Q & A with Peter Dinklage and Emilia Clarke: TV’s New Power Couple

Entertainment Weekly caught up with Emilia Clarke and Peter Dinklage to talk character futures, favourite show moments and of course, all about that conversation scene.

EWOf all the changes made in the show, the meeting between Daenerys and Tyrion, two characters that have yet to meet in the books, has been one of the best received.  It seems like the actors were just as excited to work together.  Despite being on the same show for five years, the two had yet to interact on screen.  Clarke commented that:

“It was just so wonderful. I’m not killing someone. I’m not shouting. I’m not speaking Valyrian. We’re having a discussion. It’s a healthy intellectual debate, which is a joy.”

The two also discuss each other’s favourite scenes, with Dinklage citing Viserys’ “Golden Crown” moment from Season One, while Clarke enjoyed Tyrion’s prison scenes last series. The interview goes on to discuss what they think might be in store for their two characters, what they can learn from each other and how they might meet their eventual ends.

CLARKE: What if you read the script and it was like, “He died in the night….”
DINKLAGE: Cut to: “50 years from now…” [Old man voice] Got my tablets?!
CLARKE: Then he tripped over a twig…
DINKLAGE: That’s how I want to go in life, but I don’t think that’s how Tyrion’s going to go—if he goes.

The two actors are completely adorable and you can read the whole thing over at EW.

script async src="//pagead2.googlesyndication.com/pagead/js/adsbygoogle.js">

122 Comments

  1. So any speculation on what’s gonna happen with Tyrion et al left in Meereen? Where do they even go from there?

    like are they just gonna sit in the Pyramid in an unsafe city while Dany rounds up a khalasar? Are Yunkai/Qarth gonna declare war and leave them desperate and she rescues them? Are they gonna leave Meereen? Are they gonna release the dragons?
  2. Mormont,

    I’m on my mobile so I don’t know how to use spoiler tags here but…
    BOOK SPOILERS+SPECULATION

    I think they’ll try to liberate the dragons Quentyn Martell style and one of them dies (possibly Jorah) but if no one does, it would be better because there’s a big dead happening already, no need for more casualties.

  3. Nice interview. And one of the most memorable meetings this season.

    Mormont,

    The show brought Tyrion to Meereen already. It can’t be for him to just sit around and wait till next season. So he has to do something relevant. What could be more relevant than some dragon time of his own? Make friends with Viserion and go for some training rides of his own?

  4. Someone put forward the idea of the SOTH breaking in and trying to kill Viserion and Rhaegal while they’re still chained up, but accidentally releasing them instead and getting cooked in the process. I like it.

  5. I don’t care about this shitty show. The book series is like one billion times better. Only stupid people that can’t get the complexity of the books like the show. The show is a joke and isn’t doing justice to these amazing books.

  6. White this show can be cruel and dark… it is moments like watching Dany and Trion meet which makes it worth it .

  7. ASOIF>>>>>>>>>GOT:
    I don’t care about this shitty show. The book series is like one billion times better. Only stupid people that can’t get the complexity of the books like the show. The show is a joke and isn’t doing justice to these amazing books.

    Wow . You are right . Thank you so much for pointing this out . I will now quit the show thanks to your wisdom .

  8. The Bastard: Wow. You are right. Thank you so much for pointing this out. I will now quit the show thanks to your wisdom.

    I was under the mistaken impression that this was my favorite show of all time. Then I read a content-less post on the internet.

    You won’t believe what happened next…!

  9. ASOIF>>>>>>>>>GOT:
    I don’t care about this shitty show. The book series is like one billion times better. Only stupid people that can’t get the complexity of the books like the show. The show is a joke and isn’t doing justice to these amazing books.

    I mean.. you’re not entirely wrong lol
    But you don’t have to be so rude, friend.

    Looks like somebody’s gasket finally exploded. Alas.. that’ll be me in a few years.

  10. I’ll never understand why some people hate Emilia’s acting so much. Almost no one I know IRL (or on the Internet even) thinks she’s a bad actress, nevermind worthy of a Razzie.

  11. Robb Snow:
    I’ll never understand why some people hate Emilia’s acting so much. Almost no one I know IRL (or on the Internet even) thinks she’s a bad actress, nevermind worthy of a Razzie.

    Now don’t get me wrong,I’ve never seen her acting in anything other then GoT,but there are some moments man…..it’s weak as hell. Not all of them. Dany acting like a stuck up b*tch sometimes doesn’t help either.

  12. Robb Snow,

    I don’t think she’s a bad actress, i just feel that as the show has been progressing her performance has been a little flat(especially these last 2 seasons).

  13. Robb Snow,

    Honestly there’s only one Dany scene I’ve significantly disliked recently, and that’s the wheel speech – which is more about writing than anything. How should an actor look whilst saying a line like that? It’s hard to say.

    Acting wise, I’ve considered this Emilia Clarke’s second best season after the first one (which just involved the most character development of any of the seasons). Really, really liked a lot of the stuff she’s done this year.

  14. Robb Snow:
    I’ll never understand why some people hate Emilia’s acting so much. Almost no one I know IRL (or on the Internet even) thinks she’s a bad actress, nevermind worthy of a Razzie.

    Once Terminator Genisys is released everyone will realize what I’ve known since S3 concluded.

    Also from what I heard Emilia stunk up Broadway when she did Breakfast at Tiffany’s.

  15. Eddard Stark II:
    Al Swearengen,

    Which is?

    That Emilia Clarke simply isn’t that good of an actress, she’s a female Orlando Bloom. Attractive and affable but not much range or nuance in their performances.

    I feel like Sophie Turner and Maisie Williams have been acting Emilia off screen for years now.

  16. ASOIF>>>>>>>>>GOT:
    I don’t care about this shitty show. The book series is like one billion times better. Only stupid people that can’t get the complexity of the books like the show. The show is a joke and isn’t doing justice to these amazing books.

    Like, OMG!!! Your incredible, intellectual argument has made me see the light!! You sir, are a true genius!!

  17. Robb Snow:
    I’ll never understand why some people hate Emilia’s acting so much. Almost no one I know IRL (or on the Internet even) thinks she’s a bad actress, nevermind worthy of a Razzie.

    Yeah, I don’t get it either.

  18. ASOIF>>>>>>>>>GOT:
    I don’t care about this shitty show. The book series is like one billion times better. Only stupid people that can’t get the complexity of the books like the show. The show is a joke and isn’t doing justice to these amazing books.

