finally get to see it and hopefully twitter/facebook/blog their happy thoughts all over the place. I guess we’ll see…
Grant GouldQuote Reply
Oh no! Ryan & Ryan didn’t like some things! But Sepinwall and a bunch of other critics liked those things a lot! I’m troubled and concerned– the show might have various defects, or maybe it might have various other defects– whatever will I do?
Oh, right– I’m going to watch the show. In four days.
Not trying to get on anyone’s case, I know we’re all just thinking out loud here, but this all just seems awfully silly to me… like if I was out with a bunch of people at dinner and everyone ordered the same soup, and a few people tried it and someone said “It’s too salty” and someone else said “Good saltiness, but not enough pepper” and someone else said “It’s great! Just the right amount of salt and pepper! But I’d like it even better if it had noodles in it”… and I just sat there getting ready to try my soup, saying “I’m starting to get concerned! What if it’s too salty… or maybe I’ll be bothered by the lack of noodles! It’s all very worrisome.”
mummerQuote Reply
Quite amusing how some critics have used GoT-related web pages to hint about the series & big-up their forthcoming reviews, gaining I imagine a tonne of new traffic for their websites… only to drop negative pieces and – in some instances – be downright rude about us ‘low-end’ fan types.
I don’t blame them of course.
I just feel like I need a bit of a shower… ;-)
GravediggerQuote Reply
Winter Is Coming,
Mo has heart, and often is tough on shows she wants to love when they come up short. That said, I usually catch her reviews after the show airs. Now I have to wait six episodes in!
paulgudeQuote Reply
Good point, but for now I’m going to figuratively throw my arms around Sepinwall’s review. I smell a Metacritic 90 coming our way, and not a moment too soon.
DH87Quote Reply
mummer,
It’s silly, indeed, but I think we’re all a bit more invested in this show, its quality and impact than we’re in a soup.
raliaQuote Reply
All these criticisms choosy, remind me to the series Rome. (also had its negative criticism) Many critics are very demanding and like to put the discordant note. I also remember that this woman, speaks highly of the show “Glee” is credibility?
Impresion123Quote Reply
If you’d paid 50 million billion dollars for that meal, you might feel otherwise.
DH87Quote Reply
I didn’t see this review as negative at all – I thought it was well written, thoughtful and was basically saying GoT is uneven to begin with, but is improving by episodes 5/6 with power to add in 7-10 and if it grows on that in future seasons it has the potential to become great and don’t almost all successful multi-series shows start that way.
My own take on Dinklage is basically this. When I first saw the scene at the Inn at the Crossroads (was it Maesters reward #2) I thought Whaaaaat?!?! But eventually I concluded that this outrageous over-enunciation is just one more thing that Tyrion does to try and make himself tall within the world. It goes hand in glove with his ultra barbed wit. So yep for me no problem, it’s Tyrion.
Nick LarterQuote Reply
I agree with “Winter is Coming” on the overreaction from fans. Let me get this straight we get tons of positive reviews 9/10 and 10/10′s and we consider a 7/10 to be a negative review. Deep breath folks. The ratings and awards will come and just like you will never get 100% on any movie on Rotten Tomatoes, you are not going to get all positive reviews for the show we love.
P.S. 7/10 would be a fresh tomato and not a rotten one.
mike mcgarveyQuote Reply
So many mixed reviews. Some people say the first episodes are confusing because of the amount of characters and “lore”, others are saying there is way too much exposition. I’ve never read so much about a show before I even watched the first episode. This is definitely new territory for me. I’m just perusing the reviews for now and will read them more thoroughly after I’ve seen the first episode. Like someone else said, I too am kind of sick of reviews by people who’ve read the books (I haven’t read the books) — but I guess it’s inevitable.
I think peoples expectations for this show are just way too high. Especially for the opening episodes. Other great shows have been slow starters too. Exposition has to be fairly heavy in the beginning, especially for a show like GoT.
Either way, it’s only four days left now. Time will tell…
johnQuote Reply
Awesome metaphor!
HollyoakQuote Reply
Uh, I mean analogy.
HollyoakQuote Reply
see. now this i don’t have a problem with. she says she likes the show but with reservations. that it is good but not great. and at least half her article is pointing out good things/things she liked and only half or maybe a bit less or more is focused on criticisms or issues. that i can believe is a “like not love” review.
the McGee review, according to him, was also supposed to be a “like not love” review but spent some 70-80% of the article focusing solely on what he did not like and giving complete short shrift (oh i really thought these characters were good buuuuut let me go on for two paragraphs about the characters i didn’t quite understand right off the bat).
so i give Mo points for being well balanced and clear in what she did and did not like. i think Ryan is falling far more prey to the overt need to be more critical than praisefull (especially in the light that he by his own admission thinks the show is “good” due to some need to be contrarian or some need to establish some “against the tide” critic/reviewer street cred. “yeah, you know that GoT show everybody is raving about … well it is good but let me go on and on about all this stuff i don’t like that nobody else has the guts to tell you about … oh, but you know … it is still “good” just not “great” … hope i didn’t leave you with the wrong impression by going on and on for 75% of my review about the negative stuff”.
Who Is Jacopo Belbo?Quote Reply
Mo Ryan is entitled to her opinion. She expresses it cogently and her reasoning seems sound and plausible.
But in the end, it’s her opinion. I need to see the same six episodes to form my own views. Her opinion may be right – it may be wrong — and it may well be a case where the “truth” lies somewhere in the middle.
Whatever the case, we need to see this for ourselves to reach our own conclusions and form our own opinions.
So far, I would observe the following: nobody has said the show looks poor, sounds poor or comes off as cheesey. Nobody has said the acting was poor, and nearly everybody has said precisely the opposite. There is almost universal agreement that Sean Bean is good and that Maisie Williams and Kit Harrington are great. Mo is the only one who has singled out Dinklage’s accent — so that may simply be her impression. In all honesty, when it comes to the ability of somebody to discuss the relative merits of an accent? The person who is able to offer the most informed view on that subject is rarely an American by birth!
Her knock on the series is that it is too faithful to the books and so results in a great deal of poor pacing and excessive exposition. That may well be the case. If so, one would think that the need for such exposition diminishes dramatically as the series progresses, such that the exposition heavy “buy in” is mostly front-end loaded. If so, that promises for improved writing and pacing in episodes as the series progresses.
End Result: Mo Ryan wanted to love this series and I expect that there is an aspect of her review in which she is actively and self-consciously trying very hard NOT to be a fangrll. She may be right in her conclusions — and she may be wrong. She may be a little bit of both (which is what I expect is the case). I’m not saying her opinion is ill-informed or incorrect. It may be balls on accurate, for all I know.
In the end, it is not simply an opinion; it is her opinion. The thing we each need to do from here is to form our own opinions.
Soon enough, we will have the chance to do exactly that. Sunday can’t arrive quickly enough!
Steel_WindQuote Reply
http://www.digitalspy.com/ustv/s151/game-of-thrones/tubetalk/a314172/nikolaj-coster-waldau-chats-game-of-thrones.html
not sure if this was already posted
breastplate nipplesQuote Reply
You shouldn’t bring her to task for wanting each episode to have a beginning, middle, and end. I guess you haven’t been paying much attention to the shows you watch. All of the shows cited follow this structure. Serialization is the process of taking a large story (with beginning middle and end), and cutting it up into thematically relevant chunks which ALSO have a beginning, middle, and end. Even the paragraphs in a novel follow this.
The thematic chunks in the novel are the chapters, which I’ve explained before. We don’t jump around to different perspectives while we are in a single chapter. That would be confusing. What it sounds like in the show, is they interweave several chapters together simultaneously. It may dilute the structure that GRRM placed there.
The Wire did it. First episode. D gets out of jail and McNulty sees it; McNulty lights a fire about it; D returns to the street, but finds out he’s been demoted. Yes, complexity is there, but it ends with an answer to questions the beginning asked: “What will happen to this guy who just got out of jail, will he go kill again?” EVERY episode is like this. It’s what makes it a great show. No, you can’t just randomly pick an episode and watch it, without knowing what’s going on. But when you watch an episode, you get the satisfying crunch of “question, exposition, answer”.
It’s the same as an essay: “proposition, evidence, conclusion”. Or the scientific method. Humans love this structure, we need it. If we only get a beginning, or only get a middle, we innately feel that it is incomplete.
The reviews that have been positive have not mentioned structural issues. In fact, they have not discussed the structure much at all. This leads me to believe that the structural issues ARE there. What remains is how much that matters.
