In regards to writing in a series ... I'm a huge Simpsons fan, especially of the early seasons. I've listened to all of the commentaries for seasons. The writers of this "golden age" have often pointed out that while one writer may get credit for an episode, it's a collaborative process and often ideas come from other writers or the show runners. For example, in "Lisa the Vegetarian", credited writer David S. (X) Cohen says that Homer saying "a magical, delicious animal" comes from writer John Swartzwelder and the idea for a barbecue came from show runner David Mirkin. Those early Simpsons episodes had typically 20-30 rewrites and is a big reason why the jokes usually hold up well on repeat viewings. The writers and directors admit to cutting bits of dialogue that didn't hold up well after a few readings. They sometimes had to add dialogue if something wasn't clear. My rant is mostly trying to make the points that writing a series is a group effort and that rewrites often happen very late in production. So how could the writers strike NOT have an effect on HotD?
Yeah, if people are complaining about "wanting more dragons" and wanting "more action" or "more battles" I disregard those comments. If that's someone main concern, that tells me they don't have the appropriation of the source material and george's writing that is character-focused
@@lordinquisitordunn336 When they aged down Alicent and made them BFFs , Ithat was the moment I gave up on a "faithful adaptation". I am sick of the fake feminism making female characters so aenmic
Yeah, the rewrite stuff probably fixed some of the pacing. Yet stuff like Rhaenyra and Alicent meeting and her giving up Aegon. Or omitting the fact that Rhaenys murdered thousands of people is the writer's fault, and we will probably never know whose ideas it was. I'm just upset, I want a civil war and to tear a a family apart, and I felt like I didn't get that. Especially the trailers showed something different. I didn't think that helped either.
1:16:26 just a comment on how if Ryan and Sara stuck with fire and blood the triarchy would have been introduced earlier bc it was Otto who sent for them before his dismissal as hand
While I do agree with you that he missed a number of factual journalistic things, I would say that he does have several good points about why the writing and structure of season 2 was lacking. He should have mentioned the writers strike, but it’s often much simpler to take a look at quotes from the writer and say this is why this happened. I think that his remarks about changing the female characters have weakened them is very accurate and then the final scene breaks alicent as a character and makes her a worse person than even Cersei. The idea that everything is a mistake rather than a series of horrific revenge driven actions is a terrible idea because it makes both sides seem incompetent and it weakens the story thematically due to it making the story not about revenge and the escalation thereoff. harrenhal was pretty good if dragged on a bit long and had a really bad conclusion with the the wierwood vision, everything involving mysaria was bad and damages rhaenyra as a character going forward. There are several character inconsistencies littered throughout the season likely because of the writers not communicating properly. Since there are individual good scenes but they often contradict. His point around aegons characterization is very good where they start off with a very strong flavor for him and then walk it back for season 2 and never mention it again. Again he needed to do more behind the scenes research and reword his points but the critiques of season 2 in terms of the writing are accurate.
@@thedragondemands5186 true she isn’t responsible for the bad writing solely but she is responsible for some of the worst sound bytes. It could be that she’s just a bad interview or she just doesn’t understand certain writing principles or the audience she’s writing for but either way her comments make me seriously question her intelligence.
Brilliant observations and points. Her interviews are really poor and damages perception of the show. She'll do well to steer clear of interviews in S3.
@@kofimuni8251 yeah, they should just let other members of the writing room handle pr. Hess seems like it is not her forte. It’s very much a don’t open your mouth and prove you’re a fool without doubt situation in her case.
The problem with analyzing the creative process of a work as opposed to the work itself is that exponentially more research is required before you claim anything as fact. When SB is creating his genuinely well-produced content about a show or film, a quick google search is totally acceptable to find a particular scene or line from inside the created work he's critiquing to reference and build a point from. That amount of research and analysis is appropriate when you're reading into a creative work and trying to present and support your thoughts and theories. It's a contained work. The creative process itself, however, takes place in reality, which means it can be fact checked and verified (though not easily). To apply the same level of scrutiny to the real world as you would to an isolated work of fiction and then present your opinions as facts is....wild to me, and borderline irresponsible as a content creator. All this does is spread misinformation and encourage the people that want an easy target to blame for everything wrong in the series, especially when there are no qualifying statements in the title or front half of the video.
As far as targeting Sarah Hess specifically the only people that I’ve seen on RUclips that have a measure of clout was efap and it was minor all things considered. It was a throwaway comment by rags saying I wouldn’t be surprised if Sarah Hess was responsible for the final rhaenyra alicent scene of season 2. Everyone else seems to blame the studio. I think it’s just because she’s the person that has the worst quotes/sound bites out of a team that often have frustrating commentary on their own work. Frustrating because rather than enriching it, it is often contradictory when multiple writers on this show and make many people have to invoke death of the author/showrunner in this case and say no that’s a terrible interpretation I am not going to take the writers opinion seriously. I’m going to take the work on its own and not accept the writers commentaries into account.
While I don't blame Sara Hess for what happened and I think the personal attacks against her are awful as a writer there are definitely some questionable things in specifically the episodes she's credited with, not just Rhaenys bursting out of the floor. For example: •Larys masterbating to Alicent's feet which thankfully they seemed to have dropped •Helaena's prophecies suddenly being way too accurate in 2x08 when all she really needed to say was something like "Aemond, you will never be king." Something short and to the point like Alys's "You will die in this place." •Larys trying to have a human moment with Aegon and the latter talking about his penis. Aegon not saying anything and just listening to Larys would have been better. •Tyland mud wrestling Lohar. Just pointless. Now yes there was the writers strike and maybe something like the mud wrestling wasn't necessarily Hess's idea - maybe it was Condal's idea that he made her put into episode 8 -but it ends up being death by a thousand cuts which is how I would describe season 2 overall.
@thedragondemands5186 So then the question is why these characters combined and there's a further complication with Lohar and the young Viserys. So Lohar takes Viserys prisoner after the Gullet and later selling him to Bambarro Bazanne (as stated in Under the Regents - The Voyage of Alyn Oakenfist). Even if you take out the selling part, we're still left with a trans character capturing a little boy, taking him to another country and giving him to a stanger to be kept as a prisoner. I don't see a way out of that unless someone else captures Viserys or that the plot point is entirely cut and Viserys just makes it to Pentos.
Has it really come to this? "Anyone who doesn't like Sara Hess or all of her changes to the story must be a bigot/sexist/racist"? TDD isnt guilty of this necessarily, but a lot of the comments here are bordering that territory, and that sucks. People are allowed to dislike certain aspects of the show, regardless of who's creating it - not every critical analysis is some grift or hack, and while Savage Books was wrong in some ways there were other parts where he was spot on. It's important to remember that
Unless you've seen a part of the video i havent yet, your counter doesnt address DD's arguments. He doesn't dismiss Savage as a racist or sexist. He even begins the video by saying he's made some cogent points. DD then says the structure and the order of presentation are his immediate gripes. Additionally, an argument may be sexistly made without the person's intention. The argument is sexist not the person. Not all criticism is grift true. It's ok to criticize things you like. But we can't pretend that women are presented with 100% fair criticism ya know. We can't pretend that fault and blame is evenly and fairly placed (with proper context) on people regardless of their gender, race, sexuality etc. DD made a 2hour video wanting to add nuance to the argument, he doesn't have a 30 sec video calling DD racist and sexist and leaving it at that.
