I hear ya. Gee, really, what's wrong with those people - they get upset over a lil' bit of rape and and not over homosexuality and bisexuality (oh the horror)?
Err...
Game of Thrones 4.4 - "Oathkeeper" - Rate and discuss
- Thread starter Out Of My Vulcan Mind
- Start date
Err...
I hear ya. Gee, really, what's wrong with those people - they get upset over a lil' bit of rape and and not over homosexuality and bisexuality (oh the horror)?
Err...
Heh, those two things are quite upsetting to some people. I mostly left them in there to see how many people with terminal PCitis latched onto it
Mister Fandango
Fleet Captain
Did you miss the whole Night's Watch bit?Also...no Boltons? Again? I am disappoint.
Robert was right; you're being dishonest. The upset about the rape has nothing to do with people thinking it's the worst act in the show and much more to do with the fact that it's out of character and a nonsensical deviation from the books. Feel free to keep complaining about how it's PC at work, but that's simply not the case.
I hear ya. Gee, really, what's wrong with those people - they get upset over a lil' bit of rape and and not over homosexuality and bisexuality (oh the horror)?
Err...
Heh, those two things are quite upsetting to some people. I mostly left them in there to see how many people with terminal PCitis latched onto it
Regardless of how one feels about the issues themselves, your comment is pretty much an admission of guilt on the previous comment being trolling. Comments to PM
It seems like you are ignoring the basis of the outcry...
Earlier I was referring to the rape in this episode being wrong-headed in how it was handled. If we're talking about Jaime's rape of Cersei, that's a more complex issue. That scene had a narrative function of showing that Jaime is still capable of monstrous acts, that there's still a darkness lurking inside of him and that he's not on a simple, irreversible redemption arc.
I don't think it constitutes a nonsensical change from the book or is necessarily out of character. In the book Jaime initiates sex in the sept, Cersei resists, he keeps going with no sign he's going to stop no matter what she wants, she switches to consent, and they have sex on the altar holding Joffrey's corpse (rather than next to it as in the show). And for good measure Martin throws in the detail that Cersei is on her period, so the altar is smeared with her blood afterwards.
That's a depraved turn for Jaime to take. The show takes it further by omitting the verbal consent Cersei gives in the book. Screenwriters John August and Craig Mazin spoke about the scene on their podcast. Much of what they say is similar to what I said about the scene and its place in the episode's theme in the thread about the previous episode. You can listen to the podcast here. The discussion of Game of Thrones starts at seven minutes and 24 seconds.
I don't think it constitutes a nonsensical change from the book or is necessarily out of character. In the book Jaime initiates sex in the sept, Cersei resists, he keeps going with no sign he's going to stop no matter what she wants, she switches to consent, and they have sex on the altar holding Joffrey's corpse (rather than next to it as in the show). And for good measure Martin throws in the detail that Cersei is on her period, so the altar is smeared with her blood afterwards.
That's a depraved turn for Jaime to take. The show takes it further by omitting the verbal consent Cersei gives in the book. Screenwriters John August and Craig Mazin spoke about the scene on their podcast. Much of what they say is similar to what I said about the scene and its place in the episode's theme in the thread about the previous episode. You can listen to the podcast here. The discussion of Game of Thrones starts at seven minutes and 24 seconds.
But why didn't they have Cersei consent?
It would show them both to be in a sick and enmeshed relationship that crosses more boundaries than just incest. It would have been more interesting.
It would show them both to be in a sick and enmeshed relationship that crosses more boundaries than just incest. It would have been more interesting.
Cersei had a far stronger emotional bond to Joffrey than Jaime did. They may have felt that her giving verbal consent to have sex next to Joffrey's corpse would make her more depraved than they wanted. While some characters have been less complex on the show than in the books, they've generally given Cersei more shades of grey than she has in the books. That could have been their motivation.
