Overuse of character deaths on TV?

[sycro]

Originally Posted by Todd Tomorrow

Yes, everybody knows that, but as it's a TV show it can still be talked about a such.

What makes GoT work so well is its many interweaving stories and it's characters and how they plot against each other. It's not like I just sit there, impatiently waiting how "the main story" pans out.

From what I gather the next two books to feature in the series are far less popular among fans and I can see why. Many of the more entertaining characters are not around anymore.

That has nothing to do with why fans are down on the last 2. They are down on those because of the way GRRM chose to tell the narrative, focusing on regions instead of characters. And many of the regions were new and required a good amount of build up to connect to the larger story.

[kpkelley]

Originally Posted by theprestige85

What happened in Game Of Thrones after, say,

[Show spoiler]The Viper

bloke got killed? There wasn't even any mention of it! We never see the despair that his

[Show spoiler]wife (the bird from Luther)

and it turns out that it does nothing for the story anyway.

Just because it hasn't played out yet, doesn't mean that it won't.

BTW,

[Show spoiler]Oberyn

wasn't married.

[Show spoiler]Ellaria Sand

was

[Show spoiler]Oberyn's paramour

.

[jayembee]

Originally Posted by BluProofie

The show simply follows the books, so it sounds like your problem is with George R. R. Martin.

I can somewhat understand why people think that Game of Thrones goes overboard with killing off major characters, but I don't even think that you can blame GRRM. He's patterned the series after real history (mostly, but not exclusively, the War of the Roses), and history is just chock full of death. GRRM is just pointing out the obvious: bad shït happens to good people, often (hell, usually) completely randomly and with no purpose.

Except that in GRRM's story, the deaths aren't without purpose. Even this:

What happened in Game Of Thrones after, say, The Viper bloke got killed? There wasn't even any mention of it! We never see the despair that his wife (the bird from Luther) and it turns out that it does nothing for the story anyway. That scene was for that episode and that episode only. Something to give the audience something to talk about so that they will tune into the next season. It's rubbish, mate.

It's not completely wrong to say that Viper's death was "for that episode..." and "something to give the audience something to talk about", but it is wrong to say that "it does nothing for the story". It had a significant impact on what happened to Tyrion. And whether Tyrion lives or dies, or stays in King's Landing or escapes off to somewhere else will have a significant impact on what happens in Westeros at large, because Tyrion is a major player.

And that's what a lot of people didn't understand about Ned Stark's death at the end of Season 1. It wasn't just that it was a shock to see the death of not just a major character, but someone that most viewers saw as the major character. It was that pretty much everything that happens after that point happened because Ned Stark was executed. And each major death after that point just compounds that. It was the sound that starts an avalanche.

Me, I disagree with the initial point of the thread. If anything, I don't think there are enough characters dying on TV. For decades in popular fiction especially series fiction (whether books, comics, movies, or TV) we've gotten used to the idea that if you're an important character, nothing truly bad will ever happen to you. I think what we're seeing now is a reaction against that. A sense of "real life doesn't care if you're a major character".

I wonder if Shakespeare ever got complaints about killing off major characters in every other play.

Oh, and

Originally Posted by theprestige85

I sort of HAVE to watch the show because my girlfriend is into Tolkien and all that bollocks

Sounds like your problem isn't so much with Game of Thrones itself, but that you don't like fantasy (which you apparently think is "bollocks") and are reacting to feeling compelled to watch it because of your girlfriend.

My suggestion: man up and tell your girlfriend you don't want to watch something you don't like. I never really understood that kind of thing. My wife and I have some things we both like and watch together, but there are other things that she likes and watches that I don't, and things that I like and watch that she doesn't. Neither of us feels compelled to watch something just because the other one likes it, and neither of us wants to compel the other to watch something they don't like just because we like it.

[Foggy]

Originally Posted by BluProofie

None of the deaths have made the show less interesting.

And since Benioff and Weiss are going to adapt the 4th and 5th books chronologically in one season, we have nothing to worry about. As long as they cut all the filler from those books it could be one of the best seasons yet.

Books 4 and 5 will be combined but more than likely spread over seasons 5 and 6.

[Hucksta G]

Originally Posted by Foggy

Books 4 and 5 will be combined but more than likely spread over seasons 5 and 6.

Maybe but they are aiming for seven seasons I feel most of it will be covered in season 5.