@@vansnyder4895 If you read my comment thoroughly, I actually went out of my way to NOT include DD as my target of my criticism, in fact my overall point wasn't even directed at him but rather commenters who jump on Savage Books calling him sexist/misogynist. Also, as soon as you start throwing out subjective assertions founded in politicised sociology without objective proof, statements like "we can't pretend that women are faced with 100% fair criticism", that indirectly proves my point. I didn't even bring up the female characters or Sara Hess herself, and yet you immediately connect my "criticism of the show" to "women are treated badly in today's media" without a logical sequitur. My actual issues with the show are the lack of profound dialogue, some characters suffering zero consequences for horrendous actions that (according to the lore) should instead bear massive ramifications, and the prioritisation of spectacle and imagery over substance and character-driven dialogue. Not once did I mention women or how they're perceived in media, and yet immediately people assume my criticisms of the show to have some connection/apologism for misogyny. It just seems like that whole misogyny issue is being used as unrelated whataboutism as a means of dismissing people's legitimate criticisms of the show.
@Howardax I'll lay this out in numbered points. Skip to 7 first please. 1 . I wrongfully assumed since you commented underneath the video that your argument was directly in response to DD’s arguments. Now that I know I was incorrect in that. Your argument makes more since. I agree, it is OK to criticize things/people you like. 2. In response to “Also, as soon as you start throwing out subjective assertions founded in politicised sociology without objective proof statements like ‘we can't pretend that women are faced with 100% fair criticism’, that indirectly proves my point. In my experience whenever I start quoting academics and philosophers that scares people off. I end up coming off snooty or arrogant which isn't my goal. If you'd like, I can give you some text from Bell Hooks, W.E.B Du Bois, Peter Rose, Jean Staszak, and Michelle Wright, bit this conversation felt to casual to bring them in. If you would like for me to, I'd like to share them with you. That would show the objectivity of my claim. However I should have said “We know sexism exist. We can not pretend that sexism plays no part in out thoughts. We can not pretend we always know and are keenly aware of how/when sexism affects our thoughts. James Baldwin described this phenomenon in his debate against Buckley in “The American Dream and The American Negro”:” That is, it depends on assumptions which we hold so deeply so as to be scarcely aware of them. 3.In your second comment you stated:”I didn't even bring up the female characters or Sara Hess herself, and yet you immediately connect my "criticism of the show" to "women are treated badly in today's media" without a logical sequitur. However, Sarah Hess was mentioned in your first comment you wrote, “"Anyone who doesn't like Sara Hess or all of her changes to the story must be a bigot/ sexist/racist"?” I could be taking this out of context. please correct me if so. I thought this was your strawman. Since I thought you were talking about Sarah Hess, I mentioned her as well. I was trying to match the flow of the conversation. 4. In response to “My actual issues with the show are the lack of profound dialogue, some characters suffering zero consequences for suffering zero consequences for horrendous actions that (according to the lore) should instead bear massive ramifications, and the prioritisation of spectacle and imagery over substance and character-driven dialogue” Amen Brother. I have nothing negative to say, nor anything to add. Great point. 5. In response to “in fact my overall point wasn't even directed at him but rather commenters who jump on Savage Books calling him sexist/misogynist.” Savage Books made arguments in a way that, at the very least, have the potential to bolster and legitimate sexist/misogynist or homophonic ideas. I would say his personality is that of a sexist or misogynist. Any ism or phobia is a product of your environment, not who you are. In short, I agree, he is getting short-changed. (Damn that was kind of redundant. 6. In response to “Not once did I mention women or how they're perceived in media.” As far as I know Sarah Hess is a woman. It isn't crazy to say the show made bad decisions and at the same time, there is an undue scrutiny placed on Hess for these decisions. Critical Analysis needs nuance. 7.I try to make all of my arguments in good faith. Using logic to debate the arguments made instead of the person making them. I hate ad hominems. Please read in a conversational tone rather than an argumentative one 8. "Savage Books was wrong in some ways there were other parts where he was spot on. It's important to remember that" I agree.
@@vansnyder4895 I apologise for how I initially came off. Looking back, I was overtly defensive and insulting, when you've actually made some great points without attacking my character, so thank you. I'm just used to people eventually reverting to some ad hominem that I became what I feared in my expectations, sorry for assuming your character when you're actually very coherent and well-rounded in your arguments. While I do still disagree with some of your assertions concerning sexism, I am not familiar enough with the works you cited to directly challenge your points, so I won't challenge or disavow your claims even though I do disagree with the conclusion. Looks like you and I agree on quite a bit despite coming from different political perspectives concerning the show (particularly in regard to the writing and pacing issues I mentioned earlier), I'm glad my perspective made a bit more sense upon elaboration in my second response. Edit: As to Sara Hess, which I forgot to actually elaborate on (I mentioned her in passing more as a reference to Savage Books' focus rather than the focal point of my criticism, but in hindsight I can see how that might be lost in translation). I have mixed feelings on her as a writer in terms of character decisions. She's made some great choices in adapting a tough body of work, and I certainly trust that - with a bit more focus on the subtextual elements that made GoT and Paddy Considine's performance in HOTD so multi-layered and fascinating - she can deliver a high-quality adaptation. However, I do believe that she has made genuine mistakes (as have all of the showrunners, it's definitely not exclusive to Hess), and being outspoken about being involved in some of the more controversial decisions has led people to deign her as a figurehead for those controversial aspects for the show. As a result of this figurehead assignment, toxic actors on both extreme sides of the dumb "culture war" going on view her either through a sexist light as a witch incarnate "making muh fantasy woke", or seen by the other side as a defenseless victim of mass misogyny and grifters, and that her writing and casting choices are beyond reproach. I'd say Sara Hess being so targeted is sadly more a symptom of how divisive our society is, right down to our consumption of entertainment. I do believe that she'd be just as harshly criticised as a man would in her position (look at DnD and how they are publicly RINSED even years later for how they massacred GoT, not including the death threats they received). However, I will concede that some people are letting their scars from GoT blind them towards making overly harsh judgments concerning HOTD and Hess herself, which is unwarranted and unhelpful for those wanting to make legitimate criticisms.
I was rather let down by the SB video because the title actually had me pretty excited. I think there's some real room to discuss the idea that in recent years writers and producers are indulging in the "fan-ficification" of various properties rather than adapting them. This isn't specific to HotD - I think one could make the argument that D&D started to do this heavily after S4 and several other large adaptions have followed suit. I've been struck in recent years by how, when I read interviews with producers and writers, there's such a large focus on "me" statements. I feel like I rarely see them discussing the intentions of the author or the themes of the original work. Instead, it's always "I really wanted to do XYZ bc this is very important to me/us" or "We had to add this because this is so important to me and this property was lacking it." I have often left the interviews feeling like the writers/producers probably like the characters but want to move them into their own sandboxes, like a fanfiction. And I further think it would be interesting to ask whether this is the result of studios refusing to make anything that isn't an adaption. If you're a young writer who wants to write original screenplays, but your only source of employment is the next GOT adaptation, does that foster a breeding ground for you to deviate from the source material so that your ideas can get into the world? Yet, the video just attributed everything wrong with the show to one very specific writer, like Hess rules the writers room with an iron fist, dictating to her little minions who just fearfully follow orders I guess. I didn't even make it to the part of the video where he admits Hess can't be responsible for everything because I just couldn't hear him drone on and on about how she is personally responsible for misinterpreting everything in HotD. It felt very mean spirited and targeted in a way I wasn't expecting. There is a reason that GRRM mentions Condal and not Hess - it is the showrunners job to look at the overall plot of the series, the important themes, the high points, and help craft the episodes to fit that. Hess is not leaning over everyone's shoulders, waiting to report them to HR if Rhaenyra doesn't kiss a woman. It's fine to criticize writing decisions and even say you think the writers sucked or got it wrong. But called out specific writers is not productive because even if they say something was "their" idea in an interview, decisions are not made in a vacuum and that idea went through multiple channels before it came into the world. We're just opening the door for cyberbullying of individuals. Like, if you must call out someone by name, the only one you can even justify is the showrunner - and frankly, depending on the complaint, that's not always helpful either.
My friend got miss informed by him and I had to spend the entire day explaining why the video is wrong, I ha so for making this to put it out in better words
His point about the writers deliberately leaving out a battle in favor of a Rhaenyra and Alicent scene just demonstrates how little he did research for his video. What's more likely the case is that the Rhaenyra and Alicent scene was meant to give the season some sort of closure because they weren't able to do their planned battle. It boggles me that this guy pulled a lot of his arguments clearly out of his ass and his audience accepted as fact simply because he presented it as such. Definitely shows the potential dangers of a RUclipsr's influence over their audience.
Seriously, I am so sick of hearing/reading "they ran out of source material!" Imagine if I had 15 chairs in my home and 7 were take and I said "where there's just nowhere to sit i have to buy new chairs" bad analogy but just how stupid it is "they ran out of source material"
i still can't get over the mental gymnastics ppl do to defend d&d yet are willing to blame one writer via inductive reasoning of "we got fans hate illogical plot points"
Such is the reasoning of the dyed-in-the-wool grifter and I smelled a grift from the get go of the previous 3 clips. Classic bait and switch for the clicks and his post is gaining traction and ballooning. Money, money, money will flow his way and the YT algorithm will tilt to his channel. What's even more galling, is the fact that behaviour like his, has been normalized in real life. After all's said and done, we're still mired in the era of alternative facts, spin and selective truths, n'est ce pas?...
@@MadIvano lmaoo everyone was prasing hotd s1 , just cuz s2 had missing stuff and a few flaws doesn't make it shovelware. GOT lacked a lot of stuff from books and was mainly riding on politics
At some point, you could make a video summarizing all the cuts made by Zaslav, since the are not restricted to Asoiaf but affect a lot of popular franchises.
I feel like the last bit of his video is a 'get out of jail free card' type of thing. He spends ages crapping on Hess, but if someone tries to criticise him he can point at that small segment to say "See? I didn't really say it."
Peple keep talking about how Sara Hess ruined House of the Dragon but IMO Geeta Patel, Eileen Shim and David Hancock are the ones who ruined HotD. They also deserve a lot of flack for their terrible writing/direction but they don't get hate like Sara. HotD S1Ep8 has 9.3 rating on IMDB but for me, entire show was completely ruined as soon as Rhnyra-Ali patched up and became friends in that episode. Many fans loved the dinner scene but that whole Rhanyra-Alicent friendship vibe in that scene is where HotD got wrecked and never recovered!! I just don't understand how Rhaenyra and Alicecent friendship can happen in S1Ep8 after so many things had happened before that. Once that stupid Criston Cole confession scene happened about Rhanyra's "lies" and Luke gouged out Aemond's eye, Alicent just can not believe Rhaenyra as her 'old friend' ever again. I just don't get what kinda ultimate "friendship" they have...! (I recently realized that Sara Hess hinted that Rhani-Cent were former loves which was NEVER established in the show). In reality, people end friendships on much small matters than whatever happened between Rhnyra-Alicent! Just ask yourself what would you do if some kid blinds your son...like come on....! About Sara Hess, yes, she also deserves getting criticised but she was a scapegoat. The S1Ep9 Alicent vs Otto race to capture Aegon was hilariously dumb writing. I don't understand that plot by Sara Hess at all. Rhaenys killing hundreds of people in dragonpit was the WORST! Then we have S2Ep3, Directed by Geeta Patel and written by David Hancock is when show truly died for me. We see Rhaenys telling Rhaenyra that she can meet Alicent and somehow stop war. Like..HOW THE F?? What does Rhaenys think thats gonna happen? How Alicent and Rhnyra would stop the war when it is established both wants the throne at any cost? when both sides already lost their prince? There was an literal assassination attempt of Rhaenyra but yet, Rhaenys/Rhaenyra wants peace. This is when we see a hateful misandry quote from Rhaenys when she says all men are blood thirsty and its women who are logical. That was absolutely horrible writing and it upsets me that no one calls out Geeta Patel/David Hancock for that. It was dumb Rhaenys who tells rhaneyra to meet alicent and that whole plot in S2Ep3 was nonsense. Then, we saw whole Alicent arc getting BUTCHERED! In S1, it was Alicent who TAUGHT and BOMBARADED her sons with HER HATE FOR RHAENYRA. The Strong b@stard thing was taught by Alicent to Aemond/Aegon, so they started hating Strongs and especially Aemond started believing that his faction deserve the throne. There's also one scene in S1 when Alicent straight up shouts at kid-Aegon that YOU WILL BECOME KING; ITS YOUR RIGHT! Thats the REAL Alicent of book BUT when her sons embraced that hate; Alicent suddenly becomes soft and becomes friends with Rhaenyra S1Ep8. Its a horrendous character motive change of Alicent, which was written by Eileen Shim but she doesn't get criticism as much as Sara Hess. I don't think many people even know her name.
Honestly, I find all this whining about the show supposedly being ruined completely excessive and yet another fab (in a sad way) example of how internet fandoms of big franchises like this are just flat out ruining them for themselves. This show is on season 2. There's zero patience in letting them finish some of their takes on the material first, now it's all doom and gloom and whining about how everything is forever ruined. Only for the same people to then tune in again yet again for the coming seasons so they can obsesses some more over stuff they claim to not like at all. Which, honestly, if this is what you all enjoy spending your free time on, whatever. I do enjoy fandom and fandom discourse as well. But with this franchise in particular I feel more and more like people really do should go outside sometimes and touch a bit of grass. Because with all due respect at the end of the day it is still only a television show and one that is based on a few novellas and a faux historiography. You certainly don't need to agree with the way these writers and producers tried to piece them together and work with what I believe is a rather refreshing take on the historiography approach of F&B in principle, but some of the way these people are being targeted and all of this over a television is truly just excessive to me and makes me not want to go anywhere near any major media franchise anymore because or truly just stay away from online discourse altogether.
@@TheTufaninho how is it excessive when every point i made is perfectly logical? You mention "let them finish the material first" but S2 finale has already completely annhilated the essence of story.
I don't think your deleted videos were complete trash. Yes, there is speculation, but they helped me lower my expectations for GOT seasons 7 and 8 to the point where my anger / disappointment were kept to a minimum as I accepted that they would be bad.
Hey, I know this is naive but can’t people behind a show confirm things when they know there’s debate about them? Can’t Sara Hess say ‘Get, yes that was/ wasn’t my idea’ and Condal say ‘Hi, I wanted that/ that was not what I wanted’ or even ‘that was actually something we all came up with and after discussion’.
That is naive. Everyone would be happy to claim credit when it's about something successful and loved, but people won't want to stick their necks out for something that turned out to be unpopular.
Why should they? This is still only a friggin television show. I love this verse as much as the next person, but it's kinda insane how serious people take this and their takes/themselves and discourses on it. It's not and will never be a writers job to provide on-going comment on fandom discourse. And it shouldn't ever be their job to explain themselves in terms what precisely they wrote/came up with as opposed to what their colleagues wrote or came up with. I really don't want to sound mean or anything, but do you truly not see how entitled and kind of weird this is, to expected something like that?
