If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Huffington Post)   Today's erroneous troll headline that requires no editing: "Mad Men is better than Game of Thrones"   (huffingtonpost.com) divider line 195
    More: Interesting, Game of Thrones, Mad Men, trolls, editing  
•       •       •

2089 clicks; posted to Entertainment » on 04 Apr 2012 at 4:28 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



195 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-04-04 04:54:47 PM

Wayne 985: Never seen either show.


Thanks for stopping by.
 
2012-04-04 04:55:44 PM
I like them both, but I have to Sparticus has them beat on Sex scenes.

My take on this season of Mad Men it needs less of Don and (insert any Character other than Roger) and more of Roger and Don.
 
2012-04-04 04:56:11 PM

Apples01: Why not both?

i.imgur.com


That's... subtly horrifying.
 
2012-04-04 04:58:30 PM

SmellsLikePoo: Can I still enjoy it?


That's really between you and your cable company.
 
2012-04-04 04:58:39 PM
I may have to give Game of Thrones another shot, but watching the first few episodes left me with a general feeling of meh at best. I understand that it's taking from the books, but having around half each episode consisting of sex scenes just felt like a blatant ploy by the makers to draw in as many viewers as possible. In other words, shock for the sake of shock, or in this case boobs for the sake of boobs. It's pandering in the worst form, and I have a hard time taking any program seriously that uses it as its base.

You could still easily accomplish the portrayal of all the sex scenes by trimming them down to be what they should be: plot devices that help illustrate a society or individuals. It's my opinion that it should never be the prime focus unless you are going for erotica, because when you do, it just comes across as show makers that can't figure out anything better to do than jiggle a few breasts around on the screen for a while. Hell, it's what drove me away from Stargate Universe until they finally cut that shiat out, but by then, the damage was done.

So Farkers, does it actually start getting better in having episodes predominately focused on story line, or do the first few episodes pretty well sum up what else to expect?
 
2012-04-04 04:59:17 PM
More Mad-Men BS. Overated. Doesn't hold a candle to "Pan Am" - which, like Firefly, Fox canceled well before its time.
 
2012-04-04 05:01:23 PM

impaler: "Pan Am" - which, like Firefly, Fox canceled well before its time.


Well, here's your problem!
 
2012-04-04 05:01:37 PM
rabble rabble rabble Firefly greatest show evar rabble rabble rabble
rabble rabble rabble Can't stop the signal rabble rabble rabble


oh and

img17.imageshack.us

got anything Mad Man has beat
 
2012-04-04 05:01:49 PM

Toshiro Mifune's Letter Opener: Bluemookie: I don't know where I stand on Walking Dead. I hate all of the actors and their feeble over acting.

It's troubling when a bit-part character on Justified or Breaking Bad elicits more sympathy and concern than THE ENTIRE CAST OF THE WALKING DEAD COMBINED

...

Excluding Glenn, Daryl, and Herschel, naturally.


Tatsuma: Agreed

Which is to say nothing of Justified.


Naturally.
 
2012-04-04 05:04:17 PM

Tom_Slick: My take on this season of Mad Men it needs less of Don and (insert any Character other than Roger) and more of Roger and Don.


I think we're going to get a lot of Roger and Don as the season moves along while they grapple with time passing them by.

There's a reason it was just those two together when Roger uttered his "when are things going to get back to normal?" line.
 
2012-04-04 05:04:46 PM

vampishlypale: I may have to give Game of Thrones another shot, but watching the first few episodes left me with a general feeling of meh at best. I understand that it's taking from the books, but having around half each episode consisting of sex scenes just felt like a blatant ploy by the makers to draw in as many viewers as possible. In other words, shock for the sake of shock, or in this case boobs for the sake of boobs. It's pandering in the worst form, and I have a hard time taking any program seriously that uses it as its base.

You could still easily accomplish the portrayal of all the sex scenes by trimming them down to be what they should be: plot devices that help illustrate a society or individuals. It's my opinion that it should never be the prime focus unless you are going for erotica, because when you do, it just comes across as show makers that can't figure out anything better to do than jiggle a few breasts around on the screen for a while. Hell, it's what drove me away from Stargate Universe until they finally cut that shiat out, but by then, the damage was done.

So Farkers, does it actually start getting better in having episodes predominately focused on story line, or do the first few episodes pretty well sum up what else to expect?


So... You're not into boobs, huh?
 
2012-04-04 05:07:55 PM

The Stealth Hippopotamus: rabble rabble rabble Firefly greatest show evar rabble rabble rabble
rabble rabble rabble Can't stop the signal rabble rabble rabble


oh and

[img17.imageshack.us image 300x429]

got anything Mad Man has beat


www.brobible.com

You sure there?
 
2012-04-04 05:09:02 PM

Aarontology: sigdiamond2000: collapse of Dexter-esque proportions

hahahahaha.

We really need a term like Jumping the Shark to describe the mess Dexter became.


Butchered?
 
2012-04-04 05:09:44 PM

elvisaintdead: Tatsuma: Also I want that little inbred king to be stabbed in the face repeatedly. I only saw him for like 10 minutes of screentime combined so far, but I can't stand the little shiat.

THIS (new window) should prove quite theraputic.
Did for me. Really kicks in at about :50.


That was... awesome.
 
2012-04-04 05:13:13 PM
"Dragons are fantasy. If there's magical talismans or a magic sword or wizards or farking crazy not-real animals.... all these basic things that break laws of reality: that shiat's all fantasy. I'm into hard sci-fi. Fantasy is bullshiat."
 
2012-04-04 05:13:36 PM

Bluemookie: Naturally.


It's amazing how much The Walking Dead is dragged down by Lori.

She has to be one of the most nonsensical characters on TV today. I mean, it's bold of the staff to allow her character to be written by brain-damaged jellyfish, but c'mon...
 
2012-04-04 05:13:57 PM
There is no Ros in "Mad Men", so the headline is full of sh*t.
 
2012-04-04 05:15:39 PM
Apples and oranges, and all that.
 
2012-04-04 05:17:42 PM

vampishlypale: I may have to give Game of Thrones another shot, but watching the first few episodes left me with a general feeling of meh at best. I understand that it's taking from the books, but having around half each episode consisting of sex scenes just felt like a blatant ploy by the makers to draw in as many viewers as possible. In other words, shock for the sake of shock, or in this case boobs for the sake of boobs. It's pandering in the worst form, and I have a hard time taking any program seriously that uses it as its base.

You could still easily accomplish the portrayal of all the sex scenes by trimming them down to be what they should be: plot devices that help illustrate a society or individuals. It's my opinion that it should never be the prime focus unless you are going for erotica, because when you do, it just comes across as show makers that can't figure out anything better to do than jiggle a few breasts around on the screen for a while. Hell, it's what drove me away from Stargate Universe until they finally cut that shiat out, but by then, the damage was done.

So Farkers, does it actually start getting better in having episodes predominately focused on story line, or do the first few episodes pretty well sum up what else to expect?




Well truth be told if you take out the descriptions of the food and outfits from the books they go from a thousand pages to around 200. Cut out the descriptions of wounds from war scenes and you're down to about 50. You need some filler. And talk about some tasty filler:

img822.imageshack.us

I don't care who you are, that's hot
 
2012-04-04 05:18:53 PM

Nix Nightbird: vampishlypale: I may have to give Game of Thrones another shot, but watching the first few episodes left me with a general feeling of meh at best. I understand that it's taking from the books, but having around half each episode consisting of sex scenes just felt like a blatant ploy by the makers to draw in as many viewers as possible. In other words, shock for the sake of shock, or in this case boobs for the sake of boobs. It's pandering in the worst form, and I have a hard time taking any program seriously that uses it as its base.

You could still easily accomplish the portrayal of all the sex scenes by trimming them down to be what they should be: plot devices that help illustrate a society or individuals. It's my opinion that it should never be the prime focus unless you are going for erotica, because when you do, it just comes across as show makers that can't figure out anything better to do than jiggle a few breasts around on the screen for a while. Hell, it's what drove me away from Stargate Universe until they finally cut that shiat out, but by then, the damage was done.

So Farkers, does it actually start getting better in having episodes predominately focused on story line, or do the first few episodes pretty well sum up what else to expect?

So... You're not into boobs, huh?


I have two of my own. Why should I care about ones on a screen?
 
2012-04-04 05:19:18 PM

Toshiro Mifune's Letter Opener: Bluemookie: Naturally.

It's amazing how much The Walking Dead is dragged down by Lori.

She has to be one of the most nonsensical characters on TV today. I mean, it's bold of the staff to allow her character to be written by brain-damaged jellyfish, but c'mon...


Am I wrong in fervently hoping for a particularly grisly demise for both her and her insufferable child next season?
 
2012-04-04 05:20:58 PM
and this is STILL not the stupidest thing written about Season two of Game of Thrones. That honor goes to the NY TIme TV critic who thinks the plot of GOT is "too Complicated" and they should trim out "vestigal," unnecessary characters like Lady Catelyn Stark who CLEARLY is no longer of any importance now that Ned Stark is dead (new window)
 
2012-04-04 05:21:18 PM
Awake is pretty good.
 
2012-04-04 05:21:53 PM

Aarontology: sigdiamond2000: collapse of Dexter-esque proportions

hahahahaha.

We really need a term like Jumping the Shark to describe the mess Dexter became.


Californication got Dextered by season 3.
 
2012-04-04 05:23:10 PM

proteon: Awake is pretty good.



Agreed. That and Grimm are the only NBC shows I care about.
 
2012-04-04 05:24:03 PM
The production values are equally excellent, albeit in drastically different genres and tone. The writing, character development, and acting probably qualifies Mad Men as the better show, but I just can't same seem to care about any of the characters and am generally bored by the pacing.

So I'll concede that Mad Men is "better," quality-wise, but I am much more engaged and entertained by Game of Thrones.

Plus, funny midget and hot-ass dragon girl, LOL hurr.
 
2012-04-04 05:24:28 PM

Apos: Toshiro Mifune's Letter Opener: Bluemookie: Naturally.

It's amazing how much The Walking Dead is dragged down by Lori.

She has to be one of the most nonsensical characters on TV today. I mean, it's bold of the staff to allow her character to be written by brain-damaged jellyfish, but c'mon...

Am I wrong in fervently hoping for a particularly grisly demise for both her and her insufferable child next season?


Stop tempting me to post spoilers!

Oh, wait... I thought we were talking about Cersi and Joffrey. Nevermind.

Oh, and I totally agree about Lori and Carl.
 
2012-04-04 05:24:28 PM

The Stealth Hippopotamus: Well truth be told if you take out the descriptions of the food and outfits from the books they go from a thousand pages to around 200. Cut out the descriptions of wounds from war scenes and you're down to about 50. You need some filler.


Given the amount that HBO has cut or skimmed over, I'd say no. They need less filler and more character development. "Hi. I'm an old guy and I don't like the red priestess and I'm dead now."
 
2012-04-04 05:24:56 PM

vampishlypale: I have two of my own. Why should I care about ones on a screen?


ah-hum
img337.imageshack.us
 
2012-04-04 05:27:19 PM

The Stealth Hippopotamus: vampishlypale: I may have to give Game of Thrones another shot, but watching the first few episodes left me with a general feeling of meh at best. I understand that it's taking from the books, but having around half each episode consisting of sex scenes just felt like a blatant ploy by the makers to draw in as many viewers as possible. In other words, shock for the sake of shock, or in this case boobs for the sake of boobs. It's pandering in the worst form, and I have a hard time taking any program seriously that uses it as its base.

You could still easily accomplish the portrayal of all the sex scenes by trimming them down to be what they should be: plot devices that help illustrate a society or individuals. It's my opinion that it should never be the prime focus unless you are going for erotica, because when you do, it just comes across as show makers that can't figure out anything better to do than jiggle a few breasts around on the screen for a while. Hell, it's what drove me away from Stargate Universe until they finally cut that shiat out, but by then, the damage was done.

So Farkers, does it actually start getting better in having episodes predominately focused on story line, or do the first few episodes pretty well sum up what else to expect?



Well truth be told if you take out the descriptions of the food and outfits from the books they go from a thousand pages to around 200. Cut out the descriptions of wounds from war scenes and you're down to about 50. You need some filler. And talk about some tasty filler:

[img822.imageshack.us image 550x374]

I don't care who you are, that's hot


Yeah, but when it's the same filler every time? It's like they're not even trying.

"Crap, what's supposed to come next? Anyone got a script?"

"Meh, Hell with it. Let's film an extended rape scene."

"But we did rape last time."

"I don't know...two chicks doing it?"

"Works for me."
 