[Foggy]

Originally Posted by Hucksta G

Maybe but they are aiming for seven seasons I feel most of it will be covered in season 5.

Fair enough, I don't know how dense the latter books are, but with book 3 being two season, it doesn't seem practical to squeeze two books into one season.

[Hucksta G]

Originally Posted by Foggy

Fair enough, I don't know how dense the latter books are, but with book 3 being two season, it doesn't seem practical to squeeze two books into one season.

In my opinion far more happened in book three than it does book four and five combined

[BluProofie]

Originally Posted by Foggy

Books 4 and 5 will be combined but more than likely spread over seasons 5 and 6.

Nope. They are aiming for seven seasons and their plan is for those books to take up season 5. Seasons 6 and 7 will be made up of the book 6 and 7 material given to them by GRRM.

If Benioff and Weiss cut all the filler in books 4 and 5 they can easily fit both books into one season and it can be one of the best seasons.

[theprestige85]

Originally Posted by sycro

Read the damn books before you complain about the payoff. They had 2 episodes after that, but trust me, it wasn't for nothing. I'm sorry that you can't follow more than 2 story arcs at once, but GoT has way too many to focus on

[Show spoiler]Oberyn's

death in the last 2 episodes.

I'm not saying that they should have completely concentrated on

[Show spoiler]Oberyn's death

but, come on, they could have at least had a few scenes where Ellaria Sand (thank you kpkelley) reflects on what's happened or something.

[theprestige85]

It's not completely wrong to say that Viper's death was "for that episode..." and "something to give the audience something to talk about", but it is wrong to say that "it does nothing for the story". It had a significant impact on what happened to Tyrion. And whether Tyrion lives or dies, or stays in King's Landing or escapes off to somewhere else will have a significant impact on what happens in Westeros at large, because Tyrion is a major player.

Dunno mate, I just don't see how it did. The fact that Kingslayer just decides to release Tyrion with ease shows that the death of Oberyn was for nothing. The odds weren't exactly in Oberyn's favour prior to the fight, why wait to release him until after??

And that's what a lot of people didn't understand about Ned Stark's death at the end of Season 1. It wasn't just that it was a shock to see the death of not just a major character, but someone that most viewers saw as the major character. It was that pretty much everything that happens after that point happened because Ned Stark was executed. And each major death after that point just compounds that. It was the sound that starts an avalanche.

Yeah, see I would agree THAT was a reasonable justified killing off a major character. As you say, it has shaped the characters and the series in a way that wouldn't be possible had he been left to live. But then they got trigger happy and now it's an awful gimmick. Notice how each of the other characters death get more and more gruesome too, as if to say 'Ned Stark's death was pussies, wait till you see this, folks!' It's just dodgy business, mate.

Me, I disagree with the initial point of the thread. If anything, I don't think there are enough characters dying on TV. For decades in popular fiction especially series fiction (whether books, comics, movies, or TV) we've gotten used to the idea that if you're an important character, nothing truly bad will ever happen to you. I think what we're seeing now is a reaction against that. A sense of "real life doesn't care if you're a major character".

That's interesting, I think it's definitely the other way around for me. I've gotten used to seeing characters dying as some knee jerk reaction to get more ratings that it always surprises me when I haven't seen a death at the end of every season. It's one of the strengths of Mad Men. A show i'm not exactly in love with but do appreciate. Given it's setting and tone, you are very unlikely to see any deaths of characters. And the very few deaths that you do see or hear about are effective because it's a show that doesn't rely on it. It's just good old fashioned storytelling and character development that the show prides itself on, not characters dying at the end of the season.

The Wire was also a show that used character deaths sparingly, but then, that show was about SO much more than that.

Sounds like your problem isn't so much with Game of Thrones itself, but that you don't like fantasy (which you apparently think is "bollocks") and are reacting to feeling compelled to watch it because of your girlfriend.

Mate, look at my avatar! Of course I don't like fantasy. I LOVE fantasy. I've no problem with that genre at all. 'Fantasy is true', as Ursala K. Le Guin says. 'Not factual but true'. My problem with thrones has absolutely nothing to do with fantasy as so much as to do with a weakness storytelling

You alluded to Shakespeare telling off characters in his plays in defence of GoT. Difference is Shakespeare actually seemed to have sympathy and care for his own characters.

