[Cyphon]

Battalion, on 20 May 2011 - 10:28 AM, said:

QuickTidal, on 18 May 2011 - 12:45 PM, said:

Battalion, on 18 May 2011 - 07:20 AM, said:

Even given the fact that there were only 'slight' undertones of this in the book, I see no need for a homosexual scene of this kind.

See, now why on earth is it cool for there to be umpteen "whore and *insert lord here*" scenes that are used as a way to tell the story, but you aren't cool when it's a gay one?

Er, because Im not gay and I don't feel comfortable having stuff like that rammed down my throat - pun intended - and also because it's not in the book and the other scenes are.

Bauchelain the Evil, on 18 May 2011 - 03:47 PM, said:

To all those bothered by the Renly/Loras scene: Really in the book it was all but stated clear. Renly wants Loras to go and "pray" with him the night before the battle. Stannis makes some rather telling comments during the parlay. Loras go in a killing frenzy when Renly dies. Loras is more upset than Margaery at Renly's death. Jaime tells him he'll stick his sword "where not even Renly did".

He was head of Renly's King's Guard, so he's bound to pissed when he gets killed. Being 'all but stated clear' and having the scene go down the way it did - pun intended - are totally different.

QuickTidal, on 19 May 2011 - 11:03 AM, said:

Gothos, on 19 May 2011 - 09:27 AM, said:

Aight, so I finally watched it.
Great so far!
Though: I don't exactly recall the relationship between Renly and Loras being ever explicitly stated like this. It was all hush hush and I don't think that making it so clear did the series good.

See upthread as to how we all thought it makes the series better, or Renly better for down the road.

We didn't ALL think it made the series better. I found it uncomfortable to watch and nobody on here's going to make me change my opinion on that. There were plenty of other ways to get the point across that the two men were close, but I found this hard to swallow - pun intended.

I dont like the whorehouse scenes.

Er, because Im not straight and I don't feel comfortable having stuff like that rammed down my throat - pun intended - and also because it's not in the book and the other scenes are.

Sheeesh.

This post has been edited by Cyphon: 20 May 2011 - 10:49 AM

[Tapper]

Battalion, on 20 May 2011 - 10:28 AM, said:

QuickTidal, on 18 May 2011 - 12:45 PM, said:

Battalion, on 18 May 2011 - 07:20 AM, said:

Even given the fact that there were only 'slight' undertones of this in the book, I see no need for a homosexual scene of this kind.

See, now why on earth is it cool for there to be umpteen "whore and *insert lord here*" scenes that are used as a way to tell the story, but you aren't cool when it's a gay one?

Er, because Im not gay and I don't feel comfortable having stuff like that rammed down my throat - pun intended - and also because it's not in the book and the other scenes are.

There have been a great many scenes so far which have been adapted, omitted or outright added to what we know from the book.

You not being gay has nothing to do with it. It is almost as if you're trying to say that any real heterosexual should object to this. Well, plenty of straight people don't object to it (me included). D'rek already said she liked the scene.

You are not comfortable with it, others probably aren't either - entirely your moral right - but to outright say it should not be in there in the episode because of your feelings about gay people goes way too far. basically, what you are asking is the show to pretend that there is no such thing as homosexual relationships in the book.

Besides, GRRM is attached to the project as advisor and even as director. If he didn't approve, I bet this scene would not have been there.

Furthermore, HBO is allowed to show whatever they want, without paying attention to public conventions and whatnot. By watching one of their shows, you more or less know you can be subject to stuff that is shocking compared to regular TV and to your conventions.

Quote

We didn't ALL think it made the series better. I found it uncomfortable to watch and nobody on here's going to make me change my opinion on that. There were plenty of other ways to get the point across that the two men were close, but I found this hard to swallow - pun intended.

Maybe if you were to relax and stop clenching your butt cheeks, this wouldn't be such a rough and painful introduction to on-screen manlove for you.

Crude pun fully intended.