It's worth reiterating that in the eyes of the director and both of the actors, that scene didn't represent a rape, but something more ambiguous. (That's the problem some of us have, that they could film a straightforward rape and imagine it meant something different because the characters are intended to be nuanced and complex.) What they thought they were doing is pretty close to the scene in the books, once you account for the fact that it's no longer going to be entirely from Jaime's point of view. This isn't a case of the show wanting to make a major change from the books; it's a case of wanting to make a minor one and doing it awkwardly.
At least for me it's not that I find simulated rape on a TV show about a fictional mid evil empire to be offensive but rather the shock value of using it has vanished - and IMO it's overused.
For the record, tit shots are overused as well IMO on this show but I lack objectivity in that regard as a gay male.
To GoT directors: Bring on the dicks.
For the record, tit shots are overused as well IMO on this show but I lack objectivity in that regard as a gay male.
My wife agrees with you on that.
I don't object to the nudity, as it's usually contextually appropriate. Although it gets a bit silly that we've gotten so many scenes in brothels just so we can have lots of breasts and sexytimes going on. Silly, but not especially objectionable except insofar as it lacks any degree of parity. Where are all the hot naked men? The straight women and gay men who watch this show probably like their nudity, too. 
At least that aspect got some service with Oberyn recently.
This show has had a handful of rapes depicted and, while I wouldn't give them all a blanket pass, they were usually in service to some larger aspect of the story being told. Dany's relationship with rape, for instance, has her witnessing what were most likely rapes at her wedding party, then experiencing Drogo raping her on their wedding night (and repeatedly thereafter, albeit not depicted often), and then her stepping in when Drogo's men were raping the women of a village they sacked. She endured a profound violation and found the strength to turn it around and actually change the behavior of Drogo and his men. That's relevant. It's not gratuitous, but rather there for a purpose.
Sansa's near-rape during the riot after Myrcella's departure served a purpose in showing how desperate the people of King's Landing had become, though I don't find the scene entirely defensible given how over-the-top it goes. It's actually less awful the corresponding book scene.
For Arya's story at Harrenhal, they pretty much removed the rape altogether, which was in the book mostly to show what monsters Clegane and his men are. Instead, we got the Tickler torturing people in a way that wasn't especially graphic though still hard to watch.
Joffrey's abuse of Tyron's "birthday presents" to him certainly drove home what a sadistic asshole Joffrey was, in a way you couldn't get from his "mere" insensitivity and callous violence. You got the sense before that he rather enjoyed making people suffer, but here you had an instance where he could force that suffering an intimate setting and truly savor it. It was a layer to his character we didn't see previously, at least not at such horrifying depth. Even so, I still wouldn't call the scene wholly defensible since it's debatable whether or not we needed more graphic evidence of Joffrey's depravity.
Contrast that with having two consecutive episodes with rapes in them and yeah, it does seem a bit like the show's gone off the rails. You had Jaime raping Cersei, which was apparently just a big fuckup on the part of the director since it wasn't supposed to be a rape, but then you also had the events at Craster's which were definitely meant to be quite rapey. What was probably intended to be a "sexposition" scene got punched up into a bunch of rape and casual violence against women, to the point that I couldn't even tell you what the Boss Mutineer talked about--I was too distracted by the senseless violence going on. These are characters we don't know, whose goals aren't quite clear, and who essentially got introduced in the most cheaply "evil" manner possible. This show has never been subtle but it's also not usually been so lazy. And in this case, yes, rape was absolutely a cheap, lazy way to get the point across that these guys are eeeeeeeeevil.
At least that aspect got some service with Oberyn recently.This show has had a handful of rapes depicted and, while I wouldn't give them all a blanket pass, they were usually in service to some larger aspect of the story being told. Dany's relationship with rape, for instance, has her witnessing what were most likely rapes at her wedding party, then experiencing Drogo raping her on their wedding night (and repeatedly thereafter, albeit not depicted often), and then her stepping in when Drogo's men were raping the women of a village they sacked. She endured a profound violation and found the strength to turn it around and actually change the behavior of Drogo and his men. That's relevant. It's not gratuitous, but rather there for a purpose.
