EricMontreal22

LOL Seriously, what lesson were we meant to take away with us after episode four?

TBL: Scandal is a big show right now. Do you think viewers should compare that show with this one? AO: I think parts of Scandal can compared to our show but I think the way Tyler Perry and Oprah Winfrey operate, they always want somebody to take away something from the show. I think that’s the difference, the difference in Scandal and The Haves and The Have Nots is that there are life lessons and messages to be learned in every single episode and in every single character. LOL http://www.thebacklot.com/watch-bro-hunts-mo-on-new-o-show/06/2013/

I agreed with everything you said--until this part. There's zero question that the show (especially early on) had more female nudity than male--and often the examples of male nudity they have had have been for comic reasons. I agree on the nudity, frankly and I *love* the show. I think there are many instances--particularly early on where it jumps out and distracts me from the scene. OK, I know you hate the changes from the book but 35%? C'mon! Then I apologize for mis-reading you. I think I expected some scandal like she had had an infamous affair or something.

"And. The. Pauses. Between. Characters. When. They. Speak. WTF? The first scene that bugged me was in the 2nd episode when Jim and Peter Parros (p.s. ill need to see a shirtless scene for him too, just to see how he's holding up) were in the office and it progressed so slowly with so many pauses. I thought to myself, geez at least add some background music or SOMETHING to get this scene movin'!" So glad someone agrees with me on both points. That scene was THE worst example. And yes, the long gaps between answers in conversations it's like they all have earpieces on and are waiting to hear their lines. Hahah I love how telegraphed that moment was from the first scene.

Did anything even happen in this episode? For a weekly show, this is SLOOOOOOOOOW

Thanks! I actually read that right after I made the post and googled Martin and the series. I know a few people on here would disagree, but I think--especially with Martin's guidance, the show would be wise to go in its own--slightly different--direction... As I've said on here, the plot changes *nearly all* make story sense to me and actually tighten the story. I appreciate how much people want fidelity to the novels--but I think that could be a mistake, and amalgamating some characters and situations makes a lot of sense. Everyone seems to say how the people who don't know the novels and merely watch the show don't even know half the character names. I don't think that's a fault (maybe I'm at fault, when I read the novels at this point I have to write down notes and charts about families--and ultimately it makes me find reading them a chore....) I think David Benioff and D. Weiss have done a remarkable job with adapting the series and I trust them to continue. There are things in the show I HATE--but so much that I love and do feel is groundbreaking. I wish they would hire better scriptwriters (they write as many of their own scripts as Weiner does for Mad Men, and I think his scripts are always better when someone is written as a co-writer.)

I think it is a younger generational thing (though I remember my parents going to wine tastings, when I was a kid)--have others on here recently gone? It is nice (and I think actually this is one reason Game of Thrones is bigger than maybe it should be--the event episodes, etc) and something I have not experiences in ages--even when I was really into serialized female based anime shows as a teen like Fushigi Yuugi or Rose of Versailles, my two experiences at going to conferences basically made me think I was the only person who enjoyed that. Still--websites like this have been a godsend. (Carl, a close friend of mine who name checks anything I say say with a comparison to an TNG episode has actually persuaded me to watch the series... I'm three episodes in.) As to your spoiler--I have not read that far in the book, and I wonder if the show would do that--but someone on the wine tour DID explain all that aspect (I wanted to throw my wine at her ). I wonder if that character will play a part in the show. I wouldn't mind, given the great performance from the actor. Why don't you watch GOT?

Robb, to me was much more appealing in the show than in the books. This may be because he's not one of the POV characters in the books--or simply that I find the actor very attractive and charismatic. The Dany stuff is hard because its progression is so slow in the books--and the show wants to keep her center (as it should--I think the books should have more--and I admit here, without giving any spoilers I am barely into the fifth book.) Her move on events is a slow build, regardless of the pacing of books vs movies and it's hard not to make her scenes redundant. I thought her story had a number of great scene this season, though, and I was more happy with it than last year. Except for a few plot details I see as minor (and others on here, fairly, see as major) I think we're actually fairly close to the end of book three--at least two thirds. I think that's one reason the actual finale seemed to force some cliffhangers and conclusions which weren't that interesting. From now on I suspect they'll combine the books more so (and they'll have to given what a SLOG it was to get through book four despite how much I love one of the new characters.)

Ok that makes me feel better--thanks Carl for the link, and Julia for explaining. I was expecting some sort of horrible scandal--and while I think I'm good at separating actors from their roles, for some reason (maybe because she's never been a top name) this actually had me worried. In more GOT news, a good friend of mine won a contest for a wine tasting tour here on Vancouver Island, and I took the day off work with her to take it with her. What was funny to me, especially after we had gone to one of 12 (!) vineyards in the bus they provided, was just how many people watch this show (there were 24 of us in the limo/bus and all but two were regular viewers) and how differently everyone felt about it. I admit it was really fun to discuss a show I love to watch with people in real life (not that I don't think of most of you as people in real life...) and to hear how much everyone agreed with me about how they hated elements like the endless Theon torture scene.

I didn't know she had money troubles. To be honest, I had no idea who she was until I looked her up after TheArtistFormerlyKnownAs Carl's post I *love* her on Thrones, and I hope her charisma in, admittedly a terribly charismatic villain role will give her more great roles. Her personal life I guess I'll have to read more about--or preferably just ignore--at least from Ann's comment I get a vibe people think she deserves her issues?.

This was my main issue too (though I agree about the racial issues, I'm gonna give them the benefit of doubt for now.) I thought the episode was fine, though after last week of course it felt anti climactic. But ending the season on that scene felt so redundant to me (the producers said they wanted to show just how big her army had grown, but again I think we knew that.) In the past the penultimate episode tends to be more drama filled than the actual finale, but I admit that with all the story threads, the pacing was off with this episode.

I dunno, trying to look at it from a purely show POV I don't think having Jamie appear in Kings Landing at this point is a bad "quality" story decision. I assume they wanted him back there before the end of the season (and they probably thought shoe-horning in another wedding this season would be too much (I could imagine season 4 opening with that.) Ha I loved the scene with Asha myself--I guess I was just kinda sick of seeing Theon tortured and nobody caring (and this is TV... Sometimes it's better to show things than have everything talked about and happen off camera). Remember that it was in the episode Martin penned himself that they showed the castration, so obviously he was down with the decision (as I said at the time, I did think his episode was one of the weaker ones--despite writing strong scripts in past seasons--especially the drawn out Theon scene which gave us little new information wise. He's apparently already penned episode two of the next season so I wonder if there's a major event there.)

I do think some of the gratuitous elements, particularly in season 1 will be seen as a slight mistake, but certainly for this genre (if there even are many examples of this genre) I think the show will be remembered as one of the best examples. Of course it depends on how it will play out--if people are unhappy with the final seasons that could play a part, but.... I'm not even sure where it would sit genre wise. There hasn't really been an epic fantasy series with such a huge cast and production before as well as a sense of gravitas--and certainly it compares favourably to historical soapy shows like The Tudors. Personally I think the actress brings a lot of sympathy to the character that I didn't always feel in the books, especially in the early books.

I wish she would move on to a new song--it's been too long IMHO to try to gain buzz with Woman's World.

Wha? Then why give us scenes of him licking his lips while staring at Wyatt's body?

Cutting was a throwaway line, but I'm sure it was meant to be key and will be played up. I think we are meant to think Jeffrey really does care about his job and Wyatt--but the lip smacking scene could prove me wrong. I may be just prejudiced to thinking how Tyler Perry will deal with any gay character--

Torrents.

I've piked on you about this show (and the online ones) before But you didn't say the vintage Y&R comparison--someone else did on here in one of the first few pages (I swear, but am too lazy to look.) On another forum, whenever anyone says anything bad about the show, a group of peple who LOOOOOOVE it reply that they are hypocrits because t's just as good as vintage Knots and Dynasty (to which I'd say vintage Knots had far more relatable and better writing and vintage Dynasty was aware of how great its camp appeal was--and both for primetime soaps looked spectacular.) But I definitely agree with you. Between scenes going on too long and--as you mention with the Hannah and her son scene, but I find his in most of hte scenes--the pauses between each line of dialogue, even when they should be quick comebacks, Perry has zero sense of how to direct this. I think in this case he probably is striving for the sorta hypnotic way people talk on Bill Bell soaps--he has said he was obsessed with Y&R as a kid--but he's going about it all wrong, because that style doesn't mean you take a long beat between every reply. I wonder if at one time tis was an attempt to write a daytime soap and then they decided to just invest weekly? Because the writing so far is as repetitve as Reilly's writing which, as you say, can work in a daytime soap, but it seems ridiculous to be even more repetitive than most daytime soaps when you are weekly. I do think Tika makes Candace work (she genuinely seems to boh care about Amanda genuinely and her brother and be a completely manipulative bitch, something that is more in the performance than the writing) and Hannah is good actress too, although I find her "'po' black God-fearing matriarch" who hates her demon daughter and worhips her agelic son a bit too cliche even for this genre, and John Schneider seems to realize he's playing camp and have fun with it. Mrs Potts understudy lady looks the part as Katherine but has weird line delivery--which with such weird dialogue doesn't help. Why doesn't Wyatt just become a male model or go into porn to support his habit? I know super buff, hot half naked men who still have all these issues are nothing new to soaps, but I seriously get no sense of him being a heroin and everything elese long term user with no prospects who has bizarre "quirks" that the others barely blink an eye to like taking off all his clothes. Perry sorta has little quirks for each character (Amanda is sweet and dumb and look she CUTS!) and I think he thinks that makes their characters complex but otherwise they're pretty blank. And Jeffrey is beyond ridiculous (I really picture Perry telling him to lick his lips like some hungry dog when he lusts after Wyatt's body--who does that!), not even realizing that as soon as he literally turnshis back, Wyatt has gulped down every glass of champagne on the table. I could talk about this show all day.

I think OWN constantly reruns them. I had just better not here any nonsense about it being better soap than the online soaps

I'd actually like to hear your thoughts on it, Vee. As I've made clear, I think it's awful but in a sorta mesmerizing, brilliant way--but obviously that's not the intention, and I don't mean to belittle those on here who love it, or who have said it's a true return to vintage Y&R style daytime soap (poor Bill Bell....)

Nah, I think the Walkers are faily God-less. (Everything-less.)

Ah, so ghost Reva is the storyline soap books call "astral projection Reva?"

That scene was interesting and Schneider tried his hardest to make it work--it had potential--but it had a number of WTF lines (mainly from Kathryn.) I mean even the whole lipstick on the underwear thing would make sense, except the sorta "clever" bitchy lines Perry wrote for it were WTF crazy (at least for me.) And the direction with a prolonged beat between every "quick" comeback didn't help. Wonder if he will feel guilty when inevitably it turns out Kathryn has whatever illness Hannah had and recognized in Kathryn.

Progress was the wrong word, but I can't think of a better one lol (still, it's not like early Christianity--or even later--was not without its even more hypocritical sacrificial lambs and violence.)

Vanguardian, have you been watching or just reading recaps? Because I have only seen one episode of Generations--years ago--but the dialogue must be ATROCIOUS if this has better writing. I do have to wonder about Perry--so he really honestly does write and direct everything he claims to? Talk about being overworked. I have no idea why he wouldn't just take the money and credit and hire decent staff writers--though his dialogue is so over the top bizarre and random I expect he does think it's clever. Frequentsoap--people seem to feel differently about this show, some genuinely seem to love it, some think it's unwatchable. For me it is--so far anyway--a show that's so completely awful it's good. It's genuine camp (genuine because I really believe Perry feels he's telling some deep human truths here.) I admit, while it feels more like a daily soap, if it was a daily soap I'd probably get bored with it quickly or only watch every so often--but as a weekly show it's fun enough to tune in for. I suspect that soon (Wiki has 6 episode details up) it will have some really over the top Perry moment to liven things up.