    Don’t get too cocky kid… At this point there is zero guarantee that the story in book form will never be finished. Not that I wish any harm on GRRM, but you never know at the rate he writes. It would be some poetic justice for book purist trolls. They wouldn’t know if the ending was what GRRM had intended or some massive deviation by D&D.

    The implosion of westeros.org as told by Obi Wan

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EKu7TYWNxqA

  19. Robb Snow,

    its mainly because of two things : the character she is playing and the popularity she gets

    i will blame more the writing than her acting …even in this interview we can see how bored she herself has become playing the one dimensional queen …

  20. I’ll concede that the writing for her character has been very inconsistent, particularly this season and in Season 4. Some of the things the writers have Dany say and do just baffle me, and I can see why some people thought she might be coming down with Targaryen madness.

  21. I think Emilia’s acting is sometimes subtle with her eyes and everything so people do not notice it and only focus on her big moments they do like. But I am found of her, to each to her own.

  22. Huh, I love emilia and feel she portrays Dany flawlessly. I don’t see anything wrong with her lines either , as far as I’m concerned her character has been easy to follow whilst also being complex . I doubt any of you naysayers could manage even half the performance she does. She’s gret. Those who speak against Dany in such strident terms must surely have some kind of weird pathological relationship to fictional characters . The kind of people who get mad at the TV screen when something happens they don’t approve of.

  23. So much potential with this pairing! I am really really excited for the seasons to come (and the wars to come :o))

  24. Robb Snow,

    I wouldn’t be surprised if that’s how the finale starts. I think it would be a great way to start the episode.

    Edit: On the topic of Emilia’s acting, I think she’s really good, always have done.

  25. The hate for Emilia s acting is the classic example of confusing the less likeable traits of the actual character with the acting. She has a confidence and arrogance about her that some don’t like, but she’s just doing a good job playing the character. I also feel like there is added scrutiny because she is a popular female character.

    I look at her expression in the first episode when she goes into the hot water, or the Dracarys scene, or her expression during Mossador’s execution…and I don’t see how people can casually call her a bad actress.

  26. Hodor Targaryen:
    I also feel like there is added scrutiny because she is a popular female character.

    I really don’t think it’s a sexist thing; people criticize Kit Harington all the time – i.e. he has one facial expression, his line deliveries are weak, etc. and I’ve not heard many complaints about the other popular female characters’ acting – for example I’ve mostly heard raves for Maisie Williams’ Arya, and she’s arguably as popular as Daenerys. I think Clarke is just one of the weaker actors on the show. She sometimes overreaches with her lines and veers dangerously close to cheesy territory, IMO.

    I do like her on the show, I think she’s generally a good actress but not a great one, and I think she tends to be outshone by many of the other main actors and actresses on Game of Thrones.

  27. I think Emilia’s acting is fine but unlike, say, the KL actors she hasn’t had a great deal to play against until now with Peter/Tyrion’s arrival. Already Tyrion has established a chemistry with both Dany and Jorah. In KL the actors playing Cersei, Jamie, Marg, Varys, LF have had great scenes playing off each other for years.

  28. There’s no doubt she’s had some cringeworthy lines on occasion (“Where are my dragons?!?”), but I also think she gets criticized way too much. I remember (on the ‘net) a lot of hate for the time she sent Jorah away, saying how she was just wooden, emotionless, etc., and I really didn’t see that at all. You could see in her eyes how she was forcing herself to be emotionless and hide her feelings, knowing that a queen had to be stoic, etc. It was actually a really great performance, IMO.

  29. I like how Emilia plays Dany. Her face isn’t just pretty, but communicates layers of emotions. I genuinely liked some of her scene in S2 with Xora, especially when he proposed marriage to her in front of that giant vault. The look she gives over her shoulder at the vault shows how tempted she is, but she’s fighting it, too. And then when she finds the vault is empty, the way she says, “Thank you, Xora, for teaching me this lesson”. It’s just quiet, unhurried acting, and there are many examples of that. I think some of her stiff delivery is also part of her character, a young girl trying to act like a Queen. I think her character has been sabotaged somewhat by Martin (and, by extension, the show) stranding her in Mereen. In any case, she’s practically Meryl Streep compared to Indira Varma and her campy Cruella DeVille performance.

  30. Simeon,

    Don’t get me wrong, I think she does good work and I wouldn’t have anyone else playing Dany. I just feel like people act like she’s either the worst thing to happen to television or she’s a genius, and I think she’s fairly middle-of-the-road as far as actors go. She’s had some swings and misses in certain scenes, but also some that she hits right on the head (I quite liked Jorah’s exile and really liked the scene where she locks up her dragons…she’s much better at interacting with the CGI dragons than Kit Harington is with CGI Ghost).

  31. It’s interesting the article brought up the diner scene in Heat. That’s one of the first things I thought of when Tyrion and Dany were talking at the table.

    I agree with LordDavos. I thought Emilia was on top of her game in that scene and she and Peter played well off of each other. It’s probably one of my favorite exchanges in the show now (including the breaking the wheel bit).

    She’s not Charles Dance or Stephen Dillane, but she can definitely pull her weight. I can’t picture anyone else in the role now.

  32. Bran the Muffin: Don’t get too cocky kid…At this point there is zero guarantee that the story in book form will never be finished.Not that I wish any harm on GRRM, but you never know at the rate he writes.It would be some poetic justice for book purist trolls.They wouldn’t know if the ending was what GRRM had intended or some massive deviation by D&D.

    The implosion of westeros.org as told by Obi Wan

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EKu7TYWNxqA

    I LOL’d so hard at that link. Nice..

  33. Blah blah blah Emilia Clarke’s acting sucks, blah blah the books are better than the show blah blah I ate paint chips as a child. I mean, a LOT of paint chips. I think that that generally sums it up.

  34. Martin did the biggest mistake when he sold the rights to HBO. The tv show is embarrassing bad compared to the books. It brings only shame on those amazing books.

  35. Al Swearengen,

    This.

    Her acting is sub-par at best. And some of it may come from the writing, but you can’t entirely blame them for that either. You can give a great actor “boring” lines and they’ll still act their pants off.
    The simple truth is she just isn’t a great actress. She’s one of the weaker ones in the show for sure.

  36. SKY-Man:
    Martin did the biggest mistake when he sold the rights to HBO. The tv show is embarrassing bad compared to the books. It brings only shame on those amazing books.

    Than why are you here? Why don’t you sit your nerdy ass in the corner and read the damn books instead. You’re wasting your time whinning on every single change. You make us book readers look embarrassing

  37. SKY-Man:
    Martin did the biggest mistake when he sold the rights to HBO. The tv show is embarrassing bad compared to the books. It brings only shame on those amazing books.

    Well, a lot of people wouldn’t have read the books if they hadn’t seen the show (that includes me, though I appreciate there had been a fandom for the books for long before the transition to TV was made). I think both the books and the show have their good points and their bad points.

    Now (and I appreciate you didn’t say anything about this, Skyman but I didn’t want to make two different posts), my belief is that everybody reacts differently to various actors (using the word in a non-gender specific way). Myself I don’t have a problem with Emilia Clarke but – and not referring to GoT – there is one female actor who has won awards who leaves me completely cold – won’t say her name as it would be impolite.

    I thought the article was an interesting read for my tuppence worth.

  38. I think Yunkai will take Dany’s “death” as an excuse to attack, leaving the city under siege. The Harpies will continue to pose a threat, and maybe we’ll even get the pale mare. We’ll see Tyrion taking control and kicking ass, while Daario goes against him and frees the dragons. The whole Meereen arc would then climax around the mid-season (episode 4?) when Dany returns with the Dothraki, and then they’ll be off to Westeros. Both Daario and Jorah could die. Missandei and Grey Worm I think get to Westeros.

    Then… landing in Dorne in episode 7ish, having some conversations with Doran and deciding to free Oldtown from Euron as her first big act in her campaign. Which would be the big episode 9 moment. And in the finale Sam tells her about the White Walkers.

  39. jentario,

    Jorah will be alive.It’s pointless to kill him right now.He needs to spread the greyscale in Westeros and he amd a peace with Dany.Daario will make it too.Sam seems to be still at Castle Black in ep.10.Otherwise agreed.It will take them 3-4 episodes to finish this off and head to Westeros.
  40. jentario,

    I always imagined them landing in the Westerlands and using Tyrion’s knowledge as the former keeper of Casterley Rock’s sewers (you don’t put that kind of Chekovian gun in the books for nothing) to do some kind of Lann the Clever-esque trick to take the Rock and start the invasion from there possibly from a base on Pyke.
  41. Emilia has done very little other TV or film work than GoT so I think it’s premature to judge on her acting abilities based on one role.

    I’ve found Daenerys one of the least interesting characters in the books really whereas others will find her the most interesting. I think she’s one of the harder characters to translate from book to screen, because the drawn out Meereenese Knot stuff in ADWD appears to regress her emotional maturity a bit and as Dany’s aged up for the show it jars a bit more than it would for the 15 y.o. or so she is in the books.

  42. Ravyn: I think her character has been sabotaged somewhat by Martin (and, by extension, the show) stranding her in Mereen. In any case, she’s practically Meryl Streep compared to Indira Varma and her campy Cruella DeVille performance.

      Quote  Reply

    I liked Indira Varma’s season 4 performance but this season the powers that be have radically changed show Ellaria’s character from book Ellaria – that is one change from book to show that I HAVEN’T liked – it’s nearly up there with Jeyne Westerling being morphed into Talisa Twitface. Indira Varma had a recurring role in “Luther” a British cop show and she was up to the mark in that – I’ve seen her in a few home grown (for the British market) shows and I would say that usually she is a competent actress. Jessica Henwick (Nymeria) has acquitted herself well in certain British shows as well. I have only seen Keisha Castle-Hughes in “Whale Rider” when she was but a lass (not that she’s old now) and she was very good in that. So I don’t know what has gone awry with the ladies of Dorne…..

  43. The majority of the comments here on this post is why I am reading the books AFTER the TV show airs. It seems that some people who have read the books think that the TV show has to adapt EVERY THING. Fair enough, I’ve heard about:

    Aegon Targaryen being saved by Varys, the Greyjoys having a dragon taming horn and Drogon spitting fire at Dany in Daznak’s Pit

    and I love those ideas. I think they are great. I cannot wait to read them in the books but you guys do realise that adapting everything the book has done will get messy?

    A Song of Ice and Fire is too big for a film franchise. 20 hours of television adapted the first two books. It is definitely also too hectic and too busy for more than 10 episodes in a season (sadly). If they adapted every little bit of detail the book has done it would cost them $$$$$$$ and take around 15 seasons. Fifteen seasons sound great of Game of Thrones but cut the team some slack. They work 240 days per year filming for one season from one country to the next. Try being in their shoes often working 12+ hours per day for 240 days a year. They are condensing it because of the reality of the time and money it would take to adapt everything. Besides, longer seasons can affect the quality of a show a la The Walking Dead. The first 3 seasons were strong but 4 and 5 were god damn awful.

    I cannot wait to read the books and enjoy a different journey from start to finish. I love the show and I am sure I will love the books.

  44. jentario,

    meereen is going down to the dirt when dany comes back with a khalasar that is confirmed from dany in the last episode

    jorah will not die till the end of the books and all this Greyscale spreading in westeros will just be a theory because remember a girl just died in the north and nothing happened

    she will Land in KL in episode 9 of next season i am sure abut that

    all in all it is going to be quite a season for dany and emilia

  45. Well, as a sullied, if they don’t show Dany

    having the raging squitters in close up graphic detail in the next episode I will be disappoint.
  46. dragonbringer,

    I will put my money on Dorne.They even omitted Martells from “The Wheel” speech.It makes perfect sense to land in Dorne and make an alliance with them.Not t mentione that Dorne could be much more interesting with Dany,Tyrion and co.Doran even could be part of the group Varys mentioned in Volantis.It¨s quite a strech,but it’s a possibility.
  47. Hodor Targaryen,

    Quite the opposite, Clarke has brought a gravity to the role that I had not previously imagined. In particular , her voice work is great: she particularly excels at hitting deep tones in an unaffected manner. Yet on occasion, she manages to “squeel” (sorry, that is the best word by caffeine deprived brain thesaurus can find!) like a normal young kady in appropriate circumstances.

  48. Cathair,

    Every famous novel or novel series has its fundamentalists. However, plenty of us are “theologians,” too, who understand that the point is to adapt the story from one medium to another.

