Use the code TREE for 51% off World Anvil with the link worldanvil.com/?c=mltt Or else try it out for free!! Patreon link: www.patreon.com/mylittlethoughttree
In the books, Jon letting Ygritte live was categorically NOT the reason Qhorin's group was captured. Qhorin says so when he tells Jon he knows that he spared her--she did not have a way to get back to the Lord o Bones until after they were already found out. They were found out by Orell's eagle. Qhorin says he wanted to know what kind of man he was--and because he spared Ygritte, Qhorin knew he was the man to infiltrate the Free Folk. Qhorin already knew they were going to be caught when they attacked Ygritte and Orell's position. He's just that good.
Yes, the books make so much more sense. I was so disappointed when in the movie they left Jon all alone to kill her - the youngest and most inexperienced brother, he had never ever kill anyone up to that moment and they knew it. I was thinking: this is stupid, who in his right mind will do such a thing. I red the books later and it really made so much more sense, including the way Qhorin lets Jon know that he knows that he let the girl go. I truly enjoyed the books so much more, even compared to the first seasons, since the characters are so much more ... complex and respectively lifelike.
I can give grace for adaptations in different mediums, but I agree with you, that example in particular makes no sense in changing it. Only makes it worse
Show Jon: “I dun wan it” Book Jon: “He wanted it, Jon knew then. He wanted it as much as he had ever wanted anything. I have always wanted it, he thought, guiltily. May the gods forgive me.” Honestly I think a lot of the problems with Jon in the show begin all the way in Season 1 and the changes to his characterization. The show removes a lot of his personality and flaws. Like his cynicism and snarky, sarcastic humor. Jon is straight up one of the funniest characters in the books alongside Tyrion, Edd, and the One True King of Comedy Stannis. And then his flaws like his insecurity and resentment from being a bastard, being quick to anger, and his general angst. Not to mention how deep down Jon actually envied Robb (despite loving him) and covets Winterfell, and is genuinely tempted and has a whole internal crisis when Stannis offers to make him Lord of Winterfell. Now to be fair a lot of Jon’s characterization is in his internal monologue. But the show also removes any outward expression of it. The show seems like it was just trying to make him like Ned. When I think a big aspect of Jon’s character is that he isn’t honorable like Ned, although he aspires to be. And that’s even before Jon is elected Lord Commander and tries to “kill the boy” and become the cold, callous, pragmatic Lord Snow. And then the difference in characterization are exasperated and completely diverge. “Jon, he'd said, but Jon was gone. It was Lord Snow who faced him now, grey eyes as hard as ice.” And then Jon will probably come back even darker after his resurrection…
Just like Caitlyn when she came back as Lady Stoneheart. She wasn't the same as she was before. Like I think not including her and not showing what resurrection does to one of the characters we followed was a mistake
I'd disagree there. Jon has moments cynical and or retorts with sparky remarks. I think most fans miss that because jon doesn't have clear sense of resnements that his book counterpart has
@@HeatherHolt At this point I am pretty much convinced this is case. Varamyr's prologue is a strong indicator for it. It specifically provides the information that if you are killed while your consciousness is inhabiting the creature, part of your consciousness will stay alive there. I certainly don't think we get that information there for no reason. "Jon fell to his knees. He found the dagger's hilt and wrenched it free. In the cold night air the wound was smoking. "Ghost," he whispered. Pain washed over him. Stick them with the pointy end. When the third dagger took him between the shoulder blades, he gave a grunt and fell face-first into the snow. He never felt the fourth knife. Only the cold…" His last word being Ghost definitely hints to him reaching out to him, and him not feeling the fourth knife can definitely mean he already was in Ghosts body by the time they stabbed him that last time...
They ruined Jon's character almost immediately when they zapped his sass. Yes, book Jon wants to follow Ned's honorable teachings (in the beginning), but he is also incredibly sassy and has a hard time not talking back. He's a bit of a smartass and becomes quite political, which is why him and Tyrion get along so well in the first place. The show muted his character and made him a generic, kind of dumb hero. It's like D and D read Ygritte telling Jon her famous line and mistook it for him actually being stupid, missing the entire point of their relationship and character differences. "You know nothing Jon Snow" doesn't mean he's an idiot, but more that he's never really lived, he doesn't know what's truly important (at least to people who are free), and he doesn't really know who he is yet. This is long-winded, but Jon was my book fav and seeing the show strip his character to such a cliche dullard actually hurt me. I can only imagine how George felt.
Note that in the books Qhorin does not need Jon to kill Ygritte. He says that the wildlings would have sighted them anyway and if he wanted her dead, he’d have killed her himself. The only reason he instructs Jon to do it is to get a measure of his character, which he does when Jon spares her. Qhorin uses this information later when he gives Jon his mission. He knows that Jon stays true to his values over orders, and that he won’t kill without a good reason. This means he can be trusted to pose a double agent and take enemy orders while staying true to the Watch, and it also means that Qhorin has to explain to Jon clearly why he has to kill him. All of this is lost for the sake of a chase in the snow with Ygritte.
Honestly, Jon especially had some weird stuff going on right from the beginning. In the first episode they had Theon assign Ghost to him instead of having Jon himself claim him. It’s not that big but they were stripping his agency right from the start and it spiraled out of control from there
That scene kinda works because it kinda hints at a solidarity between Jon and Theon as fellow outsiders in the family. But since that relationship is never built on, you are right that it does just end up as a wasted oppurtunity for Jon.
Another TH-camr (Dominic Noble) pointed out that the point where Jon's arc starts to go down the wrong path (compared to the books, at least) is actually in episode one of season one. When they find the direwolves, in the show, when they find Ghost, Theon tells Jon, "this one will die, it's yours" or something along those lines. Jon looks at Ghost almost shocked. It males Jon a passive person, someone in a mean and backhanded receiving what will turn out to be power. In the book, Theon says it's a runt and it will die first (or something similar), a lot like in the show. BUT, it's Jon that says, "I think not: this one is mine." Jon is CLAIMING, making an active move to gain what he KNOWS is power. He is rejecting the fate that is given to him and the puppy (death/being lesser). It was clear, at that point, what path was chosen for show Jon. He's the classic hero being pushed into the world of politics. They decided they didn't want the book Jon. Anyway, Dominic Noble was amazing to catch that.
I found it confusing that on the show not even Qhorin seems to take the mission of the watch seriously and then sacrifices himself like that makes sense. In the book he's determined and has a strong investment in fighting the wildlings and that he'd instruct Jon to kill him makes sense. Jon is a kid being thrust into a suicide mission he has little choice in and that's powerful stuff, he's not even very strongly tied to the watch yet, he's very young and it's natural for him to get infatuated with Ygritte and sympathise with the wildlings. Why couldn't the show pick up these clearly very interesting character conflicts and challenges? The show runners seemingly got confused by the white guy with beard iconography and decided he's Jesus.
The more you look at the show, the examiner and deeper the cracks appear. D&D botched the story on so many levels, it’s a testament to how great the source material is that the show still slapped for as long as it did.
Book Jon is almost a completely different person than show Jon. Great points all around. If anyone is looking for another in depth explanation, Alt shift X did a Real Jon Snow vid that's very detailed and goes into more details on the themes and background and speculates on his future in the books.
I thought they made it pretty clear that Jon was meant to infiltrate the wildlings, but the conflict was just that he was impressed with mance rayder and he fell for Ygritte
I think they showed his falling for the girl and respect for Mance and I think they tried to show a conflict in him, but because they wanted also to hide the spying plan they did not emphasize properly that internal conflict, just as it is suggested in the video.
D & D messed up pretty much everyone's character. The only characters that are more fleshed out in the show then the books and given more interesting storylines are Olenna and Margery Tyrell. Their book characters are a little more boring.
Olenna is boring in the book?! Man she was amazing. What a sassy chic. Cracked me up so often even when she was about to die she was slaying with her words.
That's why I never took GOT seriously as an adaptation of ASOIAF, they made some pretty good changes and some really bad ones, I loved it from season one to four, kinda like season five for some of it's moments but absolutely hated everything after it. The show runners changed the characters too much, even if the changes were subtle they still mattered a lot
First four seasons were great. Minus the excessive noodie scenes but hey that’s what got many people watching. After season four.. things went downhill fast. I’m still salty about how they ruined Jamie’s character with one stupid sentence right at the end and his decision to return to Cersei. I could understand him returning but ending up like they did in was laughable. But damn the Jamie and Brianne bath scene where he explains about the mad king, gawd that hit hard. You hate him then you are glad he’s captured then you start to feel bad for him then you understand him then you like him then you love him. Oh and then he r words Cersei next to Joffreys body 🫤 but the showrunners said it was supposed to look consensual?? Sure ok bc y’all don’t edit and run it past tons of people who surely said ew what’s happening here. I have so much to complain about post season 4 but I do appreciate the great content in the first half of the show. (Sand snakes can take a hike and little fingers end was so fkn absurd, not to mention the ships Dani “forgot” about lmao)
@HeatherHolt I think Season 4 or even S3 E10 is where the show starts to fall apart, cutting Lady Stoneheart is a major change, and by S4 E10 we’ve also skipped the Tysha reveal which is a major part of Tyrion’s arc leading into Book 5.
@@HeatherHolt Nothing wrong with nude scenes, naked people is a normal thing. EDIT: I now see that you are a woman, so I get your discomfort with naked people, regardless, it is natural.
It seems the show's creators misunderstood most of the characters on a pretty fundamental level. They wanted us to believe that both Jon and Dany were definitively heroic instead of showing them both as morally grey and growing darker. They wanted us to believe that they would have an epic romance instead of worldviews and values that clash on a fundamental level. And maybe they could have made those aspects of the story work if they'd tossed aside GRRM's planned ending and just written the ending that they wanted. Like, if you're going to deviate from the source material's characterization that much to make the characters fit your preferred type, then of course the source material's ending is going to appear nonsensical. Why not just write Jon and Dany teaming up to heroically take down the White Walkers and then placing themselves on the Iron Throne in a glorious rebirth of the Targaryen dynasty? Sure, that's pretty much the opposite of what GRRM is going for, but at least it would have satisfied the writers and a large portion of their audience.
Death and resurrection is supposed to mean something in the Game of Thrones world. It’s supposed to have consequences, it’s supposed to change people. It did nothing to Johns character at all and everybody around him acted like it was totally normal. And it meant nothing. You literally fighting an enemy that doesn’t stay dead and willingly accept somebody without even a word who has just come back from the dead and everybody goes on as though it’s a great thing. It may as well have not happened.
Show jon is the character book jon wishes he was. Heroic, always knowing what to do and never tempted and always in control of his emotions. What baffled me by rereading the books is how much Jon seeks moments to be a hero, to have songs sung about him, to be seen as a stark....
@@stevem2323 show Jon has his moments where he is tempted by his family name, but the show draws far less attention to it and those temptations seem therefore far less tempting
@@stevem2323 that's true ..the lack of inner monologue is a challenge to every show, though if they wanted to make his inner push and pull and his desire for glory and power which is there in the book a focus of his character a main point they could have made some dialogs with some of Jon's trusted friends or even with ghost.. But the show tended to make morally good characters even purer and morally bad characters even more despicable, so they removed most of his temptations...
@@saraa.4295 I loved Jon until season 7, sure book Jon is more nuanced and complex, but still. Seasons 7 and 8, there's no Jon almost, but they did that to many other main characters.
I like the comment about the story bending around Jon. It's such a dangerous trap in writing, getting attached to a character and making sure that the story doesn't change or kill them. Or maybe in a show like this there was a concern that doing too much to alter his character, especially later on when show fans couldn't be reassured by readers of the books, might cause audience disengagement? As a completely unrelated note, it would be awesome to see My Little Thought Tree's take on the contrast between Max and Vincent in the movie Collateral, if that would be an enjoyable project. Their dynamic is just fascinating. Great, thought-provoking video, as always. :)
I have a bit of a headache & want to 'consume' on yt, but everything is so loud & fast. I was thinking, where can I go to think, but with a calm voice at a natural pace? Lucky me, there are a few videos I can catch up on♡ Thank you for being you
Looking back on it, so much of what went wrong with the show seems like it turned into bad fanfiction, with every plot point that wasn't GRRM's becoming fan service and wish fulfillment: show how awesome the good guys are by having them win against bad guys. Whenever the books have monstrous characters (the Mountain, Ramsay, the Brave Companions, etc.), they're never defeated in a straight-forward victory, and they're always used to explore complicated themes about how horrible people are politically empowered in this terrible terrible world.
Rewatching it with my girlfriend currently and Jon's moral was never actually pointed out. During his time with the wildlings he never has this "I must do because of my honor", instead, they made him claim that after he returns to the night's watch which always felt VERY false to me watching the show. He claims that Halfhand told him to kill him (which he did in the books) but there wasn't a scene before, so like, 10 episodes you just keep thinking Jon is a dick
It's kinda funny just how early on the divergence from the books is setting up characters to fail by key aspects for their arcs. In the early seasons Jon is still a pretty solid character and mostly works but due to the fact that his story is for a less honourable and more morally grey character, it doesn't really work in the later seasons anymore. As someone else in the comments so nicely put it: "Jon Snow isn't as honourable as Ned Stark, though he aspires to be". He does desire Winterfell, he has to fight huge inner battles between love and duty and he is truly tempted by Stannises offer, he wants it but knows it's wrong. Honour doesn't come easy to Jon as it seemingly did with Ned. One thing I would like ta add to the reasons mentioned in your video is the resurrection of Jon Snow and just how little impact it has on the man and his story. Like his character doesn't change at all from it whereas others like lady Stoneheart and Derrick Dondarrion go through dramatic changes. Being betrayed like that should change you. Experiencing death on its own should change you and the books at least have clearly set up that when you return from the dead it's "not all of you that comes back" a little of your humanity, what made you you is left behind each time.
Your videos really make me wanna reread the books but having given up all hope the series will never get finished, I don't want to get invested all over again 😭
Your ad transition literally cracked me up 😂 but in regards to your video I think you have it pretty spot on. From the moment Jon went south to meet Dany to almost to the end of the show I kept telling myself he was secretly playing politic because he needed her dragons and knew what she could do with them. I was disappointed that never happened. It would have made his singular line that much more convincing, as well as the fact that, as you pointed out - he seemed to fall in love with Dany like flicking on a switch.
Jon's resurrection was probably the biggest disappointment for me in Game of Thrones, and if Lady Stoneheart is any indication it will be very different in the books. Stoneheart is a distillation of Catelyn's negative attributes, her vindictive grudge holding, poor aim/disregard for consequences when pursuing vengeance are taken to the extreme. Jon's resurrected form Lord Snow will unleash the parts of Jon he has held back until now. He will be coldhearted, covetous, and quick to violence. A wolf wearing the skin of a man, driven by instinct.
I remember while everyone else was complaining about Dany and Arya's character arcs, Jon was the one who became my least favorite. Everything he did was morally correct and he could never do anything wrong, and he was ALWAYS rewarded for his honor, which goes against everything the story told us when Ned and Robb were killed for their honor. He just became the blandest perfect Gary Stu of a character that everyone worshipped which was SO boring compared to the moral ambiguity the show used to be known for. Not to mention his "punishment" at the end of the show not only felt contrived since Grey Worm wasn't around to enforce it, it didn't feel like a real punishment since it kinda portrayed him as coming home to his family beyond the wall, and it felt like even if he wasn't banished he would just go there anyway.
The moment the show fell apart was in episode 1 when Catelyn begged Ned to stay at Winterfell rather than pushing him to go south. From that moment on, all the female characters were written to be 2D
When I see the quality, quantity, and production of your videos, I'm always shocked that you don't have 1M+ subscribers. I'm sure it's just a matter of time. Keep it up!!
I think if it was gonna happen, it would've done by now. There's a lot of my videos youtube just doesn't promote, I don't mind necessarily. I'm just about earning enough to get by. If I could get to two hundred, and then be freer to take more time on my videos and make them even better, instead of rushing because I need to earn more revenue each week, that'd be enough for me
It was anoying that he basically killed Velarion by not escaping in time, he wasn't good in the battle of the bastards and mostly, he was useless in the long night. Plus all those repetitive lines. 'I don't want it'
I always found Jon to be the most boring character in the show. Kit Harrington seems to have had only one expression of Bored-Marginally annoyed throughout. And he talked in the same tone of voice too. Not sure if that was bad direction, bad writing or bad acting.
Its really sad because season 7 Jon was *almost* great. I feel like more pandering writers (which I'm amazed I'm saying right now) would simply have Jon and Dany immediately click, but nah they actually resisted that urge for a little while, having Jon be at least somewhat antagonistic towards her, despite her appearing to be a good person and their alliance being one that would make sense. But towards the end of the season and DEFINITELY by season 8, he becomes the generic loyal knightly character towards her at best, a pre-programmed response robot at worst. He was my favorite character for most of the series, but it's really hard to get behind a character who has given up all autonomy when they were a good character for often breaking taboos and bending rules for the purpose of helping the unfortunate.
Aww come on, are you saying you didn’t love hearing “yer muh Queen” for the hundredth time by the end of the show?? 😅 jk I agree, it was so frustrating to see him roll over like a dog and fold to everyone else’s will when he was one of the few characters who stuck to his morals the most.
What do you mean Grey Worm had little to no influence in that council scene. He was the head of the only army in that city besides the northmen, which were leaderless. He should have been the only person in that scene who got to make any decisions.
D&D and the other show writers NEVER understood the Stark kids…including Jon. I’m just going to focus on Jon, Sansa, and Arya because they got the most screen time out of the Stark kids. Jon, Sansa, and Arya are very internal characters. Which means most of their actions are motivated by their deep internal thoughts which is easy to convey in books but way more difficult to convey in a show. They wrote Sansa as this stupid, spoiled, little girl rather than a child trying to be the perfect woman in Westeros society and when that blows up for her, Sansa has to confront all the things she was told about the world. What makes Sansa so great in the books is that we see her starting to realize her political power and she is determined to use her political power to make the world better. What makes Sansa strong in the books is her internal power, she refuses to let the horrible things that happen to her shape her into a horrible person. Jon in the books isn’t an action hero he actually thinks a lot before he makes a decision. He has a lot of internal conversations with himself and Jon stands behind his decisions not matter the risks. Also the scene in the show when Jon kills Qhorin makes no sense. In the show Qhorin just attacks Jon & Jon kills him in self defense. So why would that win over the Wildlings? Again in the books Jon actually thinks about this and realizes this is his only way to survive so HE attacks and kills Qhorin to show the wildlings that he is on their side. Arya was done the worst by this awful show. In the books Arya is just a traumatized child that has no idea what home means anymore, so she searches for a new home and purpose. Arya isn’t some unstoppable killing machine, she is just a young girl trying to find a place in the world after the destruction of her family and home.
I wish they would've included Val and Dalla in the show. It would've been interesting to see where the Jon/Val thing went, since the book is never going to be finished
I never watched the show beyond a few episodes in the fourth season because they were messing everything up so badly by then. Who is that kid at the Wall who didn't like Jon? It's so weird to me that the show cuts tons of characters and one could argue it's for practical purposes but at the same time they also just invent their own, like Locke or, presumably, that kid.
Hi I absolutely love this channel and all it's content so much and Ive never commented before but I just wanted to say how much I miss the ramblily videos which were my favorite like the one about doors and the one about not taking things too serious and all the therapy ones especially ones about children's therapy whether that be the case study things or the more general ones and the ones about lesser known films and tv shows, I know you've got big projects taking up a lot of your time and you might just prefer mainly doing videos about the same popular shows if that's the case then fair enough but I just wanted to consent in case u weren't doing your random rambling videos about your thoughts on different things anymore cus u thought people didn't like them and if that was the case then I just wanted to let you know they are very missed by me, I hope this don't come across rude or entitled obviously make whatever u wanna make but if u did wanted to make any none film or TV based videos again I would love that as they are missed, sorry for the long comment as u can tell I'm a rambler and I'm aware u might not read this anyway but just thought I'd try as I love those kind of videos so much and would be great to see some more
Hey, glad you liked them! I definitely love making those kind of videos, the problem is more a) they don't get many views b) my channel in general doesn't pull in as many views nowadays, so I have to try and make more popular stuff in order to earn enough to pay bills and c) youtube doesn't like when you jump around with different topics. That said, I do still make them. A katie video was released recently (unlisted but it can be found via my community post about it or by looking in the public playlist). I made a couple recently rambling in regards to rescent films but one got taken down and the other had some weird glitch where it just disappeared completely. They do still crop up and, if I reach a place where my views are more stable, more of them will definitely appear again, I'm just in a spot where I've got to be pragmatic. That said, things like it appear on my patreon more regularly. Not often in video form but as audio recordings or written stuff, so there is that but it's also slightly different. I hope more rambling videos do come again, though. I'm glad it's not just me that liked them
That has to be one of the most painful ad reads I’ve seen. You sounded like WORLD ANVIL had kidnapped your family and this was the only way to get them back
I mean I tend to go for deliberately cheesy and overtop, but kidnapped family works, too 😂 I commit to working with them so much, that there could be some sense to that
Book Jon would’ve absolutely become tempted with the notion of being heir to the iron throne. Even though he wanted to be a Stark more than anything, he does have a bit of an internal lust for power. Now while his true identity would be a struggle for him, he’d definitely be a little tempted, liking the idea. Instead we got….”I don’t want it”
The showrunners committed themselves to spectacle over substance. They didn't have the writing skill or depth to handle ANY of the characters or plot points after the books ended.
Show Jon in contrast to book Jon lost me the moment Ygritte ESCAPED him. Their whole Romeo and Juliet thing becomes unbelievable to nonsensical when she ESCAPES him instead of HE LET HER GO. Like someone else already commented, the took away his agency in so many occasions, he is just a blank slate to fill in generic heroism whenever you need it.
With Jon in the show I find they took inspiration from King Arthur, that being that a hero comes from small beginnings and has no interest in ruling others, and isn't just forced to rule them but is guided. That's why this show doesn't really portray it correctly, Jon Snow doesn't have a Merlin. Not to say they should've added one but to say that King Arthur does and Jon Snow does Not and that's why it doesn't work.
I always applaude thus type of analysis... but I wonder, why do them? Mainstream TV and movies are are essentially rubbish and their adaptations never ever reach the toe of the original book writer. They're a waste of space.
Nahhh they're not all bad! Game of thrones had its strengths too. It would never possibly be a scratch on the book, too much inevitably has to be lost in adaptation but there are also different advantages that a film medium can convey. I've never been the kind of person to write things off as useless but in the case of this show, I make these videos a) because it's super interesting to pick apart how such a massively successful show could end up so despised. B) I think there are writing lessons to learn from others mistakes and c) I made one of them in the build up to a character analysis video and it did well for views. At times when my channel is in a dip and paying bills is hard, I need to make things that'll be seen
lol this was actually one of the things I liked better in the show. Jon citing Mormont’s tolerance of Craster as his reason for defecting was much more believable than “uhh… idk… I just think you wildlings are cool…”
Couldn't disagree more. Mance's story about visiting Winterfell during Robert's visit there and seeing everyone in the hall sets Jon up perfectly for his "And did you see me? Did you see where they seated the bastard?" line and is really the only reason I think Mance could buy. On the show he's like "I want to fight for the side that fights for the living" and it's dumb as hell, not at al convincing.
I quite liked that, too. I think you can pick holes in it, but it streamlines things well for the show and helps to emphasise his unease about the watch supporting crastor, when you don't get the internal monologue of the book. I don't know if it's as good but it makes sense for the adaptation. It was just the handling of Qorin and his feelings about it that bothered me
@@jetsilveravenger the issue Jon's reasoning in the books is that he likely wouldn't join the nights watch first if he genuinely just desired to be treated equally amongst his pears.
Jon was my favorite character, in both the books and the show but I was always very up about the changes the show made to him. He felt like a shadow of himself compared to his book counterpart.
They could have at least had fun with it. As he’s banished to the wall he randomly stops citizens his entire way there and says “we need more allies.” Then when the credits roll you hear him say it again, followed by “my queen.” 😂
Its the main problem when adapting a book to film. Especially A song of ice and fire. Most of the chapters are people thinking and debating with themselves about themselves and the world around them.
I always found the “need more allies“ plot A lot more essential and complex for the story than you’re making it out in this video. Because it related to the white walkers which in any sane persons head would’ve been the end game plot line. So you needed at least one character who saw the true threat and knew everyone needed to put aside their petty differences and work together or we will all die. So they could have that told you so moment where all the other characters finally see the true threat and realize they’ve been living in luxury and maybe shouldn’t have killed all of each other’s best fighters. But since the walkers didn’t become the endgame plot and the fight for the iron throne did I guess your point does stand that we should’ve seen Jon be more political in his motivation and moves. But I knew early on he was never gonna have a chance because he was taught the lesson by evil men and by the time he was actually in power to make political moves the real world strong woman movement was just getting started and all the other leaders were women and there was no way in hell they were going to make Jon Snow look more capable than a woman leader
The whole "the best leader is the one who does not want to lead" makes Jon a way more passive character and robs him of agency. Show!Jon is a lot more like Frodo Baggins, a simple guy who just does what needs to be done and sacrifices himself while doing so. Just without that pesky being successfully tempted by power thing. Their remodelled Jon might be more morally acceptable and he does not at all try to change the status quo (because you'd have to want the power to do so and we can't have the hero wanting power, that's just too corrupting) but he does not fit the plotline. Jon in the show just makes less and less sense because he was redone to be a pure high fantasy hero. It's like putting Walter White into the Lord of the Rings- some things just don't mesh and if you try to harmonize, you'd end up with gibberish. I am reminded of "Anatomy of Story" by Turby, how everything has to fit the theme and characters are a web, other characters get flat if you only focus on the main character. Here they just cut out the Jon that fit the plot and exchanged him for a more steamlined and heroic version, maybe to make him more likeable. Sadly we don't just like "good and pretty" people. To be entertaining, a character must be interesting. And Jon became less so, not more.
I wouldn't say he isn't tempted by power considering he complains about being a steward and only calms down when Sam says he'll likely be lord commander through that position.
@@fightingmedialounge519 I don't think that was about power but about status. It was not "Oh, cool, I get to be LC after the old Bear drops dead" but more like: "Oh, okay, they did not mean to punish me by making me empty chamber pots but being THIS steward actually means something, it is an honorable position, not simply a servant." Even in the show Jon is allowed to be snobby, just not powerhungry. It is (imho) subtly different in the book and the whole "Jon is pissy because he is not a ranger"-plot does fit better into the book plotline, true. But it did still fit into the "Jon is angsty because he is a bastard"- plot (and that is pretty much all Jon does get in the show. Besides the princess to kill, I guess).
@@fightingmedialounge519 In a way they are, esp. in a feudal system. But I think they are different incentives and they seem to be viewed differently. To obtain high status is seen much more positively then the quest for power. Some link ambition for power with evil schemers etc. While is is seen as natural and proper to optain (or even more: just keep) status. And not for all is the link between social status and power is so obvious.
@@RikkaP to obtain high status us only not seen as quest for power if the person themselves were already of a higher status. It's the unfortunate loop monarchies foster.
«i dun wan it» «you Are mah queen» show jon Snow is ned Stark 2.0 i don’t understand why he can’t stay in Winterfell the north is it own kingdom now Bran has no power there and the unsullied left Westroes
I think this is the Captain America Complex; a heroic character that wants to do the right thing simply becuase it is the right thing to do but While the MCU has room in its stories for a character like Steve Rogers, I dont think GOT where everything is morally grey and a political game had room for a character like Jon Snow. Of they were going to embrace the nilhism they should have had him stay dead.
I ofcourse know of Alt Shift X and have dipped into his lore videos in the past but I'm afraid I haven't seen his Jon Snow one, 2 hours was too much for me. What I did was compile every Jon Snow scene from the show and watch them in order, then thought about where it might've gone wrong, and then made this video. For me, I consider that quite a rushed effort, and it is kind of lazy, when I rushed this out while my focus has been avsorbed by a bigger video...but that's how I made this one. Thinking about what went wrong with show Jon's arc, sometimes in relation to the books but, as I tried to argue here and in other videos: the show doesn't have to do the same thing. Jon could absolutely have had a different arc to the books BUT they still need to actually write one in. I've made loads of these videos before on other characters from the show, ones Alt Shift X hasn't made videos himself on. I've also made big psychological analyses of characters drawing on my work as a psychotherapist. I get why it'd look like I'm copying, if you don't already know my channel, but most of stuff I said here is just the painfully obvious points when you watch back the show. It's the same points I think anybody would notice, so if Alt Shift said the same stuff, that doesn't surprise me. More so, there are a great many small channels that discuss asoiaf on youtube that aren't Alt Shift X, so many more devoted to it than me that I've talked up in the past. It'd feel a shame if all of those channels are just judged in comparison to the big one
As someone who waited until after the fanfare to watch the show I actually really enjoyed the whole thing. I think the biggest critique of the show is not giving things enough time to breathe. Everyone is in such a rush to put time tables on shows without thinking about how long this stuff really takes or giving situations enough time to breathe. I think the second half of the show feels rushed, storylines aren’t fleshed out enough and given their due. It’s said there’s supposed to be a 5 year gap between season 4 and 5 and I think the show could’ve really used that time. Especially to explain the way the characters have changed while shooting.
Using plot points from seasons 7 and 8 to highlight why a character is “bad” is like playing soccer/football without a goalie. It’s honestly pathetic. I respected your opinion up until you tried to bolster it with content from s7 onward. Seeing as every single character got butchered it’s hardly fair to use that as an example of “bad” characters because they all fuckin sucked from that point on. As someone who hasn’t read the books I can’t relate to the disappointment that people feel with the differences in character (in the case of GoT anyways) but from a purely show watching standpoint I don’t think there’s nearly as big of a problem as people suggest. Especially seeing as I don’t think you HAVE to question/challenge his morals every chance you get in order to make him more compelling. Given how hard it is for any other character to do the “right” thing in this world, it can be very compelling to watch someone while they try to live doing the “right” thing when the world is constantly pushing back against these ideals. It causes struggle and conflict which is why we watch this stuff in the first place.
