Game of Thrones begins....

[Crazy_Ivan80]

would be a bad investment policy. No subjects, no income.

So what? A lot of people do not act in their long term best interest. If heirs to vast capitalist fortunes can squander them away, I don't see why heirs to feudal holdings can't.

Incidentally, another example of a sadist psychopath baron I just thought of is Gilles de Rais.

fortunes generally don't wield farming- or other implements that are -when you think about it- horrible weapons.

[Crazy_Ivan80]

Elizabeth Bathory?

Not to mention Vlad Dracula.

Isn't Vlad actully fairly well respected in Romania?

slaughtering 10.000s of Turks usually has that result.

[Viking]

Elizabeth Bathory?

Not to mention Vlad Dracula.

Tepes killed his enemies for politics, not for sport or dermatology.

[Queequeg]

Caligula, Bathory, Saltykova, de Rais, de los Ríos y Lísperguer...given the circumstances it's not totally impossible that you would hear stories of someone like Bolton.  I think it is debatable to what extent they would actually be accurate though. 

[jimmy olsen]

Sounds good!
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/04/11/game-of-thrones-third-season_n_1416386.html

When HBO's renewal of "Game of Thrones" for a third season was announced Tuesday, one question sprang to many fans' minds: How many episodes will there be?

A spokesperson for the network would not confirm that, as was the case with the first two seasons, the third season will have 10 episodes. But executive producer D.B. Weiss, whom I interviewed after the renewal announcement, said that he and fellow "Game of Thrones" executive producer David Benioff were proceeding on the assumption that Season 3 will consist of 10 episodes.

"I would say that, going forward, 10-episode seasons are really all that are possible, given our 12-month [production] cycle," Weiss said. "For this show specifically, it's really all we can do to do 10 of them in a year. I would say not to expect more than 10 a season any time in the near future ... We had always planned on a 10-episode season [for the show's third year]."

Some fans and media observers had hoped that the show, currently in its second season (Sundays at 9 p.m. ET on HBO), would get a two-season renewal, and I asked Weiss about that as well.

"I'm not aware of [HBO] having done that in the past -- doing two at a time," Weiss replied. "Generally, it seems to be a season-by-season thing."

The question was partly prompted by the theory that the show would need two seasons to deal with "A Storm of Swords," the third book in Martin's "A Song of Ice and Fire" novel series. But fans of the shows (and books) should not presume that certain seasons will deal with certain books, Weiss said. He said the plan that he and Benioff have involves taking on sections of the overall saga that make sense in 10-episode installments.

"We've always said that we see the show as an adaptation of George's series, not this book or that book," Weiss explained. "It's definitely true that 'A Storm of Swords' is too big to even come close to fitting in one season. We've done some shuffling around of things -- as an example, there were some things from Book 2 that ended up in Season 1, and there are probably going to be some things in Book 2 that didn't make it into Season 2 or maybe won't show up later. Book 3 is definitely too much for a 10-episode season, so we're taking the long view of the series of the whole, and trying to do as much justice as possible to George's overall epic story and be as true to the spirit as we can, while keeping it an exciting and viable and vivid as a television show that stands on its own two legs."

As I said in my conversation with Weiss, it sounds as though the way to look at upcoming season (hopefully seasons) of the show are as portions of the overall saga, not sections of particular books.

"Yeah," Weiss said. "A season of television needs to feel like a season of television. We have so many storylines to juggle, and they all need to ideally have a sense of a beginning, middle and end over the course of a season. Each character needs to feel like they're traveling a specific road in the course of a season, and coming out as a different person than they went in. It's never going to be about taking a book and ripping it in half -- 'At page 673, this is the place where [the season] ends.' It comes down to case-by-case [decisions] with each story and how best to serve each character's story going forward."

And yes, Martin himself will be writing a third-season episode. The fan site Westeros has the details on that front.

Much more from my interview with D.B. Weiss will be posted here on Monday, in addition to my review of the third episode of the season.