  49. Al Swearengen,

    Emilia Clarke, Jai Courtney, and Arnold Schwarzenegger all in the same movie is a recipe for massive disaster. I feel bad for Jason Clarke (no relation as far as I know)

  50. Cathair:
    The majority of the comments here on this post is why I am reading the books AFTER the TV show airs. It seems that some people who have read the books think that the TV show has to adapt EVERY THING. Fair enough, I’ve heard about:

    Who? Where? Not even the infamous Linda makes that claim. Literally everyone understands that changes need to be made to adapt things from book to film, and fit within screen time / budget / logistical constraints. Understanding such does not imply that you cannot criticize specific decisions made by the directors.

  51. Chad Brick,

    If you think “directors” have any say in any overarching creative decision in a TV show, you truly don’t understand how television works.

  52. King Podrick: Than why are you here? Why don’t you sit your nerdy ass in the corner and read the damn books instead. You’re wasting your time whinning on every single change. You make us book readers look embarrassing

    I think you are arguing with a sockpuppet.

  53. ctid,

    That really was not a Chekhovian Gun: it got passing reference once, if I recall.

    Something that has gotten a little bit more attention that is relevant to this is that the Lannisters are basically a spent force. That might be much more relevant.

  54. Luka Nieto:
    Chad Brick,

    If you think “directors” have any say in any overarching creative decision in a TV show, you truly don’t understand how television works.

    I was using it in a generic sense. I mean D&D and anyone and everyone involved in the production of the show.

    I love the show, but it is far from flawless. There is plenty to criticize every week, and the amount has been growing like wildfire lately.

  55. Chad Brick,

    It’s such an incredibly coincidence that the amount of things to criticize in the show is rising in proportion to how much it strays from the books, and that only book readers seem to arrive at that conclusion —Just take a look at some Unsullied reviews.

    I wonder why that would be.

  56. Luka Nieto,

    Agreed, unless they also are part of the larger production team. (That is sometimes the case.) Otherwise, they are captains of a ship in a fleet of episodes: they have huge influence on what happens on their particular episode, but none on other episodes . And, of course, in a series like this, they cannot deviate from what past and future episodes dictate.

    All of that stated, I think that almost anyone could see that the showrunner’s had GRRM’s “kill the boy (or girl) and let the man (or woman) be born” story firmly in mind this season. The one major character where we have not seen this yet is Jaime: and there still is one more episode! (Jaime’s story has lagged the most: whether it just be that 10 horses always means 10th place for someone or the Curse of Dorne, I don’t know….)

  57. Chad Brick: Literally everyone understands that changes need to be made to adapt things from book to film, and fit within screen time / budget / logistical constraints.

    Eh, to be fair, A LOT of people don’t understand that at all. Sure, they say they do, but they actually don’t. And Linda is their undisputed queen of love and beauty.

  58. Luka Nieto:
    Chad Brick,

    It’s an incredibly coincidence that the amount of bad is rising in proportion to how much it strays from the books, and that only book readers seem to arrive at that conclusion.

    That’s rather self-evident, is it not? Most non-readers wouldn’t be in the position to judge whether something was deviating from the books, or by how much, so how could they criticize it from that point of view?

  59. Dany/Emilia and Tyrion/Peter chemistry is amazing.Their scenes are one of the highlights of this season,but it will be very curious to see how would Dany/Jon scenes look on the screen.The most anticipated meeting after Dany/Tyrion.I have this feeling that it’s not gonna be that good.Tyrion is witty,smart Jon a bit boring,moody,vanilal type of guy.Not exactly fun,but we’ll see.

  60. Mr Fixit: Eh, to be fair, A LOT of people don’t understand that at all. Sure, they say they do, but they actually don’t. And Linda is their queen of love and beauty.

    There are 7 billion people on earth and tens of millions who watch the show. I am sure you can find a few nutbags somewhere and call them a “lot”, but it sounds like you are constructing strawmen for the most part. It’s pretty much par for the course on this website, in my experience. There is constant ranting about “purists” and vague pointing towards westeros.org, but if you go there and read the forums they are little different than here and contain about as many people who believe what you claim above as they do purple unicorns.

  61. A Man Grown,

    Yeah. The guy who grumbles when he doesn’t get a happy ending. He also doesn’t understand how stories work. He (and some book readers, too) need to read this amazing piece by Sean T. Collins; and more importantly, Amanda Marcotte’s piece on Slate:

    It’s tempting to argue that Game of Thrones kills people off for shock value, as Margaret Lyons did at Vulture this week. “The show loves wondering how bad … or how far … or how much …,” she wrote, wondering why the show can’t “balance brutality with hope.” Or, if you’re feeling more generous, you could argue that Game of Thrones’s brutality is a necessary answer to the Pollyannaish tendencies in the rest of the fantasy genre. This is how George R.R. Martin himself sees it, explaining that Game of Thrones is “reacting to a lot of fantasy fiction,” which he calls “Disneyland Middle Ages.”

    But while Game of Thrones is in part a rebuttal to traditional fantasy fiction, I’d argue that it’s become clear—after five books in A Song of Ice and Fire and five seasons of the TV series—that Martin and showrunners D.B. Weiss and David Benioff are actually playing with a format that isn’t so revolutionary at all: They’re reviving and updating the classical tragedy as a narrative form.

    In a traditional tragedy, there should be a growing sense of dread as events converge. The hero is generally invested with some specific “tragic flaw” that leads to his downfall. He should make some terrible decision that the audience can see, in retrospect, was the point of no return that leads to ruin.

    The most obvious example from Game of Thrones is the story of Shireen and Stannis. Shireen’s murder has raised complaints from critics who protest that it was out-of-character for Stannis. But the plot might as well be based on the ancient Greek tragedy “Iphigenia in Aulis,” by Euripides. Every beat of the Greek myth is the same as Stannis’s story: The troops are stuck and starving and the general, Agamemnon, must sacrifice his own daughter to turn the fates to their favor. The mother begging for mercy, the disapproving second-in-command who can do nothing to stop it, the daughter who says she will do whatever it takes to help—it’s all a clear echo. […]

    There’s not a lot of truly tragic storytelling in modern TV and movies. We are trained to expect, especially when it comes to action-packed fantasy and sci-fi stories, that just when things look bleakest for our heroes, they will perform some amazing feat and save the day at the last possible minute. That is the plot of Lord of the Rings, Harry Potter, The Hunger Games, Mad Max: Fury Road, every DC and Marvel superhero movie, and nearly every B-list thriller on the market. As the Dothraki might say, it is known that the heroes emerge triumphant.