Many of the reviews have been written after watching all 6 episodes at once. I think Mo Ryan, and Ryan McGee consumed them more slowly. I think Mo mentioned she was going to write a small episode review after watching each episode. So it is more similar to how people will be watching, one episode at a time. It may be, that the show works really well as a marathon, and not so well as episodes. That’s the impression I’m getting anyway.
salukQuote Reply
Impresion123,
Popular shows are often decent shows. Glee is one of them. It certainly isn’t bad enough to destroy the credibility of everybody who likes it. Remember Roger Ebert’s dictum: it’s not what it is, it’s how it is.
Meanwhile, I’m very concerned about the second episode of GoT being a weak one. Often people watch a first episode out of curiosity and tune into the second to check if it’s worth going the distance with. A stunning fifth episode won’t be much help if viewers have given up a couple of weeks back.
EleanorQuote Reply
I don’t find a contained story to be a virtue at all. Most TV-series sacrifice their overall narrative for the functionality of single episodes (like the excellent Buffy, which sometimes have extremely clunky episodes in between strong arcs because it needed to be episodic in nature).
The episode as a single entity has no inherent value. It is shorter than most short stories and nearly always clunky and irritating. Look at the difference between the Killing, were one murder stretch the entire 13 epiodes, and a show like CSI. And Mo herself praises this kind of storytelling all the time.
I find this pretty baffeling that both her and Ryan McGee are so inconsistent in how they apply their criteria to this show, and not others.
Then again, they are both huge Sparatacus fans, while Sepinwall was the man that guided me through series like In Treatment and The Wire. I guess I know which one I trust more, though Mo has the same taste as me in genre if not in execution (I hate the BSG finale).
SkyweirQuote Reply
We’ve heard this criticism of pacing and character development several times now. Enough so that I don’t think it can be easily shrugged off as mere opinion. However, I also think that this same criticism can be (and has been) hurled at any epic drama with multiple plot lines and characters (e.g. The Wire, Boardwalk Empire, The Tudors).
These sorts of shows require a lot of patience and attention from their audience. For some viewers, this is tedious and they will soon tune out. For others (myself included), they keep watching (even if it’s not “fun” yet) because they have faith that if they can make it through all the exposition and groundwork, that there will be an eventual pay-off, which there usually is for these kinds of television series.
I think if we were to go back and read the initial reviews for some of these epic dramas (e.g. The Sopranos) that are now considered to be masterpieces, we would find similar criticisms. I still believe Game of Thrones will be successful because I know that the source material is excellent storytelling. Regardless of how slow the start might be, the pay off will be worth it and audiences will be hooked. But like all great art (whether it be music, film, television, etc), the best works demand something of their audiences. And (often) the greater your investment as a viewer/listener, the great the reward.
furreverQuote Reply
mummer,
I think you’re right on the money with the soup thing. Problem is, too many people seem willing to let others form their opinions for them…
It also seems to me that some hardcore ASOIAF “fans” can’t decide whether they desperately want this series to be a success, to the extent of lynching anyone who dares breathe a negative opinion, or whether they really want it to fail…for some reason I can’t fathom. There certainly seems to be an almost masochistic desire to wallow in the negatives from some people that I don’t really understand.
A Bear_A BearQuote Reply
Eleanor,
So here comes HBO. Viewers should know that is a great guarantee. the viewer must have patience. The first days of “Rome” and “John Adams” had more negative reviews “A Game of Thrones”
impresion123Quote Reply
I agree with you about Boardwalk Empire. I loved it and though it suffered in ratings early on because some people didn’t give it much of a chance. I do hope more people hear about how great it is and see the replays or DVD/Blue ray and start watching season two when it airs like what happened to True Blood.
I’m afraid of the same thing happening to GOT. I actually had this fear before the first reviews of the episodes came out given that even thought I’ve read AGoT half a dozen times the first time I wasn’t hooked until at least halfway through. It sounds like the same thing could happen to GOT. I fear we may lose more views over the first four episodes then some people may think
However if we get episode 5 with at least half of the initial audience then I’m confident the viewership will grow in the second half of the season like with BE. Also if the last four episodes are as good as or even better that 5 and 6 (which there’s probably a good chance that they are) then word of mouth will spread and more people will come to watch the start of (*fingers crossed*) season 2.
GrinbombQuote Reply
Very much this. Mo’s opinion is more valid than ours, at the moment.
RoseQuote Reply
“If you took season One of the Wire, and made it into one long 10 hour episode, and then just randomly divided that into episodes, do you think it would watch the same? Of course not, because each episode has a start & and end.”
Actually, that is PRECISELY how “The Wire” was constructed. Half the episodes ended in seeminly random spots with no resolution whatsoever of the 18 different plot threads shown in that episode.
shadallionQuote Reply
The reviews are a total rollar coaster of an experience for me. The Sepinwall take was just what I needed to hear right now. I love hearing from newcomers, because I’m certain fans of the books will stick through early shakiness for the brilliance to come, but people who don’t have an understanding of how amazing Martiin’s storytelling becomes as he progresses may be less forgiving.
ZackQuote Reply
Yes, although I’ve never seen Glee and haven’t watched any broadcast television series in years. You don’t come to Glee expecting GOT and vice versa. In that way, critics subconsciously do grade on the curve. If they didn’t, Shakespeare, James Joyce, and Samuel Beckett would get a l00 and everyone else would fall somewhere below, into the hundreds of thousand in negative numbers.
DH87Quote Reply
impresion123,
Honest question: is it really seen as such a guarantee?
I speak from the perspective of an Irish person who pays for an extremely basic, cheap TV package. That package has various channels, some from Ireland and some from the UK, that buy American shows. I rarely know ahead of time whether it’s a HBO show or not that I’m watching. It’s just another American show.
Swearing’s often a hint… but QAF US, for example, has swearing and I’m pretty certain it’s not HBO.
EleanorQuote Reply
Not necessarily comforting.
Rome was canceled and John Adams was a miniseries, not an ongoing series, so was never going to be subject to renewal.
DH87Quote Reply
I think she has written a show for people who watch TV, fan or reader or whatever. She is saying, in my own words: This is worthwhile TV, but it has flaws. I hope it gets better.
Larry D CurtisQuote Reply
Skyweir,
The reason why TV is such a difficult beast is because you do not get the entire story at once. Instead you receive a small piece once a week.
Having an episodic structure keeps people invested in a show. It does not have to be to the exclusion of a larger structure. All i am saying is that good shows take a larger season long arc and divide it in a way that each episode has a thematic resonance to both the larger arc and the self-contained status of the episode itself.
We all know the series so well that is no worry we will get confused but for newcomers these touchstones of traditional tv series can be grounding. I have not seen the series obviously I was merely pointing out something she said that I don’t think is ridiculous and may actually be quite prescient.
mratfinkQuote Reply
DH87,
I find it quite amusing that according to your post 2/3 of the perfect genius of this world is from my country, yet I just wrote a comment defending American broadcast TV!
EleanorQuote Reply
since this is talking about reviews and shows we (mostly) all love i’d thought i’d throw out this little gem for fans of The Wire.
Idris Elba was recently in a BBC series that also showed on BBC America called Luther. i missed it the first time but anybody who is interested can probably find a clever way of watching it if they wish. it is a “cop” show and he plays a detective but i have found (thru 3 episodes of 6) that i am very much enjoying it and like it (i guess that means in my mini-review i should spend the rest of my time going on and on about what i didn’t like … ha ha uh). it very much isn’t your typical cop show and Idris is excellent (and so are a few others) and the writing and some of the grim and very realistic potrayals of crime and law enforcement that are on the show are quite compelling.
obviously not the best show ever (that is airing in 5 days time) but definitely worth the watch if you like him or generally find you like sundry BBC/British shows (MI-5, Hyde, Sherlock, Misfits, Life on Mars, etc).
Who Is Jacopo Belbo?Quote Reply
it seems like that is all you do on this board
tekQuote Reply
DH87,
If it is comforting. For now, Game of Thrones has better initial reviews.
Impresion123Quote Reply
Don’t know what thread to stick this in but thought people might want to see the great GOT cover this week on the UK magazine “TV and Satellite Week”……
http://twitpic.com/4jmggm
SeanFanQuote Reply
Off-Topic:
I am not sure if this was already posted (it´s getting way to much right now), but sky.com has a site about Got. Loots of stuff, and as far as I see some of it is new (pictures etc.)
In other news: Steve has a very good version of the extended Stark video up on youtube.