[Ulrik]

Strange... I had no problems with gay scene. I think it was made pretty realistic way ... no too romantic babbling, but not only "come, push it into me, its only way we like"... it looks natural. Maybe its not realistic, but its like I imagine gay "happy times"...pretty same as hetero )

Gothos: Well, yeah, thats mystery, isnt it? Many people say "ewww" on gay contact (OK, show me gay porn and I´ll close my eyes very tightly), but with lesbian its OK...where could be difference...mhmmm mhmmmm....

[Tapper]

Gothos, on 20 May 2011 - 10:42 AM, said:

Call me primitive but I find gay sex revolting and makes me sick in the stomach. Curious how it's not so with lesbians!

That's because it has double the amount of interesting goodies on display.

[Ulrik]

And for importance of the scene. In books, its many many many times hinted, but not in key dialogues. Series dont have space for it. And it is part of Renly´s style and it also says why isnt Loras too fond of marriage and got berserk after ... you know after what. And why he went... well, you know where he went

[Tsundoku]

Did somebody say "lesbians"?

[MTS]

Tapper said it best I think.

I don't feel like it was being 'shoved down our throat' anyway. The shaving and the overt revelation of his homosexuality served a clear thematic purpose in establishing Renly's character in clear counterpoint to Robert, in removing Renly from all characteristics that define Robert as a man (war, big bushy beard, orgies etc.), and setting him up for future seasons. It was barely even shown anyway, just Loras' head going down and Renly's face changing for a second. If you think this is 'shoving it down our throat,' go watch Six Feet Under. I'm curious as to what you think should have happened instead, considering Renly's motivation was always rather unclear in the books, and his homosexuality easily missed (I know I missed it the first time). It's easy to criticise something as unnecessary, but it's much harder to illuminate complex motivations for a huge host of characters in a short space of time.

[Battalion]

Cyphon, on 20 May 2011 - 10:48 AM, said:

Battalion, on 20 May 2011 - 10:28 AM, said:

QuickTidal, on 18 May 2011 - 12:45 PM, said:

Battalion, on 18 May 2011 - 07:20 AM, said:

Even given the fact that there were only 'slight' undertones of this in the book, I see no need for a homosexual scene of this kind.

See, now why on earth is it cool for there to be umpteen "whore and *insert lord here*" scenes that are used as a way to tell the story, but you aren't cool when it's a gay one?

Er, because Im not gay and I don't feel comfortable having stuff like that rammed down my throat - pun intended - and also because it's not in the book and the other scenes are.

Bauchelain the Evil, on 18 May 2011 - 03:47 PM, said:

To all those bothered by the Renly/Loras scene: Really in the book it was all but stated clear. Renly wants Loras to go and "pray" with him the night before the battle. Stannis makes some rather telling comments during the parlay. Loras go in a killing frenzy when Renly dies. Loras is more upset than Margaery at Renly's death. Jaime tells him he'll stick his sword "where not even Renly did".

He was head of Renly's King's Guard, so he's bound to pissed when he gets killed. Being 'all but stated clear' and having the scene go down the way it did - pun intended - are totally different.

QuickTidal, on 19 May 2011 - 11:03 AM, said:

Gothos, on 19 May 2011 - 09:27 AM, said:

Aight, so I finally watched it.
Great so far!
Though: I don't exactly recall the relationship between Renly and Loras being ever explicitly stated like this. It was all hush hush and I don't think that making it so clear did the series good.

See upthread as to how we all thought it makes the series better, or Renly better for down the road.

We didn't ALL think it made the series better. I found it uncomfortable to watch and nobody on here's going to make me change my opinion on that. There were plenty of other ways to get the point across that the two men were close, but I found this hard to swallow - pun intended.

I dont like the whorehouse scenes.

Er, because Im not straight and I don't feel comfortable having stuff like that rammed down my throat - pun intended - and also because it's not in the book and the other scenes are.

Sheeesh.

The whorehouse scenes are in the book, though.
When you say you don't feel comfortable with stuff like that, are you refering to men and women having sex? Unfortunately for you, if we stop doing that the human race will become extinct in about 120 years, but hay, each to their own.

