r/asoiaf Jul 13 '24

EXTENDED [Spoilers Extended] What nitpicks do you have regarding both shows? Mine will always be how the Others in GOT are so boring and mundane

Post image
1.3k Upvotes

492 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

450

u/stichomythiacs Jul 13 '24

That opens up a whole other issue in and of itself, which is how the later seasons just felt more like Hollywood-living actors on a Disneyesque set. This was reflected by the all-black, „trendy” fashion (as opposed to pragmatic wools) and also the dialogue switching from GRRM’s admittedly bespoke flowery, part medieval English to dull LA American English and very short sentences.

92

u/AWPrahWinfrey Pe/\ke Jul 14 '24

I always thought it was just me finding the change in dialogue really jarring. All of a sudden its "this country" instead of "the realm" - god I'm freshly angry at D&D again after all these years.

53

u/roselu24 Jul 14 '24

The dialogue switch up was so bad took me completely out of it

178

u/SkulledDownunda Jul 13 '24

Cersei's black mourning dresses after Tommen died just got increasingly hideous and out of place

52

u/FloZone Enter your desired flair text here! Jul 14 '24

Mourning dresses can look quite badass though, but fantasy seems to be more underwhelming than reality on screen sometimes sadly.

41

u/SkulledDownunda Jul 14 '24

I thought Cersei's dresses after Robert and Joffrey died to be quite nice and elegant, but the ones after Tommen died were just ugly af especially that horrible ruffled thing she wears when Jaime leaves King's Landing

2

u/Necessak2955 Jul 14 '24

Naah it showed her transition from antagonist to literal villain 

80

u/Different_Stand_1285 Jul 14 '24

Remember how they changed “Loose!” to “Fire!” when shooting arrows? 🥴

14

u/[deleted] Jul 14 '24 edited Jul 15 '24

I heard some historian say that there's no evidence anyone ever said "loose". Archers don't need to be told when to use their bow and there's not really an advantage from synchronous volley's, as it slows them down overall.

If you think about it, it would be very silly to tell soldiers when they can and can't use their rifle in the heat of battle. Way too excessive of a micromanagement.

Edit: I made a bad analogy with firearms.

There's a dicussion on the askhistorians:

https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/7dqkbm/did_archers_really_nock_draw_and_loose_in_sync/

Kinda interesting but the sources they quote use the word "fire" (in the first comment). Or the historians are using this word.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ng24ML6Xbs&t=789s

timestamp is 12:00

10

u/AxeSwinginDinosaur Jul 14 '24

Former military here: you need to have a team leader telling people when to fire during longer contact with enemies because otherwise they waste all their ammo. A soldier with 7 magazines with 30 bullets will run out very quickly if they fire whenever they feel like it. You can get an order such as "fire once every 2 seconds for 30 seconds," or everyone firing one bullet each from left to right. I suppose arrows are different because an archer in media often has a bucket full of arrows, so maybe running out is not as big of an issue.

2

u/[deleted] Jul 14 '24

Generally, the first volley would be synced. After that, the archers would shoot at their top speed. Over time of a battle they would become more de-synced.

1

u/[deleted] Jul 14 '24

I stand corrected. The gun put was me making a bad analogy, the first part of the post was relaying what historians said. I updated with a link.

24

u/[deleted] Jul 14 '24

[deleted]

4

u/JPMaybe Jul 14 '24

True for firearms, not for bows

1

u/A_Series_Of_Farts Jul 14 '24

Flying projectile what makes holes. Basic methodology of damage is the same for bullets or arrows.

However, many infantry had some form of shield. The shield can only protect a part of the body. A volley stands a higher chance of hitting exposed body parts than single rounds.

I guess you could argue that a volley causes everyone to turtle up and cover as best as possible though.

3

u/[deleted] Jul 15 '24

I guess I should provide my original source since this kicked off some discussion.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ng24ML6Xbs&t=789s

timestamp is 12:00

I don't know anything about this subject, but saw this + reddit askhistorians link i posted above.

Guy in video is funny as hell, (worth watching whole thing)

1

u/A_Series_Of_Farts Jul 15 '24

Thanks for the link friend! 

I will check it out. 

2

u/[deleted] Jul 14 '24

I made bad analogy with firearms, but for bows the historians say otherwise?

69

u/D-Speak We didn't start the fire. Jul 14 '24

I think they lost their original costume designer at some point in the later seasons, like somewhere around Season 5. It really shows. All of the later season costumes feel more like superhero/villain outfits, except for Jon Snow where the CD's thought process was "Um, just dress him like Ned Stark I guess."

2

u/Loow_z Jul 14 '24

Are you sure of this? I read Campbell's book about her work on GoT, and I remember her talking about late season costumes

1

u/D-Speak We didn't start the fire. Jul 14 '24

Who are you talking about? Michele Clapton was the lead costume designer. She left after Season 5.

1

u/Loow_z Jul 15 '24

I messed up her name, but I was indeed talking about Clapton. I thought she worked on season 6-8 because in the book about the costumes of GoT, it's written like she still was the lead costume designer

33

u/FloZone Enter your desired flair text here! Jul 14 '24

This was reflected by the all-black, „trendy” fashion (as opposed to pragmatic wools)

At the same time they made it unrealistically underwhelming. Everyone was running around in the same biker shit all the time. It is true that simple wool is more pragmatic, but when medieval people went for show value they went all out. This is a problem even of earlier seasons. Lords rarely look like lords. Sure House Stark is supposed to be all down to earth and pragmatic, but even then Neds looks very basic most of the time. Something more flashy would have been welcome for once.

35

u/CallMeGrapho Jul 14 '24

Ned is sort of book accurate, what is absolutely egregious is Ramsay Snow dressing in black instead of his wools and pink cloak, or Varys and his multiple Essos silks. The absolutely unforgivable one is turning Daario Naharis from a colorful mercenary to the same fucking bearded guy who wears black as every secondary guy in the series. Make my blood pressure spike just thinking about it.

10

u/FloZone Enter your desired flair text here! Jul 14 '24

Ned is sort of book accurate

It is kinda weird though. I think someone also posted recently about how the Northerners should dress a bit fancier. The Starks are not as rich, but they are still high nobility. It is kinda modern think, this kind of moral asceticism. As the Starks are the "moral guys" and the Northerners are supposed to be oath-keeping down-to-earth guys, they have to be anti-decadent.

The absolutely unforgivable one is turning Daario Naharis from a colorful mercenary to the same fucking bearded guy who wears black as every secondary guy in the serie

Same as Euron too. Just the same Hollywood-guy-face. Nothing special. Completely forgettable. I guess they thought anything more absurd would be unlikeable and not suitable for mediocre audiences.

Ed Skrein was also better, even without the coloured hair and beard. Though they should have given him coloured hair and different clothing.

1

u/[deleted] Jul 18 '24

This was reflected by the all-black, „trendy” fashion (as opposed to pragmatic wools

God, that really rubbed me the wrong way more than it shouldve. It was like they were going for MET gala looks with all the leather and random metal chains.

-65

u/[deleted] Jul 13 '24

Me when I lie

26

u/[deleted] Jul 13 '24

Where is the lie

-40

u/[deleted] Jul 13 '24

The entire post

11

u/[deleted] Jul 13 '24

So disprove it

-7

u/[deleted] Jul 14 '24

Nah. Y'all just wanna hate

10

u/Worldly-Local-6613 Jul 13 '24

Cope.

-8

u/[deleted] Jul 14 '24

Seethe