AbyssQuote Reply
tek,
I’m not sure this is necessary. It was a good reminder to have a bit of perspective, which can b e difficult when in the midst of an opinion barrage.
At some point we shall have to keep in mind two things: 1) even The Godfather and Citizen Kane have their detractors, and we cannot change everybody’s minds 2) The show might very well have a lot of flaws
Ultimately I just have to live with my own opinions, and spending a lot of time being stressed whenever somebody disagrees is pointless…
ZackQuote Reply
DH87,
i think this is partially what we are most missing.
let’s be honest a lot of the negativity (outside the “ew fantasy” stuff) comes from GoT being graded harshly or with high expectations.
i listen to the R&R podcast and they were going out of their way to find nice things to say about Camelot even tho it sucks … they spent far more time talking about “good” stuff they had to reach for than their overall “not very good but i’ll keep watching hoping it gets better” would warrant. because both of them are the kind to not want to pile on and look for the good stuff when the tide is against something (and sometimes they look like geniuses a la Spartacus tho they seem to have forgotten or like to gloss over the fact of just how bad that show was in the beginning and that it got better-ie pretty decent-is damning with faint praise, in the end it was still a bit cheesy and over the top and not every performance or character was “great”).
but i suspect and can see in their reviews that the opposite is true. if the tide is going overwhelmingly positive they don’t want to be seen as “piling” on that way either so they both “like” the show and “think it is good but not great” but spend more time talking about negatives (Ryan especially) than any sane person would suspect in a review for a show that was “good”. i don’t know if that comes from reviewer insecurity or their personalities or what but it is definitely something that comes thru in their podcast. they try their best to give Glee as much rope as they can, never saying it is “great” but definitely trying to put as positive a spin on it when they can.
but let’s be honest. is this show better than Legend of the Seeker? Xena? Camelot? just about any other single fantasy show every? i’d have to say probably yes. and i know from listening to them about Camelot they’ve been much kinder to that show in their reviews than they have been to GoT so there must be some higher double standard they are holding the show to. and that is good but it might be best if they simply acknolwedged that up front … say something like:
“okay, compared to usual network TV shlock and reality TV drivel and any other fantasy series that has come before GoT looks like Citizen Kane but having said that we are holding this show to a much higher standard and so our reviews must be kept in that context.”
Who Is Jacopo Belbo?Quote Reply
Luther is excellent, especially his relationship with Alice and his ex wife.
Anyway, The Killing follows a good episode structure. (slight spoilers) Episode 1 is all about if they will find the body (we know the girl will be dead since the name of the show is the killing). At the end of the episode – what do you know – they find the body. Every episode so far has made it clear at the beginning what piece of the puzzle you are missing, and at the end gives you that piece, moving you ever closer to the complete picture we’ll have at the end.
The discussion isn’t about “episodic” vs “serial” storytelling. It’s about how the episodes in serial storytelling are structured, if that makes sense. NO ONE wants the show to be like Buffy. They want it to be more like The Wire, or BSG, or other serial shows are than it is.
I’m sorry, but no. Seemingly random, maybe, but in no way do the episodes end at “random” spots in the story. That final few beats of the soundtrack at the end of each episode are SO satisfying because of how well the episode was put together. I’m not talking about resolutions here. Having an “ending” doesn’t mean that anything is resolved, just that whatever main question the episode in a metaphorical sense was leading you to ask yourself in the beginning has been illuminated in some way. The quote at the beginning of each episode is, in general, what the episode is focused on. That focus gives you something to hold onto, and by the end it is clear why they gave you that quote. SUCH a well written show. NOTHING random about it.
I started watching the wire thanks to this board, and I kind of wish I didn’t because now I compare everything to it, and inevitably this will mean GoT as well :)
Of course, most shows have it easier, because they usually are an original storyline, which is free to define the structure as they please. Taking the structure of an existing book and trying to fit that to tv is a lot more difficult the more I think about it than I even realized.
salukQuote Reply
Here is a review from Rob Owen of the Pittsburg Gazette:
http://www.scrippsnews.com/node/60956
Viewers bored with predictable procedurals should welcome the opportunity to dig into this sprawling story, TV’s most challenging serialized drama since “Lost.” “Game of Thrones” may not have that show’s heart, but it does share a complexity in storytelling that’s unmatched in prime-time television today.
He is also someone that has never read the series.
SuperdeluxeQuote Reply
Wasn’t ‘Mo’ Ryan a big fan of Lost all the way through ? Her liking that trash till it finally sank says all that needs to be IMO. Who cares what she thinks.
Tyrion’s ScarQuote Reply
I need to stop reading reviews… I was always worried about the reviews, and never wanted to read them… but it’s hard not to. The criticisms and lukewarm reactions from some critics are really bumming me out. I’m getting worried again. :(
I think Ryan and Ryan were quite a let down, for me. They seemed to be early supporters of the show, and now they’re critiquing it a little harshly. Especially considering they’re fans of things like Twilight and Spartacus. Seems odd.
LexQuote Reply
As a person who has casually followed the production with a slight degree of curiosity, I am thankful of Mo Ryan’s review as it gives me perspective about whether I can fully be invested in this show and about whether I want to advise my colleagues to watch it also.
Mo Ryan doesn’t appear to write the review to please the fans. Rather it is a message to people who may be interested in watching the show. A totally valid warning flag.
Dark HalibutQuote Reply
Tyrion’s Scar,
Millions of people liked Lost I don’t think liking that show is enough to invalidate your opinion
YeremiahQuote Reply
More ‘Glowing’ reviews:
Collider weighs in:
http://collider.com/game-of-thrones-review/85822/
Game of Thrones is a compelling journey into fantasy that only HBO can deliver. There’s carnage, sex and some of the saltiest language I’ve ever heard in an epic series of this type. It’s strange seeing a character in a medieval like fantasy world dropping F-bombs amongst other choice words, but it makes the series that much more gritty and jarring. Complete with stellar writing, a phenomenal cast and stunning visuals, this is a series that delivers on an epic scale both literally and figuratively.
SuperdeluxeQuote Reply
Lex,
Twilight and Spartacus have plenty of issues, but structurally they are pretty sound. Cliche, stupid, but sound. I think this is the case, of GoT being almost great, but having enough weaknesses in this one aspect to turn it from great to good for these reviewers.
Don’t let the reviews get you down, it’s still just someones opinion. Besides, most viewers don’t notice structure at all anyway :) Mo watched every episode AT LEAST twice.
I have every confidence that if you go in expecting to like it, and don’t try and analyze everything, you will love it, especially if you’re already a fan who just wants to see their favorite characters on screen.
salukQuote Reply
Off-Topic (again…):
Last video from ThinkHero about the Food Trucks (and many more).
– And Fabio is in it! ;-)
AbyssQuote Reply
Luther was pretty good TV, I enjoyed it even though you could see the holes.
For me there was one real stand out performance in it – Ruth Wilson as Alice, now there’s Melissandre in a nutshell, her presence on screen was electric (if hammed up a little)
Ruth Wilson
As far as the review – it seems to me although it is probably pretty accurate in overall assessment, although most people won’t have the source material to compare it to – and so will be investing in the show based purely on how they become drawn to the characters, and that does worry me a little. A lot of us are incapable of reading these characters from the TV screen as we all have the baggage already – we know their motivations, what they are supposed to be feeling, we already have our favourites and will be looking forward to certain scenes.
For me – one comment she made was on the money:
“But in my view, ‘Song of Ice and Fire’ fans are so loyal because they love the people in this world ferociously.”
If those characters don’t engage on screen and draw new viewers in, then we may have a problem. (that’s a big IF and MAY though)
MartinQuote Reply
Review? from ClickClaque (says it is a preview, kind of reads like a review..but I guess that is coming next week):
http://cliqueclack.com/tv/2011/04/13/hbo-game-of-thrones-preview/
This guy sounds like a fan:
My job was just to tell the nerds if they’ll be nerdgasming come Sunday … and my answer is this:
You’re gonna need some Gallagher-style tarp for your living room.
SuperdeluxeQuote Reply
Wrong. If they don’t like it, no one can. :P
fafhrdQuote Reply
I think the reviews of the local newspaper TV critics may turn out to be just as important as the reviews from national mags like TV Guide, EW, Variety, etc. I think what we’re finding from local critics who have not read the books and who have not been following the online buzz that closely are very positive reviews.
This leads me to believe that perhaps the reviews from the famous TV critics are not as representative of the casual viewer as we may have thought. Or perhaps they, being very involved in the hype and buzz build-up, are pushing back a little bit more to temper expectations and appear level-headed.