Tapper, on 20 May 2011 - 10:49 AM, said:

Battalion, on 20 May 2011 - 10:28 AM, said:

QuickTidal, on 18 May 2011 - 12:45 PM, said:

Battalion, on 18 May 2011 - 07:20 AM, said:

Even given the fact that there were only 'slight' undertones of this in the book, I see no need for a homosexual scene of this kind.

See, now why on earth is it cool for there to be umpteen "whore and *insert lord here*" scenes that are used as a way to tell the story, but you aren't cool when it's a gay one?

Er, because Im not gay and I don't feel comfortable having stuff like that rammed down my throat - pun intended - and also because it's not in the book and the other scenes are.

There have been a great many scenes so far which have been adapted, omitted or outright added to what we know from the book.

You not being gay has nothing to do with it. It is almost as if you're trying to say that any real heterosexual should object to this. Well, plenty of straight people don't object to it (me included). D'rek already said she liked the scene.

You are not comfortable with it, others probably aren't either - entirely your moral right - but to outright say it should not be in there in the episode because of your feelings about gay people goes way too far. basically, what you are asking is the show to pretend that there is no such thing as homosexual relationships in the book.

Besides, GRRM is attached to the project as advisor and even as director. If he didn't approve, I bet this scene would not have been there.

Furthermore, HBO is allowed to show whatever they want, without paying attention to public conventions and whatnot. By watching one of their shows, you more or less know you can be subject to stuff that is shocking compared to regular TV and to your conventions.

Quote

We didn't ALL think it made the series better. I found it uncomfortable to watch and nobody on here's going to make me change my opinion on that. There were plenty of other ways to get the point across that the two men were close, but I found this hard to swallow - pun intended.

Maybe if you were to relax and stop clenching your butt cheeks, this wouldn't be such a rough and painful introduction to on-screen manlove for you.

Crude pun fully intended.

Of course they can show what they want, I was merely stating that I didn't like it and that I didn't find it relavent. Those are my opinions and I mean no disrespect by them, but I stand by them.
As for relaxing my cheeks, I'm afraid this is my point. I don't want an introduction to on screen manlove, but thanks for the offer.

[Battalion]

MTS, on 20 May 2011 - 11:26 AM, said:

Tapper said it best I think.

I don't feel like it was being 'shoved down our throat' anyway. The shaving and the overt revelation of his homosexuality served a clear thematic purpose in establishing Renly's character in clear counterpoint to Robert, in removing Renly from all characteristics that define Robert as a man (war, big bushy beard, orgies etc.), and setting him up for future seasons. It was barely even shown anyway, just Loras' head going down and Renly's face changing for a second. If you think this is 'shoving it down our throat,' go watch Six Feet Under. I'm curious as to what you think should have happened instead, considering Renly's motivation was always rather unclear in the books, and his homosexuality easily missed (I know I missed it the first time). It's easy to criticise something as unnecessary, but it's much harder to illuminate complex motivations for a huge host of characters in a short space of time.

In the book Renly is described as being how Robert was when hh was younger, during the rebelion, so he's not that different.

Regarding what they could have done instead, they could have used the same dialogue, but have the scene take place in a tavern or somewhere, then at the climax - pun intended - instead of him going down, they could have held hands under the table or something like that. Look, I know the series is sexed-up and often some of the other sex scenes are shoe-horned in dispite their apparent lack of relavence, but it still left a bad taste in my mouth ... pun intended.

[MTS]

Battalion, on 20 May 2011 - 11:49 AM, said:

MTS, on 20 May 2011 - 11:26 AM, said:

Tapper said it best I think.

I don't feel like it was being 'shoved down our throat' anyway. The shaving and the overt revelation of his homosexuality served a clear thematic purpose in establishing Renly's character in clear counterpoint to Robert, in removing Renly from all characteristics that define Robert as a man (war, big bushy beard, orgies etc.), and setting him up for future seasons. It was barely even shown anyway, just Loras' head going down and Renly's face changing for a second. If you think this is 'shoving it down our throat,' go watch Six Feet Under. I'm curious as to what you think should have happened instead, considering Renly's motivation was always rather unclear in the books, and his homosexuality easily missed (I know I missed it the first time). It's easy to criticise something as unnecessary, but it's much harder to illuminate complex motivations for a huge host of characters in a short space of time.

