Tuesday, April 2, 2013

The Throne

Comcast hosted their "Watchathon" last week where viewers could stream almost their entire catalog of TV shows for free.  The general idea is that customers would get hooked on those shows and pay to continue their viewing experience.

Not a bad idea unless you run into a cheapskate like me.  Their price per episode ($3 to $6 per) is way too high.  Particularly when I can use my Netflix account to get the DVDs.

However, it was a great opportunity to start watching the HBO series "A Game Of Thrones".  I made it through season 1 and had a couple of thoughts to offer.

One of the current trends in fiction is for authors to create some sort of mega-world where they can create a series of books.  While this is not exactly a new phenomenon, it does seem to be a bit more in favor these days.

Unfortunately, many of those series do not produce the level of narrative and character development to justify a multi-part story.  It appears from this consumer's perspective that many of these series exist only because the first one or two books were sufficiently promoted to create a sort of reader inertia that carries sales down the line.

Thankfully, George R.R. Martin's "The Game of Thrones" series does not fall into this category.  I have read the first four books.  I will read the fifth after I place an order for the physical paperback or the Kindle version price comes back to earth.

If find it particularly galling to pay more for an e-book than I would pay for a physical paperback.

In watching the HBO series, I was reminded of how much I have missed these characters.  In particular, I am curious about Arya as well as about John Snow dealing with the coming winter.  Well written characters and plots create an almost effortless invitation to return to the next installment of a series.

As I have previously observed, Hollywood has undergone a significant change over the last 40 years.  This change was immediately apparent in the HBO series.  Each episode included at least one or two images of full frontal nudity.  Sometimes it was to depict sexual liaisons.  At other times it was associated with some sort of punishment.  Almost every time, I was struck by the fact that recent films shown in a real theater almost never contain that level of nudity.

Blood?  Sure.

Gore?  Of course.

Explosions, bullets, rockets?  By the traincar load.

Deaths?  They stack up the bodies like firewood!

Cursing?  Hell yeah.

Nudity?  By comparison, it is a sidelight at best.

Far more eloquent observers have pointed out the apparent hypocrisy of Hollywood showing people killing one another with reckless abandon while simultaneously being unwilling to show people loving one another. 

No comments: