I promised a season finale review when I wrote my season five
opener review for Game of Thrones and I like to keep my promises, like
Ned Stark (if you don't know what that means, then please spend the
summer reading A Song Of Ice And Fire). But here we are at the end of
another season. Jon is dead (maybe), Dany has flown, Arya is blind,
Cersei took a walk, and no one has any idea what is going on with
Brandon Stark. I am going to be fairly blunt up front: I thought season
five of Game of Thrones was the worst one to date. This isn't to say
that there weren't shinning moments of brilliance--the episode Hardhome
comes to mind--but rather that season five slowed down the narrative to
an almost standstill and open gaping plot holes every which way, while refusing to take that opportunity to present
an introspective look at what is going on Westeros and the lives of our
favorite characters. Let me unpack that a bit. The fourth and fifth book
of A Song of Ice and Fire, "A Feast For Crows" and "A Dance With
Dragons," respectively, are significantly slower than the first three
books. For two or three characters, AFFC is essentially one giant
travelogue and for the rest it's about feeling stuck in situations you
can't control--the mean streets of Meereen, the turbulent religious zeal
of King's Landing, The Wall and daggers in the dark. You could make the
argument that the reason season five of A Game of Thrones felt so much
slower was because their source material, the work of George RR Martin,
was significantly slower. It's an argument that holds water and has merit
EXCEPT in what GoT does not do, but Martin does. AFFC and ADWD might be
slower than the three previous books but GRRM takes that time to
allow for philosophical, moral and ethical ponderings as well as intense character development, be it of the good kind or the bad kind. And why not? Is
that not how war and trauma work? Yes, war is loud and in your face and there are
dates and events that become solidified in the public conscious as
important, normally circled in red sharpie, but there is also the
"after" of war. People wonder why did we do this as they begin to look
past the actual conflict and look at the toll it has taken on the world
and its people. That is, essentially, what A Feast For Crows is. And
it's important. It's essential to have Ellaria Sand speak against the
blood lust and vengeance that fuels her family in the wake of Oberyn's
death. It's essential to have Septon Maribald speaking about broken men
who never return home from war. In a lot of ways, GRRM is writing an
anti-war narrative and thus when Game of Thrones only shows the horrors
of war and men in general but not the characters reflecting on said
horrors, it only gives one side of the story.
Instead of these introspective and quiet moments, the characters this
season simply moved from plot point to plot point in order to reach the
desired endgame. I have come to believe, after watching the whole
season, that the show runners worked backwards in order to write all of
season five. They knew they wanted the final three episodes--Hardhome
(Jon's battle against the White Walker), The Dance of Dragons (Dany's
flight), and Mother's Mercy (Cersei's Walk and Jon's death)--to be the final images of
this season. All three are incredibly powerful in text and certainly could be watchable
TV designed to generate buzz. The problem is that the writers still had
to come up with enough plot to get the characters to those points. I
guess that's one way of writing--instead of letting your characters lead
you where they want to go, you come up with their final endgame and
then write the narrative to get them to point X. Whether or not that is
an acceptable way to write fiction is a debate for another day. In
brief, those are my overall thoughts on season five of GoT. Lack of
introspective, meaningful, conversation and thought that lead to some
awkward storylines full of plot holes and bizarre turns up until the the
final three episodes which ranged from spectacular to rage inducing to
confusion. And of course this is to say nothing of the continued sexism
and torture porn GoT is becoming so famous for. So what in particular
worked? And what did not? Grab a flying lizard and let's go.
I have written this review three times now--and deleted it each time. Thus the lateness and the somewhat scattered nature of this final attempt. As I said in the introduction, I thought this season was simply....bad. One great episode does not a season make nor does it endear me toward the other 9 episodes which were either slow and boring or offensively bad. I wasn't sure if this was going to turn into a season review or an episode review, so I think it's going to turn into a bit of both. All I can say is that I don't know if I can continue to watch Game of Thrones; I don't know if I can continue to watch HBO and the two show runners hack George RR Martin's world to bits the way that they are doing. There are adaptations that work when you taken differences in medium into account (say, for example, the first season of Game of Thrones) and then there are adaptations that remove the heart and soul that it is adapting from. It is like the show runners decided that the best way to craft their narrative was to do the opposite of whatever was going on in the books and add in elements that were never there to begin with, which always--
always this season--ended up being a nightmare of epic proportions
. Book readers get a bit of a bad wrap in this fandom when we launch criticisms at the show because we are told that we are being snobbish and that the books aren't the show but here's the deal: the characters and the narrative should at least resemble the books in something more than name. Yes there is a Doran Martell in Game of Thrones but his resemblance to the book version ends there. Yes, there is a "For the Watch" in Game of Thrones but the spirit and impetus that lay behind the book version of the same event is lacking to the point of being non-existent in the show. The Brienne of Tarth in the books in no way resembles the kind and caring and somewhat naive Brienne in the books. I considered breaking this review down into "stories that worked" and
"stories that did not" except that in each case--from Meereen to the
Wall--there were elements that worked and did not work. Except
for Dorne. That was just drivel from start to finish. I am only going to hit a few stories and a few points because talking about this episode as a whole would (and already has) left me exhausted. It was bad, guys. It was just bad.
I know that was a lot of text to set up what I'm getting at but here's the crux:
Game of Thrones
more often than not relies heavily on shock value that is too
dissociative from its narrative framework and how they've presented the
characters thus far. It is done with very little explanation or
understanding of Martin's world and is increasingly being done for no
other motivation that to claim to be innovative and shocking and pushing the
envelope when in reality, the show writers are relying heavily on some
fairly old and redundant tv themes. Is there any agency left for any woman in this series that feels natural and organic? Sansa was raped and tortured and in the end it did not push her to save her own skin or take down Ramsey Bolton like many claimed it would, but instead it opened the door for Theon Greyjoy to become a hero who saves Sansa from her sad fate; a fate that she is more or less accepting of and passively prepares herself for when she is confronted by Miranda in the final Winterfell moments. I have never denied the violence of Martin's world, though a large
portion of that violence happens offscreen and is related through
various POV's who are either at the center of (but after the fact) or on the periphery of
said violence. However, when violent acts do take place, they are not
random nor haphazard; they fit into an already established narrative arc
that also aligns with the characters as we uncover their multifaceted layers. Arya walking the Riverlands shows the horrors of war and her hardening heart toward such bloody acts, as an example. After the rape scene in episode 506, the internet was abuzz with both
praise (for realism in this medieval setting) and outrage at having yet
another rape scene for what seemed like pure shock value. I happen to
agree with the latter stance but let's work through the former. In one
regard, yes this rape kept in line with Ramsey Bolton's character--a non
POV sociopath who is only ever seen through the eyes of another, mostly
Theon-turned-Reek. Ramsey is known for his ill treatment of beast and
man alike and is probably as close to "pure evil" as one can get in
Martin's grey speckled world. With regards to the realism debate, I will
never deny that marital rape is a very real part of Martin's world: to
do so is to deny Cersei and Robert and to deny (the beginnings at least)
of Daenerys and Drogo. It is also to deny what happens between Ramsey and his Book Bride, the Fake Arya Stark. The marriage and subsequent rape in the show, however, did not make narrative sense nor did it have
any sort of satisfactory conclusion or emotional follow through. It was
also heavily cliched.
Sansa's rape was for Theon's character
development because Hollywood continues to deny the female agency and perspective and
instead myopically focuses on the male. I hated the rape aspect as a whole, but from an objective standpoint it is part of GRRM's world, rape in general and marital
rape specifically. But during a time when we're supposed to be focused
on Sansa's trauma, heartache, and pain...they went to Theon and
instead we focused on how Sansa's rape was affecting him. That's a big
no-no for me. And in the end, it is Theon who is the hero to poor defenseless Sansa. Nothing about the rape of Sansa and her situation furthers her character. It makes her pitiable but after 3 seasons with Joffery, Sansa is already pitiable. It makes Ramsey a monster but after watching him flay and slice up Theon, he is already a monster. It makes the Bolton family the enemies of the Starks, but after Roose betrayed Robb at the Twins and then took Winterfell for himself, the Boltons already are the enemies of the Starks. In other words, packing Sansa off to Winterfell and having her married and raped by Ramsey Snow served no purpose in furthering Sansa's arc or the arc of the grand narrative. I'll just keep reminding myself that Sansa is really in the Vale, eating lemon cakes, and toying with Harry the Heir at Littefinger's insistence.