Of course I'd mention season 7 and 8. This isn't a video trying to argue "show Jon is bad", it's a video trying to pick apart what aspects caused it to go wrong. S7 and 8 are the blatantly obvious faults but you still need to mention them
@@mylittlethoughttree but if you’re looking for aspects that caused things to go wrong, looking at the end of something isn’t really a good spot to look for flaws regardless of the situation. Cause before effect as it were and therefore cause isn’t found at the end. I’m a little biased as Jon is my favorite character but I believe I’m pretty fair when it comes to criticism. His ideals aren’t the most complex so they may not be the most interesting to some but I don’t think he’s boring or bad by any stretch. I think it shows just how strong of a character he is by not having his moral compass shift back and forth. Consistent characters are the base for every great story ever told and it’s why the inconsistencies of them in the final 2 seasons are what destroyed this show. It’s one thing to not like someone or something when you can’t see what isn’t there. But in the case of Jon Snow I think some of the points you touched on you either ignored certain aspects of them or just missed them entirely. I’ve met a lot of people that don’t particularly care for Jon because he doesn’t have the grey morals that other characters (this world even) are so known for. That’s fine if that’s how you feel. If those are the only kind of characters you like then more power to you but I don’t think that makes characters who are more straightforward bad by any means. TLDR: I disagree with your assessment but we’re each entitled to our opinions and not much I can do through comment section banter. If you did read it all the I appreciate it and I hope I haven’t wasted your time. 🙂
Yeah, I don't think s7 and 8 are the main cause but they're worth at least mentioning. My main argument if anything was that Qorin halfhand was the moment that "ruined" Jon although I still don't even see it as ruined. The titles and thumbnails are faintly clickbait because I know people love dunking on the show, but I just find it interesting to see what can be learned from possible mistakes or in tracing a downfall. In past videos I've argued that I refuse to call david and dan "dumb and dumber" the way everybody does because I don't think it's fair. They had sense and they tried things, but the show did progressively drop in quality and it's interesting to try and pick apart things that went wrong. Personally, I'd be fine with a more honourable and conventionally heroic Jon, it's just he still needs a compelling arc. The book arc was about a morally grey Jon, and the show was using a lot of story that followed that arc and tested Jon's heroism, but then rarely having it affect him as a person. He can stay heroic but his arc can't be static, and I feel they should've written one in, instead of creating this disconnect I argued. That said, he did still have some moments. You haven't wasted my time at all, though! It's always interesting to hear when people think I'm wrong or have different perspectives. Especially with this video which, full disclosure, I made in a rush because my big 2 hour character analysis I was planning to release got delayed. I think you're right to pick holes in this video, even if I stand by my opinion :)
Jon obviously wasn’t quite happy to join the Wildlings, and killing Qhorin was obviously somewhat difficult for him; you see this in the acting, Jon hesitating and his facial expressions. And I never once thought he was going to actually join them; it is totally against his character, and him breaking away was obviously a waiting game because cannot just break away whenever. The scenes make it clear the the is not really joining them either. Just because he likes Ygritte and has an understanding with a few of them, and respects their ways does not, in any way, mean or imply Jon is going to join them. I feel as if this is just a misreading on your part.
Jon choosing love over the right politics with Dany could've been so much better if they never cut Satin from the show. A reason why Jon is killed in the books is because he appoints Satin as Lord Steward despite barely being at the wall a year. Yes, Satin is one of the few people in the watch that can read, but Jon appointed the pretty femboy to be his right-hand man for more than just his ability to read. Jon chooses Satin because he has a crush on Satin in the books. And this is indicative of the greater issue with show Jon. D&D taking away what makes Jon a complex character. The fact he is in a constant battle of wanting so much, but always being reminded of his greater duty, only for a letter to arrive that crosses a line. It's just another reason why I am convinced D&D disliked books 4 and 5. I even doubt they read them in full
I have a very different way of looking at this. Not that Jon Snow's character was ruined, but the fact that audience feedback suggested they just liked having him back, raised from the dead. -that the audience just wanted to hang out with their favorite characters, to hell with the plot and character development and storytelling. It wasn't the character that got ruined, it was the relationship between the series makers and the audience. From that point J & J stopped caring what direction anyone was taking, it was just one dramatic moment after another, with characters the audience loved or hated. Basically the fans ruined the series, not the writers. For that matter, any show which calibrates to audience metrics from now on! Jon Snow wasn't ruined, Jon Snow ruined us! 😳
I disagree with you, although I appreciate your opinion. There’s nothing wrong for the show to have this “hero” especially considering all the other characters in the show. It’s a shame how the show didn’t follow through and see this point home and have that awful ending
Oh yeah, having a hero is perfectly fine, but he still needs a clear arc, to grow and change, and to do so without bending the story to make it work. They could've definitely written in something different that works with Jon more like a conventional hero, the problem was they didn't
@@mylittlethoughttree I actually happen to think to think otherwise. They’ve been setting him up as honorable and heroic and the Trueborn King aegon VI, and then they try to subvert us by him not slaying the night king, not becoming king of Westeros, weird/forced romance with Daenerys (which could’ve worked), and her slaying. That was out of character for him imo
“It’s not like in the books , mimimi” - summary of this video. This show does an insanely good job fleshing out a huge number of characters and story arcs. Not ALL of them , but a huge number. They didn’t cut some of the arcs and characters because they are “scared of exploring morality”, but because some of them are just less important or entertaining than the others. In a book that’s fine, in a show, it’s not. You just don’t compare GOT to the books. You compare it with OTHER SHOWS.
Well I think I must've worded this one badly,. because a few other people thought I was saying the same thing. I'm absolutely fine with it being different to the books, though. I even like a lot of changes, however the problem isn't Jon is different, it's that they didn't write in a proper arc. If you don't want his story to be about challenging his morality, then it has to be challenging his character in other ways and developing him differently, and I don't think they did that clearly enough. He'll vaguely grow in some moments but he's also still tied to the outline of the books, so is experiencing things that, at first, challenge his morality, then suddenly don't anymore, and then nothing character-based is changing at all. I'm fine with it being different so long as it commits to that properly. I get what you're saying about a lot of characters but Jon is arguably the main character, or at least top 3. It's essen his arc feels strong, as a result. And sure, if we compare it to other shows, then I think I'd still say the same: a main character needs a stronger sense of arc
I kind of disagree with almost everything you are saying here. As someone who didnt read the books, I Think people who did cant set aside their views on the books to look at the show on its own. and when you consistently compare it to the books you could say anything is this and anything is that. I really wish people would start analyzing this show based on the show and not wth the shadow of "the books are better" over everything they argue. I could go into everything Jon screwed up all the way through the show and ended up being the reason the capitol was burned down. I mean, he literally forced that on the realm by backing dany. How is that not intriguing and interesting to his character?
I'm very have for an adaptation to do things differently and have positively talked about such changes in the past. I personally feel it can be as different as it likes providing there's a clear and meaningful story being told in the adaptation. For me, Jon's problem is being caught between two different stories. He's half the book version but never truly committing to that arc, and he's half a show version that also never stretches his arc and pushes him to grow effectively enough because it's still tied to the book. My problem isn't that it's different, it's that it didn't commit, and you therefore end up with an inconsistent arc: one that builds in the same direction the books to, only to then step back, try something else, then vaguely veer back to the book version again. I think his arc ends up weak as a result and Jon never changes as much as he deserves to. That said, you're not the only one to disagree with me here, so it is my own opinion
Use the code TREE for 51% off World Anvil with the link worldanvil.com/?c=mltt
Or else try it out for free!!
Patreon link: www.patreon.com/mylittlethoughttree
In the books, Jon letting Ygritte live was categorically NOT the reason Qhorin's group was captured. Qhorin says so when he tells Jon he knows that he spared her--she did not have a way to get back to the Lord o Bones until after they were already found out. They were found out by Orell's eagle. Qhorin says he wanted to know what kind of man he was--and because he spared Ygritte, Qhorin knew he was the man to infiltrate the Free Folk. Qhorin already knew they were going to be caught when they attacked Ygritte and Orell's position. He's just that good.
Yes, the books make so much more sense. I was so disappointed when in the movie they left Jon all alone to kill her - the youngest and most inexperienced brother, he had never ever kill anyone up to that moment and they knew it. I was thinking: this is stupid, who in his right mind will do such a thing. I red the books later and it really made so much more sense, including the way Qhorin lets Jon know that he knows that he let the girl go. I truly enjoyed the books so much more, even compared to the first seasons, since the characters are so much more ... complex and respectively lifelike.
I can give grace for adaptations in different mediums, but I agree with you, that example in particular makes no sense in changing it. Only makes it worse
@@gerganakoleva4137movie? What movie of GoT did you watch?
@@posivibe989the plural of medium is media
@@pyropulseIXXI TV series - big deal
Show Jon: “I dun wan it”
Book Jon: “He wanted it, Jon knew then. He wanted it as much as he had ever wanted anything. I have always wanted it, he thought, guiltily. May the gods forgive me.”
Honestly I think a lot of the problems with Jon in the show begin all the way in Season 1 and the changes to his characterization.
The show removes a lot of his personality and flaws. Like his cynicism and snarky, sarcastic humor. Jon is straight up one of the funniest characters in the books alongside Tyrion, Edd, and the One True King of Comedy Stannis. And then his flaws like his insecurity and resentment from being a bastard, being quick to anger, and his general angst.
Not to mention how deep down Jon actually envied Robb (despite loving him) and covets Winterfell, and is genuinely tempted and has a whole internal crisis when Stannis offers to make him Lord of Winterfell.
Now to be fair a lot of Jon’s characterization is in his internal monologue. But the show also removes any outward expression of it.
The show seems like it was just trying to make him like Ned. When I think a big aspect of Jon’s character is that he isn’t honorable like Ned, although he aspires to be.
And that’s even before Jon is elected Lord Commander and tries to “kill the boy” and become the cold, callous, pragmatic Lord Snow. And then the difference in characterization are exasperated and completely diverge.
“Jon, he'd said, but Jon was gone. It was Lord Snow who faced him now, grey eyes as hard as ice.”
And then Jon will probably come back even darker after his resurrection…
Just like Caitlyn when she came back as Lady Stoneheart. She wasn't the same as she was before. Like I think not including her and not showing what resurrection does to one of the characters we followed was a mistake
Dark Jon… wolf like Jon… the idea he might have warged into ghost (partially?) is interesting to me.
I'd disagree there. Jon has moments cynical and or retorts with sparky remarks. I think most fans miss that because jon doesn't have clear sense of resnements that his book counterpart has
@@HeatherHolt At this point I am pretty much convinced this is case. Varamyr's prologue is a strong indicator for it. It specifically provides the information that if you are killed while your consciousness is inhabiting the creature, part of your consciousness will stay alive there. I certainly don't think we get that information there for no reason.
"Jon fell to his knees. He found the dagger's hilt and wrenched it free. In the cold night air the wound was smoking. "Ghost," he whispered. Pain washed over him. Stick them with the pointy end. When the third dagger took him between the shoulder blades, he gave a grunt and fell face-first into the snow. He never felt the fourth knife. Only the cold…" His last word being Ghost definitely hints to him reaching out to him, and him not feeling the fourth knife can definitely mean he already was in Ghosts body by the time they stabbed him that last time...
I actually think the problems started when Ned died, after that I feel the show tried to make him a new ned
They ruined Jon's character almost immediately when they zapped his sass. Yes, book Jon wants to follow Ned's honorable teachings (in the beginning), but he is also incredibly sassy and has a hard time not talking back. He's a bit of a smartass and becomes quite political, which is why him and Tyrion get along so well in the first place.
The show muted his character and made him a generic, kind of dumb hero. It's like D and D read Ygritte telling Jon her famous line and mistook it for him actually being stupid, missing the entire point of their relationship and character differences. "You know nothing Jon Snow" doesn't mean he's an idiot, but more that he's never really lived, he doesn't know what's truly important (at least to people who are free), and he doesn't really know who he is yet.
This is long-winded, but Jon was my book fav and seeing the show strip his character to such a cliche dullard actually hurt me. I can only imagine how George felt.
Less incredibly, and more just noticeably. He still is in the show, just in a much more sparce fashion.
well said
Note that in the books Qhorin does not need Jon to kill Ygritte. He says that the wildlings would have sighted them anyway and if he wanted her dead, he’d have killed her himself. The only reason he instructs Jon to do it is to get a measure of his character, which he does when Jon spares her.
Qhorin uses this information later when he gives Jon his mission. He knows that Jon stays true to his values over orders, and that he won’t kill without a good reason. This means he can be trusted to pose a double agent and take enemy orders while staying true to the Watch, and it also means that Qhorin has to explain to Jon clearly why he has to kill him.
All of this is lost for the sake of a chase in the snow with Ygritte.
Honestly, Jon especially had some weird stuff going on right from the beginning. In the first episode they had Theon assign Ghost to him instead of having Jon himself claim him. It’s not that big but they were stripping his agency right from the start and it spiraled out of control from there
That scene kinda works because it kinda hints at a solidarity between Jon and Theon as fellow outsiders in the family. But since that relationship is never built on, you are right that it does just end up as a wasted oppurtunity for Jon.
Also Jon being angry at not being at the feast, instead of being glad that he can just sit with the people he likes and can drink as much as he wants.
@@sebastos7693 there was still resentment from jon in the books during the feast.
@@fightingmedialounge519 He was really drunk, too.
Another TH-camr (Dominic Noble) pointed out that the point where Jon's arc starts to go down the wrong path (compared to the books, at least) is actually in episode one of season one.
When they find the direwolves, in the show, when they find Ghost, Theon tells Jon, "this one will die, it's yours" or something along those lines. Jon looks at Ghost almost shocked. It males Jon a passive person, someone in a mean and backhanded receiving what will turn out to be power.
In the book, Theon says it's a runt and it will die first (or something similar), a lot like in the show. BUT, it's Jon that says, "I think not: this one is mine." Jon is CLAIMING, making an active move to gain what he KNOWS is power. He is rejecting the fate that is given to him and the puppy (death/being lesser).
It was clear, at that point, what path was chosen for show Jon. He's the classic hero being pushed into the world of politics. They decided they didn't want the book Jon.
Anyway, Dominic Noble was amazing to catch that.
Not exactly what Domenic says. More just that there is a clear differences in the first episode in regards to jon(amongts other things).
@@fightingmedialounge519 ha! Well, it's been a while since I've watched, I must have added stuff to my memories! Thanks for clearing it up!
@@FanOfTheMyths eh, you probably took what he said recognized it as the reason show Jon fell flat for you.
@@fightingmedialounge519 very likely!
I found it confusing that on the show not even Qhorin seems to take the mission of the watch seriously and then sacrifices himself like that makes sense. In the book he's determined and has a strong investment in fighting the wildlings and that he'd instruct Jon to kill him makes sense. Jon is a kid being thrust into a suicide mission he has little choice in and that's powerful stuff, he's not even very strongly tied to the watch yet, he's very young and it's natural for him to get infatuated with Ygritte and sympathise with the wildlings. Why couldn't the show pick up these clearly very interesting character conflicts and challenges? The show runners seemingly got confused by the white guy with beard iconography and decided he's Jesus.
Sad that the show wasn't able to portray GRRM's theory that "the human heart, in conflict with itself is the one thing worth writing about".
@@mercyjokes2d696That’s not a theory from GRRM, that’s a quote from William Faulkner 😀
The more you look at the show, the examiner and deeper the cracks appear. D&D botched the story on so many levels, it’s a testament to how great the source material is that the show still slapped for as long as it did.
@@Sheija it was good for about 2 seasons and was trash by season 5 unwatchable by 7
@@Sheija not exactly since plenty book fans enjoy show original scenes.
Book Jon is almost a completely different person than show Jon. Great points all around. If anyone is looking for another in depth explanation, Alt shift X did a Real Jon Snow vid that's very detailed and goes into more details on the themes and background and speculates on his future in the books.
That’s a good one. Didn’t remember how whiny Jon was in the books until seeing alts video.
In deep geek also has great takes.
@HeatherHolt He was also kind a hot head and a bit of a schemer in his own right, something the show completely left out.
I've been meaning to watch that, thanks for reminding me!
I wouldn't go that far. They differ crucial points but thr fudememtal elements that make up his character are their both.
@fightingmedialounge519 Not really, fundamentally they are very different in the book vs show.
I thought they made it pretty clear that Jon was meant to infiltrate the wildlings, but the conflict was just that he was impressed with mance rayder and he fell for Ygritte
It was in the books. He was told by a captain north of the wall to be a double agent then the captain got killed. It was a whole thing
I think they showed his falling for the girl and respect for Mance and I think they tried to show a conflict in him, but because they wanted also to hide the spying plan they did not emphasize properly that internal conflict, just as it is suggested in the video.
@@gerganakoleva4137 but they did show the spying plan.
D & D messed up pretty much everyone's character. The only characters that are more fleshed out in the show then the books and given more interesting storylines are Olenna and Margery Tyrell. Their book characters are a little more boring.
Olenna is boring in the book?! Man she was amazing. What a sassy chic. Cracked me up so often even when she was about to die she was slaying with her words.
@@HeatherHolt I liked her better in the show than her book version tbh
I would say Cersei to, at least up until the books go Season 1-6 Cersei is a much more sympathetic and interesting character then book Cersei
That's why I never took GOT seriously as an adaptation of ASOIAF, they made some pretty good changes and some really bad ones, I loved it from season one to four, kinda like season five for some of it's moments but absolutely hated everything after it. The show runners changed the characters too much, even if the changes were subtle they still mattered a lot
The show was a joke made by people who never understood the story.
First four seasons were great. Minus the excessive noodie scenes but hey that’s what got many people watching.
After season four.. things went downhill fast. I’m still salty about how they ruined Jamie’s character with one stupid sentence right at the end and his decision to return to Cersei. I could understand him returning but ending up like they did in was laughable. But damn the Jamie and Brianne bath scene where he explains about the mad king, gawd that hit hard. You hate him then you are glad he’s captured then you start to feel bad for him then you understand him then you like him then you love him.
Oh and then he r words Cersei next to Joffreys body 🫤 but the showrunners said it was supposed to look consensual?? Sure ok bc y’all don’t edit and run it past tons of people who surely said ew what’s happening here.
I have so much to complain about post season 4 but I do appreciate the great content in the first half of the show. (Sand snakes can take a hike and little fingers end was so fkn absurd, not to mention the ships Dani “forgot” about lmao)
@HeatherHolt I think Season 4 or even S3 E10 is where the show starts to fall apart, cutting Lady Stoneheart is a major change, and by S4 E10 we’ve also skipped the Tysha reveal which is a major part of Tyrion’s arc leading into Book 5.
@@HeatherHolt Nothing wrong with nude scenes, naked people is a normal thing.
EDIT: I now see that you are a woman, so I get your discomfort with naked people, regardless, it is natural.
Great analysis - frustrating how much richer GOT could have been. Also your ad transition made me legit smile.
It seems the show's creators misunderstood most of the characters on a pretty fundamental level. They wanted us to believe that both Jon and Dany were definitively heroic instead of showing them both as morally grey and growing darker. They wanted us to believe that they would have an epic romance instead of worldviews and values that clash on a fundamental level. And maybe they could have made those aspects of the story work if they'd tossed aside GRRM's planned ending and just written the ending that they wanted. Like, if you're going to deviate from the source material's characterization that much to make the characters fit your preferred type, then of course the source material's ending is going to appear nonsensical. Why not just write Jon and Dany teaming up to heroically take down the White Walkers and then placing themselves on the Iron Throne in a glorious rebirth of the Targaryen dynasty? Sure, that's pretty much the opposite of what GRRM is going for, but at least it would have satisfied the writers and a large portion of their audience.
OMG Karl Tanner is so much a budget Ramsey, that I entirely forgot he existed.
Death and resurrection is supposed to mean something in the Game of Thrones world. It’s supposed to have consequences, it’s supposed to change people. It did nothing to Johns character at all and everybody around him acted like it was totally normal. And it meant nothing. You literally fighting an enemy that doesn’t stay dead and willingly accept somebody without even a word who has just come back from the dead and everybody goes on as though it’s a great thing. It may as well have not happened.
Show jon is the character book jon wishes he was.
Heroic, always knowing what to do and never tempted and always in control of his emotions.
What baffled me by rereading the books is how much Jon seeks moments to be a hero, to have songs sung about him, to be seen as a stark....
