I’m finding it difficult to buy his argument that by investing feature-length-film money into a show that gained the highest viewership of any program they’ve ever broadcast, they “threw away an asset” and should be sued.
I’m guessing Mr Arends has a poster of the Khaleesi above his bed.
There is a psychological phenomenon that occurs when people unrelated and maybe ignorant to the subject make brash judgements about what they are seeing. Classic example is sports: “the coach is stupid and the players dont care”, this coming from a guy that spends 45 hours a week at a desk so neither critique is well informed or accurate. It’s kind of like Dunning Kreuger with some reductionism thrown in, I think I even learned about it here at BB.
I don’t really buy it. Whatever the storytelling style, and whether or not it changed midstream, there were satisfying ways to end the story that would have been self-consistent, doing justice to the characters and remaining true to the overall themes of the series. As near as I can tell, the explanation for why we didn’t get such a denouement was simply haste, laziness, and literary incompetence.
ETA: I understand that the things I complain about could be seen as resulting from the change in style that the article posits – I just don’t think it’s necessary to explain what happened, and that the actual reason is simpler.
Quite true…but while perhaps the criticism when it comes to a sporting event there are specific tactics and techniques that the viewer may not be informed about and the in the moment “you’re an idiot” could still be followed with “OMG WE WON!”
In the case of GoT (and by extension all forms of art regardless of medium) the viewer IS the critic. Yes, some artist craft their wares for their own happiness and fulfillment regardless of receiving others approval. But television is really NOT that…they very very specifically want that approval. RATINGS! are what win the day.
So…in this case, I think the statement holds. The simplest truth here is…the story turned to shite. And it did so because they sucked once they had firm control and were free to do as they please.
I think Norman Rockwell sucks, but I know that is my opinion on his product and that he actually may be great at what he does.
You’re taking a much higher view than most people do on art.
Additionally…I’m still holding that TV is while still art, definitely around “please like what I made”.
Yeah. Can’t it just be…bad?
Occam would not be proud.
It can be bad in your opinion. Yes.
Absolutely right on both counts, and not only that, it would not have taken all that much revising to get us there. (Which is why I still have hope that GRRM can stick the landing in a way D&D couldn’t, assuming he ever is able to finish the books). Season 7, and to a much greater extent Season 8, feel like first drafts committed to film, where you say “Okay, now that we’ve got all the points we’ve needed to hit, let’s revise it and make sure everything is properly built.” (At least, that’s kind of how I write.) So many obvious plot holes in this season were so easy to avoid.
As just one example (that I think I’ve harped on in these discussions before): imagine during the Battle of Winterfell that Jon Snow riding Rhaegal is the one who dracarys-es the Night King. He’s hovering, because apparently that’s something that dragons can do, less than a hundred yards away from the NK and has no visibility of him because of, you know, the fireball. Then the Night King’s javelin flies out of the fire and strikes Rhaegal. There’s a tense scene where Rhaegal is out of control and Jon is barely holding on, and then Rhaegal crashes to the ground. He’s dead. Jon is thrown clear and injured, though not too badly. This (1) ups the stakes from the Battle of Winterfell, which was otherwise the story of brown people being slaughtered and plot armor saving everyone else; (2) plants the seed of Dany’s turn against Jon (she entrusted her child to him and he got it killed!); (3) avoids the stupid MAGIC CROSSBOW death in the next episode; and (4) fixes all the problems the MAGIC CROSSBOW point created in the episode after that when Drogon suddenly was able to evade every shot after Rhaegal was brought down by three direct hits at a range of two miles.
I get that it’s hard to write well. I just wish D&D had asked for some rewrite help.
Opinion is always implied in criticism of art. It never needs to be explicitly called out.or stated.
In this case, the opinion would be the popular one.
They turned down more episodes. I don’t pretend to know how HBO’s finances work, but I suspect it’s the case that HBO concluded that making lots of GOT was better than not making lots of GOT, and that having more episodes in the final two seasons would have either increased subscriptions or prolonged them enough to make the investment worthwhile. If that’s the case, then Benioff and Weiss did in fact throw away an asset–namely, the 6-7 more episodes HBO offered them, shortening HBO’s tentpole show and, in the opinion of a large portion of the show’s fanbase, ruining a number of the storylines with crappy writing to boot.
Yes, opinion is always implied in criticism. The difficulty becomes when people start to insist that their opinion is the only correct one, the overwhelming popular one (and therefore correct), or subjective fact. None of which are true.
Yeah, but I didn’t do that. So…what’s your beef?
How did I piss in your cornflakes?
I’m not “beefing” with you, nor drinking your piss, but mentioning – as I did earlier in the thread – that a lot of people (here and elsewhere, articles in financial magazines, etc) seem to confuse opinion and fact when it comes to things they’re passionate about. Don’t take that personally.
There is no way to interpret your post other than a personal reminder that my critiscm is an opinion.
Consider silence next time you feel the need to roam threads reminding people of the general understanding of critical discourse.
Are we all wrong because whatever we say is just our opinions?
And you think we’re not aware of that already?
Maybe you should tell us again.
I can’t remember where I read it, but there’s a theory/model/paradigm that proposes (a) all stories are fundamentally about conflict and (b) the three media of film, stage play and novel are all best at exploring a particular type of conflict:
At least the last season was short. And it taught me not to invest in fiction any more, so there’s that.
I didn’t like the last season of Broad City but couldn’t find anyone to complain about it with 
