Movies

House of the Dragon is breaking hard with its source material, which is exciting but dangerous

BBG News

House of the Dragon is breaking hard with its source material, which is exciting but dangerous

As a longtime fan of George R.R. Martin’s intricate world-building and character development, I’ve been both thrilled and disappointed by the adaptation of “House of the Dragon.” Having read the books multiple times and eagerly awaiting each new installment, my expectations were high for this prequel series.

In more simplified terms, “Smallfolk,” the latest installment of “House of the Dragon” (this season), stood out as one of the strongest episodes: long-awaited storylines from earlier in the season unfurled, the abundance of intriguing characters shone, and the tension between them sizzled. To top it off, a dragon exacted a lethal punishment on an unfortunate soul who dared to trespass. All in all, an engaging episode worth watching.

The production of the show diverged more and more from George R.R. Martin’s “Fire & Blood” book as it progressed. Some of the differences, listed in approximate order of significance, are as follows:

  • In Fire & Blood, Otto Hightower has the idea to contact the Triarchy, old enemies of Daemon Targaryen and Corlys Velaryon, and bring them in on the side of the Greens. On the show, Otto’s grandson and prince regent Aemond Targaryen gets that idea.
  • Daemon Targaryen’s stay at Harrenhal little resembles his time at the crumbling Riverlands castle as laid out in Fire & Blood. There, Daemon sweeps into the Riverlands and has almost no trouble raising an army. Alys Rivers is a Harrenhal wet nurse who doesn’t do much of importance at this point in the story. On House of the Dragon, Daemon’s attempts to raise an army have failed at every turn, and Alys is a healer who may well have been the deciding factor in getting things to turn around.
  • In the book, a peasant named Nettles befriends and mounts a dragon named Sheepstealer, who lives on Dragonstone with the other wild dragons. On the show, it looks like Daemon’s daughter Rhaena will encounter that dragon instead. We can’t be certain, but it’s looking more and more like Nettles has been cut from the story entirely. Also, the dragon now lives in the Vale.

In his latest blog post about dragons in his novels, George R.R. Martin mentioned that they rarely venture far from warm locations such as Dragonstone. He added that dragons aren’t present in areas like the Riverlands, Reach, or Vale according to the books. The recent episode of the show introduced new elements, including a plotline where Rhaenyra and Mysaria win over King’s Landing’s people by distributing food. This event leads to a mob uprising. In the books, there is no mention of a romance between Rhaenyra and Mysaria, making this an unexplored area as well.

The Adaptation Tango

Changing the original content for a new format like “House of the Dragons” is common and acceptable. However, an excessive number of modifications are causing concern as the show’s track record with this approach has been uneven.

I’ve appreciated some changes in the story. Although the riot among the smallfolk in King’s Landing under Green’s rule might not be from the book, I found Mysaria and Rhaenyra’s scheme inventive. The scene where food was transported via uncrewed rowboats was quite cinematic, and it allowed us to experience minor characters like Hugh Hammer and Ulf White in a fresh perspective. Furthermore, the tension between Alicent and Helaena during the riot was genuinely frightening.

I’m equally captivated by the blossoming relationship between Rhaenyra and Mysaria. Their unexpected kiss took me by surprise, yet their scenes throughout the season had left me eagerly anticipating this romantic turn of events. Such a plot twist is exemplary: surprising yet logically consistent.

Although some other modifications have not worked out for me, I’ve reached my limit with Daemon’s prolonged stay at Harrenhal in the show. The recurring dreams are becoming excessive, and I find it confusing why the writers aim to portray Daemon as weak and unskilled. His storyline lacks suspense; when Aemond mentions Daemon as a danger or when Daemon declares his intention to seize the Iron Throne personally, I fail to be convinced due to his poor performance in these situations. It’s worth noting that in the book, Daemon is depicted as an experienced warrior, making this deliberate change by the writers.

When I read this, it brings to mind a quote by George R.R. Martin from his blog post titled “The Adaptation Tango.” In his own words, he said, “All of you who prefer books to movies or vice versa, show your hands. Now, put them down, because every one of you is wrong.” This resonates with me as a gamer, as I too have my preferences, but understand that each medium has its unique strengths and weaknesses. The experience of reading a book and playing a game is distinct from watching a movie or TV show. Therefore, instead of constantly comparing and declaring one superior to the other, let’s appreciate and enjoy them for what they are.

Everywhere you look, there are more screenwriters and producers eager to take great stories and “make them their own.” It does not seem to matter whether the source material was written by Stan Lee, Charles Dickens, Ian Fleming, Roald Dahl, Ursula K. Le Guin, J.R.R. Tolkien, Mark Twain, Raymond Chandler, Jane Austen, or… well, anyone. No matter how major a writer it is, no matter how great the book, there always seems to be someone on hand who thinks he can do better, eager to take the story and “improve” on it. “The book is the book, the film is the film,” they will tell you, as if they were saying something profound. Then they make the story their own.

They never make it better, though. Nine hundred ninety-nine times out of a thousand, they make it worse.

George R.R. Martin has expressed his appreciation for the “Shogun” series on various occasions, as evident from his heartfelt compliments. Regarding “House of the Dragon,” it’s unlikely that Martin is criticizing the show based on these positive remarks. Many people can resonate with Martin’s perspective. Why do some adaptations insist on altering elements that already work flawlessly?

Will House of the Dragon end like Game of Thrones?

In the initial run of “House of the Dragon,” the creators generally stuck to the storyline of “Fire & Blood.” However, when they deviated, the results were less compelling. For example, in the source material, Criston Cole kills knight Joffrey Lonmouth at a tournament without repercussion since such accidents occur frequently during such perilous events. Consequently, he remains on the Kingsguard.

At the wedding event on the program, Criston kills Joffrey in an unmistakable and lethal manner. This act rules out any possibility for him to claim it was an accident or that things had gotten out of control. Surprisingly, he escapes without any punishment whatsoever. It’s a baffling turn of events that brings to mind another quote by George R.R. Martin: “Fantasy shouldn’t be a free pass for anything; it requires grounding…Disregard the established rules, and your fabricated universe risks falling apart like fragile tissue paper.” Criston’s violent act certainly strained the world of “House of the Dragon,” but it didn’t cause it to collapse entirely.

Since that time, the transformations have grown more extensive and occurred more frequently in “House of the Dragon,” much like its precursor series “Game of Thrones” deviated increasingly from George R.R. Martin’s “Song of Ice and Fire” books as it progressed. As Martin himself puts it regarding “Thrones”: “Divergences between the novels and the television show have existed since the initial episode of season one. And for just as long, I’ve been discussing the butterfly effect. Small variations give rise to larger alterations which ultimately lead to significant shifts…Now, we find ourselves at a juncture where the fluttering of a butterfly’s wings is instigating tempests.”

Is it debatable if a adaptation truly remains one when all recognized elements from the original work are altered? I personally don’t find it problematic as long as the outcome is engaging. In fact, some of the most memorable scenes on “Game of Thrones,” such as Cersei Lannister’s destruction of the Sept of Baelor in the season 6 finale, were either exclusive to television or heavily influenced by the source material.

After that point, the saga of “Game of Thrones” persisted. It went on for so long that it became one of the most controversially ended TV series, sparking intense backlash that overshadowed any potential final explosion. While not entirely its fault – as the creators had exhausted their source material by then – this situation serves as a reminder of the risks involved when adaptors feel compelled or choose to alter a story.

I have concerns that “House of the Dragon” might stray too far from the solid foundation of “Fire & Blood,” risking a collapse. Some alterations have been exhilarating, while others have underdelivered, leaving me with mixed feelings. For instance, I’m disappointed to see Nettles depart from the show, but eagerly anticipate Rhaena’s storyline unfolding. The journey remains engaging for now, but the more the series strays from familiar terrain, the higher the risk of a catastrophic fall. So buckle up and hold on tight!

Read More

2024-07-22 17:41

Previous post Team Penske just had one of the most disastrous laps in IndyCar history
Next post Emily In Paris season four trailer: Lily Collins’ character embraces newly-single life as she tries to steer clear of THAT love triangle… but will she find her way back to Alfie or Gabriel?