2012-04-04 05:27:34 PM

Cosmk: The production values are equally excellent, albeit in drastically different genres and tone. The writing, character development, and acting probably qualifies Mad Men as the better show, but I just can't same seem to care about any of the characters and am generally bored by the pacing.

So I'll concede that Mad Men is "better," quality-wise, but I am much more engaged and entertained by Game of Thrones.

Plus, funny midget and hot-ass dragon girl, LOL hurr.


HTML fail.

"...qualifies Mad Men as the better show, but.."
 
2012-04-04 05:28:06 PM

sigdiamond2000: I've never seen Game of Thrones, but the last 3 episodes of Mad Men (season 4 finale and the first two of season 5) I think are 3 of the worst episodes in the show's entire run.

They better come up with something quick. Mad Men is starting to have the feel of a collapse of Dexter-esque proportions, where all the characters and the storyline cease being interesting virtually overnight.


Uh oh. I've got most of season 5 and all of 6 sitting on my DVR ready to watch. I loved first two seasons, moderately enjoyed 3rd, and thought 4th was a return to form. Should I ditch, or stick it out, knowing it's done in two seasons and this might just be the crappy middle part of the story?
 
2012-04-04 05:28:13 PM
Apples...oranges...opinions....assholes....blah blah blah grumble grumble...
 
2012-04-04 05:28:41 PM

Son of Thunder: The Stealth Hippopotamus: Well truth be told if you take out the descriptions of the food and outfits from the books they go from a thousand pages to around 200. Cut out the descriptions of wounds from war scenes and you're down to about 50. You need some filler.

Given the amount that HBO has cut or skimmed over, I'd say no. They need less filler and more character development. "Hi. I'm an old guy and I don't like the red priestess and I'm dead now."


Yeah, this seems to be a bit of an issue. I read the first book prior to watching the first season, and am finishing up reading the second book now. A lot of the season 2 premiere seemed like it would have been confusing for anyone not familiar with the book first.
 
2012-04-04 05:31:58 PM

The Stealth Hippopotamus: vampishlypale: I have two of my own. Why should I care about ones on a screen?

ah-hum
[img337.imageshack.us image 640x426]


*sigh* Fine...if it'll shut you up...
www.favonius.com

Happy now?
 
2012-04-04 05:33:10 PM

Son of Thunder: Given the amount that HBO has cut or skimmed over, I'd say no. They need less filler and more character development. "Hi. I'm an old guy and I don't like the red priestess and I'm dead now."


Any story line would have to include the little girl and the fool. You would really introduce three characters just to give a little back story to him?! You get the important part, she's a bad arse and has powers that maesters don't. They could have beaten it over your head he was a maester!

Are you upset that he didnt have to wear the bucket-helmet??
 
2012-04-04 05:34:55 PM

vampishlypale: Happy now?


strangely yes. but I could be happier.


just saying
 
2012-04-04 05:38:22 PM

Son of Thunder: Given the amount that HBO has cut or skimmed over, I'd say no. They need less filler and more character development. "Hi. I'm an old guy and I don't like the red priestess and I'm dead now."


You know not all characters in a story are meant to be developed fully, right? Some have only a small role in the overall tale. The old guy you're referring to: he was one of those types of characters.
 
2012-04-04 05:41:50 PM

The Stealth Hippopotamus: vampishlypale: Happy now?

strangely yes. but I could be happier.


just saying


Let me guess, you demand boobies as well? Alright...
chzsomuchpun.files.wordpress.com
 
2012-04-04 05:43:18 PM

Apos: Am I wrong in fervently hoping for a particularly grisly demise for both her and her insufferable child next season?


At this point, they could hit a major reset button for the show, retitle it Daryl and T-Dog Vs. the Walking Dead, and we'd be THAT much better off for it.
 
2012-04-04 05:46:03 PM

Toshiro Mifune's Letter Opener: Apos: Am I wrong in fervently hoping for a particularly grisly demise for both her and her insufferable child next season?

At this point, they could hit a major reset button for the show, retitle it Daryl and T-Dog Vs. the Walking Dead, and we'd be THAT much better off for it.



Now that would be awesome.
 
2012-04-04 05:46:16 PM

Toshiro Mifune's Letter Opener: Apos: Am I wrong in fervently hoping for a particularly grisly demise for both her and her insufferable child next season?

