Funny, for me it's the opposite. I absolutely LOOOOOOOOOVE Game of Thrones. Currently my favorite show by far. And I hated just about everything in The Wire. Completely the opposite of what I like in a show.


Honestly, I saw an interview from the GoT author talking about book readers like you who can never really be satisfied in a show. With all the constraints they have due to time and money and what's possible to do and what isn't, they're doing more than just an amazing job. And for the millions of people who HAVEN'T read the books, the series is just marvelous. Saying you "wouldn't recommend it" is just odd.

you're a juggalo, you've already claimed yourself to be a fgt and an annoying child living at home with his mother

I'm not saying they didn't do a good job. Like I said, I'm amazed at how they were able to cast everyone and make all the settings perfectly. It is a brilliant adaptation from book to show.

However, I'm saying that the 10 episode HBO constraint is damaging to a show that's as dynamic as GoT. Because of that, the pacing of the show and authenticity of scenes and development suffer immensely. When trying to view this from a perspective of someone who doesn't read the books, and thus not caring how well they reproduce characters and scenery, the structure of the show itself just doesn't seem nearly as good as it could be. Don't mistaken me for someone who gets angry at every little detail that's different from the books. I love the inventions they do; some of my favourite scenes are the ones with no PoV characters. I don't see the show constraints as a thing that prevents book accuracy, I just see it as a thing that prevents the show from being very fleshed out like - well - The Wire.

I'll use an example from The Wire (I'm sorry you don't like it, but I think it can be used for ample comparison, as most critics worth their salt hail it as the best show on television). Seasons 1 through 4 had 12 or 13 episodes which was enough to get the story through with good pacing. Season 5, the final season, had only 10 episodes and it suffered greatly for that (most people, including myself, consider season 5 the worst one). The Wire has about as many major characters as GoT, but was allowed much more breathing room to give us natural character and story development. GoT does not.

It is a constraint when compared to the novel format. But even if they had 13 episode seasons, it would still be a constraint. In order to remove the constraint, they'd have to have 50 episode seasons. The difference between 10 and 13 episodes per season would be marginal.

As I said, I watched the first 2 seasons, then read all the books before Season 3. So I've experienced the show from a non-book reader's POV and from a book reader's POV. I agree that the show is better if you've read the books. But the first 2 seasons still got me hooked enough to read the book. It was still my favorite show on TV before I read the books.

Well I get where you're coming from, but speaking as one of the viewers who has not read the books, the show doesn't feel rushed whatsoever. Maybe because of just how much more details the book contain, the show ends up having just enough. The drama and conflicts from story to story keeps me more than entertained and I feel I get enough information out of the show to understand the situations rather well (certainly not as good as a book reader, but enough to appreciate the show for how amazing it is).

This post was edited by CMBurns on Jun 10 2013 10:15pm

You still think that I'm worried about the show filling in all the details of the book. I'm not. I'm saying, purely from a show watcher's perspective (assuming I never read the books) that 10 episodes per season is not enough to naturally flesh out stories and character development for a show whose cast is as wide as GoT. The Wire has a similar cast size, and if you watch any season from 1 to 4 and compare it to season 5, you would see that the difference between 10 episodes and 12 or 13 is not marginal, it's huge.


Fair enough. I acknowledge that having read the books before the show came out makes me biased in this regard, as I can't fully empathize with the non-reader's perspective.

This post was edited by AnomanderRake on Jun 10 2013 10:17pm

I don't disagree with the bolded statement. The character development does fall short of "naturally fleshed out". I simply disagree that that fact means the series isn't one of the Top 3 active shows on TV right now.

Things feel rushed. They don't bother to explain half the shit the characters are thinking/feeling. But despite that, there are enough great aspects of the show to make it one of the best.

thats a shame, it starts really getting good in season 3. although I really liked season 1, season 2 wasnt great and was a bit slow.

I've read the books before the show even came out.

Books - Point of View from characters (mainly the main characters).

T.V. - It's all about what is happening from the viewers point of view.

Overall - both very good and no complaints. I'd rather have 10 eps over 50.

As a book reader, I still like it a lot. Book readers get plenty of nods and inside jokes (good example: When Tyrion gets back after Battle of Blackwater, Cersei says she heard he lost his nose, which is what happens in the books).

Some changes I don't like and some changes I do. Tywin+Arya was absolutely marvelous in S2, aswell as Ramsay+Theon scenes in S3 (which happened in the background in the books).