[thewerepuppygrr]

Originally Posted by theprestige85

That's interesting, I think it's definitely the other way around for me. I've gotten used to seeing characters dying as some knee jerk reaction to get more ratings that it always surprises me when I haven't seen a death at the end of every season. It's one of the strengths of Mad Men. A show i'm not exactly in love with but do appreciate. Given it's setting and tone, you are very unlikely to see any deaths of characters. And the very few deaths that you do see or hear about are effective because it's a show that doesn't rely on it. It's just good old fashioned storytelling and character development that the show prides itself on, not characters dying at the end of the season.

The Wire was also a show that used character deaths sparingly, but then, that show was about SO much more than that.

Mate, look at my avatar! Of course I don't like fantasy. I LOVE fantasy. I've no problem with that genre at all. 'Fantasy is true', as Ursala K. Le Guin says. 'Not factual but true'. My problem with thrones has absolutely nothing to do with fantasy as so much as to do with a weakness storytelling

You alluded to Shakespeare telling off characters in his plays in defence of GoT. Difference is Shakespeare actually seemed to have sympathy and care for his own characters.

None of the shows you mention are remotely similar to Game Of Thrones. If someone died every week in Mad Men, then it wouldn't make any sense - they don't exactly live in a dangerous environment. As I believe someone else here tried to point out to you, Thrones is set in a harsh, feudal environment where, in many circumstances, escaping death and tragedy is more difficult than being a victim of it. The entire story is a war - guess what? People die in wars. A lot.

To complain of a weakness in storytelling or to accuse Martin of having no sympathy for his characters is a narrow-minded opinion. Every death matters.

[Show spoiler]Obyryn's death has major repercussions later on. Robb and Catelyn's deaths are already affecting the lives of many characters, not least Arya and the Bolton family. The Hound may or may not be dead, but if he is, then it was to provide a further influence on Arya.

None of it is for naught. The significance of events may not be apparent to you right off the bat, but the ripples WILL resonate.

While I am happy to accept that there will be major character deaths in a show such as Thrones, in other shows it simply doesn't work. I agree major character deaths in Buffy (like JC and JS) were shocking and well done, but one that did my head in was Heroes. They kept introducing interesting people and then bumping them off before you even got a chance to see their full potential, and instead chose to kept the focus on tiresome people like the Petrellis. I think that was one of the major reasons Heroes went downhill so fast. Agents of SHIELD is in danger of succumbing to the same trend as well.

[jayembee]

Originally Posted by theprestige85

Dunno mate, I just don't see how it did. The fact that Kingslayer just decides to release Tyrion with ease shows that the death of Oberyn was for nothing. The odds weren't exactly in Oberyn's favour prior to the fight, why wait to release him until after??

You're still focusing too narrowly, and I think that's the issue here. Unlike many (if not most) series, in which the each episode is largely a self-contained story, Game of Thrones needs to be looked at as a long (very long) serialization of one mega-story. The events don't happen in a vacuum. Something that happens now may not have any immediate repercussions, but may have considerable impact a ways down the road.

At any rate, the thing about the Viper/Mountain fight was that Oberyn actually did (much to a lot of people's surprise) have considerably good odds against the Mountain. It was his own obstinance that did him in. If he had just focused on killing the sonofabïtch instead of trying to make him confess, he'd've won.

As for the ease of Jamie freeing Tyrion, it was obvious that he was trying to play things by the book. He didn't want to commit treason (which is what he did) if he didn't have to. He succeeded in getting Tywin to agree to judge in Tyrion's favor, but then Tyrion's pride and obstinancy got the better of him, and that deal was screwed. Jamie freed Tyrion because it was the only card left to play. And that eventually led to Tyrion killing his father, which will have more repercussions.

Again, it's an avalanche. Something minor ends up causing major disaster, and it keeps getting worse and worse.

The Wire was also a show that used character deaths sparingly, but then, that show was about SO much more than that.

Oh, absolutely. For me, The Wire is the best TV show I've ever seen in roughly 55 years of watching TV. But that doesn't mean that every show needs to be and do the same things.

You alluded to Shakespeare telling off characters in his plays in defence of GoT. Difference is Shakespeare actually seemed to have sympathy and care for his own characters.

So does Martin. He's talked with great emotion how agonizing it was to write the Red Wedding scene, and did everything he could to put it off writing it until there was nothing else left to write for that book.

The biggest reason that readers/viewers don't like seeing characters they like getting killed off, is because in real life, you don't get to choose who lives and who dies (unless you're a ruthless dictator). The appeal of fiction is that the author does get to decide who lives and who dies, so a happily ever after ending is possible. The good people get to live, the bad people die. But an author who is honest with himself and his work knows that the story has its own ideas.