To the point of blaming Sara Hess for Rhaenyra sneaking into King’s Landing in episode three, Hess didn’t write that episode - David Hancock did. So it doesn’t make any sense to just blame Hess for that
@@thedragondemands5186and the problem with that is all of the majority of the writing should be done by preferably one person, typically projects turn out better when there’s less hands in the pot
Thank you for this and all your smaller videos leading up to it. I've been following Savage Books for longer than your channel, because I would like to be a published author and though I am definitely not a huge ASOIAF fan I appreciate your analysis and insight for how I might improve my own writing and learning about how the film world works. I honestly didn't finish Savage Book's video because something felt off about his arguments and didn't get to the ending defense of Hess. What really grinds my gears about this topic is Savage Books presents himself as an editor as well as an author and youtuber. There have been moments where my mouse hovered over "submit" for his services. Now I won't. I don't feel like I can trust to get honest and well-reasoned feedback, especially as a queer woman writing some queer themes into my work.
I personally liked the finale. It reminded me a lot of Daenerys finally starting the travel to Westeros. It is kind of like finishing on a clifhanger. The whole season was indeed building up to gathering allies and preparing for a war on the scope of the whole realm. They also concluded a few plot-lines. Will Daemon try to overthrow Rhaenyra, will Aegon live, will Alicent step up... etc If they didn't add the Triarchy, the season would end with odds being completely on the Blacks side. This way it tilts towards the Greens more. Still asymmetrical but it's not a sense of "the greens are doomed" as it was after finding three new dragonriders for the Blacks' side
I think the network imposed certain criteria on the writers and showrunners. That's the only way I can explain why they had to include the queer mud wrestling scenes. There is plenty of LGBTQ representation both in the show and the actors. I would say over representation. That said, the only cast members I think do not carry their characters is Mysaria and Rhaeyna. and the Admiral of the Triarchy. The rest give us good performances. I don't blame the writers per se, I believe they were forced to work these scenes and characters into the story for DEI reasons. We will never know what we would have gotten if the network didn't cut 2 episodes. I still think that from episode 5 to 8 we get too much filler and repetition. The screen time could have been more wisely used. That is on the writers. DId we really need to go camping with Alicent? I would have rather seen how Aegon escaped KL. Why did we have to watch Rhaeyna chasing the dragon? I would have rather got the one canonically racially diverse character in the source material, Nettles. I blame the network for not doing everything in their power to make this show a blockbuster success. If they had to cut the budget and air time, they had lots of unsuccessful bad shows to choose from. I also believe the network insists on doing call backs to GOT, in hopes that we will accept the ending because it somehow makes more sense and is justified in HOTD. The references to Dany and the White Walkers fall flat, only re igniting my anger at how they ruined it all. The supposed prophecy is that a Targ must be on the throne to defeat the WW. But that's not what happened. There wasn't a Targaryen on the throne and Dany only played a supporting role in that battle, the big baddie was taken out by a little Stark girl.
Even if Hess’s queerness did affect her writing, so what?! Race & gender ALSO affect an author’s writing. It’s part of WHO you are! OF COURSE - to an extent - it’s affects your writing. It doesn’t mean she’s going to FORCE ‘queerness’ onto characters for no reason. 🤷♀️ ‘Savage Books’ seems to be bigoted against queer people. I hate that he’s blaming her for things that, as you pointed out, may or MAY NOT be on her. As for GOT, the first 4 seasons were SO phenomenal because they stuck fairly close to the books, which were perfect for direct adaptation because of its POV writing style. It’s started falling apart when D&D started just dropped amazing characters and plotlines. They did NOT actually “run out of source material!” Not only did they leave out the entire Dorne plotlines but also a lot of great Greyjoy characters!
Injecting queerness into the story is fine when you do it in a way that is coherent, like was done in F&B. Black Aly was a great queer character that made sense for the story, and she was removed, and in place was a made up girlboss story for no reason, in a way that directly contradicts with the narrative in F&B. This is what he means by "insert her queerness". George wrote it the way he did in the book for a reason, and he did it much better.
I feel like we also need to talk that the dance as a feminist piece makes sense it's about primugeniture if a women can rule at all And as someone who's read fire and blood more then once - the section that contains the dance has multiple queer men and at least 6 queer women I can name at the drop of a hat it's not a change from George's vision The more I think of it the more I return to the same conclusion he doesn't want asoiaf he wants GoT
@@will-ev2143 He mostly has the same complaints others have. In his interviews he complains about censorship. In his blog he complained about HoTD. He has the same complaints we have. So yes, you technically said it.
Did you know George recently said in an interview that he used to call himself a feminist but it's changed so much that he doesn't really call himself one anymore?
I mean, if you don’t like a creative decision, who cares really who to blame when they don’t tell you? It’s just a waste of speculation and goes no where - you’re still left with ‘I didn’t like it’. It will make no difference.
It took an hour and thirty-seven minutes for you to mention the most obvious motive in all this. Why? You seem to be tip-toeing around the most obvious answer. Trolls abound these days, as do shallow garbage takes. I was curious why you platformed him without comment for the last few days, and I’m sensing a strange reticence here. I’d be calling this out for its obvious anti-Hess slant, and WHY it’s so wrong on every level.
@@alanpennie I’m not sure what that even means. I know bigoted nonsense (savage books) when I see it. I don’t really care who is churning it out, quite frankly.
@@thedragondemands5186His video has a lot of views because the bulk of YT watchers are unemployed narcissistic men who watch videos all day long . The tech giants funnel this low grade content so angry people will will watch it and they will stay on the platform and therfore they can justify viewership to advertisers. Audience numbers does not equal quality. I blocked YT on my phone years ago and the only way I watch it is on TV (therefore bypassing the comment s we ction) or on mydesk top computer.
House of the dragon been awful since Season one, it was not a new development with season 2. At least in my opinion. the changes they have made havent benefited the story at all. and the writers they have I have to agree with Georges rant (though i wish he would just finish winds rather than produce shows he than blames for delaying winds) Made changes which do not benefit the story at all. The truth is it george fault. He got burned by D&D and he thought well maybe they can do Fire and blood well...nope.
I feel like his video is a perfect example of fakers in the fandom because there’s no way he uploaded that video with evidence a middle schooler would give…
![The Complete History of the Rings of Power [COMPILATION]](/img/1.gif)
In regards to writing in a series ...
I'm a huge Simpsons fan, especially of the early seasons. I've listened to all of the commentaries for seasons. The writers of this "golden age" have often pointed out that while one writer may get credit for an episode, it's a collaborative process and often ideas come from other writers or the show runners. For example, in "Lisa the Vegetarian", credited writer David S. (X) Cohen says that Homer saying "a magical, delicious animal" comes from writer John Swartzwelder and the idea for a barbecue came from show runner David Mirkin. Those early Simpsons episodes had typically 20-30 rewrites and is a big reason why the jokes usually hold up well on repeat viewings. The writers and directors admit to cutting bits of dialogue that didn't hold up well after a few readings. They sometimes had to add dialogue if something wasn't clear.
My rant is mostly trying to make the points that writing a series is a group effort and that rewrites often happen very late in production. So how could the writers strike NOT have an effect on HotD?
That should be seasons 3 through 9. I had typed it as seasons 3-9 and for some reason it disappeared and now I can't edit the comment
Im more worried about characters like Alicent Hightower being destroyed than putting in extra battles.
@@shape78-m7k yes, he stressed the battles a lot
@@shape78-m7k sorry too late. Alicent and rhaenyra are permanently ruined at this point there’s no going back.
Yeah, if people are complaining about "wanting more dragons" and wanting "more action" or "more battles" I disregard those comments. If that's someone main concern, that tells me they don't have the appropriation of the source material and george's writing that is character-focused
@@lordinquisitordunn336 When they aged down Alicent and made them BFFs , Ithat was the moment I gave up on a "faithful adaptation". I am sick of the fake feminism making female characters so aenmic
Yeah, the rewrite stuff probably fixed some of the pacing. Yet stuff like Rhaenyra and Alicent meeting and her giving up Aegon. Or omitting the fact that Rhaenys murdered thousands of people is the writer's fault, and we will probably never know whose ideas it was. I'm just upset, I want a civil war and to tear a a family apart, and I felt like I didn't get that. Especially the trailers showed something different. I didn't think that helped either.
Can't wait to watch all of this hope everyone is doing great
1:16:26 just a comment on how if Ryan and Sara stuck with fire and blood the triarchy would have been introduced earlier bc it was Otto who sent for them before his dismissal as hand
Why cant those hacks just follow the source material?
While I do agree with you that he missed a number of factual journalistic things, I would say that he does have several good points about why the writing and structure of season 2 was lacking. He should have mentioned the writers strike, but it’s often much simpler to take a look at quotes from the writer and say this is why this happened. I think that his remarks about changing the female characters have weakened them is very accurate and then the final scene breaks alicent as a character and makes her a worse person than even Cersei. The idea that everything is a mistake rather than a series of horrific revenge driven actions is a terrible idea because it makes both sides seem incompetent and it weakens the story thematically due to it making the story not about revenge and the escalation thereoff. harrenhal was pretty good if dragged on a bit long and had a really bad conclusion with the the wierwood vision, everything involving mysaria was bad and damages rhaenyra as a character going forward. There are several character inconsistencies littered throughout the season likely because of the writers not communicating properly. Since there are individual good scenes but they often contradict. His point around aegons characterization is very good where they start off with a very strong flavor for him and then walk it back for season 2 and never mention it again. Again he needed to do more behind the scenes research and reword his points but the critiques of season 2 in terms of the writing are accurate.
@@lordinquisitordunn336 yes. But blaming Sara Hess and also the fact Sapochnick left doesn’t line up with the evidence
@@thedragondemands5186 true she isn’t responsible for the bad writing solely but she is responsible for some of the worst sound bytes. It could be that she’s just a bad interview or she just doesn’t understand certain writing principles or the audience she’s writing for but either way her comments make me seriously question her intelligence.
Brilliant observations and points. Her interviews are really poor and damages perception of the show. She'll do well to steer clear of interviews in S3.
@@kofimuni8251 yeah, they should just let other members of the writing room handle pr. Hess seems like it is not her forte. It’s very much a don’t open your mouth and prove you’re a fool without doubt situation in her case.
The problem with analyzing the creative process of a work as opposed to the work itself is that exponentially more research is required before you claim anything as fact. When SB is creating his genuinely well-produced content about a show or film, a quick google search is totally acceptable to find a particular scene or line from inside the created work he's critiquing to reference and build a point from. That amount of research and analysis is appropriate when you're reading into a creative work and trying to present and support your thoughts and theories. It's a contained work.
The creative process itself, however, takes place in reality, which means it can be fact checked and verified (though not easily). To apply the same level of scrutiny to the real world as you would to an isolated work of fiction and then present your opinions as facts is....wild to me, and borderline irresponsible as a content creator. All this does is spread misinformation and encourage the people that want an easy target to blame for everything wrong in the series, especially when there are no qualifying statements in the title or front half of the video.
As far as targeting Sarah Hess specifically the only people that I’ve seen on RUclips that have a measure of clout was efap and it was minor all things considered. It was a throwaway comment by rags saying I wouldn’t be surprised if Sarah Hess was responsible for the final rhaenyra alicent scene of season 2. Everyone else seems to blame the studio. I think it’s just because she’s the person that has the worst quotes/sound bites out of a team that often have frustrating commentary on their own work. Frustrating because rather than enriching it, it is often contradictory when multiple writers on this show and make many people have to invoke death of the author/showrunner in this case and say no that’s a terrible interpretation I am not going to take the writers opinion seriously. I’m going to take the work on its own and not accept the writers commentaries into account.
While I don't blame Sara Hess for what happened and I think the personal attacks against her are awful as a writer there are definitely some questionable things in specifically the episodes she's credited with, not just Rhaenys bursting out of the floor. For example:
•Larys masterbating to Alicent's feet which thankfully they seemed to have dropped
•Helaena's prophecies suddenly being way too accurate in 2x08 when all she really needed to say was something like "Aemond, you will never be king." Something short and to the point like Alys's "You will die in this place."
•Larys trying to have a human moment with Aegon and the latter talking about his penis. Aegon not saying anything and just listening to Larys would have been better.
•Tyland mud wrestling Lohar. Just pointless.
Now yes there was the writers strike and maybe something like the mud wrestling wasn't necessarily Hess's idea - maybe it was Condal's idea that he made her put into episode 8 -but it ends up being death by a thousand cuts which is how I would describe season 2 overall.
the mud was from the novel
@@thedragondemands5186 The only mud wrestling I found was between Alyn Velaryon and Racallio during the Regency era. Is that what you're referring to?
@@EvanSol919 this was their version of Racallio
@thedragondemands5186 So then the question is why these characters combined and there's a further complication with Lohar and the young Viserys. So Lohar takes Viserys prisoner after the Gullet and later selling him to Bambarro Bazanne (as stated in Under the Regents - The Voyage of Alyn Oakenfist). Even if you take out the selling part, we're still left with a trans character capturing a little boy, taking him to another country and giving him to a stanger to be kept as a prisoner. I don't see a way out of that unless someone else captures Viserys or that the plot point is entirely cut and Viserys just makes it to Pentos.
Has it really come to this? "Anyone who doesn't like Sara Hess or all of her changes to the story must be a bigot/sexist/racist"? TDD isnt guilty of this necessarily, but a lot of the comments here are bordering that territory, and that sucks. People are allowed to dislike certain aspects of the show, regardless of who's creating it - not every critical analysis is some grift or hack, and while Savage Books was wrong in some ways there were other parts where he was spot on. It's important to remember that
Unless you've seen a part of the video i havent yet, your counter doesnt address DD's arguments. He doesn't dismiss Savage as a racist or sexist. He even begins the video by saying he's made some cogent points. DD then says the structure and the order of presentation are his immediate gripes. Additionally, an argument may be sexistly made without the person's intention. The argument is sexist not the person. Not all criticism is grift true. It's ok to criticize things you like. But we can't pretend that women are presented with 100% fair criticism ya know. We can't pretend that fault and blame is evenly and fairly placed (with proper context) on people regardless of their gender, race, sexuality etc. DD made a 2hour video wanting to add nuance to the argument, he doesn't have a 30 sec video calling DD racist and sexist and leaving it at that.
@@vansnyder4895 If you read my comment thoroughly, I actually went out of my way to NOT include DD as my target of my criticism, in fact my overall point wasn't even directed at him but rather commenters who jump on Savage Books calling him sexist/misogynist.
Also, as soon as you start throwing out subjective assertions founded in politicised sociology without objective proof, statements like "we can't pretend that women are faced with 100% fair criticism", that indirectly proves my point. I didn't even bring up the female characters or Sara Hess herself, and yet you immediately connect my "criticism of the show" to "women are treated badly in today's media" without a logical sequitur. My actual issues with the show are the lack of profound dialogue, some characters suffering zero consequences for horrendous actions that (according to the lore) should instead bear massive ramifications, and the prioritisation of spectacle and imagery over substance and character-driven dialogue.
Not once did I mention women or how they're perceived in media, and yet immediately people assume my criticisms of the show to have some connection/apologism for misogyny. It just seems like that whole misogyny issue is being used as unrelated whataboutism as a means of dismissing people's legitimate criticisms of the show.
@Howardax I'll lay this out in numbered points. Skip to 7 first please.
1 . I wrongfully assumed since you commented underneath the video that your argument was directly in response to DD’s arguments. Now that I know I was incorrect in that. Your argument makes more since. I agree, it is OK to criticize things/people you like.
2. In response to “Also, as soon as you start throwing out subjective assertions founded in politicised sociology without objective proof statements like ‘we can't pretend that women are faced with 100% fair criticism’, that indirectly proves my point. In my experience whenever I start quoting academics and philosophers that scares people off. I end up coming off snooty or arrogant which isn't my goal. If you'd like, I can give you some text from Bell Hooks, W.E.B Du Bois, Peter Rose, Jean Staszak, and Michelle Wright, bit this conversation felt to casual to bring them in. If you would like for me to, I'd like to share them with you. That would show the objectivity of my claim. However I should have said “We know sexism exist. We can not pretend that sexism plays no part in out thoughts. We can not pretend we always know and are keenly aware of how/when sexism affects our thoughts. James Baldwin described this phenomenon in his debate against Buckley in “The American Dream and The American Negro”:” That is, it depends on assumptions which we hold so deeply so as to be scarcely aware of them.
3.In your second comment you stated:”I didn't even bring up the female characters or Sara Hess herself, and yet you immediately connect my "criticism of the show" to "women are treated badly in today's media" without a logical sequitur. However, Sarah Hess was mentioned in your first comment you wrote, “"Anyone who doesn't like Sara Hess or all of her changes to the story must be a bigot/ sexist/racist"?” I could be taking this out of context. please correct me if so. I thought this was your strawman. Since I thought you were talking about Sarah Hess, I mentioned her as well. I was trying to match the flow of the conversation.
4. In response to “My actual issues with the show are the lack of profound dialogue, some characters suffering zero consequences for suffering zero consequences for horrendous actions that (according to the lore) should instead bear massive ramifications, and the prioritisation of spectacle and imagery over substance and character-driven dialogue” Amen Brother. I have nothing negative to say, nor anything to add. Great point.
5. In response to “in fact my overall point wasn't even directed at him but rather commenters who jump on Savage Books calling him sexist/misogynist.” Savage Books made arguments in a way that, at the very least, have the potential to bolster and legitimate sexist/misogynist or homophonic ideas. I would say his personality is that of a sexist or misogynist. Any ism or phobia is a product of your environment, not who you are. In short, I agree, he is getting short-changed. (Damn that was kind of redundant.
6. In response to “Not once did I mention women or how they're perceived in media.” As far as I know Sarah Hess is a woman.
It isn't crazy to say the show made bad decisions and at the same time, there is an undue scrutiny placed on Hess for these decisions. Critical Analysis needs nuance.
7.I try to make all of my arguments in good faith. Using logic to debate the arguments made instead of the person making them. I hate ad hominems. Please read in a conversational tone rather than an argumentative one
8. "Savage Books was wrong in some ways there were other parts where he was spot on. It's important to remember that" I agree.
Sara Hess wrote 4 eps only one was good (2.2)
@@vansnyder4895 I apologise for how I initially came off. Looking back, I was overtly defensive and insulting, when you've actually made some great points without attacking my character, so thank you. I'm just used to people eventually reverting to some ad hominem that I became what I feared in my expectations, sorry for assuming your character when you're actually very coherent and well-rounded in your arguments.
While I do still disagree with some of your assertions concerning sexism, I am not familiar enough with the works you cited to directly challenge your points, so I won't challenge or disavow your claims even though I do disagree with the conclusion. Looks like you and I agree on quite a bit despite coming from different political perspectives concerning the show (particularly in regard to the writing and pacing issues I mentioned earlier), I'm glad my perspective made a bit more sense upon elaboration in my second response.
Edit: As to Sara Hess, which I forgot to actually elaborate on (I mentioned her in passing more as a reference to Savage Books' focus rather than the focal point of my criticism, but in hindsight I can see how that might be lost in translation). I have mixed feelings on her as a writer in terms of character decisions. She's made some great choices in adapting a tough body of work, and I certainly trust that - with a bit more focus on the subtextual elements that made GoT and Paddy Considine's performance in HOTD so multi-layered and fascinating - she can deliver a high-quality adaptation.
However, I do believe that she has made genuine mistakes (as have all of the showrunners, it's definitely not exclusive to Hess), and being outspoken about being involved in some of the more controversial decisions has led people to deign her as a figurehead for those controversial aspects for the show. As a result of this figurehead assignment, toxic actors on both extreme sides of the dumb "culture war" going on view her either through a sexist light as a witch incarnate "making muh fantasy woke", or seen by the other side as a defenseless victim of mass misogyny and grifters, and that her writing and casting choices are beyond reproach.
I'd say Sara Hess being so targeted is sadly more a symptom of how divisive our society is, right down to our consumption of entertainment. I do believe that she'd be just as harshly criticised as a man would in her position (look at DnD and how they are publicly RINSED even years later for how they massacred GoT, not including the death threats they received). However, I will concede that some people are letting their scars from GoT blind them towards making overly harsh judgments concerning HOTD and Hess herself, which is unwarranted and unhelpful for those wanting to make legitimate criticisms.
I was rather let down by the SB video because the title actually had me pretty excited. I think there's some real room to discuss the idea that in recent years writers and producers are indulging in the "fan-ficification" of various properties rather than adapting them. This isn't specific to HotD - I think one could make the argument that D&D started to do this heavily after S4 and several other large adaptions have followed suit. I've been struck in recent years by how, when I read interviews with producers and writers, there's such a large focus on "me" statements. I feel like I rarely see them discussing the intentions of the author or the themes of the original work. Instead, it's always "I really wanted to do XYZ bc this is very important to me/us" or "We had to add this because this is so important to me and this property was lacking it." I have often left the interviews feeling like the writers/producers probably like the characters but want to move them into their own sandboxes, like a fanfiction. And I further think it would be interesting to ask whether this is the result of studios refusing to make anything that isn't an adaption. If you're a young writer who wants to write original screenplays, but your only source of employment is the next GOT adaptation, does that foster a breeding ground for you to deviate from the source material so that your ideas can get into the world?
Yet, the video just attributed everything wrong with the show to one very specific writer, like Hess rules the writers room with an iron fist, dictating to her little minions who just fearfully follow orders I guess. I didn't even make it to the part of the video where he admits Hess can't be responsible for everything because I just couldn't hear him drone on and on about how she is personally responsible for misinterpreting everything in HotD. It felt very mean spirited and targeted in a way I wasn't expecting. There is a reason that GRRM mentions Condal and not Hess - it is the showrunners job to look at the overall plot of the series, the important themes, the high points, and help craft the episodes to fit that. Hess is not leaning over everyone's shoulders, waiting to report them to HR if Rhaenyra doesn't kiss a woman.
It's fine to criticize writing decisions and even say you think the writers sucked or got it wrong. But called out specific writers is not productive because even if they say something was "their" idea in an interview, decisions are not made in a vacuum and that idea went through multiple channels before it came into the world. We're just opening the door for cyberbullying of individuals. Like, if you must call out someone by name, the only one you can even justify is the showrunner - and frankly, depending on the complaint, that's not always helpful either.
@@Flyingpinkrhinos skip to 1 hour 13 minutes in his video and watch to the end
My friend got miss informed by him and I had to spend the entire day explaining why the video is wrong, I ha so for making this to put it out in better words
*misinformed
@@carastone3473 dammit text to speech while I’m driving 😂 thank you lol
@@LionOfGondorwhat did he misinforme him about?
The main problem with season 2 is that it was boring. I legit would fast forward scenes cause I got so bored.
@@MadIvano such as?
His point about the writers deliberately leaving out a battle in favor of a Rhaenyra and Alicent scene just demonstrates how little he did research for his video.
What's more likely the case is that the Rhaenyra and Alicent scene was meant to give the season some sort of closure because they weren't able to do their planned battle.
It boggles me that this guy pulled a lot of his arguments clearly out of his ass and his audience accepted as fact simply because he presented it as such. Definitely shows the potential dangers of a RUclipsr's influence over their audience.
Seriously, I am so sick of hearing/reading "they ran out of source material!"
Imagine if I had 15 chairs in my home and 7 were take and I said "where there's just nowhere to sit i have to buy new chairs" bad analogy but just how stupid it is "they ran out of source material"
i still can't get over the mental gymnastics ppl do to defend d&d yet are willing to blame one writer via inductive reasoning of "we got fans hate illogical plot points"
Such is the reasoning of the dyed-in-the-wool grifter and I smelled a grift from the get go of the previous 3 clips. Classic bait and switch for the clicks and his post is gaining traction and ballooning. Money, money, money will flow his way and the YT algorithm will tilt to his channel. What's even more galling, is the fact that behaviour like his, has been normalized in real life. After all's said and done, we're still mired in the era of alternative facts, spin and selective truths, n'est ce pas?...
The difference is that GoT was must watch tv for the first 4 seasons. HotD is shovelware at best.
@@MadIvano lmaoo everyone was prasing hotd s1 , just cuz s2 had missing stuff and a few flaws doesn't make it shovelware. GOT lacked a lot of stuff from books and was mainly riding on politics
At some point, you could make a video summarizing all the cuts made by Zaslav, since the are not restricted to Asoiaf but affect a lot of popular franchises.
@@marcneef795 well that’s a good idea but I’m not as familiar with all of them
I feel like the last bit of his video is a 'get out of jail free card' type of thing.
He spends ages crapping on Hess, but if someone tries to criticise him he can point at that small segment to say "See? I didn't really say it."
....maybe?
Peple keep talking about how Sara Hess ruined House of the Dragon but IMO Geeta Patel, Eileen Shim and David Hancock are the ones who ruined HotD. They also deserve a lot of flack for their terrible writing/direction but they don't get hate like Sara. HotD S1Ep8 has 9.3 rating on IMDB but for me, entire show was completely ruined as soon as Rhnyra-Ali patched up and became friends in that episode. Many fans loved the dinner scene but that whole Rhanyra-Alicent friendship vibe in that scene is where HotD got wrecked and never recovered!! I just don't understand how Rhaenyra and Alicecent friendship can happen in S1Ep8 after so many things had happened before that. Once that stupid Criston Cole confession scene happened about Rhanyra's "lies" and Luke gouged out Aemond's eye, Alicent just can not believe Rhaenyra as her 'old friend' ever again. I just don't get what kinda ultimate "friendship" they have...! (I recently realized that Sara Hess hinted that Rhani-Cent were former loves which was NEVER established in the show). In reality, people end friendships on much small matters than whatever happened between Rhnyra-Alicent! Just ask yourself what would you do if some kid blinds your son...like come on....! About Sara Hess, yes, she also deserves getting criticised but she was a scapegoat. The S1Ep9 Alicent vs Otto race to capture Aegon was hilariously dumb writing. I don't understand that plot by Sara Hess at all. Rhaenys killing hundreds of people in dragonpit was the WORST!
Then we have S2Ep3, Directed by Geeta Patel and written by David Hancock is when show truly died for me. We see Rhaenys telling Rhaenyra that she can meet Alicent and somehow stop war. Like..HOW THE F?? What does Rhaenys think thats gonna happen? How Alicent and Rhnyra would stop the war when it is established both wants the throne at any cost? when both sides already lost their prince? There was an literal assassination attempt of Rhaenyra but yet, Rhaenys/Rhaenyra wants peace. This is when we see a hateful misandry quote from Rhaenys when she says all men are blood thirsty and its women who are logical. That was absolutely horrible writing and it upsets me that no one calls out Geeta Patel/David Hancock for that. It was dumb Rhaenys who tells rhaneyra to meet alicent and that whole plot in S2Ep3 was nonsense.
Then, we saw whole Alicent arc getting BUTCHERED! In S1, it was Alicent who TAUGHT and BOMBARADED her sons with HER HATE FOR RHAENYRA. The Strong b@stard thing was taught by Alicent to Aemond/Aegon, so they started hating Strongs and especially Aemond started believing that his faction deserve the throne. There's also one scene in S1 when Alicent straight up shouts at kid-Aegon that YOU WILL BECOME KING; ITS YOUR RIGHT! Thats the REAL Alicent of book BUT when her sons embraced that hate; Alicent suddenly becomes soft and becomes friends with Rhaenyra S1Ep8. Its a horrendous character motive change of Alicent, which was written by Eileen Shim but she doesn't get criticism as much as Sara Hess. I don't think many people even know her name.
Honestly, I find all this whining about the show supposedly being ruined completely excessive and yet another fab (in a sad way) example of how internet fandoms of big franchises like this are just flat out ruining them for themselves. This show is on season 2. There's zero patience in letting them finish some of their takes on the material first, now it's all doom and gloom and whining about how everything is forever ruined. Only for the same people to then tune in again yet again for the coming seasons so they can obsesses some more over stuff they claim to not like at all. Which, honestly, if this is what you all enjoy spending your free time on, whatever. I do enjoy fandom and fandom discourse as well. But with this franchise in particular I feel more and more like people really do should go outside sometimes and touch a bit of grass. Because with all due respect at the end of the day it is still only a television show and one that is based on a few novellas and a faux historiography. You certainly don't need to agree with the way these writers and producers tried to piece them together and work with what I believe is a rather refreshing take on the historiography approach of F&B in principle, but some of the way these people are being targeted and all of this over a television is truly just excessive to me and makes me not want to go anywhere near any major media franchise anymore because or truly just stay away from online discourse altogether.
@@TheTufaninho how is it excessive when every point i made is perfectly logical? You mention "let them finish the material first" but S2 finale has already completely annhilated the essence of story.
I don't think your deleted videos were complete trash. Yes, there is speculation, but they helped me lower my expectations for GOT seasons 7 and 8 to the point where my anger / disappointment were kept to a minimum as I accepted that they would be bad.
Hey, I know this is naive but can’t people behind a show confirm things when they know there’s debate about them? Can’t Sara Hess say ‘Get, yes that was/ wasn’t my idea’ and Condal say ‘Hi, I wanted that/ that was not what I wanted’ or even ‘that was actually something we all came up with and after discussion’.
That is naive. Everyone would be happy to claim credit when it's about something successful and loved, but people won't want to stick their necks out for something that turned out to be unpopular.
Why should they? This is still only a friggin television show. I love this verse as much as the next person, but it's kinda insane how serious people take this and their takes/themselves and discourses on it. It's not and will never be a writers job to provide on-going comment on fandom discourse. And it shouldn't ever be their job to explain themselves in terms what precisely they wrote/came up with as opposed to what their colleagues wrote or came up with. I really don't want to sound mean or anything, but do you truly not see how entitled and kind of weird this is, to expected something like that?
To the point of blaming Sara Hess for Rhaenyra sneaking into King’s Landing in episode three, Hess didn’t write that episode - David Hancock did. So it doesn’t make any sense to just blame Hess for that
Well she collaborated on specific dialogue, but the point is that such a big structural element wasn’t chosen by one writer
@@thedragondemands5186and the problem with that is all of the majority of the writing should be done by preferably one person, typically projects turn out better when there’s less hands in the pot
Thank you for this and all your smaller videos leading up to it. I've been following Savage Books for longer than your channel, because I would like to be a published author and though I am definitely not a huge ASOIAF fan I appreciate your analysis and insight for how I might improve my own writing and learning about how the film world works. I honestly didn't finish Savage Book's video because something felt off about his arguments and didn't get to the ending defense of Hess. What really grinds my gears about this topic is Savage Books presents himself as an editor as well as an author and youtuber. There have been moments where my mouse hovered over "submit" for his services. Now I won't. I don't feel like I can trust to get honest and well-reasoned feedback, especially as a queer woman writing some queer themes into my work.
that last part of Savage's video is most important you need to watch to end - he suddenly has very large claims at the end
I personally liked the finale. It reminded me a lot of Daenerys finally starting the travel to Westeros. It is kind of like finishing on a clifhanger. The whole season was indeed building up to gathering allies and preparing for a war on the scope of the whole realm.
They also concluded a few plot-lines. Will Daemon try to overthrow Rhaenyra, will Aegon live, will Alicent step up... etc
If they didn't add the Triarchy, the season would end with odds being completely on the Blacks side. This way it tilts towards the Greens more. Still asymmetrical but it's not a sense of "the greens are doomed" as it was after finding three new dragonriders for the Blacks' side
I think the network imposed certain criteria on the writers and showrunners. That's the only way I can explain why they had to include the queer mud wrestling scenes. There is plenty of LGBTQ representation both in the show and the actors. I would say over representation. That said, the only cast members I think do not carry their characters is Mysaria and Rhaeyna. and the Admiral of the Triarchy. The rest give us good performances. I don't blame the writers per se, I believe they were forced to work these scenes and characters into the story for DEI reasons. We will never know what we would have gotten if the network didn't cut 2 episodes. I still think that from episode 5 to 8 we get too much filler and repetition. The screen time could have been more wisely used. That is on the writers. DId we really need to go camping with Alicent? I would have rather seen how Aegon escaped KL. Why did we have to watch Rhaeyna chasing the dragon? I would have rather got the one canonically racially diverse character in the source material, Nettles. I blame the network for not doing everything in their power to make this show a blockbuster success. If they had to cut the budget and air time, they had lots of unsuccessful bad shows to choose from. I also believe the network insists on doing call backs to GOT, in hopes that we will accept the ending because it somehow makes more sense and is justified in HOTD. The references to Dany and the White Walkers fall flat, only re igniting my anger at how they ruined it all. The supposed prophecy is that a Targ must be on the throne to defeat the WW. But that's not what happened. There wasn't a Targaryen on the throne and Dany only played a supporting role in that battle, the big baddie was taken out by a little Stark girl.
Even if Hess’s queerness did affect her writing, so what?! Race & gender ALSO affect an author’s writing. It’s part of WHO you are! OF COURSE - to an extent - it’s affects your writing. It doesn’t mean she’s going to FORCE ‘queerness’ onto characters for no reason. 🤷♀️
‘Savage Books’ seems to be bigoted against queer people. I hate that he’s blaming her for things that, as you pointed out, may or MAY NOT be on her.
As for GOT, the first 4 seasons were SO phenomenal because they stuck fairly close to the books, which were perfect for direct adaptation because of its POV writing style. It’s started falling apart when D&D started just dropped amazing characters and plotlines. They did NOT actually “run out of source material!” Not only did they leave out the entire Dorne plotlines but also a lot of great Greyjoy characters!
Injecting queerness into the story is fine when you do it in a way that is coherent, like was done in F&B.
Black Aly was a great queer character that made sense for the story, and she was removed, and in place was a made up girlboss story for no reason, in a way that directly contradicts with the narrative in F&B. This is what he means by "insert her queerness".
George wrote it the way he did in the book for a reason, and he did it much better.
@@carastone3473 because poorly written and illogical depictions of queerness in media hurts the cause more than it helps.
I feel like we also need to talk that the dance as a feminist piece makes sense it's about primugeniture if a women can rule at all
And as someone who's read fire and blood more then once - the section that contains the dance has multiple queer men and at least 6 queer women I can name at the drop of a hat it's not a change from George's vision
The more I think of it the more I return to the same conclusion he doesn't want asoiaf he wants GoT
So George doesn't want asoiaf he wants GoT?
@@Jamesxx15 that is literally not what I said
@@will-ev2143 He mostly has the same complaints others have. In his interviews he complains about censorship. In his blog he complained about HoTD.
He has the same complaints we have.
So yes, you technically said it.
@@Jamesxx15 No, it's not at all what was said. You're still misunderstanding the original comment.
Did you know George recently said in an interview that he used to call himself a feminist but it's changed so much that he doesn't really call himself one anymore?
I mean, if you don’t like a creative decision, who cares really who to blame when they don’t tell you? It’s just a waste of speculation and goes no where - you’re still left with ‘I didn’t like it’. It will make no difference.
It took an hour and thirty-seven minutes for you to mention the most obvious motive in all this. Why? You seem to be tip-toeing around the most obvious answer. Trolls abound these days, as do shallow garbage takes. I was curious why you platformed him without comment for the last few days, and I’m sensing a strange reticence here. I’d be calling this out for its obvious anti-Hess slant, and WHY it’s so wrong on every level.
It's not The Critical Drinker we're talking about.
This is a reputable channel.
@@asdlogician6536 his video has a lot of views so I’m thoroughly reacting point by point
@@alanpennie exactly
@@alanpennie I’m not sure what that even means. I know bigoted nonsense (savage books) when I see it. I don’t really care who is churning it out, quite frankly.
@@thedragondemands5186His video has a lot of views because the bulk of YT watchers are unemployed narcissistic men who watch videos all day long . The tech giants funnel this low grade content so angry people will will watch it and they will stay on the platform and therfore they can justify viewership to advertisers. Audience numbers does not equal quality. I blocked YT on my phone years ago and the only way I watch it is on TV (therefore bypassing the comment s we ction) or on mydesk top computer.
Please don’t mention Emergency Awesome as a fan channel. 😂😂 he is truly not. 😂😂
@@jabarimuhammad well he’s a big channel and he blamed the studio
Guys but for real am I the only one who thought the narrator was a white guy. My boy looks fine as hell like damn bro what's your insta ❤
He definitely keeps in shape.
Who SBs or TDDs?
House of the dragon been awful since Season one, it was not a new development with season 2. At least in my opinion. the changes they have made havent benefited the story at all. and the writers they have I have to agree with Georges rant (though i wish he would just finish winds rather than produce shows he than blames for delaying winds) Made changes which do not benefit the story at all.
The truth is it george fault. He got burned by D&D and he thought well maybe they can do Fire and blood well...nope.
But you’re still watching it?
I thought Season 1 was great. Season 2 felt like fan fiction in comparison. 🤷♀️
@@carastone3473 no gave up after season 1 cause how disappointing I found S1
🙄I miss the OLD content ⚠️ Who cares what this guy is making videos about 😂 Where are more video about dragon breeds and dragon biology ‼️
viewership is down across the board, makes more sense to wait for the Dunk & Egg trailers
I feel like his video is a perfect example of fakers in the fandom because there’s no way he uploaded that video with evidence a middle schooler would give…
@@az-dx7iq what do you mean?
37:40 Emily Carey uses they/them pronouns.
@@soraminamichishiro538 oh I thought listed as “she/they”
@@thedragondemands5186 Emily Carey went from she/they to preferring only they. They have said they feel more comfortable not being gendered.
@@soraminamichishiro538 ah, yes