    Game of Thrones gives us plenty of fist pump moments: Bronn saving Tyrion in a trial by combat, Stannis saving The Wall from the wildling army, the deus ex Tywin that prevented the sack of Blackwater in season two, Daenerys flying away on the back of Drogon. But many of Game of Thrones’ best moments are its bleakest—the ones that show us how noble-minded people with the best intentions can still defeat themselves. And even as the series seems to blow up narrative expectations, it’s still playing by its own set of conventions and rules. They’re just not the rules we’re used to.

    The fact that people expect the heroes to ultimately win, or at least for the villains to “get their comeuppance” as if some God was imparting justice in this world, says much about how they misunderstand the story ASOIAF and Game of Thrones are telling.

  62. Chad Brick,

    No, I’m not talking about a few people out of tens of millions. I’ve been part of this fandom for a very long time and I’ve read countless posts from countless people on countless sites that are exactly like that: saying they understand that deviations are necessary, but then showing through example that they actually do not understand that at all.

    I’ve never said that all, or even the majority of critics belong to this group, but they most definitely do exist. Hell, I watch the show live with one such specimen, who is also a relative of mine. Every time the show deviates from the books, this girl has a heart attack. After every episode we then have a lengthy conversation on how and why, and in 80% of cases she ultimately agrees with me. But there’s always that initial almost instinctual reaction that something’s wrong because it “isn’t supposed to be this way”.

    I’m happy for you that you seem to have missed such people, but they are out there, and a lot of them too!

  63. Mr Fixit:
    Chad Brick,

    No, I’m not talking about a few people out of tens of millions. I’ve been part of this fandom for a very long time and I’ve read countless posts from countless people on countless sites that are exactly like that: saying they understand that deviations are necessary, but then showing through example that they actually do not understand that at all.

    I’ve never said that all, or even the majority of critics belong to this group, but they most definitely do exist. Hell, I watch the show live with one such specimen, who is also a relative of mine. Every time the show deviates from the books, this girl has a heart attack. After every episode we then have a lengthy conversation on how and why, and in 80% of cases she ultimately agrees with me. But there’s always that initial almost instinctual reaction that something’s wrong because it “isn’t supposed to be this way”.

    I’m happy for you that you seem to have missed such people, but they are out there, and a lot of them too!

    Then you should easily be able to point to these countless posts. There is only one on this thread, and that is almost certainly from a sockpuppet trying to be ironic. I think there are ninety-nine strawmen in your head for every real person who believes what you keep claiming people believe.

    There is nothing wrong with changes. For example, sending Jon to Hardhome on TV was good. In the books, we imagine it in our heads regardless of whether we “see” it via Jon’s first person report, or via the third person raven note. On TV, it is much better to show than to tell, so Jon going made more sense. Neither GRRM’s choice or D&D’s was wrong. The natural difference arose due to the different mediums.

    On the other hand, changes that are unnecessary, illogical, contradictory, or based on the assumption that the TV audience has the IQ of a pear irk me, and changes that were necessitated by time, budget or logistical constraints are disappointing, if understandable. I will continue to criticize the former in particular, not because it is “different from the books”, but because it is bad story-telling. I do, however, have a general “default to the books” attitude. It is book fans that brought this series out of obscurity and gave it a shot at TV, and in a sense we are owed a bit of deference on close calls.

  64. Wimsey:

    Agreed, unless they also are part of the larger production team.(That is sometimes the case.)Otherwise, they are captains of a ship in a fleet of episodes: they have huge influence on what happens on their particular episode, but none on other episodes . And, of course, in a series like this, they cannot deviate from what past and future episodes dictate.

    Yup. The directors aren’t involved in these things, with some exceptions of course. For example, Michael Rymer, who directed the Battlestar Galactica miniseries — essentially a 4-hour-long pilot for the show — and then went on to direct many of the most important regular episodes, was instrumental in setting the tone and Shape of Things to Come(TM).

  65. Chad Brick,

    I’ve no intention of combing through the endlessness of Internet. Every major fan site has a multitude of these. Yes, go over to westeros.org for the most hilarious effect, find the Season 1 or 2 subforums, and you’ll see throngs of people regularly complaining about EVERYTHING, from the lack of the Battle of the Green Fork to how they made Renly gay (yes, a sizable contingent of book fans back then didn’t realise that Renly was gay and complained that the show ruined his character trying to pander to the Hollywood Homosexual Lobby), to how the show ruined Tyrion because he made Bronn the Commander of the City Watch instead of that other guy who wasn’t his crony (forgot his name), to Ros the Whore and Missandei-Grey Worm who almost no single Unsullied had any problems with, but a bunch of book readers couldn’t stand (gee, I wonder why?), to show!Margaery who “totally butchers the younger, more innocent book!Margaery”, to certain characters being black in the show while they’re white in the books, etc, etc…

    Honestly, I’m not sure if you’re kidding here or what. There are thousands of similar posts out there. I can’t believe you don’t know about them.

  66. Luka Nieto,

    What is even worse is that in Thrones, there actually are gods, or things near enough that we can call them that: and they have no interest in human concepts of justice!

  67. Luka Nieto:
    Chad Brick,

    It’s such an incredibly coincidence that the amount of things to criticize in the show is rising in proportion to how much it strays from the books, and that only book readers seem to arrive at that conclusion —Just take a look at some Unsullied reviews.

    I wonder why that would be.

    THIS

  68. Jacob,

    Ok, that tops (or bottoms) HS=HR for sheer illogic. I think that all three classic fallacies are in prime evidence here (as are some unsound premises). Kudos…

  69. Emilia Clarke is probably the best example of the risks of a show or film casting a lead role primarily for beauty. For every Elizabeth Taylor, you get 10,000 Jessica Albas.

    With that said, I loved this interview. Peter Dinklage seemed a little less surly than usual, and Emilia Clarke was lovely and gracious. It seems like she’s as sick of Imperious Daenerys shouting and executing people as the audience is.

  70. Luka Nieto:
    A Man Grown,

    The fact that people expect the heroes to ultimately win, or at least for the villains to “get their comeuppance” as if some God was imparting justice in this world, says much about how they misunderstand the story ASOIAF and Game of Thrones are telling.

    Thank you for this.

  71. Little Flower,

    Greenwald might perhaps counter that great classic tragedies are still entertaining to read/watch. I can understand the argument for the Shireen burning in the tragic sense. But Ramsay is no longer entertaining. Wanting Ramsay to get comeuppance is reasonable because we just want him to be gone already so the story can move on to other things.

  72. Luka Nieto,

    Brilliant! Thanks for posting this … It’s nice to read something intelligent, considering the immature bitchfest that this site has become …

  73. Cathair,

    After binge watching the first 3 seasons, I read the first book. While I enjoyed it, found it compulsively readable, I also couldn’t stop thinking of all the actors in their characters, even when the book described them differently (i.e., Tyrion). After that, I decided to just stop and stick with the show for now. I’m not even sure I’ll go back to the books, considering how low an opinion of the last two books most people have. I did think of reading Storm of Swords, since that’s considered the masterpiece of the five and judging from the adaptation in S3 and 4, its not hard to see why.

  74. Ravyn,

    I understand, I’ve read the first one, on the second one now, and I did feel the first one was a chore but after book 2 is where most of the changes happen so that’s why I feel it will be more exciting

  75. Ravyn,

    Dragons really is pretty good. Yes, GRRM writes too much, but the extra writing does not bury the story. There is only one unnecessary new protagonist and he does not get many chapters. I do not know if it was fully a “return to form”: but it was a huge step back to the right direction.

  76. M,

    Hmmm, given that the shouting and executing happen about as often as Xmas, I am not sure that I buy that at all.

  77. Luka Nieto,

    This extends further than Thrones. The article lists Harry Potter as an example of good guys triumphing: yet while that series was being written, there was a lot of complaining about all of the “unnecessary” deaths of characters, and why the price of good guys winning seemed to be so high.

    Hizdar’s and Tyrion’s exchange is pertinent: few great things come sbout without death and cruelty: but that does not mean that people should want it to be that way. Still, better this than one of Sansa’s stories!

  78. Hodor Targaryen,

    Agreed. It’s like how everyone hated Joffrey. It wasn’t Jack Gleeson’s fault, he was just such a damn good actor! However, I do think some of the clunky dialog Emilia’s been given sometimes doesn’t help.

  79. Robb Snow:
    I’ll never understand why some people hate Emilia’s acting so much. Almost no one I know IRL (or on the Internet even) thinks she’s a bad actress, nevermind worthy of a Razzie.

    I think she’s a terrible actress, and so do my friends who watch GOT. For me it’s the leaden facial expressions (when she has any, other than staring intently) and the fact that when she speaks it feels like she’s thinking “HERE’S MY LINE I WILL SAY IT NOW”, not reacting to the actor or the situation she’s in. It was really evident in the scene with Dinklage who is a great actor – he said so much with just his eyes, and the lines sounded like they were coming from a human being. For me she’s ruined Dany, who I think is a great character. Never seen her in anything else though.

  80. I dunno. I guess you’re seeing something that I’m not (or not seeing something that I do) in her acting.

    I’ll play devil’s advocate (and rant) a bit here though. Like I said earlier, I’ve been frustrated with Dany’s writing this season (and a lot of last season). Executing Mossador and feeding that noble to Viserion and Rhaegal were frustratingly stupid, unnecessary, and violent. And too often she seems really whimsical and overly prone to change her mind.

    This kind of weird, hot and cold behavior is probably why some people think she’s going mad like her father. It might also be the real source of criticism for Emilia’s acting since she’s having to juggle all of these snap changes in Dany’s thoughts and behavior, and it’s not always translating well onscreen.

    If they really are writing her as slowly going mad, then I say well played. If not, then they really need to get their shit together for this character.

  81. Wimsey,

    Wimsey:
    Cathair,

    Every famous novel or novel series has its fundamentalists.However, plenty of us are “theologians,” too, who understand that the point is to adapt the story from one medium to another.

    Lord, not this again. Not liking something in the show does not equal not understanding the needs of adaptation, therefore no need to name-call those who criticize the show as “fundamentalist”. Can we let this go now once and for all and go back to waiting for the GIANT KILLER PENGUINS (tm Lulu’s Mum) to show up in the finale?

  82. chameleon,

    How does that possibly follow from what I wrote? $5 if you can name the logical fallacy that you just committed. (That is rhetorical, but I am pretty sure that you will not get the right answer.)

  83. Geralt of Rivia!! What in the blue hell are you doing here? You should be searching for Ciri!

  84. Hodor Targaryen:
    The hate for Emilia s acting is the classic example of confusing the less likeable traits of the actual character with the acting. She has a confidence and arrogance about her that some don’t like, but she’s just doing a good job playing the character. I also feel like there is added scrutiny because she is a popular female character.

    I agree with this. Here is what the character Dany is at this point. She is a person who is trying to display confidence, but in fact is internally very uncertain, and unconfident. That is something which when played correctly is going to make the viewer (and by extension the characters in the scene with her) feel uncomfortable, because it makes them feel that she is not doing a good job. That is what people are picking up on with Emelia. They incorrectly think it’s bad acting which is making them feel uncomfortable, when in fact she is doing exactly what she’s supposed to with the character.

    Leadership is all about displaying certainty and in fact being certain in oneself. Dany isn’t good at this in Mereen which is part of why people think she’s a crappy leader.

  85. Ravyn:
    Cathair,

    After binge watching the first 3 seasons, I read the first book. While I enjoyed it, found it compulsively readable, I also couldn’t stop thinking of all the actors in their characters, even when the book described them differently (i.e., Tyrion). After that, I decided to just stop and stick with the show for now. I’m not even sure I’ll go back to the books, considering how low an opinion of the last two books most people have. I did think of reading Storm of Swords, since that’s considered the masterpiece of the five and judging from the adaptation in S3 and 4, its not hard to see why.

    AFFC, generally considered the worst of the books, was nominated for a Hugo Award and has better ratings at Goodreads than all but one of the 15 nominees from that three year stretch. Being the worst of the best still leaves it better than 99% of the sci-fi / fantasy out there. Pretty much everyone agrees it comes across better in a second, post-ADWD reading as well. Reading it as part of a whole rather than stand-alone, as well as reading it more patiently rather than rushing through in order to find out what happens, provides a much better experience.

    There are a small contingent of people who really hated it, mostly because it doesn’t include the three biggest characters (Jon, Dany, and Tyrion). While they are few in number, they spout off a lot and tend to collect in places like this one.

  86. Wimsey:
    chameleon,

    How does that possibly follow from what I wrote?$5 if you can name the logical fallacy that you just committed.(That is rhetorical, but I am pretty sure that you will not get the right answer.)

    You can see how it follows exactly from what you wrote – what is not clear?

  87. Queenofthrones: I agree with this.Here is what the character Dany is at this point.She is a person who is trying to display confidence, but in fact is internally very uncertain, and unconfident.That is something which when played correctly is going to make the viewer (and by extension the characters in the scene with her) feel uncomfortable, because it makes them feel that she is not doing a good job.That is what people are picking up on with Emelia.They incorrectly think it’s bad acting which is making them feel uncomfortable, when in fact she is doing exactly what she’s supposed to with the character.

    Leadership is all about displaying certainty and in fact being certain in oneself.Dany isn’t good at this in Mereen which is part of why people think she’s a crappy leader.

    Nope nope nope. I have made clear the distinction between what I think of Emilia as an actress and Dany as character (“she ruined Dany for me”), and I’m not the only one. I actually think the character has been adapted pretty well, with some things I’m not so happy about (Daznak’s Pit and the difference between taming a dragon and being Mommy-Son to it). I’m sad that Emilia isn’t up to par in most of her scenes, for the reasons stated, much like others who are unimpressed with her acting. Different strokes, folks.

  88. Chad Brick: Then you should easily be able to point to these countless posts. There is only one on this thread, and that is almost certainly from a sockpuppet trying to be ironic. I think there are ninety-nine strawmen in your head for every real person who believes what you keep claiming people believe.

    There is nothing wrong with changes. For example, sending Jon to Hardhome on TV was good. In the books, we imagine it in our heads regardless of whether we “see” it via Jon’s first person report, or via the third person raven note. On TV, it is much better to show than to tell, so Jon going made more sense. Neither GRRM’s choice or D&D’s was wrong. The natural difference arose due to the different mediums.

    On the other hand, changes that are unnecessary, illogical, contradictory, or based on the assumption that the TV audience has the IQ of a pear irk me, and changes that were necessitated by time, budget or logistical constraints are disappointing, if understandable. I will continue to criticize the former in particular, not because it is “different from the books”, but because it is bad story-telling. I do, however, have a general “default to the books” attitude. It is book fans that brought this series out of obscurity and gave it a shot at TV, and in a sense we are owed a bit of deference on close calls.

    Agree 100%. Love the show, love the books, and this is a comment board, right? So we’re allowed to post when we have criticisms of the show, right? So tedious to have to keep saying this…

  89. chameleon: You can see how it follows exactly from what you wrote – what is not clear?

    Wow, either you really failed logic 101 badly or you cannot read! (Actually, I suppose that there are other explanations, too.) From what I wrote above, two things follow: 1) “fundamentalist” fans will criticize an adaptation for altering details; 2) “theologian” fans will criticize an adaptation for failing to retain the story.

    Nowhere in here does it suggest that these are the only two types of criticism. That means that you committed the fallacy of affirming an antecedent (If P then q; not P; not q) right off the bat. After all, if an adaptation of a novel tells a different story than the book did and alters details much, then both “fundamentalist” and “theological” fans will criticize the adaptation: but it might get high praise from people who never have read the book and who consider the adaptation to be good storytelling in its own right. This was the case with Lord of the Rings, where some fans argued that the movies failed to tell Tolkien’s story about Death and Immortality even if it told a story quite well.

    And, of course, it never follows from my statement that all fans necessarily would be described as “fundamentalists” or “theologians.” People do not always become fans for details or stories: some people like the plots; other people like the characters independent of the character development creating the story. Halfway in between, some people like mysteries that a series like this introduces. So, that is the fallacy of affirming the consequence (If P then q; q; therefore P) right there: there are many more options than just these two for fans.

    In this case, Two out of Three is really bad….

    Chad Brick: There are a small contingent of people who really hated it, mostly because it doesn’t include the three biggest characters (Jon, Dany, and Tyrion). While they are few in number, they spout off a lot and tend to collect in places like this one.

    It also got reamed by the critics at the time. (And, no, those “reviews” you cite at Amazon were not reviews of Crows: they were snippets of reviews of Game of Thrones that have been put on the book covers of subsequent SoI&F novels). One obvious criticisms was the lack of a coherent story. However, it also got criticized for its almost misogynistic tones: there are fully five storylines (Cersei’s, Arianne’s, Asha’s, Brienne’s and Arya’s) featuring women who seem to be failing miserably in a men’s world. The worst of it was, it was not so much just that they were women, but that they seemed to be incompetent women. Cersei is a blithering idiot. Arianne is a naive brat. Asha refuses to accept that she is facing extremely long odds and thus has nothing close to a contingency plan when she flops. Brienne wanders about in what seems to be a daze. Only in Arya’s case was there the question of whether she had failed or graduated on to the next level.

    It was that (GRRM previously had provided a much more balanced distribution of female PoVs) and the fact that people like Asha who were supposed to be tactically savvy that led to more than one critic stating that it was almost like GRRM didn’t write it at all. That’s what led to the “ghost writing” rumors (I don’t think that any of the critics actually accused it of being ghost written: I just remember some saying that it was almost like it was).

    “But it got a Hugo nomination!!!” Yeah, and the Twilight films got MTV nominations. That’s about the level of Hugo nominations most years.

    Remember, what really “hurt” about this was that after the critical and popular success of the Harry Potter series, people were talking about a “Harry Potter for adults.” Because the first three SoI&F novels had been pretty good novels in their own right (and I mean novels independent of anything to do with SciFi/Fantasy), people were hoping that this might rise and claim the theoretical mantle. Instead we got the stereotype of Fantasy: aimless, storyless wandering with bad roles for women and generally weak character development.

  90. Is it only GoT / ASoIaF that creates such divisive and inflammatory opinions? Do the Marvel or The Walking Dead or Outlander adaptations compared to the printed forms get people’s knickers in such a bunch too?

  91. Wimsey: Wow, either you really failed logic 101 badly or you cannot read!(Actually, I suppose that there are other explanations, too.)From what I wrote above, two things follow: 1) “fundamentalist” fans will criticize an adaptation for altering details; 2) “theologian” fans will criticize an adaptation for failing to retain the story.

    Nowhere in here does it suggest that these are the only two types of criticism.That means that you committed the fallacy of affirming an antecedent (If P then q; not P; not q) right off the bat.After all, if an adaptation of a novel tells a different story than the book did and alters details much, then both “fundamentalist” and “theological” fans will criticize the adaptation: but it might get high praise from people who never have read the book and who consider the adaptation to be good storytelling in its own right.This was the case with Lord of the Rings, where some fans argued that the movies failed to tell Tolkien’s story about Death and Immortality even if it told a story quite well.

    And, of course, it never follows from my statement that all fans necessarily would be described as “fundamentalists” or “theologians.”People do not always become fans for details or stories: some people like the plots; other people like the characters independent of the character development creating the story.Halfway in between, some people like mysteries that a series like this introduces.So, that is the fallacy of affirming the consequence (If P then q; q; therefore P) right there: there are many more options than just these two for fans.

    Blah blah blah if P then Q, really? This isn’t a mathematics or philosophy blog. What it boils down to without the tortured prose is that I was responding to your claiming that those who criticize the books are actually complaining about adaptation issues, and moreover are “fundamentalists” to boot. The former is bullshit and the latter is name calling. You respond with a bunch of blabla and attack me personally, but fail to defend what you actually said.

    Also, imo anyone who makes a good argument ought to be able to say it without jargon like Occam’s Razor, Chekov’s Gun etc or mathematical equations. I grade my students down for that sort of bullshit because usually it’s hiding a bad argument. Doesn’t make anything you say any more true to dress it up in a bunch of jargon.

    And notice how I’m not insulting YOU personally here, just what you say? Can be done, people, watch and learn!

    Now, on to more important things like GIANT KILLER PENGUINS and some more hot n’sexy Jaquen, please!

  92. chameleon: I grade my students down for that sort of bullshit because usually it’s hiding a bad argument. Doesn’t make anything you say any more true to dress it up in a bunch of jargon.

    These things are not “jargon”: they are terms for important concepts. It is simpler to write the terms than explain the whole concepts. The resort to “it’s jargon” is a classic rhetorical one, and never a good one.

    Moreover, do not accuse me of making bad arguments when the entire reason we are having this exchange is because of the bad argument you made regarding my statement. Nothing that you concluded followed from what I wrote: and that is your mistake, not mine. (And, yes, I grade down students for that, too.)

    I almost dread to ask this, but: what do you teach?

  93. Wimsey: These things are not “jargon”: they are terms for important concepts.It is simpler to write the terms than explain the whole concepts.The resort to “it’s jargon” is a classic rhetorical one, and never a good one.

    Kind of like ad hominem arguments, right?

    Moreover, do not accuse me of making bad arguments when the entire reason we are having this exchange is because of the bad argument you made regarding my statement.Nothing that you concluded followed from what I wrote: and that is your mistake, not mine.(And, yes, I grade down students for that, too.)

    I almost dread to ask this, but: what do you teach?

    Again, nice try to turn it to a personal attack, but what I teach is irrelevant because that makes it a personal argument, not an argument about ideas. So I’m not going to answer you.

    Here is what you wrote:

    “Every famous novel or novel series has its fundamentalists.However, plenty of us are “theologians,” too, who understand that the point is to adapt the story from one medium to another.”

    Here is what I understood from what you wrote. Please do correct me if my understanding is wrong?

    “People who like the books are book purists and therefore raving mad funadmentalists on the order of religious terrorists. However, those of us who are more intelligent/learned/etc understand that It Is Difficult To Adapt Content From One Medium To Another, and No One who Criticises the Show Understands This And Are Therefore Fundamentalists see above.”

  94. chameleon: Kind of like ad hominem arguments, right?

    Yes, you provide a nice example of that. (I was almost going to point that out when you resorted to the “jargon” bit, as that is a classic example of people trying to deflect points with rhetoric and attempts to defame the other person: but amusingly I thought that it would be too jargony!)

    chameleon: “People who like the books are book purists and therefore raving mad funadmentalists on the order of religious terrorists. However, those of us who are more intelligent/learned/etc understand that It Is Difficult To Adapt Content From One Medium To Another, and No One who Criticises the Show Understands This And Are Therefore Fundamentalists see above.”

    No, that is completely wrong, and (again) classic examples of at least two types of logical fallacy. I’ll give it to you in multiple choice form!

    1. Wimsey’s post suggests how many different fan types for big book series like SoI&F:
    a. 1
    b. 2
    c. a minimum of 2

    Correct answer: c. Book series like this always have the “fundamentalist” fans in it for the details. They also always have “theological” fans in it for the story. It is not stated that these are the only two types of fans, so this means that there are at least 2 and possibly more. (As comes up in prior posts, there are fans of plot, character development, theme, etc., too: of course, those could be considered different “theological” branches in many ways.)

    2. According to Wimsey’s post, all criticisms of adapted shows/movies are:
    a. purists bitching about changes in details
    b. adaptationists bitching about too many details being retained and stories being lost
    c. not directly addressed, but directly implied to be of varying nature.

    Correct answer: c. It is not explicitly addressed, but in the context of the post to which it was replying (some of which was quoted in my post), because different types of fans are fans for different reasons, they will praise/criticize an adaptation for different things.

    As for the “purists” being dumb, that is a side issue. The problem is that the purists make all of us look dumb. That happened big time 15 years ago with the Lord of the Rings films. But even then, we were always stereotyped as being like the Trekkers in the famous William Shatner SNL skit. Indeed, if HBO is smart, then they will use people like Linda to their advantage: the more people like her shout about how awful the TV series is, the more people will be reminded of the Tolkien fans like her 15 years ago: and that’s exactly the train of thought that HBO wants to have potential audiences taking.

  95. Wimsey:

    Indeed, if HBO is smart, then they will use people like Linda to their advantage: the more people like her shout about how awful the TV series is, the more people will be reminded of the Tolkien fans like her 15 years ago: and that’s exactly the train of thought that HBO wants to have potential audiences taking.

    Don’t take my word for it, but I believe Elio and Linda were active in LoTR fandom and were waging some kind of online crusade against Peter Jackson’s movies. IIRC.

  96. I think Emilia Clarke is ok most of the time but when she gives her speeches such as ‘They will live in my new world or die in their old one’/ ‘break the wheel’ etc. it doesn’t ring true. I’m not sure if it’s poor acting or if the director told her to say it that way. It’s like she is just reciting her lines, she doesn’t act naturally and have natural pauses in her speech. I find it hard to believe she’s incapable, she’s either been asked to do it that way or she believes that is the best way to do it. Her acting is better when she’s not speaking or speaking in a less ‘preachy’ manner, such as her last convo with Barristan or any more personal conversation.

Comments are closed.