[BluProofie]

Originally Posted by theprestige85

I'm not saying that they should have completely concentrated on

[Show spoiler]Oberyn's death

but, come on, they could have at least had a few scenes where Ellaria Sand (thank you kpkelley) reflects on what's happened or something.

That would have been a waste of screen time considering all the events from the books that had to happen in the finale. And we see her and Dorne next season anyway.

[theprestige85]

Originally Posted by thewerepuppygrr

While I am happy to accept that there will be major character deaths in a show such as Thrones, in other shows it simply doesn't work. I agree major character deaths in Buffy (like JC and JS) were shocking and well done, but one that did my head in was Heroes. They kept introducing interesting people and then bumping them off before you even got a chance to see their full potential, and instead chose to kept the focus on tiresome people like the Petrellis. I think that was one of the major reasons Heroes went downhill so fast. Agents of SHIELD is in danger of succumbing to the same trend as well.

Yeah well Heroes had a lot more problems than cast overkill.

None of the shows you mention are remotely similar to Game Of Thrones. If someone died every week in Mad Men, then it wouldn't make any sense - they don't exactly live in a dangerous environment. As I believe someone else here tried to point out to you, Thrones is set in a harsh, feudal environment where, in many circumstances, escaping death and tragedy is more difficult than being a victim of it. The entire story is a war - guess what? People die in wars. A lot.

I get that it's an unforgiven environment, I really do. That STILL doesn't justify the killing off these major characters like they've been doing. The world in The Wire is as much of a war zone as the one depicted in Game Of Thrones, if not more since the characters in the projects aren't expected to live beyond 18. You didn't see David Simon and Ed Burns killing of 4 major characters within a season now, do you?

You're still focusing too narrowly, and I think that's the issue here. Unlike many (if not most) series, in which the each episode is largely a self-contained story, Game of Thrones needs to be looked at as a long (very long) serialization of one mega-story. The events don't happen in a vacuum. Something that happens now may not have any immediate repercussions, but may have considerable impact a ways down the road.

Perhaps you and others are right. I may be looking at the show as a whole. A bigger picture or something. I guess that's one of the advantages of reading the book - you guys get have an understanding of what to expect. I'm happy to admit that I may be a bit narrow minded there.

As for the ease of Jamie freeing Tyrion, it was obvious that he was trying to play things by the book. He didn't want to commit treason (which is what he did) if he didn't have to. He succeeded in getting Tywin to agree to judge in Tyrion's favor, but then Tyrion's pride and obstinancy got the better of him, and that deal was screwed. Jamie freed Tyrion because it was the only card left to play. And that eventually led to Tyrion killing his father, which will have more repercussions.

The way you've just described the events makes more sense than what was presented to us. Though, treason or not, I imagine Jamie knows he pretty much has immunity with his father since he's the golden boy of the family. But yes, I can now see that maybe he freed Tyrion as a last resort.

Oh, absolutely. For me, The Wire is the best TV show I've ever seen in roughly 55 years of watching TV. But that doesn't mean that every show needs to be and do the same things.

Yeah man, I agree. I've always said that the two most important television shows ever made were Buffy The Vampire Slayer and The Wire. Two distinctive shows. Does every show need to do the same things as each other? Of course not. But I also don't expect shows to use the same tired shock tactics week in week out to 'develop' it's story.

The biggest reason that readers/viewers don't like seeing characters they like getting killed off, is because in real life, you don't get to choose who lives and who dies (unless you're a ruthless dictator). The appeal of fiction is that the author does get to decide who lives and who dies, so a happily ever after ending is possible. The good people get to live, the bad people die. But an author who is honest with himself and his work knows that the story has its own ideas.

Agreed. Look, I have no problem with bad endings, non decent characters and the subversive. I just don't like the overuse of that one magic card. That's one of (many) problems I have with the show.

Meh, you've presented a strong argument I guess I should really wait until the entire series is finished to make a definitive statement of it. So far I don't like it and it rubs me up the wrong way, but if there is some great big master plan, an avalanche, then perhaps i'll change my mind.

That would have been a waste of screen time considering all the events from the books that had to happen in the finale. And we see her and Dorne next season anyway.

