HBO can kiss my ass
May. 18th, 2011 11:59 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
merielleI don't know what the fuck that mess was on Sunday night, but it damn sure wasn't anything like the Song of Ice and Fire I know.
- Who the FUCK was that Cersei Lannister? Because the one in the book 1) would never open her heart to Robert Barratheon; 2) would never say a word against her brother; 3) is nowhere near thoughtful or strategic enough to have that conversation.
- (Previous related WTF) Where did that strategic conversation between Cersei and Joffrey come from? Joffrey doesn't have that much between his ears, not by a long shot - nor anywhere near enough discipline to actually think something through!
- What the FUCK was that scene between Renly and Loras? The relationship was heavily implied in the books, but never explicitly stated. Changing that, I don't object to. But what the fuck was up with the shaving, and Loras brattily saying I want you like this? Jesus, NAMBLA much? That was so unnecessary - and kinda homophobic. And making Loras into a bitchy, nelly Gay-dy Macbeth and Renly all weak-willed and uncertain, manipulated into seeking the kingship by the Tyrells? WRONG. NO. And it will fuck up the plot later. Renly's smarts, good cheer, and charisma are important! Loras' charm is also important! I think it sucks that the people adapting the books made the most prominent queer characters so much weaker, more annoying, and generally less substantive people.
- Why did I have to look at Theon Greyjoy's penis? What is he even doing having a scene of his own at this point?
- What the holy hell were they thinking, having Catelyn Stark refer in her sister's court with plenty of witnesses to the super secret message Lysa wrote her about the Lannisters' involvement in Jon Arryn's death? Stupid and wrong!
- Why did I just watch Ned Stark swordfight with Jamie Lannister and then Ned get wounded by a random soldier? That's totally wrong. Ned's badly broken leg, which he got by falling from a horse during the fight with the Lannister soldiers, is not trivial - again, it figures in the plot later. And Ned is supposed to shout, "NO!" when Jamie orders his men killed - his demonstrated loyalty to his own people and lands is a key part of his character. I'm supposed to believe that he'd just stand there and then start fighting? No fucking way.
And from the previous episode… who the fuck was that useless, lecherous wastrel they call Tyrion Lannister? So much of what was cool about Tyrion in the books is that his failure to achieve normative manhood because of his dwarfism is clearly portrayed as problematic. *He's* not portrayed as a loser - quite the opposite. He's one of the only truly decent and sensible Lannisters. His sexuality isn't pathologized or played for laughs; it's portrayed as a normal, natural part of him and a need he has. It's constructed as tragic that Tyrion can't make a traditional royal marriage because no highborn lady will have him, so instead he seeks companionship and sex with women of lower social status (sex workers and peasants), which his father won't accept and for which he repeatedly and viciously threatens and punishes Tyrion. The conflict between Tyrion's ambition (inextricably connected with his family), his desire to do something meaningful with his life and opportunities, and his need for affection and sex met through relationships with 'unsuitable' women is significant and painful for him. But in the first episode, he's portrayed as a lecherous fool who's too busy fucking half the whores in the North to even attend the banquet at Winterfell. Because of course a person with dwarfism can't just, you know, want to get laid sometimes like most people do. It's got to be a character flaw. That's such bullshit. And again, this huge change in the characterization is going to get in the way of the plot later.
I also HATE the way Dany's wedding night was portrayed. The wedding portrayed the Dothraki as Standard Exotic Savages - gross. And the sex was portrayed as straight-up rape - which it absolutely was NOT in the book! In the book, Khal Drogo, a so-called 'savage' with dark skin, treats Dany with gentleness and respect and explicitly waits for her consent to intercourse. This is a huge contrast with her brother, a light-skinned 'noble' of the allegedly civilized Seven Kingdoms, who explicitly tells her that he's selling her to a savage for political and military gain and that he would let all 40,000 of the Khal's warriors fuck (read: rape) her if it meant he would gain the army he needs to take the crown. We're clearly meant to question what 'civilization' really means, and that's important and cool.
I'm a big fan of the books. I know there's a load of feminist criticism of them, and I get why. There is a lot of what we now think of as sexual assault in them. Women face a lot of oppression in them. The fanboy response is, b-b-but it's medieval! The feminist response to that is, fuck off, he's writing in the 2000s for a contemporary audience; and also, fuck off, it's fantasy - you can accept magic and dragons, but you can't imagine gender equality? And I get all that. My thing is, you know, it *is*, in fact, a *feudal* society with primogeniture, that has consequences for women and those defined as Other (like Tyrion Lannister), and George RR Martin is strongly critical of how those consequences suck. I've always loved how, at the beginning of the series, fantasy conventions lead you to believe that Ned Stark is Our Hero, but eventually you realize that if there are Heroes in the series, they're Arya, Dany, and Tyrion - two young girls and a little person, all of whom are fierce, intelligent, independent, and deviating considerably from the scripts they were handed at birth. Rad.
So WHY, I ask, are the adapters of the books making these very different, very significant changes? I know that the books' gigantic length and complexity make them tough to adapt, and I expected some condensing and combining, but these choices are not innocent or context-free. And they hurt rather than help the narrative!
Liss and Iain point out that being on HBO may be hurting the story, because they're so frequently all 14-year-old boy, heh-heh-we-can-show-TEH-SEX-and-also-OMG-BOOBIEZZZ. This is not edgy or challenging. It's boring and completely mired in male-gaze bullshit. A commenter at Shakesville also made the astute point that they didn't show the sex scene between Ned and Catelyn - of course not, because that was loving, consensual sex between two people committed to each other and over the age of 40. Feh.