At this point, they could hit a major reset button for the show, retitle it Daryl and T-Dog Vs. the Walking Dead, and we'd be THAT much better off for it.


Uh oh, now some pretentious twat is going to come in here and point out that "The Walking Dead" refers to the living, and imply that you're a drooling idiot without the mental capacity to understand the brilliance that was the first half of season 2.
 
2012-04-04 05:49:12 PM
27.media.tumblr.com
Squidbillies is a very good show, also. Let's wiggle dance.
 
2012-04-04 05:50:04 PM
Mad Men is nowhere near as good.
 
2012-04-04 05:50:38 PM

The Stealth Hippopotamus: Son of Thunder: Given the amount that HBO has cut or skimmed over, I'd say no. They need less filler and more character development. "Hi. I'm an old guy and I don't like the red priestess and I'm dead now."

Any story line would have to include the little girl and the fool. You would really introduce three characters just to give a little back story to him?!


That would have been better. Especially since Little Miss Greyscale and her pet loony are actually interesting, and more important than the dead maester.

You get the important part, she's a bad arse and has powers that maesters don't.

What is important is that she is gaining a dangerous amount of influence over Stannis, to the degree that those around him are scared. So scared, in fact, that the maester who basically raised Stannis and saw him as the son he never had was willing to lay down his life to stop her. But how do we know the deep connection between him and Stannis? Was there any clue of it on screen? We've seen Stannis the uncharismatic hardnosed legalist, but have we seen that there are also some who are utterly devoted to him? But hey, forget about human personalities and relationships and motivation, all that matters is that she's a bad arse... and freeing up more space for gratuitous boobs, of course.
 
2012-04-04 05:51:34 PM

Toshiro Mifune's Letter Opener: Bluemookie: Naturally.

It's amazing how much The Walking Dead is dragged down by Lori.

She has to be one of the most nonsensical characters on TV today. I mean, it's bold of the staff to allow her character to be written by brain-damaged jellyfish, but c'mon...


I don't remember if she's written the same way in the comic, as it's been awhile since I read it. By the end of the season finale, I wanted her gone--not dead, but just gone from the rest of the group. Leave her behind with a gun, some ammo, and some peanut butter. And let her dream of Shane while the zombies come for her.
 
2012-04-04 05:52:39 PM

Fish in a Barrel: Uh oh, now some pretentious twat is going to come in here and point out that "The Walking Dead" refers to the living, and imply that you're a drooling idiot without the mental capacity to understand the brilliance that was the first half of season 2.


It could still imply that Daryl and T-Dog are robbing the living of their lunch money.

I HAVE CONTINGENCY PLANS FOR MY CONTINGENCY PLANS!


Apos: Now that would be awesome.


With special guest stars like on The New Scooby-Doo Movies!

Imagine...

Daryl and T-Dog Vs. the Walking Dead

WITH SPECIAL GUEST STARS

The Harlem Globetrotters!
 
2012-04-04 05:52:56 PM

NeoCortex42: Yeah, this seems to be a bit of an issue. I read the first book prior to watching the first season, and am finishing up reading the second book now. A lot of the season 2 premiere seemed like it would have been confusing for anyone not familiar with the book first.


I'm sure it is. Unfortunately, it's all rather necessary. The book has a huge cast of characters and the show has already done everything it can to consolidate and eliminate redundant and unnecessary characters. In spite of that, there's more left to introduce. We haven't even met the Greyjoys yet.

I'm actually impressed by how well they were able to cover a whole lot of ground in the S2 opener. It wasn't perfect, but I think that it's about as good as you can expect given the scope of the material.
 
2012-04-04 05:53:05 PM
Mad Men - Bunch of guys drinking and whoring. No tits.
Game of Thrones - Bunch of guys drinking and whoring. Tits AND Blood.

Game of Thrones > Mad Men
 
2012-04-04 05:55:08 PM

Galileo's Daughter: I don't remember if she's written the same way in the comic, as it's been awhile since I read it. By the end of the season finale, I wanted her gone--not dead, but just gone from the rest of the group. Leave her behind with a gun, some ammo, and some peanut butter. And let her dream of Shane while the zombies come for her.


A thousand times over, YES.

Have her taken away by robot ninja pirate elves or something, I don't care, just get her *out* of the picture.
 
Displayed 50 of 195 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report