Is GoT crueler than OZ? (MASSIVE SPOILERS)

[Feredir]

I've read up to the 4th book. Then I threw them away when I realized that it's not getting any better.

4th book to me was a compendium of deleted chapters from book 3 with added material. So yeah, I could see why you might feel that way reading that one.

[Shadowferal]

4th book to me was a compendium of deleted chapters from book 3 with added material. So yeah, I could see why you might feel that way reading that one.

My hate for the series has a bit more to it...4 books in should tell anyone what they're in for if they continue reading.
If you're really interested...To repost from a past thread...

[rant on}
Does Martin write well? Sure, no doubt about it.
To me, a mark of a good author is one who engages the reader emotionally...makes an emotional connection between the characters written and the reader.
George R.R. Martin does this damn well. (Weis and Hickman did this even better in their Dragonlance books)
Martin make one angry for what happens in the books, and then tells you that you can't do a thing about it.
He created a wide cast of complex characters...nice.

Spoiler: 

The heroes that drew one into the story initially have mostly died. and when they did, it was in cruel despicable fashion. This would mark every freaking character in these books that I, the reader, gave a damn about. After Robb Stark died, I said screw it. There were only two "rulers" who seemed to be learning how to truly rule in my opinion, Robb Stark and Daenerys. (who is out in left field half a world away.)
Sure, reading Jaime Lannister seeing himself through the eyes of "that stupid ugly cow" Brienne, the Maid of Tarth, and realizing that she above all those referring to themselves as knights was the genuine article and comes to value this new perspective immensely, was a good read.
And then seeing him defend her honor towards the end of the 4th book when one of his men makes cutting remarks about her was nice...and then ruined when she apparently dies in typical cruel fashion. (For a talented writer that was an awkward cliffhanger.)

If I want to read of things that are going to piss me off and can't do anything about, I can read history tracts on torture and abuse. Which is how I feel as if I have been reading, abused.
I was looking for more emotional payback here. It's was the fourth book and I had not gotten it. [/rant]
I thoroughly enjoyed the anthologies he headed, the Wildcard Series (needed to be read in order), which had a point that made you angry but it was because of something you knew about in history anyway. (The McCarthy hearings)

I read fantasy for entertainment and to set my imagination on fire. And a Song of Ice and Fire has become less and less entertaining with every chapter.
Maybe a spoiler or not...

Spoiler: 

Our heroes dug their graves simply by being good, just and honorable. (Which lends the unfortunate parallel to real-life history weight.)

I'll stick to fantasy where good eventually triumphs. I'll stick to stories where evil eventually is redeemed (which is even better. Being a tad cynical, I tend to see both of these ideas as very much fantasy and less realistic
I like the way that some people view the supposed "realism" however...
How old is Rickon? (5yrs?) How old is Arya? (8-10?) Bran? (less than 12? and completely paralyzed from the waist down)
Consider reality when looking at their ages and all that which is supposedly endured by children. Hmm..

Spoiler: 

Sansa is how old before repeatedly beaten and psychologically tortured by Joffrey and his knights? (13 going on 14?) But never raped...? At least up to the fourth book. Did Robb live to a ripe young age of 17?
And it seems that Martin regrets creating the character of Rickon, as he isn't even in the books after the first half of the first book. Another admittedly rare point of poor writing from Martin. And nothing from that character at all beyond rumors mentioned in one book

But then I guess this is where the "fantasy" part comes in.

[Ivanstone]

My hate for the series has a bit more to it...4 books in should tell anyone what they're in for if they continue reading.
If you're really interested...To repost from a past thread...
*snip
But then I guess this is where the "fantasy" part comes in.

I guess you were looking for a fantasy where Ned Stark was the "good" guy. The "good" guy who helped start a giant civil war so his drunken buddy could make nookie with a sister that wasn't sure she even wanted him. I guess you probably thought Robb was the "hero" of the story as well.

Or maybe you should take a closer look at the people who have some legitimate power but are treated poorly because of societal disadvantage.
Ex Tyrion, Daenerys, Bran, Sansa, Jon, Asha, Brienne. We'll see what side of the fence Margaery, Arienne, Arya and Cersei end up on. Although the latter two are behaving rather badly.

[PACOX]

GoT: A bunch of political leaders who backstab each other in an attempt to fill a power vacuum.

OZ: A bunch of criminals who backstab and rape each other to fill a power vacuum.

[ItachiZaku]

When I saw the 1st season of GoT, I said that, this is the best TV show of all time. I especially loved the pilot. It was so dark, it had too much deaths, characters were breaking apart already. That was incredible. My favorite was The Wire. However, after seeing all the seasons, I came back to The Wire as the best show.

I just started re-watching The Wire, and after the first episode I told a few of my best friends... this was a huge mistake, cuz I'm reminded, in just that first episode, of many, many reasons why this is my all time favorite show and now i'll have to completely watch it again. There are shows that come out of the box and I really, really like them, but when they settle into themselves, that's when you really see if a show has staying power, or just sort of hums along.

GoT kills off too many good characters. Joff, Ned, Viper, Tywin to name a few. As of RIGHT MEOW, I don't really have anyone to root for (maybe Ramsay, love that dude) and no one to really root against (maybe Ayra, she's just annoying) but... kinda meh at this point.

- - - Updated - - -

For example book Ramsey is even worse than show Ramsey. The show has probably more sex scenes/nudity, but less rape and less "gratuitous violence".

I can't even remember anyone being raped in the show. Ramsay certainly did not rape Sansa and Jaime didn't rape Cersei. I can't remember any others that were debatable, but it's still early.

[Icaras]

I found game of thrones killing of characters to be...well, just a piss off more than anything. It'd be one thing if it had just one main character and otehr characters died as we follow that one characters story.

But given the changing viewpoints, half the time it seems like just as you learn enough about a character to enjoy their story it seems to go "GOTCHA HES DEAD! HAHAHAHAHAHA....and then Bran was dreaming of being a wolf...."

It's what killed my interesting in continuing past season 1 (Well that and finding out the fate of Arya, it's not quite where I was hoping she'd go). Well, that and the fact that they show clearly revels in it's "gray" status (IE: There's no clearly defined heroes or villains. Everyones kind of equal shades of horrible).

Note that this isn't to say it's a bad show or even book series (I've not read the books, I no longer intend too)...it's just not the kind of story for me. I like my fantasy to have a clearly defined hero. When there are none...it just kinda pisses me off. *shrugs*

[ItachiZaku]

Well, that and the fact that they show clearly revels in it's "gray" status (IE: There's no clearly defined heroes or villains. Everyones kind of equal shades of horrible).

Right, that's why I "liked" Joffrey, he gave everyone someone to root against. And as much as people would like to view Eddard Stark as the first main "hero" of the show, he is very clearly NOT a hero, nor are the Starks. They are merely lesser evils for the most part. They act noble but are far from it, yet they commit the fewest "cruel" acts, but I also don't have enough viewing experience of Oz to make a comparison. I would like to go back and watch it though, a lot of good actors came through there.

[Violetti]

Right, that's why I "liked" Joffrey, he gave everyone someone to root against. And as much as people would like to view Eddard Stark as the first main "hero" of the show, he is very clearly NOT a hero, nor are the Starks. They are merely lesser evils for the most part. They act noble but are far from it, yet they commit the fewest "cruel" acts, but I also don't have enough viewing experience of Oz to make a comparison. I would like to go back and watch it though, a lot of good actors came through there.

The way Joffrey and some other characters are portrayed is the reason why GoT will never reach the greatness of The Wire
In the Wire every move a character does, whether you agree with it or not, you can see his reasoning behind it.
In Game of Thrones someone like Joffrey just acts the most disgusting way anytime he has the chance to, as if he's just designed to be hated.

In pure violence Oz wins easily, in regard of killing of characters, they match even.

[drwelfare]

I think Oz stands out more.

Baltimore in The Wire was worse though

[announced]

The way Joffrey and some other characters are portrayed is the reason why GoT will never reach the greatness of The Wire
In the Wire every move a character does, whether you agree with it or not, you can see his reasoning behind it.
In Game of Thrones someone like Joffrey just acts the most disgusting way anytime he has the chance to, as if he's just designed to be hated.

In pure violence Oz wins easily, in regard of killing of characters, they match even.

the wire is a good show, up till the last season where it starts to get bad, but its not the end all best show in the world. season 2 almost killed their entire fanbase, season 1 3 4 were great though. however GoT has been consistently well done throughout seasons 1-5 so far.


game of thrones has many harsh moments, mostly like how the good guys dont always win. but none of these characters aside from perhaps Ned Stark are totally good, its a mixture of black and white. with that being said, its not really a cruel show, its more realistic and surprising than anything how no one seems to be safe from death

[Felpacino]

I think Oz stands out more.

Baltimore in The Wire was worse though

Baltimore had more variety through streets, ports, politics, school and media. OZ had prison violence and a little bit politics. Surely, The Wire was more realistic and the 4th season was heartbreaking. I think the writers of OZ, joined The Wire and wrote the 4th season. Maybe I am wrong tho. However, OZ showed it's cruelty in the pilot with the main protagonist gets a swastika branded on his ass and the secondary protagonist gets roasted. That's enough for me.