![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
A couple of posts about the tv series Game of Thrones have sprung up across my friends lists in the last couple of days, probably caused by the dvd release of season 1 in Germany and the airing of season 2 (?).
I've followed the posts closely and - so far - I've come to the conclusion that Game of Thrones is one of those fandoms, which I will avoid because I love the books and the tv show, and find its grisly depictions entirely befitting the source. (I only mourn that the direwolves didn't get as much attention as I'd wished for them).
Everybody reads and envisions the events in books differently and GRRM wraps his tale in very pretty prose, but the tale itself is ugly (up to English book 5 - as far as I read) and doesn't pull punches. I assume that for most people it's one thing to read pretty words about ugly things and another to see ugly pictures telling the same thing, because the picture they form in their head when reading is influenced by the pretty words. They are convinced they handled the ugly truth and when shown are uncomfortable (or even put off). In contrast, most of the time I'm put off by shows that pull too many punches to present their source. Maybe it's because I'm "an eye person" and while I prefer pretty words over ugly ones, the prettiness of the words itself doesn't affect the image my mind makes of them. Or maybe my pictures have always been ugly, I don't know. I prefer Alien over E.T., Robin of Sherwood over Errol Flynn any time.
Anyway, people - and people reading - are different and from experience, this specific difference is one that often sours the experience of shows and books (and fan connections), because we all feel we have to prove our points and how tough we are. I don't think that helps with this, however, and I have too much fun with Game of Thrones (books and show) and people in various other fandoms. I don't have - or want - to risk any of it.
Have fun, folks! :-)
Edit: Not all comments I got here are without spoilers, though. :/
I've followed the posts closely and - so far - I've come to the conclusion that Game of Thrones is one of those fandoms, which I will avoid because I love the books and the tv show, and find its grisly depictions entirely befitting the source. (I only mourn that the direwolves didn't get as much attention as I'd wished for them).
Everybody reads and envisions the events in books differently and GRRM wraps his tale in very pretty prose, but the tale itself is ugly (up to English book 5 - as far as I read) and doesn't pull punches. I assume that for most people it's one thing to read pretty words about ugly things and another to see ugly pictures telling the same thing, because the picture they form in their head when reading is influenced by the pretty words. They are convinced they handled the ugly truth and when shown are uncomfortable (or even put off). In contrast, most of the time I'm put off by shows that pull too many punches to present their source. Maybe it's because I'm "an eye person" and while I prefer pretty words over ugly ones, the prettiness of the words itself doesn't affect the image my mind makes of them. Or maybe my pictures have always been ugly, I don't know. I prefer Alien over E.T., Robin of Sherwood over Errol Flynn any time.
Anyway, people - and people reading - are different and from experience, this specific difference is one that often sours the experience of shows and books (and fan connections), because we all feel we have to prove our points and how tough we are. I don't think that helps with this, however, and I have too much fun with Game of Thrones (books and show) and people in various other fandoms. I don't have - or want - to risk any of it.
Have fun, folks! :-)
Edit: Not all comments I got here are without spoilers, though. :/
no subject
Date: 2012-04-09 00:40 (UTC)From:In the case of Game of Thrones I almost prefer the HBO series, not so much because of the actors (although they do do a nice job of bringing the characters to life) but rather because I really like what the writers have done to the screenplay adaptation in terms of tightening up characterisation and plot points. The first book was really the best in that regard but now in the second season I'm glad they're starting to deviate from the source material a little bit.
no subject
Date: 2012-04-09 03:45 (UTC)From:I should prob give it another try, because I really enjoyed the hbo series Rome... I'm just not in a tv mood these days... and lord knows my moods dictate my life :P
no subject
Date: 2012-04-09 06:01 (UTC)From:Regarding Rome. I think the series would have been much, much better if HBO had not forced them to cramp the remaining half of the planned plot in just two closing episodes because of the budgetary. The rush through events at the end definitely killed things.
no subject
Date: 2012-04-09 05:59 (UTC)From:I can't (and want) to say anything specific about the HBO series. German public tv had season one as a weekend special a few weeks ago (that's when I watched it and decided to get the dvds as well). Season 2 is scheduled on pay-tv and that's ridiculously expensive here. So I'm waiting for the dvd release there.
I'd be happy if you would abstain from outlining or refering to the differences between book and show for that reason. :)
no subject
Date: 2012-04-09 11:18 (UTC)From:no subject
Date: 2012-04-09 11:23 (UTC)From: