The second season of Game of Thrones picks up where the first season ends and - somewhat loosely in places - follows the events of the second novel in the Song of Ice and Fire series, A Clash of Kings. For those who enjoyed the first season, it is possible to thoroughly (but not unreservedly) recommend the second. The standards of acting, set design and production values remain stunningly high. The original castmembers continue to do superlative work (it seems redundant to say it, but Peter Dinklage as Tyrion Lannister is fantastic throughout) and the new additions make an immediate impact. Most impressive is the addition of Stephen Dillane as Stannis Baratheon. If George R.R. Martin wrote A Song of Ice and Fire to be unfilmable, he wrote Stannis to be uncastable: an uninspiring martinet who nevertheless commands loyalty. Dillane knocks a tricky role out of the park and nails the character from the novels brilliantly.
Most of the other new castmembers are also impressive: Liam Cunningham makes for a likable Davos Seaworth, Natalie Dormer brings her Tudors-honed skills of political conniving to the role of Margaery Tyrell and Oona Chaplin makes a good fist of a somewhat cliched character with Talisa (more on her later). Even the minor roles are compelling: Tom Wlaschiha's Jaqen H'ghar, Patrick Malahide's Balon Greyjoy, Michael McElhatton's Roose Bolton and Simon Armstrong's Qhorin Halfhand are all superbly-played, with the actors getting across their characters' personalities in just a handful of scenes apiece.
Production wise, the show has stepped up in the second season. CGI is more plentiful and more artfully employed, with some excellent establishing shots (one of Harrenhal towards the end of the season is particularly evocative) and some great shots of the direwolves (now real wolves matted into the shots and enhanced) and dragons. That said, the show continues to be inexplicably reluctant to have shots of marching armies, continuing the first season's fine tradition of showing us twenty extras and claiming there's another 99,980 blokes just standing out of shot, which is more than a bit unconvincing.
The second season does have some issues, however. The pacing and tightness of the story feels off compared to the first season. Some of this is because of the source material: A Clash of Kings is less well-structured and focused than A Game of Thrones. However, the TV series does increase these problems beyond those of the book. In the novel the absence of Eddard Stark as a central protagonist is somewhat alleviated by Tyrion Lannister taking on this role. Whilst Tyrion does step up to the plate in the second season, a lot of his scenes and subplots (such as the infamous chain sequence and the build-up to it) have been eliminated, reducing his role considerably. Whilst understandable from a production standpoint, it does make the second season feel a bit more aimless and disjointed than the first.
A core criticism from some quarters revolves around the second season's faithfulness to the book. In fact, some of the changes for the second season were necessary. The chain storyline would have added layers of complexity, time and expense to the Battle of the Blackwater that were best avoided, painful as it was to lose them. The much-criticised relationship between Robb and Talisa is actually a change for the better, in my view (note: I appear to be the only person on Earth to think this). Having Robb disappear for a whole season and reappear with a new wife out of nowhere would have been nonsensical (the sort of thing you can do in a book but not in a visual medium) and following Robb's off-page story on the screen would have been fairly dull, forcing him to spend most of the season parked at one castle. The changes mean we get to know and (hopefully) feel some sympathy for Talisa rather than wondering what the heck was going on and why did Robb make such a silly decision.
Other changes also work. Keeping Tywin at Harrenhal for most of the season simplifies the tactical movement of the war (again, something you can do in the book with a map to hand which is harder to get across on TV) and allows for some excellent scenes between Charles Dance and Maisie Williams's Arya Stark. There's an interesting feeling of amiable menace in these scenes. Unfortunately, the writers over-use the idea a little with too many scenes saying the same thing, and under-play the idea of Arya reminding Tywin of a young Cersei, which could have been milked further (this idea should horrify Arya, but she doesn't really react to it).
Other changes are much less successful. Having cast the excellent Simon Armstrong as Qhorin Halfhand, it's then a monumental waste to change the climax of his story in the novels (an iconic moment which ranks amongst many readers' favourite scenes of the entire series) to something more confusing and less well-motivated. Non-readers will find the scene a bit off, but for readers the knowledge it could have been far superior by simply sticking to the page is extremely frustrating, especially as what we get instead (Jon Snow running around in some snow for two whole episodes in a row) is so inane. The same is true of Daenerys's storyline, which is even more inexplicable. The decision to bulk out the Qarth storyline with the addition of a political thriller storyline is actually a good one, but is completely wasted because between the 'twist' (Dany's dragons being kidnapped) and its resolution (in the House of the Undying) we only get a couple of scenes of Dany looking worried and talking with Jorah Mormont. It would have been better to have cut out the interminable Red Waste scenes at the start of the season, gotten her to Qarth faster and given this storyline more depth. Instead, what we get is notably inferior to the novel (alleviated by some excellent visual imagery in the changed House of the Undying sequence) which, given this storyline's slightness in the book, is an impressive achievement.