Show Jon does that too, just he doesn't speak about it.
@@stevem2323 show Jon has his moments where he is tempted by his family name, but the show draws far less attention to it and those temptations seem therefore far less tempting
@@saraa.4295 Sure, but there's still that in the show, we just don't have his inner monologues.
@@stevem2323 that's true ..the lack of inner monologue is a challenge to every show, though if they wanted to make his inner push and pull and his desire for glory and power which is there in the book a focus of his character a main point they could have made some dialogs with some of Jon's trusted friends or even with ghost..
But the show tended to make morally good characters even purer and morally bad characters even more despicable, so they removed most of his temptations...
@@saraa.4295 I loved Jon until season 7, sure book Jon is more nuanced and complex, but still.
Seasons 7 and 8, there's no Jon almost, but they did that to many other main characters.
I like the comment about the story bending around Jon. It's such a dangerous trap in writing, getting attached to a character and making sure that the story doesn't change or kill them. Or maybe in a show like this there was a concern that doing too much to alter his character, especially later on when show fans couldn't be reassured by readers of the books, might cause audience disengagement?
As a completely unrelated note, it would be awesome to see My Little Thought Tree's take on the contrast between Max and Vincent in the movie Collateral, if that would be an enjoyable project. Their dynamic is just fascinating.
Great, thought-provoking video, as always. :)
I have a bit of a headache & want to 'consume' on yt, but everything is so loud & fast. I was thinking, where can I go to think, but with a calm voice at a natural pace? Lucky me, there are a few videos I can catch up on♡
Thank you for being you
Looking back on it, so much of what went wrong with the show seems like it turned into bad fanfiction, with every plot point that wasn't GRRM's becoming fan service and wish fulfillment: show how awesome the good guys are by having them win against bad guys. Whenever the books have monstrous characters (the Mountain, Ramsay, the Brave Companions, etc.), they're never defeated in a straight-forward victory, and they're always used to explore complicated themes about how horrible people are politically empowered in this terrible terrible world.
"do whatever is asked, do not balk, your honor means nothing vs the realm" jon thinks about this phase a lot in ACOK. Did he say this in the show ??
Rewatching it with my girlfriend currently and Jon's moral was never actually pointed out. During his time with the wildlings he never has this "I must do because of my honor", instead, they made him claim that after he returns to the night's watch which always felt VERY false to me watching the show. He claims that Halfhand told him to kill him (which he did in the books) but there wasn't a scene before, so like, 10 episodes you just keep thinking Jon is a dick
It's kinda funny just how early on the divergence from the books is setting up characters to fail by key aspects for their arcs. In the early seasons Jon is still a pretty solid character and mostly works but due to the fact that his story is for a less honourable and more morally grey character, it doesn't really work in the later seasons anymore.
As someone else in the comments so nicely put it: "Jon Snow isn't as honourable as Ned Stark, though he aspires to be". He does desire Winterfell, he has to fight huge inner battles between love and duty and he is truly tempted by Stannises offer, he wants it but knows it's wrong. Honour doesn't come easy to Jon as it seemingly did with Ned.
One thing I would like ta add to the reasons mentioned in your video is the resurrection of Jon Snow and just how little impact it has on the man and his story. Like his character doesn't change at all from it whereas others like lady Stoneheart and Derrick Dondarrion go through dramatic changes. Being betrayed like that should change you. Experiencing death on its own should change you and the books at least have clearly set up that when you return from the dead it's "not all of you that comes back" a little of your humanity, what made you you is left behind each time.
Your videos really make me wanna reread the books but having given up all hope the series will never get finished, I don't want to get invested all over again 😭
Your ad transition literally cracked me up 😂 but in regards to your video I think you have it pretty spot on.
From the moment Jon went south to meet Dany to almost to the end of the show I kept telling myself he was secretly playing politic because he needed her dragons and knew what she could do with them. I was disappointed that never happened. It would have made his singular line that much more convincing, as well as the fact that, as you pointed out - he seemed to fall in love with Dany like flicking on a switch.
Jon's resurrection was probably the biggest disappointment for me in Game of Thrones, and if Lady Stoneheart is any indication it will be very different in the books. Stoneheart is a distillation of Catelyn's negative attributes, her vindictive grudge holding, poor aim/disregard for consequences when pursuing vengeance are taken to the extreme. Jon's resurrected form Lord Snow will unleash the parts of Jon he has held back until now. He will be coldhearted, covetous, and quick to violence. A wolf wearing the skin of a man, driven by instinct.
That's totally disappointing too, if there's no old Jon at all.
I remember while everyone else was complaining about Dany and Arya's character arcs, Jon was the one who became my least favorite. Everything he did was morally correct and he could never do anything wrong, and he was ALWAYS rewarded for his honor, which goes against everything the story told us when Ned and Robb were killed for their honor. He just became the blandest perfect Gary Stu of a character that everyone worshipped which was SO boring compared to the moral ambiguity the show used to be known for.
Not to mention his "punishment" at the end of the show not only felt contrived since Grey Worm wasn't around to enforce it, it didn't feel like a real punishment since it kinda portrayed him as coming home to his family beyond the wall, and it felt like even if he wasn't banished he would just go there anyway.
The moment the show fell apart was in episode 1 when Catelyn begged Ned to stay at Winterfell rather than pushing him to go south. From that moment on, all the female characters were written to be 2D
Roz wasn’t 2D
Cersei, Olenna, Margery
When I see the quality, quantity, and production of your videos, I'm always shocked that you don't have 1M+ subscribers. I'm sure it's just a matter of time. Keep it up!!
I think if it was gonna happen, it would've done by now. There's a lot of my videos youtube just doesn't promote, I don't mind necessarily. I'm just about earning enough to get by. If I could get to two hundred, and then be freer to take more time on my videos and make them even better, instead of rushing because I need to earn more revenue each week, that'd be enough for me
It was anoying that he basically killed Velarion by not escaping in time, he wasn't good in the battle of the bastards and mostly, he was useless in the long night. Plus all those repetitive lines. 'I don't want it'
I always found Jon to be the most boring character in the show. Kit Harrington seems to have had only one expression of Bored-Marginally annoyed throughout. And he talked in the same tone of voice too.
Not sure if that was bad direction, bad writing or bad acting.
Its really sad because season 7 Jon was *almost* great. I feel like more pandering writers (which I'm amazed I'm saying right now) would simply have Jon and Dany immediately click, but nah they actually resisted that urge for a little while, having Jon be at least somewhat antagonistic towards her, despite her appearing to be a good person and their alliance being one that would make sense. But towards the end of the season and DEFINITELY by season 8, he becomes the generic loyal knightly character towards her at best, a pre-programmed response robot at worst. He was my favorite character for most of the series, but it's really hard to get behind a character who has given up all autonomy when they were a good character for often breaking taboos and bending rules for the purpose of helping the unfortunate.
I’m sorry I can’t agree season 7 was awful all around.
I just think that the resurrection stripped Jon of all his older charisma + personality and left him an empty shell
Aww come on, are you saying you didn’t love hearing “yer muh Queen” for the hundredth time by the end of the show?? 😅 jk
I agree, it was so frustrating to see him roll over like a dog and fold to everyone else’s will when he was one of the few characters who stuck to his morals the most.
Nah, Jon wasn't a character by season 7 already, he had no identity.
@@MeleysRQ Bullshit.
What do you mean Grey Worm had little to no influence in that council scene. He was the head of the only army in that city besides the northmen, which were leaderless. He should have been the only person in that scene who got to make any decisions.
Where is that art on the thumbnail from? That's just how I imagined Jon Snow looks like when I read the book
Solid video. I do think the show's early seasons were mostly good, but as you pointed out here, a lot of cracks were beginning to form even early on.
D&D and the other show writers NEVER understood the Stark kids…including Jon. I’m just going to focus on Jon, Sansa, and Arya because they got the most screen time out of the Stark kids. Jon, Sansa, and Arya are very internal characters. Which means most of their actions are motivated by their deep internal thoughts which is easy to convey in books but way more difficult to convey in a show. They wrote Sansa as this stupid, spoiled, little girl rather than a child trying to be the perfect woman in Westeros society and when that blows up for her, Sansa has to confront all the things she was told about the world. What makes Sansa so great in the books is that we see her starting to realize her political power and she is determined to use her political power to make the world better. What makes Sansa strong in the books is her internal power, she refuses to let the horrible things that happen to her shape her into a horrible person.
Jon in the books isn’t an action hero he actually thinks a lot before he makes a decision. He has a lot of internal conversations with himself and Jon stands behind his decisions not matter the risks. Also the scene in the show when Jon kills Qhorin makes no sense. In the show Qhorin just attacks Jon & Jon kills him in self defense. So why would that win over the Wildlings? Again in the books Jon actually thinks about this and realizes this is his only way to survive so HE attacks and kills Qhorin to show the wildlings that he is on their side.
Arya was done the worst by this awful show. In the books Arya is just a traumatized child that has no idea what home means anymore, so she searches for a new home and purpose. Arya isn’t some unstoppable killing machine, she is just a young girl trying to find a place in the world after the destruction of her family and home.
I wish they would've included Val and Dalla in the show. It would've been interesting to see where the Jon/Val thing went, since the book is never going to be finished
I never watched the show beyond a few episodes in the fourth season because they were messing everything up so badly by then. Who is that kid at the Wall who didn't like Jon? It's so weird to me that the show cuts tons of characters and one could argue it's for practical purposes but at the same time they also just invent their own, like Locke or, presumably, that kid.
Hi I absolutely love this channel and all it's content so much and Ive never commented before but I just wanted to say how much I miss the ramblily videos which were my favorite like the one about doors and the one about not taking things too serious and all the therapy ones especially ones about children's therapy whether that be the case study things or the more general ones and the ones about lesser known films and tv shows, I know you've got big projects taking up a lot of your time and you might just prefer mainly doing videos about the same popular shows if that's the case then fair enough but I just wanted to consent in case u weren't doing your random rambling videos about your thoughts on different things anymore cus u thought people didn't like them and if that was the case then I just wanted to let you know they are very missed by me, I hope this don't come across rude or entitled obviously make whatever u wanna make but if u did wanted to make any none film or TV based videos again I would love that as they are missed, sorry for the long comment as u can tell I'm a rambler and I'm aware u might not read this anyway but just thought I'd try as I love those kind of videos so much and would be great to see some more
Hey, glad you liked them! I definitely love making those kind of videos, the problem is more a) they don't get many views b) my channel in general doesn't pull in as many views nowadays, so I have to try and make more popular stuff in order to earn enough to pay bills and c) youtube doesn't like when you jump around with different topics. That said, I do still make them. A katie video was released recently (unlisted but it can be found via my community post about it or by looking in the public playlist). I made a couple recently rambling in regards to rescent films but one got taken down and the other had some weird glitch where it just disappeared completely. They do still crop up and, if I reach a place where my views are more stable, more of them will definitely appear again, I'm just in a spot where I've got to be pragmatic.
