House of the Dragon (Season 1 of GoT-related series discussion)

[Fippy]

Different quality level actors yup.
Paddy Considine (King) played in many movies, he also directed Journeyman (which i haven't seen but it has good ratings).
Steve Toussaint (Lord Velaryon) i.e. mostly plays in TV / mini series.

Real actor vs. filler character. Not good when important roles are low budget.

 

[Kyriakos]

For me, the king and his brother are those that have presence - due to the actors. The king's daughter is also good. The rest... I can't say I like.
As you said, the important characters should be formidable actor-wise. The hand and the Velaryon leader just aren't, and the hand is the worst, nothing about his demeanor fits a high lord; comes across more as a mundane bank clerk

 

[Samson]

It seems to me that they are missing the side characters with a bit of humour. Everyone is so serious!

 

[Kyriakos]

It seems to me that they are missing the side characters with a bit of humour. Everyone is so serious!

What do you expect, with even Leatherface being a character in this show :S
Overall it is probably a less interesting story, so having the book finished doesn't help that much.
I heard that in the book there are two sources of information, and one is on the silly side (some imp jester), so perhaps Leatherface in the stepping stone islands was his input. Unless it is undisputed, and just irrational (why have a crab fetishist as your muscle).

 

[lymond]

Craziness - Rhys Ifans(hand) is great and I'd say the most famous of the actors on the show less Paddy. I think of Paddy as more of a Brit TV regular, rather than movies, though he's certainly done those. Paddy is certainly very good here. Ifans performance is more understated imo to this point, but I think we will see more. He's harboring something inside somewhere. (I thought it great the expression Ifans had after Rhaenyra flew away from Dragonstone. Not sure how quite to read it but I took it as "that girl is going to be something I'll have to deal with" or "she just might make a better monarch than I gave her credit")

I agree with Samson though that so far the show is missing a bit of levity now and then like Tyrion. I"m fine with the serious though.

I like the young actress playing Rhaenyra. She's doing a fine job but she will be replaced by Emma D'arcy soon with the age up. Olivia Cooke is replacing the Hightower girl, the Hand's daughter and soon to be Queen. Cooke is a very fine actress.

I've no clue what's gonna happen in the series but I expect the Kings is gonna bite it at some point this season - too much foreshadowing. I suspect Ifans will be among the main players for some time though his role might change. Right now, I suspect he will eventually be in Camp Rhaenrya at some point. He certainly does not like Daemon.

 

[MagisterCultuum]

What do you expect, with even Leatherface being a character in this show :S
Overall it is probably a less interesting story, so having the book finished doesn't help that much.
I heard that in the book there are two sources of information, and one is on the silly side (some imp jester), so perhaps Leatherface in the stepping stone islands was his input. Unless it is undisputed, and just irrational (why have a crab fetishist as your muscle).

Craghas Crabfeeder is mentioned in the book but in less detail that Coryls shared in either episode. We never get any physical description. The only details about the Crabfeeder in the book and not the show is exactly how he will die. Based on episode titles, I'm guessing that will be in episode 4.

Mushroom the dwarf jester was not a source for that. His focus is on presenting court intrigue in the bawdiest light possible, turning everything he can into a sex scandal, while generally having an anti-Hightower bias as he was part of Rhaenyra's court. For instance, he insisted that Alicent started sleeping with Viserys long before Aemma died, that she had lost her virginity to Prince Daemon, and that she may have performed some sexual favors for the Old King Jaehaerys as well.

 

[Kyriakos]

Craziness - Rhys Ifans(hand) is great

Yeah, he was great in Notting Hill, as the cretin
You are acting as if he is an a-lister or has a long line of serious roles.

Rhys Ifans | Actor, Producer, Soundtrack

Known for: The Amazing Spider-Man, Notting Hill, Anonymus

www.imdb.com

Then again, he is the hand, which used to be Sean Bean, Charles Dance etc, so of course he'd come across as nondescript. GoT just had better actors and more of them.

 

[Birdjaguar]

Episode 3 was great! The story is moving along. Good stuff in this one. It is not ground breaking like the earlier seasons of GOT, but an extension of that experience. I'm all in at this point.

Spoiler :

Apparently GRRM based this bit of his history (Viserys succession) on the succession crisis of Henry I. Not unlike his GOT is based on the War of the roses.

 

[lymond]

Episode 3 was great! The story is moving along. Good stuff in this one. It is not ground breaking like the earlier seasons of GOT, but an extension of that experience. I'm all in at this point.

Spoiler :

Apparently GRRM based this bit of his history (Viserys succession) on the succession crisis of Henry I. Not unlike his GOT is based on the War of the roses.

Yep...based on the

Spoiler Maud :

White Ship and the civil war (The Anarchy) between Stephen I and Empress Matilda. If you want some background on that in a viewing experience, I recommend watching "The Pillars of the Earth" if you've not yet seen it.

 

[RobAnybody]

I like how Rhaenyra went from age 15 to age 17 in 3.5 years.

 

[MagisterCultuum]

So, does Daemon have greyscale now?

My biggest complaint about the episode is that they gave Craghas greyscale (which was not in the book and does not seem relevant to the plot) and then had Daemon grasping his hand for quite a while in a very damp environment when neither of them is wearing any gloves.

Any maester could tell you that he should amputate that hand immediately or he will go mad and die from the highly contagious disease. He also risks wiping out half of King's Landing if he returns to the city.

Valyrians are immune to many diseases but not to greyscale, as it was said to originate as a curse Garin the Great called down against them specifically.

 

[Snerk]

Need to start this one ASAP. Just hadn't had the time yet.