Daenerys is presented as a bad ass who feeds men to her dragons when they piss her off (something Dany in the books never does; hell, she barely goes to see her chained up dragons in the fifth book) and forces men to marry her while they cower on their knees in a dungeon. Except, you know, Dany is actually a far more complex and complicated
individual than that. One who sends traitors to be tortured, who is
constantly trying to renegotiate her own identity in light of ruling
Meereen but ends up chaffing and chained under the conventions placed
upon her by the patriarchal slavery society. A woman who feels like an
avenging dragon after crucifying 163 slavers but then also can't stand
the smell and sounds of their dying and tells herself that it was
for the children. A woman who avoids her literal
dragons once they are chained; a woman is talked into marrying Hizdahr
zo Loraq because he can bring her peace even though it is fairly obvious that he too is a Son of the Harpy. A woman who finally, at the end
of the fifth book, rips off her veil and takes off her floppy ears and
saves her dragon by taming him with nothing but a whip and words because
"he is fire made flesh and so am I," who finally remembers her house
words and comes to realize that she doesn't belong in Slaver's Bay and
that dragons plant no trees because the soil in her new kingdom is rotten and it's
her job to be both destruction and creation, two forces living together
in one being, a never ending cycle of death and rebirth and...Ok, look. I
could go on forever (and have done so in other places) about how much I
flipping love Daenerys Targaryen. That is my QUEEN. Yeah, she's got a violent streak
and is morally gray and probably the most controversial character in ASOIAF,
but she's got a vision of the future and I'll follow her where she
goes. Show Daenerys is nothing like this. To the show writers, Dany only
works for them if she's being "a badass" like randomly feeding men to
her dragons and telling Hizdahr that they're going to be married, no ifs
ands or buts and with no outside counsel. Because oh! It's shocking! Dany is a woman but look how
strong and badass she is! Let's only ever show her being strong and
badass cause she's a woman and it's unexpected and trope-breaking!
Please. Woman can be
strong and independent and powerful and still be faulty, wrong, morally
complex, and be plagued by self doubt. If the writers of GoT actually
read the books (because I am no longer convinced that they have) they'd
know this. See for example: every single woman in the series!
What irks
me more, though, is that they can't carry that line of thought--Dany is a
badass--through when it matters. Dany riding Drogon for the first time
is a badass moment; it's a self empowering moment for her. But instead
the show made it all about how Dany has to be rescued, so thank god she
has a male dragon around (along with her brave knight and sellsword/lover of course)! The wrongness of Dragon's First Flight was followed by the complete and utter bastardization of Dany's final POV chapter in ADWD in which she remembers who she is while out on the Dothraki Sea. In the books Dany is literally walking back to Meereen in the hot sun, while sick and while having a miscarriage.
Her
walk back to Meereen is all about "vs": Peace vs War, Dragon vs Harpy,
Meereen vs Westeros, Monster vs Mother. And all of that--ALL OF
THAT--was cut from this "adaptation." They want Dany to be a badass
except when it comes to the really important non-dragon, non-fire and blood moments
when they clearly find her boring or something (or maybe they don't get
her). If I look back I am lost, to go forward I must go back, dragons
plants no trees, sitting next to Drogon waiting for the Dothraki,
remembering that her house words are "fire and blood...." ALL of those
are so incredibly important to who Dany is: she is the balance of life
and death, the harmony of the never ending cycle of rebirth and loss of
life. She is the Mother and The Dragon. She is war and she is peace. She
is Brahma and Shiva. She can create a new world ONLY after she has
destroyed the old one. But if you were just watching the show you'd only
know that 1) she's hot 2) has dragons 3) has a lot of men that are in
love with her and 4) is in deep shit cause oh no! the Dothraki found her! I
bet they are mad or something! Golly, I hope those two men who love her so much find her
quick cause otherwise she's doooooomed! Poor Sad Female!
Fun fact: in the books, Shireen and Stannis are about 1,000 miles apart
from each other. While I've always seen Stannis as an Agamemnon figure,
I've also seen him as someone who subverts Agamemnon, especially where
his daughter is concerned. Where Agamemnon kills Iphigenia, I've often
predicted that Stannis will arrive too late to save his daughter
from his own wife and his Red Woman (who has stopped wearing red in the
show...odd). Once again, Stannis burning Shireen at the stake without so
much as a blink is a disconnect from what was previously established
for the character of Stannis. A few episodes prior to the conflagration,
Stannis gave the most passionate speech I think we've
ever heard from him about how Shireen is his child, two weeks ago he
sent Mel away for even suggesting that they hurt Shireen. And then he decides to burn his only child--his heir--why? It
doesn't make narrative sense for Stannis to go from
point A to point Z without a layover in point B-Y. How did he get to
that emotional point? HOW?! Just because of the lack of food? Because in
ADWD, they are at that point and know what Stannis says: "pray harder."
Also, they aren't lacking food given that Stannis orders the slain 100+
horses to be cut up into meat. In the books, those he burns are traitors
or his enemies, not his own men and not his
own family. If Stannis were to arrive back to Castle Black (where Mel
and Shireen are in the books) it would be just right after Mel sets
Shireen ablaze. That's Stannis's tragedy. He's always just off by a bit.
