What? S4 should be the best. Then who cares about season 5.

Yeah, I can't wait to watch purple wedding, tyrion/tywin showdown, and the mountain vs red viper on screen.

After that, I'm struggling to come up with book scenes that I'm excited to watch play out. Well, unless you count the sexytime scenes with Dany and Irri or Cersai and Taena?

Dany and the dragon
Quentyn and the dragon
Barristan and khrazz
Victarion doing things

Thats about it

Good chance most of those won't make it to the show. I wouldn't be surprised to see both Quentyn and Victarion cut.

Yeah, Quentyn and the dragon would be pretty good. I guess I'm also interested to see how they cast the Sand Sisters, although I fear the Dorn scenes may be minimized by HBO in an effort to keep the number of characters in check.

We dont know about victarion. He may play a big role going after dany.

Those trailers are some of the most spoilery things ever posted in the GoT TV thread.

I think the idea of the unreliable narrator is a pretty central theme to ASOIF. We see Shae as a loving girlfriend to Tyrion because that's what he conveys. It's just as likely that she was a whore playing her role and when the money dried up so did her concern for Tyrion.

I think most things translate well from the books to the screen, but there is almost no way in hell that the TV show can equal the pure badassery of the Barristan vs. Khrazz moment.

I mean it's almost perfect as written

Dany and Drogon are like a lock to be the final scene of season 5, because no matter if they fill the other 9 episodes with the inane crap from AFFC and ADWD, that scene will basically redeem the entire season.

I really hope they can convey how ****ing ridiculously good Barristan is. It's much easier to do in print than conveying it through a 65 year old actor

I wonder how long they'll take to reintroduce her after that scene.

I don't think that's an example of an unreliable narrator. An unreliable narrator is one who lies to the readers.

GRRM has plenty of stupid or deluded or misinformed narrators, but each portray the world as they see it.

Beginning to think nobody's request will be approved in the other thread and it's just a way to label bookreaders easily. lol

They should put scarlet Bs in our undertitles.

I can only imagine the butthurt once the denieds start rolling in.

Subbed. I agree could have just kept the old "spoilers allowed" thread while starting the new "no bookreaders" other thread, however it's easy enough to search/quote for the old one if you want to see it. And if this will end the excruciating bookreaders allowed arguments aidsing up two otherwise good threads, then hallelujah.

An unreliable narrator doesn't have to be deliberately misleading the audience. Stupid and deluded and misinformed narrators are all examples of unreliable narrators.

GOT deaths in 8-bit Style
http://imgur.com/a/q3cE0

Sometimes I forget Freakin is a book reader.

This is correct.

I hope Victarion isnt cut and shows up next season. It will be harder to convince my hypothetical wife to name our hypothetical son Victarion if he doesnt even make the cut on the show.

"Bookreader" isn't a word.

Perhaps this is an argument of semantics, but from that point of view, virtually all narrators (except omniscient POV narrators) are unreliable. Because they are all presenting the world from their point of view with all their biases, and based on their limited knowledge about what is happening.

I would only call narrators unreliable when they misrepresent the truth whether deliberately or through madness or extreme simpleness. Like the narrator-detective in the Agatha Christie mystery who was the real murderer. Like Tyler Durden in Fight Club, or the Russell Crowe character in Beautiful Mind, or Verbal in Usual Suspects.

If you call Tyrion an unreliable narrator simply because Shae can deceive him about her true motives, then you take away all meaning from the term.

If Tyrion was to turn out to actually have ordered the hit on Bran, after us being privy to his thoughts which indicated he didn't, then he'd be an unreliable narrator.

As far as I'm concerned, the narrators in GoT are often wrong, but, because we can trust that their thoughts (and descriptions of what happened) are true, they are all reliable narrators.

Wikipedia is right:
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unreliable_narrator
The Naïf: A narrator whose perception is immature or limited through his or her point of view.Examples of naïves include*Huckleberry Finn,Holden Caulfield, and*Forrest Gump

We are getting to the citation game now. Your definition is different to the widely accepted definition.

Huckleberry Finn (a child)
Holden Caulfield (crazy)
and Forrest Gump (extremely simple)

from the same wiki:
"An unreliable narrator is a narrator, whether in literature, film, or theatre, whose credibility has been seriously compromised."

Tyrion has been seriously comprised how? He doesn't see through Shae. Is there any evidence that most people would see through her? Is anyone who falls in love or lust now an unreliable narrator? I think the list would be longer than just those three if that was true.

Perhaps you could argue that Bran is an unreliable narrator because he is very young and described Jaime and Cersei as fighting when they were shagging. Sansa was naive, but in the normal way of teenage girls, I certainly wouldn't describe her as seriously compromised.

I am not going to repeat that quote above. It literally proves you wrong.

jesus christ this is worse than the threads discussion