 

[Kyriakos]

It would be rational to use a few archers to kill Daemon, not send a thousand soldiers against him as if he is Achilles
The original GoT took a while to give characters super-powers/plot armor.

So, does Daemon have greyscale now?

My biggest complaint about the episode is that they gave Craghas greyscale (which was not in the book and does not seem relevant to the plot) and then had Daemon grasping his hand for quite a while in a very damp environment when neither of them is wearing any gloves.

Any maester could tell you that he should amputate that hand immediately or he will go mad and die from the highly contagious disease. He also risks wiping out half of King's Landing if he returns to the city.

While Daemy kind of forgot about greyscale

 

[Gorbles]

When I watched it I thought that they were more careful to not show the gory details of childbirth than they were to not show the details of torture. Considering how much it happens, I am not sure that the sensibilities are really right. Sure, it is a traumatic event that many people experience, but hiding the details does not seem likely to make the world a better place.

Just a quick aside on this (I don't want to derail the thread too much), but it's traumatic in different ways compared to something like torture, death, etc. (in how these things are normally presented on TV and in film). Blood in one context isn't the same as blood in another, is a good way to explain it. I can definitely see (without going into too much detail about mine and my wife's life) why it would be triggering moreso than any other form of trauma (as survivors, of, say, dragon-riding medieval swordfights is a rather niche demographic). Child loss, childbirth, miscarriage . . . these are all intensely traumatic and have a lasting impact in ways you honestly can't even expect without having gone through it.

It's certainly not something that showing the details turns into a positive. It's not as simple as "show it and people will get through it".

 

[Kyriakos]

Just a quick aside on this (I don't want to derail the thread too much), but it's traumatic in different ways compared to something like torture, death, etc. (in how these things are normally presented on TV and in film). Blood in one context isn't the same as blood in another, is a good way to explain it. I can definitely see (without going into too much detail about mine and my wife's life) why it would be triggering moreso than any other form of trauma (as survivors, of, say, dragon-riding medieval swordfights is a rather niche demographic). Child loss, childbirth, miscarriage . . . these are all intensely traumatic and have a lasting impact in ways you honestly can't even expect without having gone through it.

It's certainly not something that showing the details turns into a positive. It's not as simple as "show it and people will get through it".

So is losing a parent or a child. And statistically almost double the people will go through the first, than childbirth.
I am not against there being a "trigger warming", since that doesn't cost anything to anyone. Yet arguing that not showing common sources of trauma is realistic in dramatic tv, is not really having a leg to stand on (speaking of which, amputation is also featured in this show )

 

[Gorbles]

So is losing a parent or a child. And statistically almost double the people will go through the first, than childbirth.
I am not against there being a "trigger warming", since that doesn't cost anything to anyone. Yet arguing that not showing common sources of trauma is realistic in dramatic tv, is not really having a leg to stand on (speaking of which, amputation is also featured in this show )

I didn't argue anything of the kind. And no, I am telling you that losing a parent is not the same. A child is similar and can absolutely be traumatic, but we're not discussing "child brutally killed on-show", on which I'd probably have a similar opinion.

The original news was the discussion of a trigger warning, and nothing more.

 

[Kyriakos]

I'd imagine that losing a limb is also "absolutely traumatic". Happened on-screen many times in GoT and iirc already also in this show. Most people likely take into account that this is fiction, so don't focus on it.

Hot D is pretty tame when compared to the first four seasons GoT, anyway, including gore and nudity.

 

[Zardnaar]

I'd imagine that losing a limb is also "absolutely traumatic". Happened on-screen many times in GoT and iirc already also in this show. Most people likely take into account that this is fiction, so don't focus on it.

For me you should know what to expect in GoT it's been around for a decade+ now on tv.

It's like watching Rambo and complaining about the shooting.

Not opposed to trigger warning but yeah don't like it don't watch. It's an R16 or 18 type show.

 

[Samson]

"child brutally killed on-show"

My point is that we have had "child brutally killed on-show" from series 1 of GoT (with a weapon not dissimilar to that that is most popular in the uk), and that has not needed a trigger warning (I think, it could be I am missing them). Are people really coming to this show expecting there not to be horrific things? I guess traumatic childbirth is something that more people experience than knife crime, but only by degrees.

 

[Gorbles]

I'd imagine that losing a limb is also "absolutely traumatic".

Never said it wasn't. Just said it's not the same thing.

My point is that we have had "child brutally killed on-show" from series 1 of GoT (with a weapon not dissimilar to that that is most popular in the uk), and that has not needed a trigger warning (I think, it could be I am missing them). Are people really coming to this show expecting there not to be horrific things? I guess traumatic childbirth is something that more people experience than knife crime, but only by degrees.

Something happening a certain way in the past isn't the way to decide how it should be portrayed going forwards. My position then would've been the same as it is now (well, accounting for age, lived experience, etc).

My point is that the trauma is different. Having a knife inflicted on you is very different from your own body doing something you cannot control. It's very much a body horror type of situation. There's no external blame (i.e. the person holding the knife). And typically, given how ~insert political derail about women's lived experiences and how they're generally dismissed or undervalued here~, I don't think it's much to ask for a specific trigger warning for something of that specific nature. I can't really say "trust me bro", it's the Internet, but I'd hope you'd assume I'm not banging on about this for no reason.

That said, I've made my point, so I don't want to derail the fun times any longer. It looks like the show is being well-received, which is cool, even if I'm not following (or even able to watch) it myself. Always happy to see Matt Smith in more things. And Paddy Considine (ever since Hot Fuzz, hah).