In the book Renly is described as being how Robert was when hh was younger, during the rebelion, so he's not that different.

Regarding what they could have done instead, they could have used the same dialogue, but have the scene take place in a tavern or somewhere, then at the climax - pun intended - instead of him going down, they could have held hands under the table or something like that. Look, I know the series is sexed-up and often some of the other sex scenes are shoe-horned in dispite their apparent lack of relavence, but it still left a bad taste in my mouth ... pun intended.

I know in the books he isn't that different, but as it's clear they're going in a slightly different direction with Renly characteristically speaking, I don't see how you can classify something as 'irrelevant' in what is clearly an interpretative exercise. Personally I think it adds more dimension to his character, and it's much more realistic than them holding hands (I mean, holding hands, really?), but then I don't find homosexuality 'repulsive' as Gothos says, nor do I see anything wrong with putting it on the screen.

Not stinting on the hetero sex-scenes and then expecting them to do so with the gay ones is an outrageous double standard too. I'd like to know what heterosexual sex-scenes we've had that lack relevance as well. None of them really spring to mind.

Oh, and can you stop saying 'pun intended'? It's leaving a bad taste in my mouth.

[MTS]

Battalion, on 20 May 2011 - 11:41 AM, said:

Cyphon, on 20 May 2011 - 10:48 AM, said:

I dont like the whorehouse scenes.

Er, because Im not straight and I don't feel comfortable having stuff like that rammed down my throat - pun intended - and also because it's not in the book and the other scenes are.

Sheeesh.

The whorehouse scenes are in the book, though.
When you say you don't feel comfortable with stuff like that, are you refering to men and women having sex? Unfortunately for you, if we stop doing that the human race will become extinct in about 120 years, but hay, each to their own.

So it's ok for you to feel uncomfortable about witnessing homosexual sex, but it's not ok for him feeling uncomfortable about heterosexual sex because it's necessary for procreation? Wow.

By the way, Renly and Loras' relationship is in the book, we just don't see them in private because of POV limitations. I'm sure if we did things would be a mite more explicit.

Quote

Of course they can show what they want, I was merely stating that I didn't like it and that I didn't find it relavent. Those are my opinions and I mean no disrespect by them, but I stand by them.
As for relaxing my cheeks, I'm afraid this is my point. I don't want an introduction to on screen manlove, but thanks for the offer.

I think your objection is solely rooted in the fact that it's homosexual (which is fine, even though I disagree) and because 'it's not in the books' it somehow isn't relevant. Now, I think it is in the books, but even if it wasn't, what has to be made clear is that this isn't the books. It is a TV adaptation, and thus relevancy can only be established when you look at the TV series as a whole.

[Garak]

10 bucks says no one will complain when we get a lesbian scene. I know Dany has one in (I think) A Clash of Kings and Cersei has one in A Feast for Crows.

[Cyphon]

Battalion, on 20 May 2011 - 11:41 AM, said:

Cyphon, on 20 May 2011 - 10:48 AM, said:

Battalion, on 20 May 2011 - 10:28 AM, said:

QuickTidal, on 18 May 2011 - 12:45 PM, said:

Battalion, on 18 May 2011 - 07:20 AM, said:

Even given the fact that there were only 'slight' undertones of this in the book, I see no need for a homosexual scene of this kind.

See, now why on earth is it cool for there to be umpteen "whore and *insert lord here*" scenes that are used as a way to tell the story, but you aren't cool when it's a gay one?

Er, because Im not gay and I don't feel comfortable having stuff like that rammed down my throat - pun intended - and also because it's not in the book and the other scenes are.

Bauchelain the Evil, on 18 May 2011 - 03:47 PM, said:

To all those bothered by the Renly/Loras scene: Really in the book it was all but stated clear. Renly wants Loras to go and "pray" with him the night before the battle. Stannis makes some rather telling comments during the parlay. Loras go in a killing frenzy when Renly dies. Loras is more upset than Margaery at Renly's death. Jaime tells him he'll stick his sword "where not even Renly did".