Sansa's near-rape during the riot after Myrcella's departure served a purpose in showing how desperate the people of King's Landing had become, though I don't find the scene entirely defensible given how over-the-top it goes. It's actually less awful the corresponding book scene.
For Arya's story at Harrenhal, they pretty much removed the rape altogether, which was in the book mostly to show what monsters Clegane and his men are. Instead, we got the Tickler torturing people in a way that wasn't especially graphic though still hard to watch.
Joffrey's abuse of Tyron's "birthday presents" to him certainly drove home what a sadistic asshole Joffrey was, in a way you couldn't get from his "mere" insensitivity and callous violence. You got the sense before that he rather enjoyed making people suffer, but here you had an instance where he could force that suffering an intimate setting and truly savor it. It was a layer to his character we didn't see previously, at least not at such horrifying depth. Even so, I still wouldn't call the scene wholly defensible since it's debatable whether or not we needed more graphic evidence of Joffrey's depravity.
Contrast that with having two consecutive episodes with rapes in them and yeah, it does seem a bit like the show's gone off the rails. You had Jaime raping Cersei, which was apparently just a big fuckup on the part of the director since it wasn't supposed to be a rape, but then you also had the events at Craster's which were definitely meant to be quite rapey. What was probably intended to be a "sexposition" scene got punched up into a bunch of rape and casual violence against women, to the point that I couldn't even tell you what the Boss Mutineer talked about--I was too distracted by the senseless violence going on. These are characters we don't know, whose goals aren't quite clear, and who essentially got introduced in the most cheaply "evil" manner possible. This show has never been subtle but it's also not usually been so lazy. And in this case, yes, rape was absolutely a cheap, lazy way to get the point across that these guys are eeeeeeeeevil.
The way Graves and the actors (who may have been going by Graves' direction) described the scene is certainly problematic, but Benioff described the scene as Jaime forcing himself on Cersei, and that was a description he gave prior to the public reaction to the scene. It would be interesting to hear more about whether the showrunners intended it to be a conscious change and, if so, how the wires came to be so crossed between them and the episode's director.
In any event, whatever the behind the scenes production information, one is left with the textual information of what is on screen, which is as Benioff described it, however they ended up getting there.
Additionally, to your point up thread about the director not recognizing it as a rape scene is more concerning, because ya know that's real life.
Ironically, sexual assaults on US campuses is being highlighted this week in the media. And there are many males - especially young men - who do not understand that no means no even after someone initially says yes.
After re listening to the dialogue Cersi clearly says no as Jamie is going to penetrate her.
It's IMO sad and horrifying that so many men do not understand when someone is saying no to sexual relations despite receiving mixed signals.
^^^
That's why the scene is problematic in the book, too. He's forcing himself on her, she's saying no and trying to physically stop him. There's no indication he's going to stop whatever she says or does. She makes a sudden switch to consent. Had that been filmed it could easily be seen as sending a "no means yes, just keep going until you get a yes" message.
That said, it would of course have been far better had everyone involved been on the same page and either fully recognized the scene as a rape or found some other way to approach it.
That's why the scene is problematic in the book, too. He's forcing himself on her, she's saying no and trying to physically stop him. There's no indication he's going to stop whatever she says or does. She makes a sudden switch to consent. Had that been filmed it could easily be seen as sending a "no means yes, just keep going until you get a yes" message.
That said, it would of course have been far better had everyone involved been on the same page and either fully recognized the scene as a rape or found some other way to approach it.
And to reiterate, fiction can be fiction - we are after all talking about a mythological world where dragons live after all - but when the real life director doesn't believe a scene where a women who clearly says no to sexual intercourse despite sending mixed signals isn't rape - there is a real life problem.
The real world discourse of this is alarming IMO about how some men perceive sex and how some men believe that in certain situations no means yes whereas NO SHOULD ALWAYS MEAN NO.
I don't always agree with DarthTom, but when I do, it's about how poorly many men understand the concept of consent.
^^^
Yes, the view expressed by the director that she was verbally saying no but her body was saying yes is a terrible message.
Yes, the view expressed by the director that she was verbally saying no but her body was saying yes is a terrible message.