So why have Stannis burn Shireen? Because the writers don't want us to
cheer for anyone except Tyrion, Jon, and Dany. Those are their three big
damn heroes and everyone else be damned, never mind the very carefully
layered book construction that paints all three as far more grey than
white hatted heroes. So Stannis burns his child because it's shocking;
because it would set the audience's heart aflutter and make them talk
and tweet and watch next week to see if the sacrifice was worth
it--never mind the fact that R'hllor does not actually exist in Martin's
universe. But it was an unearned scene; the situation was not that
horrible, no more so than it was the previous episode unless I am
willing to suspend all my disbelief and accept that Ramsey Bolton really
stormed into an entire army encampment with 19 men and killed hundreds
of horses and burned all the foodstuffs without anyone noticing
(really...not one person noticed or captured one of the Northmen?) And
finally to have it be Selyese, who all season has been Queen
Burn-All-The-Things, be the one to suddenly turn into the considerate
parent who doesn't want her daughter burned and then kills herself in the finale. It was like watching a Greek farce in which one bad thing happens, one right after the next: Stannis burns his daughter, men desert him, his wife kills herself, and Mel leaves. Why did Mel leave exactly? Mel in the books wouldn't abandon her Azor Ahai (even though he's clearly not Azor Ahai). The writers on GoT just straight up hate Stannis for some inexplicable reason and don't seem to understand him. It isn't ambition that drives Stannis; it's duty. His final words to Brienne (whom I'll be skipping since she is so far removed from Book Brienne I don't even think we can call her Brienne) "do your duty" are actually perfect so I applaud the writers on that, but otherwise they don't get that Stannis is the best commander in Westeros, knows how to conduct war and what it takes to win a war and win a siege, and doesn't actually want the Throne but feels that he has to take it because it's what his duty requires of him since he is Robert's true heir.
The other and last aspect I am going to talk about are the events of the Wall (because I can't touch Dorne with a ten foot pole). If I just said go read the books would that be enough? No, probably not. There was no build up, no time spent on why the men of the Night's Watch are angry, why this is "for the Watch." In the books, there is a moment--a singular moment--in which Jon chooses something that casts him as an Oath Breaker. Up until that point, the men under him are upset with Jon's decisions but they don't oppose him violently. But when Jon makes his decision to, essentially, break his oaths to the Watch, that's when the men decide to kill him. And it's powerful and sad--the men doing the killing are actually crying. And of course Jon's not really dead but you wouldn't know this from the show. In the books it's clear based on clues to what--or who--Jon really is and it is his final words, "Ghost," that indicate that Jon has most likely warged but we don't even know where Ghost is here in GoT! Does Ghost still exist for Jon? He appeared once this season for Sam..... There was none of this Emo Olly nonsense in the books and this "Olly" insertion is the best example of something that is straight from the minds of the show runners that just abysmally fails. But what angers me more than the messed up For the Watch moment were the final moments between Sam and Jon. In what universe does Sam leave Jon willingly? In what universe does Sam ask to be sent away from the danger? None. There is no universe in which that is true. It is so so so so important to both characters that it is Jon who orders Sam to go to Oldtown and become a Maester. He does it to keep Aemon Targaryen (already dead now) and Mance Rayder's son (who does not exist on the show) safe from Melisandre and her obsession with King's blood. Sam goes to learn more about the Walkers, but it is Jon making a very cold, hard decision that is all about killing the boy so that the man can live. But Sam asking to go to Oldtown reeks of desertion and fear and being a coward. And while Sam might be a coward, he'd never willingly abandon Jon Snow. It just goes to show that the show runners don't understand the characters GRRM handed them on a silver platter.
Overall, season five was a mess. It really was. It relied far too
heavily on shocking moments and titillating out of character events to
ever be considered concise storytelling. It continues to move further
and further away from the books that GRRM has crafted, and that everyone
should read! Shock and titillation have their place so long as they
contribute to character development and a cohesive plot. This season
failed in that regard. There were so many times when the show just
missed the point of these huge moments that happened in AFFC and in ADWD.
Honestly, did any of the character move forward
emotionally or realistically? It felt as though at the end of 10 episodes they were right back
where they began, having never moved forward at all. No one was really pushed or challenged. Almost all the
plot lines felt stalled and remedial and in some cases far outside of
GRRM's universe. I'm struggling with my continued viewing of the show
since so much of it is coming back to torture porn (Meryn Trant, anyone?) or rape or violence
for the sake of violence with no careful consideration of what happens
after. Be realistic; be gritty; be tough. But be realistic, gritty and
tough in all matters, not just when you want to assault a character on
screen. Don't just rely on shock value and ignore the narrative at play. I doubt I'll review a GoT episode or season again; being a book
snob gets me into far too much trouble with this show. But I keep my
promises.