He was head of Renly's King's Guard, so he's bound to pissed when he gets killed. Being 'all but stated clear' and having the scene go down the way it did - pun intended - are totally different.

QuickTidal, on 19 May 2011 - 11:03 AM, said:

Gothos, on 19 May 2011 - 09:27 AM, said:

Aight, so I finally watched it.
Great so far!
Though: I don't exactly recall the relationship between Renly and Loras being ever explicitly stated like this. It was all hush hush and I don't think that making it so clear did the series good.

See upthread as to how we all thought it makes the series better, or Renly better for down the road.

We didn't ALL think it made the series better. I found it uncomfortable to watch and nobody on here's going to make me change my opinion on that. There were plenty of other ways to get the point across that the two men were close, but I found this hard to swallow - pun intended.

I dont like the whorehouse scenes.

Er, because Im not straight and I don't feel comfortable having stuff like that rammed down my throat - pun intended - and also because it's not in the book and the other scenes are.

Sheeesh.

The whorehouse scenes are in the book, though.
When you say you don't feel comfortable with stuff like that, are you refering to men and women having sex? Unfortunately for you, if we stop doing that the human race will become extinct in about 120 years, but hay, each to their own.

Sarcasm, you missed it.

I don't think the initial scene with Tyrion in the Brothel in the north was strictly in the book, for example. But that's really besides the point that I was making about your little stance on this. Your stance on the verbatim truth of the book, yet not consistently squealing about other difference reminds some very similar actions done by people using other books. Let alone the specified nature of your squealing, which MTS & Tapper has skewered quite well.

This post has been edited by Cyphon: 20 May 2011 - 12:25 PM

[Gothos]

Garak, on 20 May 2011 - 12:22 PM, said:

10 bucks says no one will complain when we get a lesbian scene. I know Dany has one in (I think) A Clash of Kings and Cersei has one in A Feast for Crows.

with Lady Merryweather, no less!

[QuickTidal]

Battalion, on 20 May 2011 - 10:28 AM, said:

We didn't ALL think it made the series better. I found it uncomfortable to watch and nobody on here's going to make me change my opinion on that. There were plenty of other ways to get the point across that the two men were close, but I found this hard to swallow - pun intended.

Sorry, I wasn't actually including you in my statement. I should have clarified. I meant that damn near everyone else in the thread seems to have had little to no problem with it.

Ain't it always interesting when some straight folk find light gay scenes disturbing or disgusting? I'm a straight guy, and I had no problem with it. They didn't show you mouth-on-wiener did they? Nopers. I'm comfortable in my sexuality, and therefore it doesn't bother me if two dudes in a story love off each other. Whatever floats their respective boats.

Can I hazard a guess that you'd have no problem with lesbian action (in which I bet you HBO would show it more explicitly than this)?

[MTS]

QuickTidal, on 20 May 2011 - 01:07 PM, said:

Battalion, on 20 May 2011 - 10:28 AM, said:

We didn't ALL think it made the series better. I found it uncomfortable to watch and nobody on here's going to make me change my opinion on that. There were plenty of other ways to get the point across that the two men were close, but I found this hard to swallow - pun intended.

Sorry, I wasn't actually including you in my statement. I should have clarified. I meant that damn near everyone else in the thread seems to have had little to no problem with it.

Ain't it always interesting when some straight folk find light gay scenes disturbing or disgusting? I'm a straight guy, and I had no problem with it. They didn't show you mouth-on-wiener did they? Nopers. I'm comfortable in my sexuality, and therefore it doesn't bother me if two dudes in a story love off each other. Whatever floats their respective boats.

Can I hazard a guess that you'd have no problem with lesbian action (in which I bet you HBO would show it more explicitly than this)?

Not to derail the thread into a discussion about attitudes to homosexuality, but of course straight men have no problems with watching two women get it on. It's a fairly pointless question to ask, and not really analogous at all. He obviously has no problems with seeing one woman naked, why would two be any different? Plus, it's two naked chicks rubbing up against each other, what is there for a straight man to object against? Even if you objected to lesbianism on principle as a straight male I doubt you'd deny the aesthetic quality on display.

[QuickTidal]

MTS, on 20 May 2011 - 01:16 PM, said:

QuickTidal, on 20 May 2011 - 01:07 PM, said:

Battalion, on 20 May 2011 - 10:28 AM, said:

We didn't ALL think it made the series better. I found it uncomfortable to watch and nobody on here's going to make me change my opinion on that. There were plenty of other ways to get the point across that the two men were close, but I found this hard to swallow - pun intended.

Sorry, I wasn't actually including you in my statement. I should have clarified. I meant that damn near everyone else in the thread seems to have had little to no problem with it.

Ain't it always interesting when some straight folk find light gay scenes disturbing or disgusting? I'm a straight guy, and I had no problem with it. They didn't show you mouth-on-wiener did they? Nopers. I'm comfortable in my sexuality, and therefore it doesn't bother me if two dudes in a story love off each other. Whatever floats their respective boats.

Can I hazard a guess that you'd have no problem with lesbian action (in which I bet you HBO would show it more explicitly than this)?

Not to derail the thread into a discussion about attitudes to homosexuality, but of course straight men have no problems with watching two women get it on. It's a fairly pointless question to ask, and not really analogous at all. He obviously has no problems with seeing one woman naked, why would two be any different? Plus, it's two naked chicks rubbing up against each other, what is there for a straight man to object against? Even if you objected to lesbianism on principle as a straight male I doubt you'd deny the aesthetic quality on display.

Indeed. Sorry, this is a good point MTS.

Let me put it down another way then...I know VERY few girls who would have a problem with Lesbian scenes...and quite a few who, though straight, entertain thoughts of lesbian stuff or don't mind watching it. Have you ever known a girl to be flat out disgusted by a lesbian scene (I've maybe met like 4 of those in my life)? Meanwhile there seem to be a lot of men who have serious issues even watching two dudes kiss. Battalion not being a girl though defeats that point as referenced to him...but I guess my point should be that when things are flipped the other way round most people (both sexes) have less of a problem.

But that just may be because the male body is fugly, and the female body is all yummy curves....lol...sorry.

Okay, let's get back on topic then.

The dude playing Littlefinger reminds me of someone...but I can't place my finger on who...another actor though.

[Ceda Cicero]

Martin wrote a blog post recently about the Varys/Littlefinger scene that was added in ep 5. He commented on the fact that it was a great scene, regardless of the fact that it was never written in the books. And in fact, it probably DID happen in the books, just not on screen because of POV restrictions. Now I recognize that getting into a discussion about which added scenes from the show might be realistic "off-screen" scenes from the books and which might not jive with GRRM and were just thrown in by HBO for whatever reason, but let's be honest: the Renly/Loras sex scenes were in the books, you just didn't see it. If it makes you feel any better about HBO, just flip to a page on ACoK and read a few paragraphs and think to yourself "Okay, while this is happening, Renly is down South kissing Loras on the mouth." Boom, it's canon.

Further, a realistic portrayal of homosexual relationships in a show that you are voluntarily watching is hardly "ramming it down your throat."

I think that we'll obviously need to see how the characters pan out through the rest of season one, and especially in season 2 when they become more prominent on the political stage. But as things stand now, regardless of your feelings about homosexuality/seeing homosexuality portrayed on screen, I would challenge anyone to make an attempt at objectivity and tell me one way in which more aggressively and openly pursuing this development early in the TV series does not contribute to a more layered, complex, and multidimensional perspective of two characters that are largely one-sided and surfacey in the books.

This post has been edited by Ceda Cicero: 20 May 2011 - 01:32 PM

[QuickTidal]

Ceda Cicero, on 20 May 2011 - 01:30 PM, said:

but let's be honest: the Renly/Loras sex scenes were in the books, you just didn't see it.

Cicero FTW!

[Ceda Cicero]

QuickTidal, on 20 May 2011 - 01:33 PM, said:

Ceda Cicero, on 20 May 2011 - 01:30 PM, said:

but let's be honest: the Renly/Loras sex scenes were in the books, you just didn't see it.

Cicero FTW!

Clarification on that: they were in the books, but off-screen. The fact that they were off-screen doesn't diminish the near-certainty that they happened.