Action>Story?

[allakaboom]

So a week ago my friend and I decided to watch the series Game of Thrones, when we were done the 10 or so episodes I just wanted to see more, I thought it was a great show. But he didn't like it, he said there wasn't enough action. So I asked him how come he likes all the other shows he likes, such as dexter, since there isn't nearly as much action in those. And he said that since the show is supposed to be some sort of mid-evil era it should have more Action.

I don't know if you guys have seen the series, but it doesn't really matter... What do you guys find more important in a TV series? Personally I would go with Story, always, doesn't matter if it's mid-evil or just a guy flying around in his time travelling blue box.

Only in a video game does that change for me. I would say there always has to be enough action to get me to keep playing, but story is still a big factor.

[Jistu]

Action > Story only if the story sucks hard, or there is no story.

Film is an art based on entertaining. If the characters are original, strong, well developed, and interesting, you don't need much action. However, if the film isn't character driven or focused on a character, action is appreciated. You can have a good film that is mostly action and very little character focus, as long as it doesn't bore, trick, or disgust the audience.

[LGalucard]

The thing is Game of Thrones has a A LOT of action .... in the books that is. The tv series has cut all major action pieces leaving only 1v1 duels and such dueobvious budget constraints. They skipped all the major battles in the first season, your friend is right it is missing a crucial part of the story ... which happensto be the action. Having read the books , i found myself cheated with the action sequences being cut and i dont plan to follow the series into its second season.

[StationaryHawk]

Story always comes before action. We have enough movies smothered in special effects and large explosions that lack a decent plot.

That being said, they did cut a few of Game of Throne's real battle scenes; even made some changes here and there to allow it (Tyrion being knocked out). I can understand that it's expensive to create these large battles, but it was a little disappointing.

That being said, I loved Game of Thrones and can't wait for the next season. Because where HBO disappointed in battle scenes, they made up for everywhere else.

[obc]

the reasoning of your friend is totally stupid. just because something is set in the medi-evil time it doesnt necasserily mean it has to contain action. if something is set in the future it doesnt mean there has to spaceship battles does it? if something is set in the 80's does it have to have hair metal band or else it sucks o.O???

and in the case of game of thrones: it works just fine with not so much action. hell its about story and characters, intrigue and companionship. the fights are 2nd. he may not like it coz there is mostly just talk, but his argument is moronic.

[Chelly]

Story > Action.
I can't stand TV series/movies with shitty stories that only focus on explosions and action scenes.

Although I do like it somewhere in-between too. A decent story with decent action scenes is good enough.

[Skizzit]

If there were two similar series and one had a weak plot but great action scenes and the other lacked action but had a great plot and characters, I would pick the later every time. Never been a big fan of action just for the sake of action.

[LGalucard]

While i strongly agree that story > action , sometimes action is an intgral part of the story and should not be dismessed, like it has been in this series, sadly they cant be blamed since it already has strong production values for a tv series. However the action cutting also makes me wonder... will they find some way to kill off the wolves for the sake of not having to present em as they are meant to be (massive dire wolves)? Or maybe they will just pretend they wolves are just regular size and have nothing dire about them.

[Cainn]

Voted story > action myself, wasn't suprised to see 0-11 votes. A good example of action > story movies are Transformers 2 and 3, and look how bad they turn out...

[Selkhet]

Story trumps all. Action without story is just porn.

Also, why people write mid-evil instead of medieval? I know it sounds the same but... where did you take it from?

[DarkTZeratul]

Also, why people write mid-evil instead of medieval? I know it sounds the same but... where did you take it from?

People who don't know how to spell writing something phonetically.

[Skelington]

Story is much better than action.

[Deleted]

Good action is good because the story is good imo. So without a good story, everything falls apart.

[AetherMcLoud]

Story = Character Development > Everything Else

[Deleted]

Interesting, enjoyable characters > atmosphere and setting > story > rest. For me.

The first three come pretty close while action and other such thing are less meaningful and can ever ruin a good show if done poorly.

[Borfl]

In movies, television shows, etc. Story trumps action all the time.

[Deleted]

The hell question is that?

Gran Torino and Hachiko are my favorite movies for obvious reasons.

[muto]

Action movie/series with good story. Why not both?

[Deleted]

In movies, television shows, etc. Story trumps action all the time.

I think the action worked quite well in Games of thrones, i like it when action is like a peak in the story or character portrait - action just for the action gets really boring (the new star wars movies had alot of incredible boring action for example).
Action can be important and if it is done right, its often the most memorable scenes from a movie or tv show, imo it just need to be served like a desert, like; establish story-> character development-> action.

[Deleted]

There must always be a golden midway.

I love 24 and i aslo like the Prison Break. They both got story and action :d