Critical acclaim for this series wont be based solely on one or two major critics but by what the overwhelming majority of local critics across the nation think.
RoQuote Reply
I have to agree that both Ryan and MoRyan’s reviews felt extremely negative in tone to me. I also agree with those who said they made the mistake of writing it to the fanbase. Big mistake, in my opinion.
Oh well… I’ll not be reading their reviews in the future.
LexQuote Reply
I thought this also, and it lost my sister who I was watching it with. I tried to get her back by telling her how good the end of the season was, but she wasn’t having any of it. and I think ratings reflected this trend also.
I just hope that doesn’t happen here with GoT, not with her, as I won’t let her stop watching, but with other HBO viewers.
MetalgoddessAMBQuote Reply
Yep. Epic levels of navel gazing going on. It’s out of love, but nothing survives this type of scrutiny and meta-comment without scars.
fafhrdQuote Reply
I think Peter Dinklage’s accent is very different from the other people’s accents, but to me, I feel like it fits his character, because I take it to mean that Tyrion is affecting a different accent on purpose, kind of like how the Queen of England has that high voice, and says “heelllooooww”. Anyone who watches the Daily Show will know what I mean, Jon Stewart does a perfect mocking ‘Queen of England’ accent. So that’s how I think of it.
purplejillyQuote Reply
Like purplejilly and nick larter , i found myself taking Dinklage’s accent as just a Tyrion affectation after about the second clip or so.. the character has to put on so much, anyway.. bravado, nonchalance..it just seems to fit for me.
obsidianQuote Reply
I found BE so-so. Episode 1 seemed full of cliches, mid series it bogged down, and seemed fairly one-dimensional, the last few episodes were good (great when compared to what come before – but still only good in the scheme of things).
The characterisation was what let it down – full of cliches, and without a ‘star’ turn. Buscemi is a great actor, but he doesn’t seem to have the necessary gravitas to carry a series in the same way as someone like Ian McShane (Deadwood) or Gandolfini (Sopranos) really anchored the shows.
Maybe it’s because I’m a born worrier – but GoT doesn’t seem to have that anchor in the midst of the complex weavings of plot and character (except possibly Ned But we know how long that lasts). That hasn’t necessarily impacted critically on other shows such as The Wire, but (in that example) it was a slow burner and you had to really work at it (esp from outside the US where the accents and slang were a real hurdle)
MartinQuote Reply
Hmm…I haven’t read all the comments so apologies if these things have already been said.
With regards to Mo Ryan’s review, I think she makes valid points. Not having seen the show I can’t judge whether or not I agree with them, but they seem reasonable and justified well enough. A few things, though. For one, I know from past experience that I tend to disagree with Mo’s assessment of shows/particular episodes at least half the time, so I took her entire review with a grain of salt since we tend to have different opinions more often than not.
I’m also wondering if maybe only people who’ve read the books will find all the exposition a chore, as she seems to. Alan Sepinwall’s review makes me think that maybe it’s boring for us because we know all these things already, but for someone who’s new to the world and characters it’s helpful and quite appreciated. I don’t mean to generalize, I’m sure there will be some variation, but I’m wondering if this may be a possible trend.
I’m also curious about exactly what the problem is with episode 2, since Mo clearly didn’t like it as much but didn’t say why. If WiC has any ideas I’d be interested to hear them.
After reading pretty much every review that’s come out so far, I really don’t know what to expect from the show. I think it could be great and it could be not so great, I really can’t tell from the overall reaction. So I guess I’m looking forward to it (as if there was any doubt), but I’m still cautious, mainly about how well it will function as a tv show.
Of course I’ll probably love it. How could I not, it is ASOIAF after all. :)
KangaQuote Reply
So what is the normal number of episodes that HBO (or other TV shows) send out to reviewers, in advance of the show starting? Is it normal to just send half of the season? Or do some shows send out the entire season? I wonder if they have done a disservice to the audience by giving the reviewers only the first 6 eps. Perhaps they should rush and send them the other four now!
purplejillyQuote Reply
Some pretty great review of Collider.com :
http://collider.com/game-of-thrones-review/85822/
However, as it stands, Game of Thrones is a compelling journey into fantasy that only HBO can deliver. There’s carnage, sex and some of the saltiest language I’ve ever heard in an epic series of this type. It’s strange seeing a character in a medieval like fantasy world dropping F-bombs amongst other choice words, but it makes the series that much more gritty and jarring. Complete with stellar writing, a phenomenal cast and stunning visuals, this is a series that delivers on an epic scale both literally and figuratively.
Nicolas WinterQuote Reply
Argh – can someone edit my above post to spolierify the Ned ref in the middle – sorry used the wrong tags when editing the post
MartinQuote Reply
I don’t usually follow TV critics, but man… Sepinwall’s review is so much better than Mo Ryan’s (which focused on the negative) or Ryan McGee’s (somewhat bizarre and rambling). Sepinwall’s writing just makes more sense. He talks about the characters, the themes, the plot, and why it all works. Those other reviews seem to just pick on certain aspects and whine about them.
LexQuote Reply
MetalgoddessAMB,
You know what stopped me with Boardwalk Empire? When they found that guy from the shootout who wasn’t quite dead yet, and that Agent dude was torturing him by shoving his hand into his open wounds. It just got to a level of disturbing to where I didn’t care anymore about the sweet lady who was against alcohol, and why the main guy kept looking wistfully at the preemie babies on the Boardwalk.
purplejillyQuote Reply
EW now has their review up.
They give it an A-.
Sansa’s DadQuote Reply
Martin,
Alice/Ruth Wilson was pretty awesome in Luther, even tho a bit over the top. My favourite Aliceism:
“the police arrested two kids yesterday. one was drinking battery acid the other was eating fire works …. they charged one and let the other one off **evil giggle**.”
i know this probably makes me a very bad person but i really liked her. she’d be a fun friend (and probably a handful/blast in bed … i know i know i’m an evil misogynistic :) )
Who Is Jacopo Belbo?Quote Reply
purplejilly,
But I’m guessing you’re going to be okay with The Tickler interrogating All-for-Joffrey? Or, at least, if they show the scene, that you won’t be stopped from continuing to watch it? To me, vile characters being cruel isn’t really a deterrent to my enjoyment.
My question isn’t implying hypocrisy or anything. I’d just like to understand why you’d be lenient for cruelty in only some circumstances, because it seems a strange distinction?
ZackQuote Reply
Do what I’m doing. Wait till the premiere. Watch the first episode. Or heck, even the second one before critiquing/reviewing it. It will help from getting so bummed out. I can already tell there is some lukewarm reviews but more more hot positive ones.
I will watch it with mid-level expectations. As I’ve seen costuming, the sets and heraldry, the weapons and such thats been revealed. What I’m more worried about a nd guarded about is the acting and the script if well written even if it diverges,adds, deletes and changes from the book. I truly have high hopes that it will thrive and get at least to the end of Season 3.
WolfheartQuote Reply
Simple explanation for Maureen Ryan’s review:
(1) She was a cheerleader of the books / show from the beginning
(2) Hence, her expectations were EXTREMELY high
(3) Things in the show were great, but weren’t perfect (of course NO show is)
(4) Her job is a CRITIC (i.e. 100% praise is seen as not being “discerning”)
(5) Hence, her otherwise very mild disappointment comes out as a seemingly negative review
HOWEVER, if you are
(a) someone who loves the books and isn’t a ridiculously picky critic, you will be overjoyed to see one of your favorite books actually come to life with such quality and detail
OR
(b) someone who had no idea about the books, you will be blown away by a fantasy series that has such politics, depth, perspective, sexiness, and “reality” (see this EXCELLENT review on The Atlantic: http://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2011/04/game-of-thrones-when-fantasy-looks-like-reality/237196)
And since probably 99% of people who will watch the show will be either type (a) or (b), I predict the show will be an IMMENSE hit.
AceQuote Reply
WooHoo! Now this one is one that’s going to reach A LOT of people.
MetalgoddessAMBQuote Reply
Forgive me for saying so, and I fear sounding like a “know it all” but the angst over reviews and the full blown media coverage reminds me so exactly of the lead up to the Lord of the Rings film, “Fellowship of the Ring.”
I remember sitting down in that theater for the first time and trying to enjoy the film and instead I couldn’t turn my brain off and enjoy the film. I was too busy dissecting the parts that had been “spoiled” for me and remembering phrases I read from reviews and recognizing parts that I had experienced.
It was, sadly, a long time before I could just watch “Fellowship” without baggage.