Also, I don't need to hear blow jobs being given. I really don't. And there are no narratively significant blow jobs in the books. I swear. So enough with the slurping, already.
- Who the FUCK was that Cersei Lannister? Because the one in the book 1) would never open her heart to Robert Barratheon; 2) would never say a word against her brother; 3) is nowhere near thoughtful or strategic enough to have that conversation.
- (Previous related WTF) Where did that strategic conversation between Cersei and Joffrey come from? Joffrey doesn't have that much between his ears, not by a long shot - nor anywhere near enough discipline to actually think something through!
- What the FUCK was that scene between Renly and Loras? The relationship was heavily implied in the books, but never explicitly stated. Changing that, I don't object to. But what the fuck was up with the shaving, and Loras brattily saying I want you like this? Jesus, NAMBLA much? That was so unnecessary - and kinda homophobic. And making Loras into a bitchy, nelly Gay-dy Macbeth and Renly all weak-willed and uncertain, manipulated into seeking the kingship by the Tyrells? WRONG. NO. And it will fuck up the plot later. Renly's smarts, good cheer, and charisma are important! Loras' charm is also important! I think it sucks that the people adapting the books made the most prominent queer characters so much weaker, more annoying, and generally less substantive people.
- Why did I have to look at Theon Greyjoy's penis? What is he even doing having a scene of his own at this point?
- What the holy hell were they thinking, having Catelyn Stark refer in her sister's court with plenty of witnesses to the super secret message Lysa wrote her about the Lannisters' involvement in Jon Arryn's death? Stupid and wrong!
- Why did I just watch Ned Stark swordfight with Jamie Lannister and then Ned get wounded by a random soldier? That's totally wrong. Ned's badly broken leg, which he got by falling from a horse during the fight with the Lannister soldiers, is not trivial - again, it figures in the plot later. And Ned is supposed to shout, "NO!" when Jamie orders his men killed - his demonstrated loyalty to his own people and lands is a key part of his character. I'm supposed to believe that he'd just stand there and then start fighting? No fucking way.
And from the previous episode… who the fuck was that useless, lecherous wastrel they call Tyrion Lannister? So much of what was cool about Tyrion in the books is that his failure to achieve normative manhood because of his dwarfism is clearly portrayed as problematic. *He's* not portrayed as a loser - quite the opposite. He's one of the only truly decent and sensible Lannisters. His sexuality isn't pathologized or played for laughs; it's portrayed as a normal, natural part of him and a need he has. It's constructed as tragic that Tyrion can't make a traditional royal marriage because no highborn lady will have him, so instead he seeks companionship and sex with women of lower social status (sex workers and peasants), which his father won't accept and for which he repeatedly and viciously threatens and punishes Tyrion. The conflict between Tyrion's ambition (inextricably connected with his family), his desire to do something meaningful with his life and opportunities, and his need for affection and sex met through relationships with 'unsuitable' women is significant and painful for him. But in the first episode, he's portrayed as a lecherous fool who's too busy fucking half the whores in the North to even attend the banquet at Winterfell. Because of course a person with dwarfism can't just, you know, want to get laid sometimes like most people do. It's got to be a character flaw. That's such bullshit. And again, this huge change in the characterization is going to get in the way of the plot later.
I also HATE the way Dany's wedding night was portrayed. The wedding portrayed the Dothraki as Standard Exotic Savages - gross. And the sex was portrayed as straight-up rape - which it absolutely was NOT in the book! In the book, Khal Drogo, a so-called 'savage' with dark skin, treats Dany with gentleness and respect and explicitly waits for her consent to intercourse. This is a huge contrast with her brother, a light-skinned 'noble' of the allegedly civilized Seven Kingdoms, who explicitly tells her that he's selling her to a savage for political and military gain and that he would let all 40,000 of the Khal's warriors fuck (read: rape) her if it meant he would gain the army he needs to take the crown. We're clearly meant to question what 'civilization' really means, and that's important and cool.
I'm a big fan of the books. I know there's a load of feminist criticism of them, and I get why. There is a lot of what we now think of as sexual assault in them. Women face a lot of oppression in them. The fanboy response is, b-b-but it's medieval! The feminist response to that is, fuck off, he's writing in the 2000s for a contemporary audience; and also, fuck off, it's fantasy - you can accept magic and dragons, but you can't imagine gender equality? And I get all that. My thing is, you know, it *is*, in fact, a *feudal* society with primogeniture, that has consequences for women and those defined as Other (like Tyrion Lannister), and George RR Martin is strongly critical of how those consequences suck. I've always loved how, at the beginning of the series, fantasy conventions lead you to believe that Ned Stark is Our Hero, but eventually you realize that if there are Heroes in the series, they're Arya, Dany, and Tyrion - two young girls and a little person, all of whom are fierce, intelligent, independent, and deviating considerably from the scripts they were handed at birth. Rad.
So WHY, I ask, are the adapters of the books making these very different, very significant changes? I know that the books' gigantic length and complexity make them tough to adapt, and I expected some condensing and combining, but these choices are not innocent or context-free. And they hurt rather than help the narrative!
Liss and Iain point out that being on HBO may be hurting the story, because they're so frequently all 14-year-old boy, heh-heh-we-can-show-TEH-SEX-and-also-OMG-BOOBIEZZZ. This is not edgy or challenging. It's boring and completely mired in male-gaze bullshit. A commenter at Shakesville also made the astute point that they didn't show the sex scene between Ned and Catelyn - of course not, because that was loving, consensual sex between two people committed to each other and over the age of 40. Feh.
Also, I don't need to hear blow jobs being given. I really don't. And there are no narratively significant blow jobs in the books. I swear. So enough with the slurping, already.
