Every time I see pictures from this show I want to see it.
Every time I see clips from this show I'm reminded why I don't want to see it.
Every time I read about the content of this show I feel even less inclined to see it.
"Sex is a part of normal life, so I want it in my shows." Yeah, but what about INCEST?
Is there a giant image bank of this show somewhere that I can just stuff into my reference folder? It's beautiful, but the show itself just doesn't catch my fancy.
there are historically quite a few incestuous monarchies... for example:
in ancient egyptian culture, the line of rule was passed down through the female line, if the son of a pharoah wanted to be ruler, he would wed his sister to do it.
the holy roman emperor Leopold I was granted a papal dispensation to be allowed to marry his niece.
the spanish monarchy had some problems with inbreeding a few hundred years ago.
the current british monarchs are third cousins, both of them being great great grandchildren of queen victoria.
to imply that incest doesn't occur is ludicrous, to imply it shouldn't occur is something completely different. part of the beauty of the written form of A Song of Ice and Fire, is just how gritty it is... it's very realistic for a fantasy saga. the good people suffer, the bad people prosper, the people you love most are ripped from your grasp while the people you hate seemingly get away with it. people plot, scheme, murder, and fuck their way to power, AND THATS HOW IT WAS HISTORICALLY.
i totally understand if your personal, political, or religious views on the subject give you a distaste toward it, but that's completely different to saying the content is poor for containing it.
I'd give the show another go Makkon, most of the gratuitous sex scenes can be skipped and after a while you kind of filter it out as background noise and start thinking about the characters and their respective houses. Not to mention the great scenerey, costumes, vfx and acting more than outshine the amount of boob and incest (the latter of which there is very little, limited to one couple only).
Even if you find the whole flesh stuff unsettling and unwarranted it's a small price of admission for a great book adaptation and in general a really good show
It's just like the little barrier of crazy ridicule one must go through for liking MLP :thumbup:
It's good we are using spoiler tags, but can we mark them from where they're from? Like what books? So people can know if they've read up to that point yet. :P
Every time I see pictures from this show I want to see it.
Every time I see clips from this show I'm reminded why I don't want to see it.
Every time I read about the content of this show I feel even less inclined to see it.
"Sex is a part of normal life
Agreed. It's trying to compete with Rome's level of smut (I guess this =ratings?). It's usually very brief though then its back to the awesomeness for the rest of the episode.
You're right, the show is gorgeous, and the third and second seasons especially.
I remember reading online about a father who edited the show to make it more suitable for his kid; maybe if you just want to gawk at the ridiculously sexy lighting and costumes and sets without all the content that you don't like, try to find a copy of that? I'm sure it's up somewhere.
If all you're bothered with is the sexuality than something's wrong. There are far, far more serious and adult issues regarding violence and oppression and such throughout the series which I'd consider to be a lot worse.
Just in this episode we've learned about an army built from castrated slaves trained to lose all identity and self-respect and inhibition. And part of their training was to murder a newborn child. Naked people engaging in some perfectly natural activities can't really compare to this.
Edit: so even without the nudity, I wouldn't let an underage kid watch any of the episodes.
lol thats pretty funny, concered about some nudity when there is graphic decapitations, disembowlments and throat slitting on a nearly semi episodic basis. remember kids: death, destruction and wanton viloence is perfectly ok but dont you dare show a titty or say some naughty words.
lol thats pretty funny, concered about some nudity when there is graphic decapitations, disembowlments and throat slitting on a nearly semi episodic basis. remember kids: death, destruction and wanton viloence is perfectly ok but dont you dare show a titty or say some naughty words.
99% of the time it's the Americans who get their panties in a twist at the first sign of sex, but have no problem whatsoever with violence, of any kind, no matter how gruesome.
The Brittish are the opposite; they're not inclined to bat an eye at any and all sex on the TV, but monocles pop and cucumber sandwiches are dropped at the first sign of violence.
*DISCLAIMER* That was a broad, generalizing statement about differences in society. *DISCLAIMER*
Thankfully, GoT manages to both appease and offend basically every label equally at all times.
yea thats pretty much what I have expereinced as well. here in canada its more towards the british style but depening on where you are and how religious your area is it can be the same prudish attitude towards nudity. never really understood that attitude.
anyways back on topic: thought the episode was pretty awesome, the scene with tyrion and his dad was great, and interesting to see the slave army and their back story. same great cinematography and acting as always.
Actually iam very happy the shows manages to bring both to the table quite graphic sex and violence because i don't think medias should be censored or should take themself back in any way. Iam happy neither Gaspar Noe, nor Shion Sono, Lars Von Trier or Thomas Vinterberg does so, instead going all out attack. It's adult Television concepted for adults it should treat people like adults. Instead of Sitcoms where i feel that Archer is the one show that treats me the most as a grown up.
Just in this episode we've learned about an army built from castrated slaves trained to lose all identity and self-respect and inhibition. And part of their training was to murder a newborn child. Naked people engaging in some perfectly natural activities can't really compare to this.
Yeah, Martin also has some weird baggage about eunuchs too. His imagination is a bizarre tapestry of weirdness for sure.
This debate over the double standards of violence being ok but nudity not is as old as modern society and we've never come to a tangible conclusion so let's just keep this about the show.
I'm a little disappointed with how insignificant Tyrion's scar is. The bridge of his nose comes down far enough to fit a gnarly scar there. The grotesqueness of the scar is referred to quite often in the books.
If all you're bothered with is the sexuality than something's wrong. There are far, far more serious and adult issues regarding violence and oppression and such throughout the series which I'd consider to be a lot worse.
Just in this episode we've learned about an army built from castrated slaves trained to lose all identity and self-respect and inhibition. And part of their training was to murder a newborn child. Naked people engaging in some perfectly natural activities can't really compare to this.
Edit: so even without the nudity, I wouldn't let an underage kid watch any of the episodes.
lol thats pretty funny, concered about some nudity when there is graphic decapitations, disembowlments and throat slitting on a nearly semi episodic basis. remember kids: death, destruction and wanton viloence is perfectly ok but dont you dare show a titty or say some naughty words.
Yeah, I think I lost all interest in this show. I'll go save a bunch of movie stills and be on my way.
Yeah, Martin also has some weird baggage about eunuchs too. His imagination is a bizarre tapestry of weirdness for sure.
Not to mention what the testosterone levels of the Unsullied might be without testicles... doesn't sound that practical.
Then again maybe on Westeros it works differently.
I'm a little disappointed with how insignificant Tyrion's scar is.
Not enough time and money to fit extensive prosthetics on the actor for each scene he's ever going to film?
Also, Tyrion was meant to be very ugly and Dinklage is - as far as I can tell - quite OK looking anyway.
In that case, don't ever, ever, ever try to read about what was going on in medieval Europe or in ancient Rome. Martin is actually quite light on the violence and decadence compared to what was actually being done by our real ancestors.
Yours too.
What a dumb thing to say. I don't want to watch a show that depicts these themes in high fidelity because that's the sort of visual content I choose to avoid. I love history, and I'm perfectly aware of all the completely messed up stuff that's happened. I just don't need to see it graphically depicted. It's not any more complicated than that. I just chose to regulate the sort of content I view.
It's good that some of us are not completely desensitized to excessive violence, shouldn't give people crap for wanting to steer clear of what they don't like tbh.
Also Makkon if you're building up a folder of great scenery and lighting etc from the show, could you possibly dropbox it for us lazy ones :P
Skamberin: I think I can do that! I haven't started it yet though, but when I do I'll post it up here. Cinemasquid is probably a good place to start, but they only have stuff from the first 2 episodes.
I felt Catelyn Starks monologue was unnecessary, so much book stuff they could have included instead. I don't mind them fleshing out the story a little more, I quite liked the crossbow scene, but not at the expense of content actually related to the book. Her schizophrenia doesn't pertain to anything in the future books, as far as I'm aware :P
Maybe the writer wanted to flesh her character out a little more, humanize her, before... the rest of this season unfolds.
Hey Makkon, I think maybe you've got the wrong idea about what Game of Thrones actually is.
I wouldn't concern yourself too much with the stuff about realistic sex and violence that's been discussed elsewhere. What Game of Thrones is, is Shakespearean. It's a drama about the politics of medieval kingdoms and war, plotting and scheme and metaphorical backstabbing (along with some literal). It's all about the dialogue, and that dialogue is extraordinarily well written.
There is some sex, some nudity and some strong violence but these are always in support of the story, and are never gratuitous, and all are limited by what can actually be shown on television (even on the more lenient HBO) and much more is implied than shown.
I actually like the way in which the series has been portraying Margery Tyrell. She doesn't get nearly as strong of a focus in the books. The novels do occasionally hint that she may be more clever than most of the characters realize. But in the series it is much more evident. I loved the crossbow scene from this week's episode. After hearing about some of Joffry's "proclivities" from Sansa, Margery uses that knowledge to get on her future husband's good side in a subtle way.
The scene from this season's first episode where Margery visits the orphanage was also fantastic. It wasn't just a matter of altruism. This act was a means for Margery to start winning the favor of the citizens of King's Landing. It was also an excellent strategy for undermining the current queen, Circe. (who is known for being unsympathetic and distant to the small-folk) Knowing that she was an outsider in the capital city, she took steps to make sure she had a positive first impression around town.
In the second season Margery's meaningful interactions were limited to Renly and Littlefinger. While some of those were interesting exchanges, here character didn't really get a chance to shine. Now that she's among the contentious Lannisters, she really has a chance to strut.
I didn't think that was so much of a spoiler... more like encouragement
And yeah, there are quite a few characters that benefited greatly from casting good actors that the producers then needed to give more screen time. Robert Baratheon and Cersei were like that, and to some extent Varys; and I think even Tywin was brought in sooner than in the book. Or there's Bronn.
Varga just keep in mind that some people have not read the books; congrats on doing so yourself but remember this is a public forum; please use tags and mark what book theyre from.
I still don't see where I've been spoiling anything in the last few posts. I always use spoiler tags where it's required but what the hell is wrong with mentioning that some scenes in series 1 were written for the show and aren't from the books?
agree with vargatom. and actually it happened in season 2 as well... and in such a way that while i'm moderately intrigued to see how they resolve it, i'm also incredibly concerned that in the show they've killed off people who are alive and very much in good health by the end of the 5th book. and important too.
Just curious but how closely does the show follow the books? Is it pretty faithful where each season covers the major story-beats of each book? Or is it more like the Walking Dead where they happen to go to the same places but who gets there and what happens next is entirely up for grabs?
Just curious but how closely does the show follow the books? Is it pretty faithful where each season covers the major story-beats of each book? Or is it more like the Walking Dead where they happen to go to the same places but who gets there and what happens next is entirely up for grabs?
Its pretty close to the books though I've noticed they introduce characters differently. Example, the reed kids are actually introduced at Winterfell and for example the show totally skipped the part where Jaime and Brienne go to Haranhall. Also Jaime is supposed to have his head shaved :P
At the end of the first episode of season 3, they re-introduce ser Barristan Selmy (the old man who rescues Dany). in the books, you don't know his true identity for some time even though he's been in their company.
an example of them not following the books at all (heavy spoilers):
Dany goes into the house of the undying, and is told before she enters "always take the first door on the right, always". so she does, and in each room she halucinates more and more, until she sees a vision of her eldest brother Rhaegar Targaryen delivering a prophecy over a baby, whilst looking directly at her (dany) and saying "hers is the song of ice and fire".
the undying warlocks are burned by her dragons which weren't captive, but sensed Dany was in trouble and tore through the roof of the building to get to her (the warlocks tried to kill her).
they were not the only warlocks, and not all of them died. and she didn't kill xaro xhoan daxos either. this is especially important as he is one of the nobles who declares war on her in the later books, and his role in the war is also fairly important.
At the end of the first episode of season 3, they re-introduce ser Barristan Selmy (the old man who rescues Dany). in the books, you don't know his true identity for some time even though he's been in their company.
Wonder why they did that. I think that added to the suspense as who was Whitebeard and how did he know so much about Westeros
I wonder how they're gonna introduce Strong Belwas. Not sure if this is really a spoiler but will be safe.
Wonder why they did that. I think that added to the suspense as who was Whitebeard and how did he know so much about Westeros
I wonder how they're gonna introduce Strong Belwas. Not sure if this is really a spoiler but will be safe.
They did it to shorten the story. The third book in the series is immense. They are going to need to cut out any non-critical story elements in order to fit the tale into the TV series. Don't expect to see Strong Belwas showing up. They will most likely write him out.
I would imagine they also did it because anybody who watched season 1 would know who he is anyway. I had forgotten his name at the time but as soon as he removed the hood I was like "awwwww yeah, wondered if he'd be back!"
an example of them not following the books at all (heavy spoilers):
Dany goes into the house of the undying, and is told before she enters "always take the first door on the right, always". so she does, and in each room she halucinates more and more, until she sees a vision of her eldest brother Rhaegar Targaryen delivering a prophecy over a baby, whilst looking directly at her (dany) and saying "hers is the song of ice and fire".
the undying warlocks are burned by her dragons which weren't captive, but sensed Dany was in trouble and tore through the roof of the building to get to her (the warlocks tried to kill her).
they were not the only warlocks, and not all of them died. and she didn't kill xaro xhoan daxos either. this is especially important as he is one of the nobles who declares war on her in the later books, and his role in the war is also fairly important.
Just regarding this last bit
How vital to the later books is it that Daxos is one of those nobles? Since technically she only left him for dead in the vault, we never saw him die.
The writers move around character introductions/deaths and combine multiple characters into one person because the cast in the books is beyond huge. GoT already has about 50-60 named characters per season and more than 20 of them are billed and all. They just can't go up to the hundreds of people named in each of the individual books.
You can not expect an audience to remember that many, especially because they consume the story in weekly doses, and may follow a dozen other shows weekly as well.
You also cannot give enough screentime to that many characters - even now they only have about 20-40 minutes per season or so (and that's just because in practice they're sharing scenes with at least 1-2 others).
The budget for actors, costumes and make-up is also limited and the show is already pretty damn expensive.
Also, Martin was trying to be very realistic in the writing, as in reality there's always a lot of people involved with everything. But this also resulted in some of the characters being pretty thin, boring, or limited to just one purpose.
A good counter example in the show is Thoros of Myr introduced in the last episode. He combines attributes of at least 2, maybe 3 characters from the book already, and will probably combine their actions and roles. He's also someone who's been originally introduced in the first book at the Hand's tournament, but hasn't really had much to do until book 3.
So the writers have given him a more interesting personality and more screentime, and managed to cast an actor with more charisma as well. They've delayed his introduction to the point in time when he becomes truly relevant, because there's a limited number of secondary characters to include.
They may also kill anyone off if they've fulfilled their roles and the writers are certain that they won't need him/her again, in order to free up room for more new characters that will become relevant in the next season.
Also, the show follows the plot of the books very closely, with very few significant differences. All in all it's a very faithful adaptation that's able to both stand on its own and still be enjoyable for the readers of the books.
and she didn't kill xaro xhoan daxos either. this is especially important as he is one of the nobles who declares war on her in the later books, and his role in the war is also fairly important.
It never showed him dying. Now he has a reason to make a twist reappearance for the audience, and has an easy reason to declare war on her.
for example the show totally skipped the part where Jaime and Brienne go to Haranhall.
They go to Harrenhall after they fight eachother and get captured. The episode ends with them fighting eachother and getting captured. It's safe to say they're going to be in Harrenhall soon, especially based on the previews.
The difference is that they were supposed to have a third character with them (a minor Lannister cousin who doesn't seem to add much and quickly dies - no wonder they didn't bother casting someone there), they were chased on boat by Tully men (which would have taken a while to show and added more to the budget), and their sword fight was supposed to be a lot more evenly matched to Brianne's surprise (which goes to show how skilled Jaime was with a sword in his hands, seeing how he was held captive for more than a year and was bound during the fight). And of course it wasn't the Bolton's who captured him in the books, but that's another understandable change as otherwise they'd have to spend more money to cast the bloody mummers for a few seasons, drag out Ayra's arc in order to introduce them and give them a reason for being at Harrenhall, and so on. It's much more efficient to just establish that the Boltons are now at Harrenhall while Rob leaves for Riverrun, and let any minor villains that might need to get introduced for a few scenes do so as Bolton men.
Also, the show follows the plot of the books very closely, with very few significant differences. All in all it's a very faithful adaptation that's able to both stand on its own and still be enjoyable for the readers of the books.
Totally agree here. The show is immensely enjoyable even if you know the books. And if you know the show, the books will add depth to the story and the world and add just so many details and sub plots.
no Belwas - so I guess Daario will do the single combat at Mereen instead of him. It actually makes a lot of sense as he could try to woo Dany with the fight; and then he could maybe even the poisoning stuff later on.
They did it to shorten the story. The third book in the series is immense. They are going to need to cut out any non-critical story elements in order to fit the tale into the TV series. Don't expect to see Strong Belwas showing up. They will most likely write him out.
from what ive been told they are making season 3 and 4 the 3rd book so hopefully they dont have to cut too much.
Yup. If you haven't - read the books! The show is excellent, but it's just an open window that allows you a short glimpse on the rich world of Westeros. Even though the books are very strong in when describing characters, the also do a great job at fleshing out the world, adding details about Wester's culture, customs, history, art, religion... all things that are barely touched by the show. I think that's where the real magic comes from. On top of great characters you have a world as detailed as Tolkien's (but imho even more exciting)
Replies
Every time I see clips from this show I'm reminded why I don't want to see it.
Every time I read about the content of this show I feel even less inclined to see it.
"Sex is a part of normal life, so I want it in my shows." Yeah, but what about INCEST?
Is there a giant image bank of this show somewhere that I can just stuff into my reference folder? It's beautiful, but the show itself just doesn't catch my fancy.
there are historically quite a few incestuous monarchies... for example:
in ancient egyptian culture, the line of rule was passed down through the female line, if the son of a pharoah wanted to be ruler, he would wed his sister to do it.
the holy roman emperor Leopold I was granted a papal dispensation to be allowed to marry his niece.
the spanish monarchy had some problems with inbreeding a few hundred years ago.
the current british monarchs are third cousins, both of them being great great grandchildren of queen victoria.
to imply that incest doesn't occur is ludicrous, to imply it shouldn't occur is something completely different. part of the beauty of the written form of A Song of Ice and Fire, is just how gritty it is... it's very realistic for a fantasy saga. the good people suffer, the bad people prosper, the people you love most are ripped from your grasp while the people you hate seemingly get away with it. people plot, scheme, murder, and fuck their way to power, AND THATS HOW IT WAS HISTORICALLY.
i totally understand if your personal, political, or religious views on the subject give you a distaste toward it, but that's completely different to saying the content is poor for containing it.
Even if you find the whole flesh stuff unsettling and unwarranted it's a small price of admission for a great book adaptation and in general a really good show
It's just like the little barrier of crazy ridicule one must go through for liking MLP :thumbup:
Or, if you don't care enough to read night and day, then you don't care about being spoiled either.
Agreed. It's trying to compete with Rome's level of smut (I guess this =ratings?). It's usually very brief though then its back to the awesomeness for the rest of the episode.
You're right, the show is gorgeous, and the third and second seasons especially.
I remember reading online about a father who edited the show to make it more suitable for his kid; maybe if you just want to gawk at the ridiculously sexy lighting and costumes and sets without all the content that you don't like, try to find a copy of that? I'm sure it's up somewhere.
Just in this episode we've learned about an army built from castrated slaves trained to lose all identity and self-respect and inhibition. And part of their training was to murder a newborn child. Naked people engaging in some perfectly natural activities can't really compare to this.
Edit: so even without the nudity, I wouldn't let an underage kid watch any of the episodes.
99% of the time it's the Americans who get their panties in a twist at the first sign of sex, but have no problem whatsoever with violence, of any kind, no matter how gruesome.
The Brittish are the opposite; they're not inclined to bat an eye at any and all sex on the TV, but monocles pop and cucumber sandwiches are dropped at the first sign of violence.
*DISCLAIMER* That was a broad, generalizing statement about differences in society. *DISCLAIMER*
Thankfully, GoT manages to both appease and offend basically every label equally at all times.
anyways back on topic: thought the episode was pretty awesome, the scene with tyrion and his dad was great, and interesting to see the slave army and their back story. same great cinematography and acting as always.
Yeah, Martin also has some weird baggage about eunuchs too. His imagination is a bizarre tapestry of weirdness for sure.
This debate over the double standards of violence being ok but nudity not is as old as modern society and we've never come to a tangible conclusion so let's just keep this about the show.
I'm a little disappointed with how insignificant Tyrion's scar is. The bridge of his nose comes down far enough to fit a gnarly scar there. The grotesqueness of the scar is referred to quite often in the books.
Yeah, I think I lost all interest in this show. I'll go save a bunch of movie stills and be on my way.
Not to mention what the testosterone levels of the Unsullied might be without testicles... doesn't sound that practical.
Then again maybe on Westeros it works differently.
Not enough time and money to fit extensive prosthetics on the actor for each scene he's ever going to film?
Also, Tyrion was meant to be very ugly and Dinklage is - as far as I can tell - quite OK looking anyway.
Yours too.
Also Makkon if you're building up a folder of great scenery and lighting etc from the show, could you possibly dropbox it for us lazy ones :P
Maybe the writer wanted to flesh her character out a little more, humanize her, before... the rest of this season unfolds.
Well, based on book 3, in a few weeks time the pace will pick up... or rather, it's gonna tear your head off
but yes--it should get interesting quick.
I wouldn't concern yourself too much with the stuff about realistic sex and violence that's been discussed elsewhere. What Game of Thrones is, is Shakespearean. It's a drama about the politics of medieval kingdoms and war, plotting and scheme and metaphorical backstabbing (along with some literal). It's all about the dialogue, and that dialogue is extraordinarily well written.
There is some sex, some nudity and some strong violence but these are always in support of the story, and are never gratuitous, and all are limited by what can actually be shown on television (even on the more lenient HBO) and much more is implied than shown.
The scene from this season's first episode where Margery visits the orphanage was also fantastic. It wasn't just a matter of altruism. This act was a means for Margery to start winning the favor of the citizens of King's Landing. It was also an excellent strategy for undermining the current queen, Circe. (who is known for being unsympathetic and distant to the small-folk) Knowing that she was an outsider in the capital city, she took steps to make sure she had a positive first impression around town.
In the second season Margery's meaningful interactions were limited to Renly and Littlefinger. While some of those were interesting exchanges, here character didn't really get a chance to shine. Now that she's among the contentious Lannisters, she really has a chance to strut.
And yeah, there are quite a few characters that benefited greatly from casting good actors that the producers then needed to give more screen time. Robert Baratheon and Cersei were like that, and to some extent Varys; and I think even Tywin was brought in sooner than in the book. Or there's Bronn.
Its pretty close to the books though I've noticed they introduce characters differently. Example, the reed kids are actually introduced at Winterfell and for example the show totally skipped the part where Jaime and Brienne go to Haranhall. Also Jaime is supposed to have his head shaved :P
At the end of the first episode of season 3, they re-introduce ser Barristan Selmy (the old man who rescues Dany). in the books, you don't know his true identity for some time even though he's been in their company.
an example of them not following the books at all (heavy spoilers):
the undying warlocks are burned by her dragons which weren't captive, but sensed Dany was in trouble and tore through the roof of the building to get to her (the warlocks tried to kill her).
they were not the only warlocks, and not all of them died. and she didn't kill xaro xhoan daxos either. this is especially important as he is one of the nobles who declares war on her in the later books, and his role in the war is also fairly important.
Wonder why they did that. I think that added to the suspense as who was Whitebeard and how did he know so much about Westeros
They did it to shorten the story. The third book in the series is immense. They are going to need to cut out any non-critical story elements in order to fit the tale into the TV series. Don't expect to see Strong Belwas showing up. They will most likely write him out.
Just regarding this last bit
You can not expect an audience to remember that many, especially because they consume the story in weekly doses, and may follow a dozen other shows weekly as well.
You also cannot give enough screentime to that many characters - even now they only have about 20-40 minutes per season or so (and that's just because in practice they're sharing scenes with at least 1-2 others).
The budget for actors, costumes and make-up is also limited and the show is already pretty damn expensive.
Also, Martin was trying to be very realistic in the writing, as in reality there's always a lot of people involved with everything. But this also resulted in some of the characters being pretty thin, boring, or limited to just one purpose.
A good counter example in the show is Thoros of Myr introduced in the last episode. He combines attributes of at least 2, maybe 3 characters from the book already, and will probably combine their actions and roles. He's also someone who's been originally introduced in the first book at the Hand's tournament, but hasn't really had much to do until book 3.
So the writers have given him a more interesting personality and more screentime, and managed to cast an actor with more charisma as well. They've delayed his introduction to the point in time when he becomes truly relevant, because there's a limited number of secondary characters to include.
They may also kill anyone off if they've fulfilled their roles and the writers are certain that they won't need him/her again, in order to free up room for more new characters that will become relevant in the next season.
Also, the show follows the plot of the books very closely, with very few significant differences. All in all it's a very faithful adaptation that's able to both stand on its own and still be enjoyable for the readers of the books.
The difference is that they were supposed to have a third character with them (a minor Lannister cousin who doesn't seem to add much and quickly dies - no wonder they didn't bother casting someone there), they were chased on boat by Tully men (which would have taken a while to show and added more to the budget), and their sword fight was supposed to be a lot more evenly matched to Brianne's surprise (which goes to show how skilled Jaime was with a sword in his hands, seeing how he was held captive for more than a year and was bound during the fight). And of course it wasn't the Bolton's who captured him in the books, but that's another understandable change as otherwise they'd have to spend more money to cast the bloody mummers for a few seasons, drag out Ayra's arc in order to introduce them and give them a reason for being at Harrenhall, and so on. It's much more efficient to just establish that the Boltons are now at Harrenhall while Rob leaves for Riverrun, and let any minor villains that might need to get introduced for a few scenes do so as Bolton men.
Totally agree here. The show is immensely enjoyable even if you know the books. And if you know the show, the books will add depth to the story and the world and add just so many details and sub plots.
Because we can clearly see his face in TV format :P
Also,
from what ive been told they are making season 3 and 4 the 3rd book so hopefully they dont have to cut too much.
Curse my imagination haha! Definitely agree with the books adding that little bit of extra lore for the characters.