I fear, after reading Mo’s review, that I have reached the same point with GOT now. Like somebody said, her words may echo in my head during portions of the shows, ruining them for me. So, I am no longer a review reader, although I did read HitFX’s linked inside this post.
I am going to relax from now until Sunday and hope to enjoy the 1 hour.
Larry D CurtisQuote Reply
Another Positive review, this time from across the Pond:
Techwatch UK:
Overall, it’s the first episode of a new series with a helluvalot lot will be expected of it by the tens of thousands of loyal readers of the novels.
Will they be disappointed? I don’t think so.
There are obviously changes and abridgements for TV, but otherwise very faithful to the story in spirit where not in letter.
What about Sky TV fans? Will they be disappointed?
Well, if they’re used to series like Boardwalk Empire, The Wire, and Battlestar Galactica, they are going to be faced with yet another ambitious and challenging adult-themed drama.
http://www.techwatch.co.uk/2011/04/13/hbo-game-of-thrones-review/
SuperdeluxeQuote Reply
The EW article is good, and PRAISES MAISIE WILLIAMS YET AGAIN! I could be mistaken, but I think nearly every single review has specifically mentioned Maisie. I’m very happy for her, and hope she’s aware of this critical acclaim!
Oh, and the EW article (like the early positive reviews) also specifically states that the pacing is great, EVEN during the talky exposition parts. Ryan and MoRyan were the only people to complain about pacing so far.
LexQuote Reply
purplejilly,
You know, I didn’t love BE, (I actually like Treme way better) but I did think it redeemed itself towards the end and got better, so I will watch season 2. I actually stopped watching it at 9 sharp though, and caught up later or on Demand.
MetalgoddessAMBQuote Reply
Over all I’d boil the negativity to this (a response from Jon Weisman’s blog):
I was appalled by the producers’ depiction of the event, which I thought was irresponsibly executed.
This is not that surprising actually, coming from HBO. I remember scenes from Sopranos that were seriously disgusting. I’m thinking especially of Joey Pants beating up a young girl to death in the back of the stripper parking lot for absolutely no reason, a girl who wore braces and who he had used for sex, just to show how insane his character is, I guess. I saw that years ago, but it never left me. At the time, I was thinking, is this scene really worth it?
I hope that Game of Thrones doesn’t try to be like that. I remember the movie Irreversible because I could not get through it. There is no way I could ever watch depictions of this nature.
I don’t think this is a bad thing for the show if you are a fan (because the book is full of violence and rape). Speaking for myself, there’s definitely some things I don’t feel are worth witnessing on screen.
Katrina Before & AftQuote Reply
A- from Entertainment Weekly!
http://www.ew.com/ew/article/0,,20481542,00.html
CadQuote Reply
There’s something that doesn’t sit well with me in all those reviews.
Every single one of them lists Ned Stark as the one character that holds the show together and that makes you care. Well, what happens once his head rolls?
… Ok, I think that’s it for me and GoT articles/reviews until Monday.
raliaQuote Reply
mratfink
I think television as a whole is too much caught up in this kind of thinking.
The way we watch TV is changing, more and more people watch the episodes in a bunch on DVD or play on demand.
I do not buy that the “beginning, middle, end” structure of an episode has any value beyond catching the casual viewer. It is inferior to a grand story told in installments in all ways except this. It might be how TV works as a product to sell, but it has no storytelling merits. As such, it should be a worry for the producers, not the critics.
The less episodic a TV-show of this type is, the better it usually is. I do not deny that shows like the Wire do have some small episodic qualities, but Mo Ryan does not say that there is no beginnings or endings, just that she wished they were more prominent. In effect, she want more episodic storytelling, which I could never get behind.
SkyweirQuote Reply
Lex,
Pacing and structure are not the same thing (ryan + ryan’s reviews were more about structure), but I agree it’s nice to see (yet another) review where the style of storytelling used works!
salukQuote Reply
Zack,
I’m kind of squeamish on gore and painful things. There’s a lot of things I could read and wince and kind of skim over in ASOIAF, that are going to be really hard to take onscreen. I’m hoping a lot of them get dropped (lol).
I think what I was trying to explain, but didn’t do quite well enough, was say that a whole bunch of little things in BE were annoying me, bit by bit, but they weren’t enough to make me give up on the show, but eventually all the little things that bothered me just culminated in that scene, and I finally decided that it wasn’t worth it anymore, for me to watch it. That scene was the tipping point for me, where I decided I’d had enough, and walked away from it. I think that was like the third episode.
Now I am thinking of two reviews we’ve gotten where critics are upset with episode two, and thought about walking away, and I am hoping this won’t be the case. If the show is so offputting by only episode two that people are thinking of walking away, that’s really upsetting..
purplejillyQuote Reply
People need to chill out. The show is, on the whole, getting very good reviews from anyone willing to give it a fair shake. Which appears to be most critics!
Yes, Ryan and Ryan were critical – but both were thoughtfully so, in a way that shows enthusiasm for the show and a desire to see it improve on its faults. That is also a good thing in its way.
I’ve known from the get-go that I will be at least as critical as they were, because I love the books and am bound to be annoyed by a hundred different things about it. I can already tell that the depiction of the Dothraki and the boatload of extra sex scenes are going to irritate me. But that doesn’t mean I won’t watch every episode 4 times anyway.
Maxwell JamesQuote Reply
HBO just released a new “EPIC” promo on youtube
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DiiQu1rQQR4
WolfheartQuote Reply
Well the books are kind of just like that. You keep reading and you find out that this wasn’t all about Ned.
dizzy_34Quote Reply
ok. post deletion denied. So i retract it here. I saw it posted on FB. Didnt look at the upload date on Youtube till I made the comment. It was in March.
WolfheartQuote Reply
dizzy_34,
I’m worried that this will not be as easy for non-readers to do with the TV show as it was for us with the books.
raliaQuote Reply
I didn’t feel Mo’s review was extremely negative, only a slightly negative tone, that might influence non readers. McGee, well I think maybe he was focused too much on “writing to the fanbase” but with Mo, I think she IS the fanbase-hasn’t she read all the books and was a fan of them? So I think maybe her expectations were way higher.
Sepinwall and Mo Ryan had some of the same pacing problems, but Sepiwall was able to skew them more positively sounding than Mo Ryan. Is this because He didn’t read it, and she did? Hmmmmm
what I am mostly curious (and worried) about is what non-readers, non-fantasy fans, and regular old HBO & TV viewers (you know, people who watch police procedurals and hospital shows normally) will think of it, and will they stick with it during those first few episodes. Because we need these people to like it for it to continue beyond a second season. I think we’ll get the second season, but after that?
I also don’t think I’m going to have all these reviews in my head when I finally get to see it, I also hung on everything written and said about Fellowship before it came out, and none of it came to mind at all when I finally sat in that movie theater on opening night. I don’t think these reviews will influence me at all.
MetalgoddessAMBQuote Reply
io9 posted their spoiler-free review: Game of Thrones really is an astonishing achievement
HannahQuote Reply
Mo Ryan seems to be worried that the show is sticking too closely to the letter of the books and not closely enough to the spirit of the books. She fears that the show won’t draw people into the story the way the books do. Alan Sepinwall’s review makes her fears seem unfounded. I’m still hopeful that a good balance has been struck between what will please book fans and yet appeal to newcomers.
LauraQuote Reply
You know what’s weird for me? That scene didn’t bother me. It was gruesome, but it worked within the context of the scene. Actually, I have more of a problem with True Blood these days. I will still watch Season Four, but my wife has completely given up. The violence in that show, although it’s set in a world that doesn’t exist, I find more disturbing. It sometimes seems purposefully cruel. Like when Lorena had her head turned around like a corkscrew by Bill. Or when Tara (constant victim) gets beaten and abused by the vampire Frankin. I don’t know. I liked Alan Ball’s American Beauty and Six Feet Under was one of my favorite shows ever, but True Blood is really starting to get on my nerves.
HollyoakQuote Reply
Yeah, I understand what you are trying to say, BE was starting to annoy me also. I did stop watching it live, missed a couple episodes, but then I went back to it, and there were quite a few episodes that were soooo slow, but I just stuck it out, and by the end I liked it better.
So what if a WHOLE BUNCH of viewers do to Got, what you you did with BE? Wouldn’t you want them to give it another chance? This is what worries me, people not giving it a chance.
MetalgoddessAMBQuote Reply
Hannah,
I’m sorry but I am so tired of these kinds of reviews that focus on whether you read the books or not. Obvious the author read the books and is telling people who haven’t read the books the good and bad news. I would have expected more (and still do) from io9.
ManwitchQuote Reply
Well then you have to be encouraged that they say the rest of the cast is stellar. Especially Dany, Tyrion (aside from Mo Ryan’s take which I think is nitpicky nerd stuff that you would find in comment boards such as these), Jon, Arya, Jaime, Cersi, Bran all who end up taking up the story.
dizzy_34Quote Reply
Off Topic but did Winter ever give us his thoughts on all of the six episodes? I remember reading his review of the first epi, but did he talk about the others?
HollyoakQuote Reply
I think I tried both those things unless there’s still something I don’t understand. The first time I tried it, I copied the address, then I pasted the address right on the comment field and it posted the address but not a live link (or whatever ). The second thing I tried is to use the link button and paste the copied address to the little box that comes up and then hit ok. The address came up on the comment field but when I posted my comment it disappeared. So maybe I’m doing something wrong, or maybe it just didn’t work that time for some unknowable reason
Luke likelyQuote Reply
Without seeing the show, I can’t really comment on the validity of the review… but it’s a lot more legitimate than other negative reviews — a negative review that says the show is improving and gives the 5th episode a 90.
With that said, considering the universal praise of Peter Dinklage in this, Mo’s review reminds me of every Daniel Day Lewis movie where basically everyone says he’s brilliant and makes X movie, then that one lone critic says, “Well he’s a bit over the top, isn’t he?” I agree with others that Dinklage’s over-pronunciation is intentional and fitting for Tyrion.
Ross BrummetQuote Reply
Once Ned dies, Robb will have declared for the North and then people can cheer for him. Not to mention by the later episodes/seasons, the characters will get more fleshed out and dynamic, which should make people warm to them more.
I’m slightly worried by the numerous reviewers’ complaints of the exposition, but hopefully that will only plague the first season and by the second everything should be fairly well fleshed out.
As for Mo’s issue with the structure, she watched each episode multiple times and is a critic, so something that she picks out and takes issue with may not bother or even get noticed by the general viewers.
JulianQuote Reply
What I really like after reading all of the reviews so far, is the fact that each critics list of best and worst actors are different. If they were all the same, than that would show that some actors really are better than others. Since everyone has their own faves and peeves, it really stresses the ensemble aspect. Very encouraging!
salukQuote Reply
ralia,
Tyrion should become more central in the second season, as I always thought he was sort of the anchor of Clash of Kings. Which, given (most of) the reviews of Dinklage’s performance, wouldn’t be a bad thing at all.
Steven SwansonQuote Reply
What’s struck me about the negative-ish reviews from Ryan and Ryan is how they focus particularly on how the story transitions from the books to TV. This isn’t a focus on how well the characters and story translate over, as much as it is a focus on how the FORM of the story translates over. In novels, there is really one long-form story: GRRM takes 807 pages to tell it. There’s some secondary structural concerns, as he wants to give a coherent vignette in each chapter, with perhaps a cool/cliffhangery ending to each chapter in order to increase the page-turner quotient. That’s how books should be structured, and that’s how GRRM’s books are structured.
TV writing is a whole different beast. Episodes are supposed to stand on their own. That doesn’t mean that you should be able to pick up any episode and immediately be able to follow along. It means that each episode needs to be a story in itself on some level: there needs to be defined character arcs that advance characters from one point to the next, that begin and conclude within the course of an episode. There needs to be unifying themes to the episode (“This episode is about how characters communicate”). And when you are dealing with multiple plot threads, each plot thread needs to reflect on each other in some larger, thematic way. These are things that TV critics are very attentive to: accomplishing these things is what makes for “good TV” in some (important) sense.
What Ryan and Ryan are saying is that GoT hews too closely to the FORM of the novels. The story arc is 10 episodes long, so there are no self-contained mini-arcs that mark off each episode, no real unity between what’s happening with Jon Snow and what’s happening with Dany over the course of one episode. The episodes seem to be broken up too much by the chronological order of the books: the thought seems to have been “We have 800 pages, and ten episodes. So what happens in the first 80 pages is Episode 1, what happens in the next 80 pages is Episode 2…” But taking this approach misses out on the well-defined arcs that are supposed to make each individual episode a whole.
This explains a lot of what they are saying in terms of pacing problems. And as they both point out, these things could have been easily fixed by messing with the chronology of the books a little. Here’s an example: Judging by the page-by-page breakdown of the books, I’m willing to bet the Hand’s tourney is in Ep. 4, while Bronn’s fight with Ser Vardis is in Ep. 5 or 6. But there’s nothing ESSENTIAL about the Tourney taking place early in the plot. They could have moved the tourney back to Ep 5, and some of the plot-y, backstab-y stuff from Ep. 5 to an earlier episode. This would have made for an Ep. 5 that is centered around two instances of ritualized combat, and the foolishness that comes with this combat. Throw some allusions to this fact into the dialogue (have Cat and Ned both talk about how stupid the combat is), and now we have something approaching thematic unity to Episode 5.
Now the above is just conjecture on my part – I haven’t seen the episodes yet, so I don’t know if this is an accurate portrayal of what is and isn’t in each episode. But reading the Ryan and Ryan reviews, it looks like mistakes like this have been made throughout the episode, and this doesn’t really make for good TV.
Strong BelwasQuote Reply
Just wanted to add that I put forward Ruth Wilson as Melisandre back in the casting debate. Since I saw her in “The Prisoner”, I think she’d be the perfect, affordable and realistic Melisandre possible.
CaedesQuote Reply
This is all EXCEEDINGLY well said and I agree with what you’re trying to communicate here. I have hope it won’t be an issue, but I definitely get what you’re saying.
RoseQuote Reply
Luke likely,
Ok, you type in something that refers to your link as in: Winter is Coming!
Then, you highlight (select) those words, then you click on the link-button and there you type in your link (http://winter-is-coming.net/2011/04/mo-ryan-reviews-thrones/#comment-92620 for example). Now you preview your post via the preview-button to check if your selected words (Winter is Coming!) indeed lead to your desired website.
If it doesn’t work there is probably something wrong with your browser or you just really can’t read instructions.
KnurkQuote Reply
So I posted above that I wasn’t reading any more reviews but then I read the EW review, mainly because it has such a powerful voice to the public and also because it will be shorter and less full of details that are likely to bother me. So, here is one bit from it:
“And if Dinklage doesn’t get an Emmy for his clever, rude Tyrion Lannister, I’ll be gobsmacked. ”
Mr Tucker has a journalist’s talent for boiling things down and presenting it well. For him to mention this in his short review is telling. He means it.
Larry D CurtisQuote Reply
I’ve never commented before.
This is the bottom line: Any review based on only %60 of an entire season will be flawed. Watch only 8 of 13 first season episodes of The Wire and try to accurately convey your feelings about the show. You can’t. You need to see where the arc goes and how the characters continue to develop in order to make connections with what came beforehand. Structure and pacing of earlier episodes in relation to the structure and pacing of later episodes begins to make more sense.
Some characters – especially those outside of the major ones – take more time to develop. In The Wire, we don’t even really get introduced to Lester until the end of episode 3, and he’s the shit. Omar only appears at the beginning of episode 3, but we don’t have a clue (i.e. don’t care) what he’s about until 6 or 7 episodes in. Even someone as fundamental as Stringer doesn’t get fleshed out until later in the first season, and that’s only the beginning of his awesomeness. Sopranos took a similar amount of time of viewing in order to really ‘get it.’
Game of Thrones is going to kick ass. Roller coasters naturally have ups and downs. Too many ‘ups’ and the excitement will begin to wane, surprises will feel less surprising, emotions will be too predictable.
My 13 cents. Canadian currency.
DeanerQuote Reply
I agree with this conjecture. The way delicious food is plated is somewhat less important than is adherence to the recipes for the entree, side dishes, and garnish. If D&D have mishandled this element of the adaption, it would explain a great deal.
DH87Quote Reply
Strong Belwas,
Thank you, Strong Belwas, for cogently expressing one of my main reactions to the TV show. I tried to convey similar ideas in my review, but your extended explanation expressed my views on this particular issue perfectly.
Mo RyanQuote Reply
OT somewhat, but Michelle Fairley needs someone to give her a rap across the knuckles (or stronger).
She was interviewed for the local news here (BBC Newsline at 6.30pm) – and gave away a huge spoiler for the series (the fact that she dies, and comes back as a ‘zombie’ – her word)
MartinQuote Reply
Mo Ryan,
Mo, i tried to convey Strong Belwas’ point earlier but did not do so nearly as well.