Check out HuffPost TV's recent interview with "Game of Thrones" actor Kit Harington (Jon Snow) and check back here later in the week for an interview with Richard Madden (Robb Stark). For my reviews of the first two episodes of "Game of Thrones" Season 2, look here and here.

[Sophie Scholl]

So, now that episode 2 is out and people have had time to digest it, what are the thoughts?  I'm less than thrilled with the writers throwing in more changes and edits in one episode than the entirety of season 1.  I know they want to streamline things to some level, but at the same time I feel they're cutting it down too much to make it "approachable".  With a televised format, you have audio and visual cues with characters and plots to work with, unlike the literary format where everything is confined to words.  If the old adage that a picture is worth a thousand words, it would seem to behoove the writers to stick to the storyline of the book.  It would also damn the slow writing Martin, but that's another issue.

[katmai]

Having never read the books, i'm quite content.

[LaCroix]

I knew that'd be the reply...
But yeah. The Starks. They're quite unquestionably "the good guys"- a big point of the books being that being good and honorable gets you screwed over by those who play to win.

grrm's point throughout the point of view characters is that perspective matters most. we see the starks as the good guys because that is the view we are given. the first book painted jaime as an utter stereotypical villain in the first book, but the later books--that showed his point of view--introduced a new side to the character. we are even given hints, here and there, of how others view ned stark: a cold man, wholly unlikeable

Sure. I can think of plenty of awful people. But I can't think of that many people who were evil towards their own subjects for the LOLZ YAY.

ramsay is not a lord, but someone roose bolton has granted an extraordinary amount of power to. we do not know what will happen to ramsay should roose perish. do they follow ramsay, or do they follow roose? ramsay's friend, really a man in roose's pocket, implies who really is in power

So, now that episode 2 is out and people have had time to digest it, what are the thoughts?  I'm less than thrilled with the writers throwing in more changes and edits in one episode than the entirety of season 1.  I know they want to streamline things to some level, but at the same time I feel they're cutting it down too much to make it "approachable".  With a televised format, you have audio and visual cues with characters and plots to work with, unlike the literary format where everything is confined to words.  If the old adage that a picture is worth a thousand words, it would seem to behoove the writers to stick to the storyline of the book.  It would also damn the slow writing Martin, but that's another issue.

even in this thread i voiced some discontentment with how the show is portraying certain characters from the series. however, it is true that the game of thrones HBO series is not the same as the a song of ice and fire book series. they should be viewed separately, as the creators themselves have said. in that sense, i suppose we do not know the personalities or futures of any of the characters unless they are hinted at on screen

[Tamas]

Elizabeth Bathory?

Not to mention Vlad Dracula.

Isn't Vlad actully fairly well respected in Romania?

They are very short on historical figures of note, being a nation of mountain goatherders and bandits. So they take what they get. If it is a sadistic turncloak robber baron who is known worldwide, they go ahead and be proud of him.

[Razgovory]

You know I can't think of any really famous Romanians.

[Eddie Teach]

There aren't very many*. Though apparently, Edward G. Robinson and Johnny Weismuller are.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Romanians

*Famous Romanians that is. There's a crap ton of random strings of letters on this list.

[Viking]

There aren't very many*. Though apparently, Edward G. Robinson and Johnny Weismuller are.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Romanians

*Famous Romanians that is. There's a crap ton of random strings of letters on this list.

Nadia Comenici? You missed her?

[Razgovory]

There aren't very many*. Though apparently, Edward G. Robinson and Johnny Weismuller are.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Romanians

*Famous Romanians that is. There's a crap ton of random strings of letters on this list.

I didn't know either was born in Hungary.  Of course, one was Jewish and the other German...

[Eddie Teach]

Nadia Comenici? You missed her?

I neither read the whole list, nor listed every name I recognized.

[Jaron]

Tamas is bringing his Romania hate into our pure GoT thread.

Next he'll be posting ugly youtube videos of what Hungary will look like in 2020 backed by Magyar techno music.