OK, last one, then I'm done.

I never thought I'd read a worse review of Game of Thrones than that one in The Guardian, but The Telegraph managed to do it.

So, Game of Thrones was on...

As a GRRM skeptic, you'd wonder why I'd bother watching HBO's latest series.  Well, truth is, I don't hate A Song of Ice and Fire - or, at least, A Game of Thrones.  Martin's a good writer, there are some really interesting elements to the series, there are some fantastic chapters, and I even liked some of the characters.  I certainly appreciate the straying from the common threads in recent fantasy being little more than shallow Tolkien clones.  However, I don't think it's the Greatest Piece of Fantasy Fiction Of Our Times either.  I don't think the infusion of profanities, gore, violence, incest, and Machiavellian court conspiracies is anything unique to Martin by a long shot.  I think the world's setting has a lot of fundamental issues which aren't really addressed in favour of the court intrigue.  Even the appropriation of historical events, individuals and cultures isn't some fresh, original idea. Thus, my biggest problem with Martin isn't necessarily with his fiction, but the fact that it's being lauded as some great, paradigm-shifting renaissance that's never been done in the history of fantasy.

So it gets a mite irritating where moronic pundits allege that incestuous royals, morally ambiguous protagonists, grim and gritty settings and frank depictions of violence and sexuality somehow didn't exist in fantasy prior to 1991. Even Tolkien dealt with those themes in The Silmarillion.  Don't even get me started on people who think that making everyone a bastard-with-a-dark-past-sordid-flaws is inherently superior to making everyone clear-cut heroes and villains.

However, let's forget all of that.  Let's forget all the idiots calling Martin the greatest fantasy writer in history, or the morons who think sex in fantasy was trapped between Patronising Escapist Fairy-Tales and Puerile Adolescent Wish Fulfillment until Martin came along, or the people who think adding sex and violence automatically makes your setting very grown up.  On its own merits, away from the hype colossus of its followers and the ill-judged opinions of infinitely uninformed journalists, A Game of Thrones is... a pretty good book.

And, wouldn't you know it, a pretty good book looks like it's going to be made into a pretty good series, if the first episode of HBO's Game of Thrones is anything to go by.

Looks like I'm not alone against the Game of Thrones pundits

"You are not entitled to your opinion. You are entitled to your informed opinion. No one is entitled to be ignorant."
 - Harlan Ellison

No sooner do I have my say about the useless media coverage around A Game of Thrones, then Cimmerian Shield Wall alum Brian Murphy has a comprehensive round-up of some of the absolute worst, some of which I was going to comment on, but then I realised Brian did more in his swift dismissal than I could. Especially since most, like that utterly odious piece from The Guardian (that old Bête Noire) which I hated the most for its attempt to come off as so very mature that ends up doing the very opposite, aren't even worth the effort of point-by-point disintegration.

Luckily, there are others.

The Game of Thrones Pundits Continue to Confound Me

No doubt Brian will be fuming if he happens by Troro Daily or The Atlantic, as that old bête noir rears its face of nightmare and lunacy once again:

The show is a departure for the network best known for character-rich dramas like "The Sopranos" and "The Wire." It's a fantasy adventure saga — but not your typical fantasy adventure saga. Earthy and explicit, it has been described as fantasy for people who don't like that sort of thing. Executive producer David Benioff has called it "The Sopranos in Middle Earth."

"It's a bit like 'Lord of the Rings' for grown-ups," says Mark Addy, who plays King Robert Baratheon, embattled ruler of the Seven Kingdoms of Westeros. "This is definitely not one that you can watch with your kids."

Now, let's not be too hasty in our judgements.

The trailer for A Game of Thrones "Isn't Really Fantasy"

Pop quiz, folks: does this trailer...

1. brutalize anything we've seen of "Conan"?
2. destroy anything we've seen of "Conan"?
3. annihilate anything we've seen of "Conan"?
4. obliterate anything we've seen of "Conan"?
5. defenestrate anything we've seen of "Conan"?

We even see a tiny glimpse of Khal Momo (whose overall look I'm still not sold on as not being Mongolian-enough), as well as the delightful addition of Yorkshire Stark and Lancashire Lannister accents, further cementing the whole "War-of-the-Roses-with-a-few-fantasy-bits-and-pieces" feel of the setting that's the series' biggest strength and weakness.  I can say that it looks very high quality in motion, and miles beyond Legend of the Seeker and other such shows.

Momo as Drogo

A supplement to the recent A Game of Thrones news, here's a picamature of Jason Momoa in that other barbarian role, that of Khal Drogo.

Looking at him, I have to say he doesn't fit my mental image of the Horse Lord.  I imagined a much longer, Hun/Mongol style moustache, for one thing. Not sure if I'm digging his tattoo on the left arm being visible (unless it's being covered up in the actual show.)

Something like this:

Still, he looks great, and I'm sure Martin's legion of fans are pleased.

Early snaps from A Game of Thrones kicking "Conan's" arse in Every Way Imaginable

My general apathy with A Song of Ice and Fire is probably one of the most puzzling things about me. How can I not like a fantasy series that's all about treachery, violence, betrayal, political machinations, battles and gritty realism?  A lot of people promised I'd be hooked after A Game of Thrones, but for the life of me I can't get into it. Yet all the same... good golly am I looking forward to the upcoming series. 

Entertainment Weekly has just-short-of-a-dozen pictures from the film.  I'm deliberating over whether posting it over at Conan Movie Blog, since it's tangentially related as another Jason Momoa project, but he doesn't appear in the pictures.  While there's no sign of Khal Momo, the contrast between these and the ones for "Conan" is utterly staggering.  All the characters look great, the costumes have incredible verisimilitude, the sets are fantastic, even the quality of the film - it looks great.  The only problems I've noticed from commentators are Daenerys' and Cersei's eyebrows not matching their hair.  Man, if only my problems with the "Conan" film could be so trivial...

I normally try to refrain from silly base proclamations, but I'm going to say right now that A Game of Thrones is going to absolutely wipe the floor with "Conan."  Hell, the fact that it actually features characters from the source material already has it won, anything else is just a bonus.  Still, given the quality of previous HBO productions, the actors and crew, and compare that to the quality of previous Lionsgate productions, actors and crew... yeah, this is a bit of a one-horse race.

See this, Lionsgate?  This is how you do a goddamn fantasy series.  This is what "Conan" should be looking like, not a sub-Hercules: the Legendary Journeys riff.