I’ve seen Todd Van der Werff of the AVClub call this a symptom of recent HBO series as they have changed their philosophy to looking at seasons as miniseries.
Still i think Skyweir makes a good point above that the nature of tv is changing and you see more and more people watching tv seasons all at once or in larger chunks. In this sense i wonder how much of a problem the lack of episodic thematic resonance really is?
MratfinkQuote Reply
Thanks for posting here, I enjoyed the reading.
But, while you may have a point, viewers at large will not be content with that explanation. People, me included, need rewards for each hour of the show. If I watch the first episode of a series and I don’t like it, I can’t be expected to come back for the second.
This may not be fair or just or right, but it is real. GoT needs to deliver each week.
Larry D CurtisQuote Reply
garik16,
The second episode from what I gather in the referencing of the reviews, is that most of the scenes concern the younger children. Kings Road, ie. Arya, Sansa, Joffrey, Micah, then Bran and Robb at Winterfell, maybe this is why some gave that episode a lukewarm response, they prefered the adult characters and their respective stories, which is understandable in some ways.
TysnowQuote Reply
That was one well-written, in depth review. Wow.
Not having seen the episodes I am in no position to address the accuracy of her points. However, it appears each one has a clear basis in fact. Having read to books (and I’ve read GoT twice), I’m not sure I will be able to empathize with the new-comers. I fear my knowledge of the story’s background, breadth and complexity will fill in any gaps D&D may have unwittingly created. Perhaps, at times, their expertise of the material was counterproductive. I don’t know. I’ll have to watch it and try as best I can to pretend I’m a fist timer.
Mike ChairQuote Reply
DH87,
Actually she said it was episode 5.
TysnowQuote Reply
Maureen Ryan,
I hereby name you a deserter of House Gatewatch, and henceforth declare you to be an OUUUTTTTLAAAAAAAAAWWWWWWWWWW!!!!!!!
Ser Ilyn shall see to your beheading forthwith. No Ice for you, though. We’ve fetched Joff’s old rusty-ass sword, Lion’s Tooth, from the depths of the Green Fork (God, I love Arya), to have done with you. Then he’s gonna cut your heart out (like you have ours)….with a spoon.
Exactly.
I honestly don’t care what motivated your scorn; be it professional, personal, political, philosophical, or economical, your review hurt this series’ chances at having a future.
Could Chinatown have been better? Yeah. Could The Wire have been better? I suppose. Could the Sistine Chapel be better? Sure.
Hell, at 10:01 EST Sunday, April 17, 2011, there’s gonna be a million (hopefully) no-nothing devotees just like me comin outta the woodwork to bash every single frame that they think was wrong with the first episode. The difference is, 99.999% of those opinions won’t matter, and, more to the point, 99.999% of them will watch the 2nd episode (and the 3rd, etc…) But you, for better or worse, have an opinion that matters, and if even one person decides not to watch this show based on your review, then that makes you worse than Cersei.
Rob VolzQuote Reply
I agree that Maureen has done the show a disservice.
Her review will definitely discourage new viewers from watching. Despite her suggesting that they do watch, at the very end of the review, the whole thing projects a tone of negativity and disappointment. She did not review the show so much as she reviewed the adaptation of the books. She failed to keep in mind the non-readers who might be reading her review, potentially interested in this new show. It’s unfortunate.
LexQuote Reply
100% agree…she should be banned :)
coltaine777Quote Reply
I couldn’t disagree more. Why is there a need for a unifying theme to the episode? Doesn’t it make everything too synchronized in a world full of chaos? That seems unrealistic to me. It’s like a character stops doing what s/he is doing only to do something else to fit into the “unifying theme”. I just want to shout to the caracter: “No! Don’t do that. Continue to do what is important to you. Follow your motivation.” This unifying theme episodes can feel like “filler” very quickly.
I remember watching the “oh so great” Battlestar Galactica. I thought it had horrible pacing between episodes. Take the boxing episode for example. Suddenly all characters decide to take a break from, well, being hunted and meet collectively at the bar to drink, bet and box (the unifying theme). I couldn’t care less about that episode. What happens is that the overall pacing drops practically to zero (it did for me, at least). Could it get any worse. So you waited a week for the next episode and it turns out you have to wait another week to see something you care about, effectively doubling your waiting time (Now that could loose some viewers). Didn’t we have that already with the books? You know, waiting more than ten years for POVs you like and that weren’t included in the AFfC Book.
I can undestand that a “unifying theme” would make “simpler TV” or “easier to understand TV” or “easier to follow TV”, but it certainly does NOT make “better TV” or “good TV”.
JimmyQuote Reply
Mo Ryan,
Thanks, Mo. I’m glad I was able to help capture your thoughts!
Strong BelwasQuote Reply
I forgot to mention, when Maureen writes “Does this show do for fantasy what Deadwood did for Westerns, or the Sopranos did for ganster stories?”, and then answers “No,” she is basically saying it’s just like every other TV fantasy out there. Even if that’s not what she meant. That’s some pretty damning criticism.
It’s funny because both Ryan and MoRyan sounded fairly positive on their podcast… but they failed miserably at translating any of that tone to their written reviews.
LexQuote Reply
i would like to amend my earlier comments about Luther (sorry to get off topic from the Mo Ryan excommunication from House Gatewatch).
this show isn’t just good … it is a really great show. the 2nd 3 episodes are just amazing. yes it does have some flaws but in comparison to just how original and refreshing it is it hardly seems far to focus on them (ahem …. Ryan and Ryan might want to take a hint here).
and the way the 6 episode season ends … just wow.
and i am now on the Ruth Wilson bandwagon for Melisandre … she doesn’t look like i think Melisandre should but having seen her do Alice she would do an amazing Melisandre … i’d choose her over Eva Green …. and for those who know me and my love of Eva Green … well that is saying something.
i cannot wait for the next series of Luther.
okay, back to the metaphoric be-headings of Ryan and Ryan …. traitors to House Gatewatch.
Who Is Jacopo Belbo?Quote Reply
a thought did occur to me. Ryan and Ryan have such cogent thoughts about how the show structure and translation from book to TV could have been done so much better as to be great.
perhaps two certain Ryans i know should be making TV themselves, or perhaps show runners? maybe they can get HBO to hire them on to take care of season two of GoT for them to fix all of the bugs they see with it. i’ll be holding my breath …
an expression comes to mind here, something along the lines of those who cannot do teach and those who cannot teach become critics? or maybe i am remembering that wrong ….
Who Is Jacopo Belbo?Quote Reply
Mo lost me for a moment at “Each hour needed to have its own beginning, middle and end.” That’s simply not true. The truly great serial dramas (“The Wire”, “Breaking Bad”, “Deadwood”, “The Sopranos”) very often completely eschew this handcuffing impulse and essentially always for the better. They unfold not as a sequence of independent short stories, but rather as individual chapters of a book, which of course is completely appropriate when adapting a book.
That being said, complaints as to the overall pacing of the series are perfectly valid and hopefully her objections aren’t too far realized.
Ser_GQuote Reply
Add me to the chorus that says that both R&R did a disservice reviewing the first six episodes with only the fan base in mind. All I got from them were all doom and gloom. If I were not a fan of the books, and read their review I would not give this show a chance because it seems that they definitely did not enjoy it. Their reviews seems to be wallowing too much in negativity.
Mo Ryan has declared that it’s not up to the level of The Wire/Sopranos, even though she hadn’t watched the last four episode. That seems premature to me, granted I haven’t watched a single episode of it. But new viewers are going to read that and would probably not give this show a chance. So, it would have been better if she had refrain from writing that this early on.
Traitors of House Gatewatch indeed.
AskelladdQuote Reply
thank you so much for that, it worked. I don’t even know if in the future I will need to post a link but I just wanted to know I could if I wanted to.
Luke likelyQuote Reply
Having a beginning, middle, and end in an episode is good storytelling. It makes a MUCH better EPISODE than an episode which is lacking those features. The stupid BSG episodes (like the boxing one, or quite a few other dumb filler) were not the only episodes of that show which followed the model, and they weren’t bad because they had 3 acts. They were bad because they didn’t fit in the larger story. The best television has both. 3 acts per episode, with each episode being an integral part of the larger story.
I’ve said it before, but I’ll continue to say it until I am blue in the face. Classic HBO shows like The Wire are the DEFINITION of this model. Each episode is about a small issue within the larger story, and the goal of the episode is to show you where it fits in that larger story – and move the needle a little bit. Without this, when you are watching, you feel as if the plot is stopped, or as if everything that is happening is random.