That said, things like it appear on my patreon more regularly. Not often in video form but as audio recordings or written stuff, so there is that but it's also slightly different. I hope more rambling videos do come again, though. I'm glad it's not just me that liked them
The ways that you work in the World Anvil ad-read in your episodes always makes me laugh.
your ad transitions are the best one on TH-cam btw 😂😂
Will you be finishing the Spirited Away video series? 🥺👉👈
I think its fair at this point to ask what character didn't get ruined, they all sucked in the end.
I have these problems with the Starks in general. They're better in the books but they seem too much like traditional fantasy heroes in the show.
That has to be one of the most painful ad reads I’ve seen. You sounded like WORLD ANVIL had kidnapped your family and this was the only way to get them back
LMAO
I mean I tend to go for deliberately cheesy and overtop, but kidnapped family works, too 😂 I commit to working with them so much, that there could be some sense to that
Book Jon would’ve absolutely become tempted with the notion of being heir to the iron throne.
Even though he wanted to be a Stark more than anything, he does have a bit of an internal lust for power. Now while his true identity would be a struggle for him, he’d definitely be a little tempted, liking the idea.
Instead we got….”I don’t want it”
The showrunners committed themselves to spectacle over substance. They didn't have the writing skill or depth to handle ANY of the characters or plot points after the books ended.
Thanks for posting today❤
I listen to those lofi songs all the time ❤ great video yo
Show Jon in contrast to book Jon lost me the moment Ygritte ESCAPED him. Their whole Romeo and Juliet thing becomes unbelievable to nonsensical when she ESCAPES him instead of HE LET HER GO. Like someone else already commented, the took away his agency in so many occasions, he is just a blank slate to fill in generic heroism whenever you need it.
With Jon in the show I find they took inspiration from King Arthur, that being that a hero comes from small beginnings and has no interest in ruling others, and isn't just forced to rule them but is guided.
That's why this show doesn't really portray it correctly, Jon Snow doesn't have a Merlin.
Not to say they should've added one but to say that King Arthur does and Jon Snow does Not and that's why it doesn't work.
Not having internal monologues is a huge blow for his character tbh, idk how dumb and dumber could've handled it.
I'm not entirely why youtube recommended this video to me since I've neither read the books nor ever watched the show but... here we are, I guess!
Well, it's pretty cool you still clicked on it, then!
I always applaude thus type of analysis... but I wonder, why do them? Mainstream TV and movies are are essentially rubbish and their adaptations never ever reach the toe of the original book writer. They're a waste of space.
Nahhh they're not all bad! Game of thrones had its strengths too. It would never possibly be a scratch on the book, too much inevitably has to be lost in adaptation but there are also different advantages that a film medium can convey. I've never been the kind of person to write things off as useless but in the case of this show, I make these videos a) because it's super interesting to pick apart how such a massively successful show could end up so despised. B) I think there are writing lessons to learn from others mistakes and c) I made one of them in the build up to a character analysis video and it did well for views. At times when my channel is in a dip and paying bills is hard, I need to make things that'll be seen
Amazing analysis as always ✨🥰
lol this was actually one of the things I liked better in the show. Jon citing Mormont’s tolerance of Craster as his reason for defecting was much more believable than “uhh… idk… I just think you wildlings are cool…”
Couldn't disagree more. Mance's story about visiting Winterfell during Robert's visit there and seeing everyone in the hall sets Jon up perfectly for his "And did you see me? Did you see where they seated the bastard?" line and is really the only reason I think Mance could buy. On the show he's like "I want to fight for the side that fights for the living" and it's dumb as hell, not at al convincing.
I quite liked that, too. I think you can pick holes in it, but it streamlines things well for the show and helps to emphasise his unease about the watch supporting crastor, when you don't get the internal monologue of the book. I don't know if it's as good but it makes sense for the adaptation. It was just the handling of Qorin and his feelings about it that bothered me
@@jetsilveravenger the issue Jon's reasoning in the books is that he likely wouldn't join the nights watch first if he genuinely just desired to be treated equally amongst his pears.
Jon was my favorite character, in both the books and the show but I was always very up about the changes the show made to him. He felt like a shadow of himself compared to his book counterpart.
They could have at least had fun with it. As he’s banished to the wall he randomly stops citizens his entire way there and says “we need more allies.” Then when the credits roll you hear him say it again, followed by “my queen.” 😂
Mormont should’ve just immediately taken the keep from Craster and established a garrison there. He seemed to have no defenses whatsoever.
Its the main problem when adapting a book to film. Especially A song of ice and fire. Most of the chapters are people thinking and debating with themselves about themselves and the world around them.
I'm hearing all of this and can't stop comparing it to Dune
It really feels like a what if of Paul's journey
I'll look, but if you haven't done it yet, you should do Six Feet Under. Character development abound!
Season 2 for me was bad adaptation of Jon's story. Dany's too.
I always found the “need more allies“ plot A lot more essential and complex for the story than you’re making it out in this video. Because it related to the white walkers which in any sane persons head would’ve been the end game plot line. So you needed at least one character who saw the true threat and knew everyone needed to put aside their petty differences and work together or we will all die. So they could have that told you so moment where all the other characters finally see the true threat and realize they’ve been living in luxury and maybe shouldn’t have killed all of each other’s best fighters. But since the walkers didn’t become the endgame plot and the fight for the iron throne did I guess your point does stand that we should’ve seen Jon be more political in his motivation and moves. But I knew early on he was never gonna have a chance because he was taught the lesson by evil men and by the time he was actually in power to make political moves the real world strong woman movement was just getting started and all the other leaders were women and there was no way in hell they were going to make Jon Snow look more capable than a woman leader
Here we go, boys (and girls).
Someone get the popcorn!
The whole "the best leader is the one who does not want to lead" makes Jon a way more passive character and robs him of agency. Show!Jon is a lot more like Frodo Baggins, a simple guy who just does what needs to be done and sacrifices himself while doing so. Just without that pesky being successfully tempted by power thing. Their remodelled Jon might be more morally acceptable and he does not at all try to change the status quo (because you'd have to want the power to do so and we can't have the hero wanting power, that's just too corrupting) but he does not fit the plotline. Jon in the show just makes less and less sense because he was redone to be a pure high fantasy hero. It's like putting Walter White into the Lord of the Rings- some things just don't mesh and if you try to harmonize, you'd end up with gibberish. I am reminded of "Anatomy of Story" by Turby, how everything has to fit the theme and characters are a web, other characters get flat if you only focus on the main character. Here they just cut out the Jon that fit the plot and exchanged him for a more steamlined and heroic version, maybe to make him more likeable. Sadly we don't just like "good and pretty" people. To be entertaining, a character must be interesting. And Jon became less so, not more.
I wouldn't say he isn't tempted by power considering he complains about being a steward and only calms down when Sam says he'll likely be lord commander through that position.
@@fightingmedialounge519 I don't think that was about power but about status. It was not "Oh, cool, I get to be LC after the old Bear drops dead" but more like: "Oh, okay, they did not mean to punish me by making me empty chamber pots but being THIS steward actually means something, it is an honorable position, not simply a servant." Even in the show Jon is allowed to be snobby, just not powerhungry. It is (imho) subtly different in the book and the whole "Jon is pissy because he is not a ranger"-plot does fit better into the book plotline, true. But it did still fit into the "Jon is angsty because he is a bastard"- plot (and that is pretty much all Jon does get in the show. Besides the princess to kill, I guess).
@@RikkaP I mean status and power are intrinsically linked.
@@fightingmedialounge519 In a way they are, esp. in a feudal system. But I think they are different incentives and they seem to be viewed differently. To obtain high status is seen much more positively then the quest for power. Some link ambition for power with evil schemers etc. While is is seen as natural and proper to optain (or even more: just keep) status. And not for all is the link between social status and power is so obvious.
@@RikkaP to obtain high status us only not seen as quest for power if the person themselves were already of a higher status. It's the unfortunate loop monarchies foster.
Jon seeing a giant for the first time will never fail to make me lol
«i dun wan it» «you Are mah queen» show jon Snow is ned Stark 2.0 i don’t understand why he can’t stay in Winterfell the north is it own kingdom now Bran has no power there and the unsullied left Westroes
good video
Wait, but Jon was never universally loved in the Watch, and never chosen like that tho.
i think Jon wanted to give halfhand an easy death
like he gave mance
Sponsor section was so worthy to watch
I think this is the Captain America Complex; a heroic character that wants to do the right thing simply becuase it is the right thing to do but While the MCU has room in its stories for a character like Steve Rogers, I dont think GOT where everything is morally grey and a political game had room for a character like Jon Snow. Of they were going to embrace the nilhism they should have had him stay dead.
They made John look like a Simp.
Just subscribed because I need more lol
It wasnt earlier than I thought
Wow, you really just watched the Alt Shift X video and summarised it in your style huh? Threw in a sponsor too. "My Little Thought Tree"?
I ofcourse know of Alt Shift X and have dipped into his lore videos in the past but I'm afraid I haven't seen his Jon Snow one, 2 hours was too much for me. What I did was compile every Jon Snow scene from the show and watch them in order, then thought about where it might've gone wrong, and then made this video. For me, I consider that quite a rushed effort, and it is kind of lazy, when I rushed this out while my focus has been avsorbed by a bigger video...but that's how I made this one. Thinking about what went wrong with show Jon's arc, sometimes in relation to the books but, as I tried to argue here and in other videos: the show doesn't have to do the same thing. Jon could absolutely have had a different arc to the books BUT they still need to actually write one in.
I've made loads of these videos before on other characters from the show, ones Alt Shift X hasn't made videos himself on. I've also made big psychological analyses of characters drawing on my work as a psychotherapist. I get why it'd look like I'm copying, if you don't already know my channel, but most of stuff I said here is just the painfully obvious points when you watch back the show. It's the same points I think anybody would notice, so if Alt Shift said the same stuff, that doesn't surprise me. More so, there are a great many small channels that discuss asoiaf on youtube that aren't Alt Shift X, so many more devoted to it than me that I've talked up in the past. It'd feel a shame if all of those channels are just judged in comparison to the big one
Damn I’m early?
As someone who waited until after the fanfare to watch the show I actually really enjoyed the whole thing. I think the biggest critique of the show is not giving things enough time to breathe. Everyone is in such a rush to put time tables on shows without thinking about how long this stuff really takes or giving situations enough time to breathe. I think the second half of the show feels rushed, storylines aren’t fleshed out enough and given their due. It’s said there’s supposed to be a 5 year gap between season 4 and 5 and I think the show could’ve really used that time. Especially to explain the way the characters have changed while shooting.
You don't know what I think.
Using plot points from seasons 7 and 8 to highlight why a character is “bad” is like playing soccer/football without a goalie. It’s honestly pathetic.
I respected your opinion up until you tried to bolster it with content from s7 onward. Seeing as every single character got butchered it’s hardly fair to use that as an example of “bad” characters because they all fuckin sucked from that point on.
As someone who hasn’t read the books I can’t relate to the disappointment that people feel with the differences in character (in the case of GoT anyways) but from a purely show watching standpoint I don’t think there’s nearly as big of a problem as people suggest. Especially seeing as I don’t think you HAVE to question/challenge his morals every chance you get in order to make him more compelling. Given how hard it is for any other character to do the “right” thing in this world, it can be very compelling to watch someone while they try to live doing the “right” thing when the world is constantly pushing back against these ideals. It causes struggle and conflict which is why we watch this stuff in the first place.
Of course I'd mention season 7 and 8. This isn't a video trying to argue "show Jon is bad", it's a video trying to pick apart what aspects caused it to go wrong. S7 and 8 are the blatantly obvious faults but you still need to mention them
@@mylittlethoughttree but if you’re looking for aspects that caused things to go wrong, looking at the end of something isn’t really a good spot to look for flaws regardless of the situation. Cause before effect as it were and therefore cause isn’t found at the end.
I’m a little biased as Jon is my favorite character but I believe I’m pretty fair when it comes to criticism. His ideals aren’t the most complex so they may not be the most interesting to some but I don’t think he’s boring or bad by any stretch. I think it shows just how strong of a character he is by not having his moral compass shift back and forth. Consistent characters are the base for every great story ever told and it’s why the inconsistencies of them in the final 2 seasons are what destroyed this show.
It’s one thing to not like someone or something when you can’t see what isn’t there. But in the case of Jon Snow I think some of the points you touched on you either ignored certain aspects of them or just missed them entirely.
I’ve met a lot of people that don’t particularly care for Jon because he doesn’t have the grey morals that other characters (this world even) are so known for. That’s fine if that’s how you feel. If those are the only kind of characters you like then more power to you but I don’t think that makes characters who are more straightforward bad by any means.
TLDR: I disagree with your assessment but we’re each entitled to our opinions and not much I can do through comment section banter. If you did read it all the I appreciate it and I hope I haven’t wasted your time. 🙂
Yeah, I don't think s7 and 8 are the main cause but they're worth at least mentioning. My main argument if anything was that Qorin halfhand was the moment that "ruined" Jon although I still don't even see it as ruined. The titles and thumbnails are faintly clickbait because I know people love dunking on the show, but I just find it interesting to see what can be learned from possible mistakes or in tracing a downfall. In past videos I've argued that I refuse to call david and dan "dumb and dumber" the way everybody does because I don't think it's fair. They had sense and they tried things, but the show did progressively drop in quality and it's interesting to try and pick apart things that went wrong.
Personally, I'd be fine with a more honourable and conventionally heroic Jon, it's just he still needs a compelling arc. The book arc was about a morally grey Jon, and the show was using a lot of story that followed that arc and tested Jon's heroism, but then rarely having it affect him as a person. He can stay heroic but his arc can't be static, and I feel they should've written one in, instead of creating this disconnect I argued. That said, he did still have some moments. You haven't wasted my time at all, though! It's always interesting to hear when people think I'm wrong or have different perspectives. Especially with this video which, full disclosure, I made in a rush because my big 2 hour character analysis I was planning to release got delayed. I think you're right to pick holes in this video, even if I stand by my opinion :)
Jon obviously wasn’t quite happy to join the Wildlings, and killing Qhorin was obviously somewhat difficult for him; you see this in the acting, Jon hesitating and his facial expressions.
And I never once thought he was going to actually join them; it is totally against his character, and him breaking away was obviously a waiting game because cannot just break away whenever.
The scenes make it clear the the is not really joining them either. Just because he likes Ygritte and has an understanding with a few of them, and respects their ways does not, in any way, mean or imply Jon is going to join them.
I feel as if this is just a misreading on your part.
He got some more totally wrong.
Jon choosing love over the right politics with Dany could've been so much better if they never cut Satin from the show. A reason why Jon is killed in the books is because he appoints Satin as Lord Steward despite barely being at the wall a year.
Yes, Satin is one of the few people in the watch that can read, but Jon appointed the pretty femboy to be his right-hand man for more than just his ability to read. Jon chooses Satin because he has a crush on Satin in the books.
And this is indicative of the greater issue with show Jon. D&D taking away what makes Jon a complex character. The fact he is in a constant battle of wanting so much, but always being reminded of his greater duty, only for a letter to arrive that crosses a line.
It's just another reason why I am convinced D&D disliked books 4 and 5. I even doubt they read them in full
I have a very different way of looking at this. Not that Jon Snow's character was ruined, but the fact that audience feedback suggested they just liked having him back, raised from the dead. -that the audience just wanted to hang out with their favorite characters, to hell with the plot and character development and storytelling. It wasn't the character that got ruined, it was the relationship between the series makers and the audience. From that point J & J stopped caring what direction anyone was taking, it was just one dramatic moment after another, with characters the audience loved or hated. Basically the fans ruined the series, not the writers. For that matter, any show which calibrates to audience metrics from now on! Jon Snow wasn't ruined, Jon Snow ruined us! 😳
The moment he was ruined, was when he didn’t stay dead
He's not gonna stay dead in the books
I disagree with you, although I appreciate your opinion. There’s nothing wrong for the show to have this “hero” especially considering all the other characters in the show. It’s a shame how the show didn’t follow through and see this point home and have that awful ending
Oh yeah, having a hero is perfectly fine, but he still needs a clear arc, to grow and change, and to do so without bending the story to make it work. They could've definitely written in something different that works with Jon more like a conventional hero, the problem was they didn't
@@mylittlethoughttree I actually happen to think to think otherwise. They’ve been setting him up as honorable and heroic and the Trueborn King aegon VI, and then they try to subvert us by him not slaying the night king, not becoming king of Westeros, weird/forced romance with Daenerys (which could’ve worked), and her slaying. That was out of character for him imo
Pin for no reason?
Never thought Jon was all that interesting in the first place.
I hate the show later seasons as much as anyone but almost every single point you made was just wrong lmao
I was thinking the same thing
Hey don't just say that and leave! I wanna know what you felt I got wrong now
I’d recommend Alt Shift X’s “The Real Jon Snow” video, book Jon and show Jon are very different characters even by Season 2.
@@Slender_Man_186 sort of.
I legit never liked John. I always thought he was over rated.
Season 8 was a love letter to disney. Saying look, we can be woke too. Give us Star Wars
The moment they ruined him was bringing him back to life
Except Jon’s getting resurrected in the books
We need the fricken Jon Snow show... come on HBO!
No TF we don't lol
“It’s not like in the books , mimimi” - summary of this video.
This show does an insanely good job fleshing out a huge number of characters and story arcs. Not ALL of them , but a huge number.
They didn’t cut some of the arcs and characters because they are “scared of exploring morality”, but because some of them are just less important or entertaining than the others. In a book that’s fine, in a show, it’s not.
You just don’t compare GOT to the books. You compare it with OTHER SHOWS.
Well I think I must've worded this one badly,. because a few other people thought I was saying the same thing. I'm absolutely fine with it being different to the books, though. I even like a lot of changes, however the problem isn't Jon is different, it's that they didn't write in a proper arc. If you don't want his story to be about challenging his morality, then it has to be challenging his character in other ways and developing him differently, and I don't think they did that clearly enough. He'll vaguely grow in some moments but he's also still tied to the outline of the books, so is experiencing things that, at first, challenge his morality, then suddenly don't anymore, and then nothing character-based is changing at all. I'm fine with it being different so long as it commits to that properly.
I get what you're saying about a lot of characters but Jon is arguably the main character, or at least top 3. It's essen his arc feels strong, as a result. And sure, if we compare it to other shows, then I think I'd still say the same: a main character needs a stronger sense of arc
I kind of disagree with almost everything you are saying here. As someone who didnt read the books, I Think people who did cant set aside their views on the books to look at the show on its own. and when you consistently compare it to the books you could say anything is this and anything is that. I really wish people would start analyzing this show based on the show and not wth the shadow of "the books are better" over everything they argue. I could go into everything Jon screwed up all the way through the show and ended up being the reason the capitol was burned down. I mean, he literally forced that on the realm by backing dany. How is that not intriguing and interesting to his character?
I'm very have for an adaptation to do things differently and have positively talked about such changes in the past. I personally feel it can be as different as it likes providing there's a clear and meaningful story being told in the adaptation. For me, Jon's problem is being caught between two different stories. He's half the book version but never truly committing to that arc, and he's half a show version that also never stretches his arc and pushes him to grow effectively enough because it's still tied to the book. My problem isn't that it's different, it's that it didn't commit, and you therefore end up with an inconsistent arc: one that builds in the same direction the books to, only to then step back, try something else, then vaguely veer back to the book version again. I think his arc ends up weak as a result and Jon never changes as much as he deserves to.
That said, you're not the only one to disagree with me here, so it is my own opinion