Game of Thrones: House of the Dragon!

[Shaibana]

Suits will keep me going for a while, new season's almost upon us.

Don't think I'll be reading the books. I like having a couple of great TV series where I don't know everything, and there aren't many shows that capture me at the moment, so I'll let GoT & Suits carry me as far as they can.

thats why you should read after the series.
ive started with book one, but i will make sure that i dont catch up on the tv show.
ive read ahead with Harry potter once.. it ruined the movie

[Del Murder]

There's other books out there to read. I think I can hold off. After some of what happened this season, I'm in no hurry to read more.

[Rantz]

Yeah that was a sad scene. I think it was done well and I'm glad Ygritte shooting him was not omitted from the show.

I get the impression that she was planning on killing him but couldn't bring herself to do it so she just shot him where it hurts instead. I don't know if that's how it was in the books, though. Sad all around

book spoilsI think she genuinely did try to kill him in the book, but it's never really hinted to one way or another, I suppose. It's just that it happens when Jon flees from the group - Ygritte never follows him. And she only puts the one arrow in his leg as he's riding away.

[Shaibana]

Yeah that was a sad scene. I think it was done well and I'm glad Ygritte shooting him was not omitted from the show.

I get the impression that she was planning on killing him but couldn't bring herself to do it so she just shot him where it hurts instead. I don't know if that's how it was in the books, though. Sad all around

book spoilsI think she genuinely did try to kill him in the book, but it's never really hinted to one way or another, I suppose. It's just that it happens when Jon flees from the group - Ygritte never follows him. And she only puts the one arrow in his leg as he's riding away.

your spoiler failed :P

edit: when i fist came back to this thread the spoiler was open :P

[Jinx]

The Harry Potter books didn't ruin the movies. The movies just really weren't that good. (Although they still have a special place in my heart, and I bawled like a baby at the end of Deathly Hallows Pt. 2)

Shauna--it's not a few months. IT'S MORE LIKE 9 MONTHS.

[Pike]

You guys are weird; the Harry Potter movies were great.

Speaking of which:

970667_373813192730332_611463780_n.jpg

[Jinx]

The Harry Potter movies are great if you recognize that they're not incredibly faithful translations of the books, and appreciate them for what they are. I guess you missed the part where I said that they have a special place in my heart/I love them.

[Shaibana]

haha thats funny

but about the harry potter movies: it wasnt ruined becaus the movie were That bad, but becaus i have read the books i saw alot of missing stuff and things that happen different in the books.

[NorthernChaosGod]

Because the books are better.

[charliepanayi]

Of course stuff is different between a book and a film, it's called adaptation. In fact some have said the Harry Potter films only improved once they stopped slavishly following the source material.

[Bunny]

Books will almost always be better than their film adaptations because of the sheer freedom that an author has in writing a scene. People need to stop comparing films and books so closely to each other without realizing that the reason things, primarily books, get adapted into films is to reach a wider audience and to show a different side of the original story.

[Del Murder]

Yeah with a book you have almost no restrictions on what you can do when in a movie or show there are obviously budget, time, and personnel restrictions to deal with. Which is why I like when they take a more creative license with the source material to adapt it to different media. GoT does this well in some respects (the Arya/Tywin stuff, Rob's storyline) and not in others (having Bran do basically nothing all season until the last episode).

[McLovin']

You guys are weird; the Harry Potter movies were great.

Speaking of which:

970667_373813192730332_611463780_n.jpg

who gives a crap that she was in Harry Potter!? She had no role! She was the damn mother of Nathan in Misfits! That's where people should recognize her performance.

[The Man]

Pretty sure David Bradley wasn't in Misfits, so you can't make good jokes about one character killing the other.

As an aside if Michelle Fairley isn't at least nominated for an Emmy or SAG for her performance this year I'll be extremely surprised.

major, major Season 4 spoilersShe's also been cast for Suits. Not that Stoneheart is going to be a particularly large role, but I hope this doesn't mean she's leaving the show.

[Roogle]

major, major Season 4 spoilersShe's also been cast for Suits. Not that Stoneheart is going to be a particularly large role, but I hope this doesn't mean she's leaving the show.[/theman]

Spoilers for A Feast For CrowsLady Stoneheart only appears twice in the text so far, so you're right that it may be a smaller role, but Michelle Fairley has read the books and hints that Lady Stoneheart will be coming in one of her interviews about the Red Wedding.