The repercussions of a death is never a 'waste of screen time', regardless of how much stuff they have to put in. Now the geezer above me had indicated that there will be a genuine fallout from those events, so i'll take back some of what I have said - for now.

[BluProofie]

Originally Posted by theprestige85

The repercussions of a death is never a 'waste of screen time', regardless of how much stuff they have to put in. Now the geezer above me had indicated that there will be a genuine fallout from those events, so i'll take back some of what I have said - for now.

Yes, it is. Oberyn is a minor character in the books and they can't waste screen time on stuff like that when the show has to wrap up the really long third book in 10 hour long episodes.

I think you should probably just stop watching the show. You clearly don't like it and that isn't going to change, especially considering you have expressed distaste for the fantasy elements and those are only going to increase as the show goes on(and there are 3 seasons left).

The "fallout" will have more to do with

[Show spoiler]who will get Oberyn's inheritance, Tyrion's escape and Tywin's death

than it does with people reacting to Oberyn's death.

[Show spoiler]Season 5, following the fourth book closely, will be very Cersei heavy and focus on how she struggles without Tywin and Tyrion to help do everything for her. It is her downfall.

[theprestige85]

Originally Posted by BluProofie

Yes, it is. Oberyn is a minor character in the books and they can't waste screen time on stuff like that when the show has to wrap up the really long third book in 10 hour long episodes.

I think you should probably just stop watching the show. You clearly don't like it and that isn't going to change, especially considering you have expressed distaste for the fantasy elements and those are only going to increase as the show goes on(and there are 3 seasons left).
.[/SPOILER]

You keep referring to the books. This is an adaptation, hun. They don't have to do EVERYTHING by the, ahem, book, do they? Oberyn certainly didn't feel like a minor character in the 6 or so episodes he appeared in.

I did mention in my last post on this page that I will give the (another) chance to redeem itself. Yourself, jay and others keep saying that this has to be viewed as one great big single narrative. Well, I give you guys the benefit of the doubt. I'll reluctantly watch the next season and the one after that.

I've also explained that I take no issue with the fantasy elements of the show. Where did I say that I did?

[jayembee]

Originally Posted by theprestige85

I've also explained that I take no issue with the fantasy elements of the show. Where did I say that I did?

I don't want to re-open this can of worms, but no doubt others reacted the same way I initially did to your comment, "because my girlfriend is into Tolkien and all that bollocks". Someone who doesn't know you and your tastes would be inclined to believe that you think fantasy is rubbish.

I'm happy to accept you at your word that that's not true, but you really shouldn't be that surprised that people might've reacted to that phrasing the way they did.

[theprestige85]

Originally Posted by jayembee

I don't want to re-open this can of worms, but no doubt others reacted the same way I initially did to your comment, "because my girlfriend is into Tolkien and all that bollocks". Someone who doesn't know you and your tastes would be inclined to believe that you think fantasy is rubbish.

I'm happy to accept you at your word that that's not true, but you really shouldn't be that surprised that people might've reacted to that phrasing the way they did.

Fair do's, I can see how somebody could have come to that conclusion with that comment. I stand corrected.

[Ajira316]

Originally Posted by theprestige85

Dunno mate, I just don't see how it did. The fact that Kingslayer just decides to release Tyrion with ease shows that the death of Oberyn was for nothing. The odds weren't exactly in Oberyn's favour prior to the fight, why wait to release him until after??.

I wouldn't say Oberyn died for nothing just yet. Dorne (where Oberyn is from) is going to be a major location for Season 5 and *Season 5 Casting Info Ahead (Some small spoilers)*

[Show spoiler]Prince Doran Martell (Oberyn's brother), Prince Trystane Martell (fiancé of Princess Marcella) are going to be major characters this season. They are also casting for the "Sand Snakes" (Oberyn's bastard daughters.)

[kpkelley]

True Blood may have just proven the OPs point.

There were:

[Show spoiler]Two deaths of new characters just introduced in that same episode (Sylvie and guru)

[Show spoiler]The death of a minor supporting character who has appeared only a few times in the last two seasons(vampire Matt)

[Show spoiler]The death of a supporting character who has appeared in the show since season one (Mrs. Fortenberry)

[Show spoiler]The death of a few of the primary villains for this season

[Show spoiler]The death of a major supporting character and the current love interest of the lead character, as well as his killer(Alcide Herveaux and some random townsperson)

[Show spoiler]NTM, the confirmation of a previously killed character that many thought was still alive

And not one of them was particularly impactful.