The season overall, is less compelling than the first. The storyline is more fragmented and, in some cases, the changes from the TV series result in scenes far less powerful and impressive than what is in the novel. I am certainly not a book purist and welcome changes which improve the telling of the story in a dramatic medium, but in many cases the TV series adopts a course which is less interesting, less impressive and less resonant than the books. However, it is notable that the most successful storylines this season - Theon's, Tyrion's and the beginnings of the Brienne/Jaime relationship - are the ones that hew closest to the novels.
The season does make amends for its many faults with the ninth episode, Blackwater. For the second season in a row it's George R.R. Martin's episode which is the stand-out of the season, an epic battle sequence lasting almost the whole episode but also featuring some sublime character development alongside the arrows and wildfire explosions (Cersei, Sansa and the Hound getting more development in this one episode alone than the previous eighteen episodes of the series combined). Absolutely brilliant stuff that restores the faith that, when it pulls itself together, Game of Thrones can stand alongside HBO's best dramas in quality. It just needs to do so more consistently.
The second season of Game of Thrones (overall: ***½) has finished airing but should be available on DVD in February or March of 2013. Season 3 will commence airing on 31 March 2013.
201: The North Remembers (****)
202: The Night Lands (***)
203: What is Dead May Never Die (***½)
204: Garden of Bones (***½)
205: The Ghost of Harrenhal (***½)
206: The Old Gods and the New (***)
207: A Man Without Honour (***½)
208: The Prince of Winterfell (****)
209: Blackwater (*****)
210: Valar Morghulis (****½)
7 comments:
I agree with you about Talisa! (my review and comments here: http://persephonemagazine.com/2012/05/23/recap-game-of-thrones-episode-2-8-the-prince-of-winterfell/) Jayne was such a wet hen in the books, it just made Robb's decision even more stupid: with Talisa, at least, you can see why he thought she was worth risking it.
Agree with most of what you say. The biggest problem for me is that we only get 3-7 minutes at the most with each storyline per episode (except ep. 9 of course). It’s really difficult to get into each storyline when you get so little off it in each episode. The most annoying of all is when we only get 1 single scene from a storyline, whats even the point with that?
I would prefer it if in s3 each character appeared in fewer episodes, but got more screen time when they did appear. For an example I would have enjoyed Jon Snows story more if instead of appearing in 8 episodes, his scenes had been spread over 5 episodes instead.
Interesting. I thought second season was much stronger than the first. I'm a huge fan of A Song of Ice and Fire, but the changes didn't bother me at all. It's strange to see only three or three-and-half stars to some great episodes like "What is Dead May Never Die" or "A Man Without Honour". Game of Thrones is my favourite of the current TV series.
That was my general impression of the second season as well: "less compelling than the first". While I didn't read any of the books, the story seemed patchy at places, it jumped around too much in the same episode, I felt some stories could have gotten a more consistent treatment since they were mostly independent (Daenery, Jon Snow).
I also liked the bit about the relationship between Robb and Talisa; I had no idea it's not in the book, but it fell together pretty well with the rest.
In my own case I agree that the changes to Robb's relationship were necessary and I liked them, but was it necessary to introduce a new character? I just feel that Talisa being from Volantis is going to undercut the overarching menace/brilliance of Tywin Lannister's ultimate plan and Robb's in-laws betrayal. Still, if the writers find a way to pull it all off, I guess it won't really matter.
And Talisa could still be someone other than she says she is.
The kidnapping of the dragons was, I thought, an absolutely brilliant change (the only alteration from the books I would describe that way) but they kind of wasted it by having Dany stand around uselessly right up until the last episode. I get that they wanted to keep the House of the Undying contained within a single episode, but I really don't think it would have hurt them to stretch it out across two or more episodes--after all, time is funny there. And I know it's not a huge deal, narratively, but as described in the books the HotU sequence is SO amazing and cinematic that it's a shame to lose all that great imagery and such a tense, horrific sequence.
I'll give them a pass due to time and budget, but I've been kind of disappointed in how the show has been handling the fantastical. The opening sequence of the pilot was masterfully done, but since then, the show has tended to fall prey to an annoying tendency in modern fantasy films and TV: the failure to develop the supernatural as something strange, wondrous, or terrifying because they're too busy packing plot points in. (I think Harry Potter is the worst offender here.) ASoIaF does sort of announce itself as restrained and light on fantasy, but once magic DOES start to creep into the story it's so well-handled that it would be a shame to continue shuffling it off to the margins.
I dunno, I'm hoping the increased time and budget coming for the next two seasons will go a ways towards fixing this problem.
THis is absolutely spot on. And I also agree that Talisa is an improvement over Jayne. (Is it only me who thinks it was made pretty clear that Talisa was spying for the Lannisters, by the way? She is shown hiding a letter she was writing immediately after Tywin says something about having secret sources of information.)
I enjoyed season 2 a lot less than season 1, although it did have its moments. Also, what was with Littlefinger teleporting all over the place to give exposition? Wouldn't have been surprised to see him pitch up in Asshai by the shadow...
Post a Comment