You don’t need to have the characters go off and participate in a random and unconnected plot in each episode to do this. People have explained how GoT could have been adapted in this way, without changing the plot at all. But of course, it would have been very difficult to do, and is a less sure prospect than the method they took. Every approach has upsides and downsides.
The lack of a solid 3 acts in each episode (if it truly is missing instead of just being Mo’s initial impression) could be one of the downsides, one that will be almost meaningless to readers; but could pose issue with newcomers.
Geez, the reviewers are all just doing their jobs. What else can they do but describe their reactions and why they reacted that way? I have to say, the opposition to their criticism from some of you is making it more real in my mind than less. If I had just read the review without all of the pushback, I would not be going into the episodes looking for structural problems. Now I fear I wont be able to miss them.
salukQuote Reply
Most critics believe that The Wire and Deadwood eschewed the classic three act episodic formula (with a few exceptions). Countless reviews that explain why The Wire needs a full season before you can properly gauge what it is and what it becomes – and that they are the most “novelized” shows ever made. The creator of The Wire even said it is ” a televisual novel, with each episode written as a chapter in the continuing drama”.
Anyway, I think Ryan and Ryan and a few other critics are being very critical because of expectations. They expect HBO, with this source material, to be GREAT, whereas they feel it is merely good, and sometimes the gavel strikes down hardest on what we have the highest hopes for. Likewise, some may be effusing enormous praise and choose not to (or didn’t see) any negatives. So I will take these critiques, as well as all the others, with a grain of salt.
SmegmaQuote Reply
This review comes off VERY negative. I understand that she likes certain things of the show but, there are ways of describing things, and the way she organized her review makes it seem more like she disliked it rather than enjoyed it.
Everyone who has written a speech, or had to write a persuasive essay knows that the structure of an argument is one of the most important things about it. Here for example Ryan starts off slightly positive but with a tone that implies that there will be a but. The positives are all hidden in the middle of her review, before summing up what she doesn’t like about it again. She puts a cherry on top she finishes the review by saying, “if nothing else, it will look great in HDTV.” High praise, that is.
Though she suggests that people should watch it, the review is written in a way to convince people not to. Negatives to begin with, some good stuff to seem objective in the middle, sum up the bad with a dash of condescension.
Convivial EddQuote Reply
Yup, Ryan and Ryan’s reviews are probably my least favourite so far (including all the positive AND negative ones). They should have delivered much more balanced reviews, catering to non-readers above all… But all they do is project an unpleasant tone of negativity, speaking to the book fans as to why the adaptation is not perfect. I expected much better of them, and they should have delivered much fairer reviews.
Sure, these aren’t on the brainless level of those “I don’t like fantasy” reviews… but still, they are unnecessarily harsh, poorly conceived, written to the wrong audience, etc. Big, big letdown.
I will not be following Mo Ryan’s weekly episode reviews. I’d prefer not to have all the joy sucked out of this series, thank you very much.
LexQuote Reply
I’m a little disappointed in Mo Ryan’s reaction. I guess I was expecting her to be all for it considering how hyped she was. However, the fact that she’s offered negative feedback shows that she’s looking at the show with a critical eye and not just fangirling all over it. It seems like her biggest problem was the pacing. And I’ve just read the Sepinwall review and he seems to say the same, but just has less of a problem with it. Something like that is very subjective, but I think Sepinwall is a bit more forgiving in that he offers the notion that shows like The Wire and The Sopranos may have required a few episodes for viewers to really get grounded. That said, I don’t think Mo Ryan means to say the show is bad. I think she’s approaching it more as a “work in progress.” It starts off okay, but she believes it can get a lot better.
A few choice Ryan quotes:
Has anyone determined what this refers to? She says it’s not in the book. I’m guessing it’s some combo of Robert, Cersei, Jaime and Ned? Isn’t there a scene where Jaime talks to Ned about how he saw Lord Rickard burn alive? Anyhow, these little moments of human interaction are what I always find carry any story, so I hope GoT is full of them.
Glad that Kit is getting some praise! I think we all knew he’d be great, but reviews have seemed to focus on the “newcomers” with regards to Emilia and the young Stark children. Go Kit! I think, just like with readers, viewers will really get behind Jon because you can feel confident that you’re cheering on a good guy.
I think I enjoyed Sepinwall’s review more. Not because it was more positive, but because I like his writing. It flows and he offers great, clever descriptions. Notice that Joffrey is “Cersei’s son,” and not “Robert’s son,” “the King’s son,” or even “the Crown Prince.” Sneaky ;). Also the way he illustrates the sky cells without giving too much away: “one of the most diabolically simple fictional prisons I’ve ever seen.”
I’m glad that as a non-reader he feels welcomed into the world and wants to get to know it. (This directly opposed Caryn James’ reaction that she couldn’t break through the “heart of nerd.”) I don’t think any of us ever had any worries that the world wouldn’t look rich or grand enough, but I do still have reservations about how easily non-readers will accept it. Sepinwall’s take is encouraging.
And LASTLY, from Mo Ryan and Alan Sepinwall, respectively:
Some of you have already said it, and I concur: Any mention of Arya/Maisie that I’ve seen, in positive AND negative reviews, has been overwhelmingly positive. Maisie is a young girl, new to the craft, in a production featuring hundreds of characters, some played by true veteran actors. The fact that she has stood out and garnered so much praise is a true testament to her talents, charisma and dedication. Maisie, you should be very proud of yourself! Give her an Emmy!
LinaQuote Reply
ralia,
Yes but if you read a reviewer over the course of a couple of years and find there opinions to not coincide with yours then no matter how well written the review is I have trouble taking it seriously
Jason HollenQuote Reply
She’s rated one episode 80 out of 100 and another 90 so I’m pretty sure she’ll be lavishing praise on those two (just avoid her review of Episode 2).
It’s a Robert/Cersei dinner table scene we’ve seen bits of it in the trailers.
MormegilQuote Reply
While I can’t say whether or not I agree with Ryan — since she’s seen the show, and I haven’t — I can say “Thanks heavens for a review of any kind that doesn’t just either gush with uncritical love for the show or damn it just because it’s fantasy!” Ryan seems to be trying to assess the show as a show — and while all artistic assessment must be to some (perhaps a great) extent subjective, and least she is setting up her criteria and discussing how well (or poorly) the show meets them. That’s sense, that — and too seldom seen.
Carl Edlund AndersonQuote Reply
Lex,
I agree completely. I’ve found Mo to be a fantastic writer and extremely detail oriented, pointing things of which I never would have thought. However, she takes it too far to the point where these superficial details cloud her judgment.
If you look at her overall scores, they are pretty damn illogical.
Season 1 of Boardwalk Empire gets a 100. Season 1 of GoT gets a 70?
Season 2 of Boardwalk Empire gets a 50?
Season 1 of Breaking Bad gets a 70. It takes her until Season 4 to realize how awesome that show is and still stops shy of a 100, by giving it a 90.
Also, she gives Boss a 60 (an unbelievably good show if you still with it for the entire first season) and likes Chicago Code better than Boss?
And she gives crappy shows like “V” an 88?????
And she is easy on Camelot and Spartucus. Camelot gets a 60 when it is not even close to GoT. Yet the 70 implies, GoT is not much better. So she is lumping in GoT with Spartucus and Camelot?????
She was right to give Homeland a high score. But she gives it a 100. So again, are you seriously telling me season 1 of Homeland is better than season 4 of Breaking Bad???? Come on now. As great as Homeland is, Claire Daines is clearly miscast (a much bigger problem than anything in GoT, like Tryion’s supposedly fake accent) and as suspensful as it is, I never get that “Holy Shit, what just happened, I don’t know if I’ll be able to survive without watching another episode until next week”, crack type addiction that Breaking Bad provides.
I understand Mo FINALLY caves in and gives GoT the credit it deserves after she watches episodes 7-9, but it takes her way too long to see a show’s potential. The superior Sepinwall liked Breaking Bad and GoT right from the start. I believe he liked Boss as well (which she called “utterly pretentious” and “weird” among other things, when it wound up being one of the beast premiere seasons of any show ever).
If she were a pro basketball scout, she would have been like the GMs of the 2 stupid teams back in 1984 who passed on Michael Jordan. She would have focused on the details that don’t matter (he’s not a 7 foot center) as opposed to what he does bring to the table (being unstoppable and better than everyone else). Then a few years later she would finally admit he’s the best player in the game. Too late Mo. Too late.
GoTtranscendsFantasyQuote Reply