Skip to content
Do you have adblock enabled?
 
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.

(CBR)   George RR Martin slams "unfaithful" TV adaptations of beloved fantasy books saying that producers and directors have an "obligation to be faithful to the written material." HBO: yeah we would have LOVED to have done that, unfortunately   (cbr.com) divider line
    More: Obvious, Neil Gaiman, A Song of Ice and Fire, George R. R. Martin, The Sandman: Season of Mists, Blood author George R.R. Martin, Sandman author Neil Gaiman, Hugo Award for Best Novella, Netflix series  
•       •       •

636 clicks; posted to Fandom » on 31 Oct 2022 at 1:05 PM (12 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



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


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2022-10-31 11:32:46 AM  
"Fire & Blood" author George R. R. Martin.

Not "Winds of Winter" author George R. R. Martin.
 
2022-10-31 11:50:21 AM  
Look, George. Your books are like 40% descriptions of clothes and food and while I absolutely love that in the books (I may be the only one), it just doesn't translate well to the screen, unless we're doing some kind of Travel Channel show touring Westeros.
 
2022-10-31 12:25:54 PM  

Shostie: Look, George. Your books are like 40% descriptions of clothes and food and while I absolutely love that in the books (I may be the only one), it just doesn't translate well to the screen, unless we're doing some kind of Travel Channel show touring Westeros.


Pretty much exactly.  Different mediums have different strengths and weaknesses, and you cannot just port one over to the other directly.  Well, you can, but the result will be shiat.  Think about 90% of movie-based novels.  They are at best boring, and often shiate because film's language is not suited for reading.  Nor is novels' language often suitable for film.  "Being faithful" is like translating from Swahili to English in strict word-for-word order.  The result will be incomprehensible or seem like you're on heavy drugs.  The way you do a good translation between mediums is to say "What are the main ideas from the source, and how can I put those ideas into the new medium's language?"  and then you do that, regardless of where it exactly matches the text of page 904 or not.
 
2022-10-31 12:55:25 PM  
Movie "rights" are just that
 
2022-10-31 1:09:34 PM  

phalamir: Shostie: Look, George. Your books are like 40% descriptions of clothes and food and while I absolutely love that in the books (I may be the only one), it just doesn't translate well to the screen, unless we're doing some kind of Travel Channel show touring Westeros.

Pretty much exactly.  Different mediums have different strengths and weaknesses, and you cannot just port one over to the other directly.  Well, you can, but the result will be shiat.  Think about 90% of movie-based novels.  They are at best boring, and often shiate because film's language is not suited for reading.  Nor is novels' language often suitable for film.  "Being faithful" is like translating from Swahili to English in strict word-for-word order.  The result will be incomprehensible or seem like you're on heavy drugs.  The way you do a good translation between mediums is to say "What are the main ideas from the source, and how can I put those ideas into the new medium's language?"  and then you do that, regardless of where it exactly matches the text of page 904 or not.


That was the problem with Watchmen. It wanted to be the comic directly transferred to the big screen.

This problem was solved nicely in Watchmen where they took inspiration from the comic, but the overall result was so much better than Watchmen.
 
2022-10-31 1:10:24 PM  
George R. R. Martin sure complains a lot.
 
2022-10-31 1:10:50 PM  
DNRTFA. If GRRM is concerned about faith to source material, then he shouldn't have engaged w/ HBO until he completed the series.

HBO GoT had its flaws. But it's the only complete story we're going to get.
 
2022-10-31 1:23:43 PM  

Shostie: Look, George. Your books are like 40% descriptions of clothes and food and while I absolutely love that in the books (I may be the only one), it just doesn't translate well to the screen, unless we're doing some kind of Travel Channel show touring Westeros.


Lol sounds like a description of robert jordans wheel of time books.

Haven't read any of the got books, but if they are anything like rj and wot, hard pass.
 
2022-10-31 1:24:23 PM  
preview.redd.itView Full Size
 
2022-10-31 1:32:40 PM  

phalamir: Shostie: Look, George. Your books are like 40% descriptions of clothes and food and while I absolutely love that in the books (I may be the only one), it just doesn't translate well to the screen, unless we're doing some kind of Travel Channel show touring Westeros.

Pretty much exactly.  Different mediums have different strengths and weaknesses, and you cannot just port one over to the other directly.  Well, you can, but the result will be shiat.  Think about 90% of movie-based novels.  They are at best boring, and often shiate because film's language is not suited for reading.  Nor is novels' language often suitable for film.  "Being faithful" is like translating from Swahili to English in strict word-for-word order.  The result will be incomprehensible or seem like you're on heavy drugs.  The way you do a good translation between mediums is to say "What are the main ideas from the source, and how can I put those ideas into the new medium's language?"  and then you do that, regardless of where it exactly matches the text of page 904 or not.


Last Rung on the Ladder is one of my favorite King stories but so much of it wouldn't translate well to screen because of internal description and thoughts. The internal dialogues kill MOST Stephen King adaptations.
 
2022-10-31 1:47:46 PM  
Then he picked up his mug of tea, straightened his bathrobe, and shuffled back into his house through a sea of cats, determined to work on finishing that last book "one of these days."
 
2022-10-31 1:49:22 PM  
Martin is wrong. Legally and artistically.
 
2022-10-31 1:52:35 PM  
What, is he another neckbeard mad that there was a black chick in Rings of Power?

I remember in like 2003 when my book reading friends were like "dude you have to read GRRM he's awesome it's so brutal and awesome and brutal and he just kills people for no reason its like so brutal and awesome" - now it's just that shiatty fantasy series that's nothing but body horror and dicks getting chopped and rape and psychological torture.

What dreck he brought into the world.
 
2022-10-31 1:57:31 PM  
I could swear that George R.R. Martin was one of the crusty & punctilious fixtures at the Blackwater Cafe in Stockton in the 80s.
 
2022-10-31 2:10:11 PM  
I'm not gonna say they're right or wrong, but of course people who write source material are going to be annoyed when people aren't faithful about adapting it. They have a vested interest in it.
 
2022-10-31 2:18:10 PM  
Everyone's edgy once the check clears.
 
2022-10-31 2:23:17 PM  
Fwiw, The Wizard of Oz and Blade Runner are VERY changed from the books they're based on, and they're both consider classics
 
2022-10-31 2:23:26 PM  

phalamir: Shostie: Look, George. Your books are like 40% descriptions of clothes and food and while I absolutely love that in the books (I may be the only one), it just doesn't translate well to the screen, unless we're doing some kind of Travel Channel show touring Westeros.

Pretty much exactly.  Different mediums have different strengths and weaknesses, and you cannot just port one over to the other directly.  Well, you can, but the result will be shiat.  Think about 90% of movie-based novels.  They are at best boring, and often shiate because film's language is not suited for reading.  Nor is novels' language often suitable for film.  "Being faithful" is like translating from Swahili to English in strict word-for-word order.  The result will be incomprehensible or seem like you're on heavy drugs.  The way you do a good translation between mediums is to say "What are the main ideas from the source, and how can I put those ideas into the new medium's language?"  and then you do that, regardless of where it exactly matches the text of page 904 or not.


I said from season one that because of the needs of the various mediums GOT and ASOFAI are telling the same story from two different points of view.  The Book are more about the effect of the wars on the "small folk", the POV characters are meant to be the lens we see that story though.   Because TV is character driven, the show was much more about the inner life of those characters, their emotions, motivations etc
 
2022-10-31 2:36:13 PM  
It'd be pretty hilarious if GRRM starts going all Kanye on us. The ego and lashing out are there. He just needs to give in to the darkness.
 
2022-10-31 2:40:22 PM  
Nobody needed to see Tom Bombadil.

NOBODY!
 
2022-10-31 2:41:27 PM  
"Based on the novel..."
 
2022-10-31 2:43:59 PM  

Gubbo: phalamir: Shostie: Look, George. Your books are like 40% descriptions of clothes and food and while I absolutely love that in the books (I may be the only one), it just doesn't translate well to the screen, unless we're doing some kind of Travel Channel show touring Westeros.

Pretty much exactly.  Different mediums have different strengths and weaknesses, and you cannot just port one over to the other directly.  Well, you can, but the result will be shiat.  Think about 90% of movie-based novels.  They are at best boring, and often shiate because film's language is not suited for reading.  Nor is novels' language often suitable for film.  "Being faithful" is like translating from Swahili to English in strict word-for-word order.  The result will be incomprehensible or seem like you're on heavy drugs.  The way you do a good translation between mediums is to say "What are the main ideas from the source, and how can I put those ideas into the new medium's language?"  and then you do that, regardless of where it exactly matches the text of page 904 or not.

That was the problem with Watchmen. It wanted to be the comic directly transferred to the big screen.

This problem was solved nicely in Watchmen where they took inspiration from the comic, but the overall result was so much better than Watchmen.

 
2022-10-31 2:50:54 PM  
It's clear a lot of people didn't read the actual complaint. He specifically mentions that changes need to occur when adapting stories from one medium into another. He calls those "legitimate" changes. What he doesn't do (and it was just a talk, he didn't really need to) is give a detailed description of what an "illegitimate" change would be. He vaguely comments that he doesn't like when adapters say they are "making it mine."  So, it doesn't seem he was commenting on anything HBO has done or on any specific show/film in this particular instance.
 
2022-10-31 2:53:17 PM  
Is athat a warning to the people that are adapting Wild Cards?
 
2022-10-31 2:58:49 PM  

phlegmjay: It's clear a lot of people didn't read the actual complaint. He specifically mentions that changes need to occur when adapting stories from one medium into another. He calls those "legitimate" changes. What he doesn't do (and it was just a talk, he didn't really need to) is give a detailed description of what an "illegitimate" change would be. He vaguely comments that he doesn't like when adapters say they are "making it mine."  So, it doesn't seem he was commenting on anything HBO has done or on any specific show/film in this particular instance.


Don't care what shade the pot uses when calling the kettle charcoal, dusk, midnight, abbey, ash, etc.
 
2022-10-31 3:09:00 PM  
"Moving something from one medium to another is very interesting - it's a lot like carrying a picture or a piece of clothing from one bit of lighting to another. Suddenly it looks very different. What interests me a bit further down the line is the way in which the different media interrelate - you can hand things off from one to another, you can exploit each other's strengths and weaknesses."

-Douglas Adams

Adams was took pride in exploiting what each medium did well and essentially maintained separate continuities for each one because of it.  Radio, print, television, and film all had different versions of the same core story, with sometimes very different outcomes to events (or new events entirely) because it better suited the medium
 
2022-10-31 3:11:09 PM  

phlegmjay: He vaguely comments that he doesn't like when adapters say they are "making it mine."


So don't sell the rights and do the writing yourself (or maintain veto/editorial power in your sale of rights).
 
2022-10-31 3:23:53 PM  

syrynxx: "Fire & Blood" author George R. R. Martin.

Not "Winds of Winter" author George R. R. Martin.


Pfft, even THAT is only a Part 1 of the novel. The Dunk and Egg series is the most "complete" version he's managed to do.

Just rewatched the GoT HBO series, and you can IMMEDIATELY tell after Season 5 they were running out of material, and basically started doing Fonzi on skis to blaze off into the weeds.

It's even more stupid in that once Martin released Dance of Dragons, the show writers were already too far on their own path, they entirely ignored the whole book, and especially the "Jon Connington" red herring while leading to the R + L = J twist in the show.

It's his own damn fault for not finishing and working with the adaptation to be sure they were on the same page. His "ending" is literally gonna be the fan fiction spinoff because he farked around and found out.
 
2022-10-31 3:24:31 PM  

Flappyhead: Nobody needed to see Tom Bombadil.

NOBODY!


Well yeah, but it would have been nice to see Goldberry.
 
2022-10-31 3:24:51 PM  

Shostie: Look, George. Your books are like 40% descriptions of clothes and food and while I absolutely love that in the books (I may be the only one), it just doesn't translate well to the screen, unless we're doing some kind of Travel Channel show touring Westeros.


He took the piss poor side of Jordan' world building, while Sanderson actually figured out how to write and complete books.
 
2022-10-31 4:02:25 PM  
WHAR SOURCE MATERIAL, GEORGE!????

WHARRRRRR!!!!????
 
2022-10-31 4:33:53 PM  
Logan Lucky - George R R Martin demands
Youtube Nwa6xgIZCv8
 
2022-10-31 4:36:17 PM  
I wonder if he has an account here, because he's just another example of "stop liking what I don't like."
 
2022-10-31 4:47:04 PM  

kermit the forg: Fwiw, The Wizard of Oz and Blade Runner are VERY changed from the books they're based on, and they're both consider classics


Fwiw, that "Wizard of Oz" wasn't the first cinematic adaptation of The Wizard of Oz. That's right, your beloved classic is a remake. As is The Maltese Falcon you think of when I say The Maltese Falcon.

Hollywood never had original ideas.

And I have no sympathy for such complaints. You want something to be your vision? Then you write, produce, and direct it. You sell the rights for someone else to produce? Then damn right you should expect the final product to be theirs.

Especially GRRM. He needs to shut up on the matter. You can't complain the later seasons of GoT didn't follow your books cause THERE AIN'T NO BOOKS.
 
2022-10-31 5:11:57 PM  
The man needs to shut the fark up and just finish "The Winds of Winter" already.

He never will, of course, but he has no business getting his jimmies rustled about faithfulness towards source material when his source material ran out and left the GoT showrunners and writing team with nothing to work with.  I'm not saying this frees them of any blame for how the show ended, but it's pretty clear that the drop in quality started when Martin's source material ended.

There are very few occasions when any written work is going to get a line-for-line adaptation to the screen.  Can it be, or has it been, done?  Sure, but it's rare and, more often than not, changes have to be made to make it workable for the small or big screen.  He's no exception to that fact.
 
2022-10-31 5:18:18 PM  
He is talking about RoP right?
 
2022-10-31 5:18:58 PM  

mcmnky: kermit the forg: Fwiw, The Wizard of Oz and Blade Runner are VERY changed from the books they're based on, and they're both consider classics

Fwiw, that "Wizard of Oz" wasn't the first cinematic adaptation of The Wizard of Oz. That's right, your beloved classic is a remake. As is The Maltese Falcon you think of when I say The Maltese Falcon.

Hollywood never had original ideas.


Exactly. Whenever I see or hear people biatch about Hollywood being "out of ideas", that is the first thing that comes to my mind.

Every movie or television show that has ever been, or ever will be, made are either adaptations of a previously written or filmed work, inspired by a previously written or filmed work, or inspired by an actual event in history.

There never was, and never will be, such a thing as "an original idea" in Hollywood.Hell, even outside of Hollywood, like gaming or writing, the same thing applies.

Even if, by some miracle, someone comes up with something that's never been written about or filmed before, the person creating it will take ideas from something they've seen already, so...again...not completely original.
 
2022-10-31 5:23:48 PM  
No book will ever adapt 100% faithfully... the media are simply too different.

Flappyhead: Nobody needed to see Tom Bombadil.

NOBODY!


Hell, just a few chapters later (at the Council) they talked about Bombadil. And the way they did made me think that Tolkien himself couldn't make heads or tails out of what he was. His later writings and letters kinda confirmed that theory.  Bombadil was just a bizarre idea that, for whatever reason, Tolkien didn't want to omit.

The first LOTR film is a very good example of adapting source material to fit the screen. It hit all the major plot points but cut out a lot of fat.

-Adding urgency to the possession of the One Ring instead of stretching it out over seventeen years? That makes sense in a film.
- Cutting Bombadil? Makes sense in a film.
-Replacing Glorfindel with Arwen? It can be argued that Glorfindel is more powerful and Arwen shouldn't have been able to cause the flood... but Glorfindel later went on to do nothing, where Arwen was an important aspect of Aragorn's film character.
-Making Aragorn a bit more of a hesitant heir? Not necessarily faithful, but it did give him room for more character growth than he had in the books.

Parts of the second film (in particular the Entmoot) is a better example of poor adaptation, because it fundamentally changed a major plot point in a completely detracting way. The third film was an overall good adaptation. I liked consolidating the attack on the corsairs with Aragorn's arrival at the battle... it cut out a lot of secondary characters and made humanity's cause feel even more desperate. Cutting the Scouring was good in the sense that it didn't give the movie a fourth act and a new conflict to resolve--but also bad because the Shire being untouched didn't really show us the scale of the War. In the films we never saw that places like Lorien and Dale were attacked by Sauron.
 
2022-10-31 5:41:43 PM  

Wave Of Anal Fury: I wonder if he has an account here, because he's just another example of "stop liking what I don't like."


He's probably one of the "George has no duty to his fans." posters
 
2022-10-31 6:22:01 PM  
Great world building.  love the settings and rich culture

half way through I stopping caring about some new character he introduced that landed on shore and said he was rightful heir.  and really started losing interest in the whole story because there was no real point, it was just rambling of an author telling everyone how cool his setting was.  Maybe make an RPG campaign or setting with it.  stop writing novels

oh wait, he did stop, because he couldn't come up with a decent ending to tie all his loose threads
 
2022-10-31 6:27:47 PM  

Clash City Farker: He is talking about RoP right?


A 'faithful' adaptation of the Second Age would've been a niche product. A smaller-scale animated series may have been appropriate, focusing on the nature of immortality in a series of stories spread across time (e.g. elves trying to keep it, Sauron trying to expand it, men trying to claim it, the reincarnations of Durin doing.. something).  But it'd be boring, partly because there isn't a fully-written story to adapt.

So I'm quite happy with what we are getting, an epic and contiguous adventure where we can get familiar with the characters and events that lead to the battle depicted in the prologue to the LotR movies. From the beginning, it's been clear that all the pieces are there.. just not necessarily where one might expect. The themes are there. There are certainly rough spots but those things are fixable. There are also a lot of things being done very well. I believe RoP represents the source material well and will bring lots of people to the books.
 
2022-10-31 6:29:53 PM  

kkinnison: oh wait, he did stop, because he couldn't come up with a decent ending to tie all his loose threads


That's one of the things I loved about seasons 6 and 7.  There were so many divergent plots that the writers just said "Fark it" and just killed off anyone inconveniencing the main story.
 
2022-10-31 7:21:26 PM  
encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.comView Full Size
 
2022-10-31 7:35:45 PM  
Just shut up and finish writing the last books, tubby.
 
2022-10-31 8:05:01 PM  

Flappyhead: kkinnison: oh wait, he did stop, because he couldn't come up with a decent ending to tie all his loose threads

That's one of the things I loved about seasons 6 and 7.  There were so many divergent plots that the writers just said "Fark it" and just killed off anyone inconveniencing the main story.


I was disappointed not to see Lady Stoneheart. Felt the show runners decided "Sweet, cut the extra dead weight for more CGI dragons!"

Because clearly, they didn't spend it on the scene lighting :P
 
2022-10-31 8:30:35 PM  

houstondragon: Flappyhead: kkinnison: oh wait, he did stop, because he couldn't come up with a decent ending to tie all his loose threads

That's one of the things I loved about seasons 6 ad 7.  There were so many divergent plots that the writers just said "Fark it" and just killed off anyone inconveniencing the main story.

I was disappointed not to see Lady Stoneheart. Felt the show runners decided "Sweet, cut the extra dead weight for more CGI dragons!"


The problem with Lady Stoneheart is that George threw her into the story halfway through then forgot about her for the most part, with one unresolved plot point left dangling. I'll bet that George never told the showrunners where her story was going so rather than follow his lead and doing a resurrection scene in season 4(?) then abandoning her until season 6 or so they might have been smart to just ditch her entirely. I feel like George's riverlands story was just grim dark boredom about how hard a war is on peasants. I kind of like how the show re-routed Brienne to the North where she could serve a useful purpose. escaping the mind numbing slog George had her go through.
 
2022-10-31 8:51:42 PM  

steve_wmn: houstondragon: Flappyhead: kkinnison: oh wait, he did stop, because he couldn't come up with a decent ending to tie all his loose threads

That's one of the things I loved about seasons 6 ad 7.  There were so many divergent plots that the writers just said "Fark it" and just killed off anyone inconveniencing the main story.

I was disappointed not to see Lady Stoneheart. Felt the show runners decided "Sweet, cut the extra dead weight for more CGI dragons!"

The problem with Lady Stoneheart is that George threw her into the story halfway through then forgot about her for the most part, with one unresolved plot point left dangling. I'll bet that George never told the showrunners where her story was going so rather than follow his lead and doing a resurrection scene in season 4(?) then abandoning her until season 6 or so they might have been smart to just ditch her entirely. I feel like George's riverlands story was just grim dark boredom about how hard a war is on peasants. I kind of like how the show re-routed Brienne to the North where she could serve a useful purpose. escaping the mind numbing slog George had her go through.


That's how I felt about Euron.  We didn't need yet another antagonist with a plan to conquer Westoros or whatever the hell Martin was cooking up.  Making him a pirate king allied to Cercei served the plot better than being some crazy wizard chasing down yet another prophecy.
 
2022-10-31 11:11:54 PM  
GRRM is the one who keeps handing in unfinished material so he's not one to talk.

Da NERVE a dat guy!
 
2022-10-31 11:50:52 PM  

leeksfromchichis: Wave Of Anal Fury: I wonder if he has an account here, because he's just another example of "stop liking what I don't like."

He's probably one of the "George has no duty to his fans." posters


Oh yes, that's always an interesting bunco theory. While clearly Annie Wilkes can go choke on a manuscript, there is an obligation on the part of the creator to do their best in the telling of a story. You wouldn't think much of a magician that walked away part way through his act without any explanation.
 
2022-11-01 1:05:25 AM  

Fano: leeksfromchichis: Wave Of Anal Fury: I wonder if he has an account here, because he's just another example of "stop liking what I don't like."

He's probably one of the "George has no duty to his fans." posters

Oh yes, that's always an interesting bunco theory. While clearly Annie Wilkes can go choke on a manuscript, there is an obligation on the part of the creator to do their best in the telling of a story. You wouldn't think much of a magician that walked away part way through his act without any explanation.


That magician might have had his reasons, but if he promises to finish that show, then repeatedly doesn't, but does other shows and heckles other magicians and is generally still around doing everything but finishing his show... now he's a c*nt.  And I'm fresh outta chicken.
 
Displayed 50 of 59 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking




On Twitter


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.