Actor Peter Dinklage says while many are quick to call Game of Thrones a fantasy series, he doesn’t think of the show that way.
“I wouldn’t be quick to use the word fantasy with this … I know that’s the word that’s been used, maybe a lot of people would disagree with me but what I see, I don’t see it as a fantasy. At least from the stuff I’ve done that actually was truly fantasy, where water creatures are coming out of the ground and lions are talking. … That, to me, is a bit more fantastical,” he tells MTV News.
So, is Dinklage trying to draw in fans who might be turned off by the word “fantasy”?
Game of Thrones airs Sundays on HBO.
Well, it certainly isn’t history, or non-fiction! Nothing wrong with the “Fantasy” label. Hell, call it Sword & Sorcery!
There are different levels within fantasy related to how prevalent magic is in the world. The general theory is that magic needs to be included somehow needs to be in the world a little. I would classify Thrones as a low-magic fantasy world and Narnia (talking lions and sea creatures type thing) high magic.
Magic does exist in the book series. I don’t have HBO so I haven’t had the ability to see the show as of yet, but I assume it wouldn’t stray so far as to take it out entirely? Perhaps they just haven’t gotten to it yet. Perhaps Dinklage has never read the book.
I agree that it isn’t “High Fantasy”, though I understand what Dinklage is saying. Many fantasy stories which I started out reading have fantastic and unrealistic heroes. Heroes with unbelievable skills or some divine heritage.
I think Dinklage is referring to how real all the characters are. They aren’t like the heroes in most of the fluff fantasy which has been on tv or film.
As far as Dinklage trying to get more people watching who may not have any interest in fantasy. I say keep up the campaign. I wouldn’t want this show to get canned because only a few geeks, like me, are tuning in. I don’t want this show to follow in the footsteps of Firefly, Deadwood, Carnival, and a few other great shows. (I know they aren’t Fantasy)
It has been too long since decent fantasy has been done… if it has ever been “good”.
Long Live A Song of Ice and Fire on HBO… and a Dance with Dragons will be out on July 12, 2011… YEAH
I’d say most of the fantastical elements *are* downplayed in favor of the human drama of it and what fantastical elements there are increase very slowly as the story goes. At its height so far it isn’t near what you’d typically see in tv/film fantasy. I think Dinklage is comparing it to tv/movies in which case he’d be mostly right graded on a curve etc. 🙂
Normally I get ticked off when writers and actors do this, because it means they have a bad attitude towards their own source material and towards the people who LIKE sci-fi/fantasy. It’s dismissive towards geeks, and when you say “oh, this obviously sci-fi/fantasy thing TOTALLY isn’t sci-fi/fantasy”, it stops the genre newbies who enjoyed the thing from perhaps going on to other sci-fi/fantasy stuff.
But I’d give Dinklage a pass here because GOT is a difficult one to define. Ostensibly it IS a fantasy series, but lacks most of the tropes of fantasy (magic, other races, etc.). The first episode has more in common with The Tudors than it does with The Lord of the Rings, so downplaying the fantasy element in promotion and interviews is probably the right thing to do since the show itself downplays the fantasy element.
I agree with Bronzethumb – usually I would be really annoyed by this kind of comment, but here I understand. Usually you hear this in the context of, ‘sure our show has magic/aliens, but it’s not fantasy/sci fi because it has character development’, which suggests that fantasy doesn’t have character development, which is silly. But here the line of thought is a straightforward ‘our show has no magic’, without the implication. So even though I can’t help but have an instinctive negative reaction to the comment, I can get over it…
He thinks Snow Zombies are real. Medieval-horror-in-a-made-up-land-where-there-may-or-may-not-be-dragons-at-some-point. Or and Sword And Spookery. He’s associating “fantasy” with “fairy tale.”
Well, Skiznot, you said it: the show is medieval, it’s got elements of horror and its set in a fictional kingdom, but thus far there’s been nothing “magical” about the show. Since 99% of people (myself included) define fantasy as a story in which magic is present, I wouldn’t look at the first episode and leap to “fantasy” as the genre to describe GOT. Right now, my inclination is to call it a period drama, albeit set in a fictional period.
I think he’s just being honest. Because this is one of the reasons I never got past the first novel. I think if something is labeled fantasy you go into it with certain expectations and in “A Game of Thrones” anyway, those expectations aren’t met. I’m assuming this changes in the novels that follow? But, in and of itself, I think the only justification for calling “Game” a fantasy novel is that it was written by a sci fi/fantasy author.
I think it’s because when most people say “fantasy” they automatically think high fantasy novels like Lord of the Rings or Sword of Shannara, or urban fantasy like Dresden Files.
I think the Song of Ice and Fire series is fantasy, just more swords than sorcery. And when you have blood magic and dragon eggs in the first book, how can that not be fantasy? 🙂
I just finished Game of Thrones (the book) last night. I would say based on the ending that it’s fantasy. Granted there wasn’t a lot of fantasy until the end but there were certainly hints of fantasy elements to come.
Am I the only one that thinks this looks like Willow?