Thrones gets its first negative reviews

Well it was bound to happen at some point. After an initial wave of positive reviews, Game of Thrones has recently been the subject of a couple of poor reviews. The good news is that both of the reviewer’s main criticism of the series seems to be “it’s fantasy, therefore I don’t like it.”

First is Kate O’Hare of Zap2It’s review, which has been discussed here at length already, but we’re mentioning it for those who haven’t seen it yet. O’Hare praises the production values, the writing and the acting, but adds that she just didn’t care and the reason is because it is fantasy. She then launches into a rambling dissertation of why she doesn’t like fantasy.

Of course, it’s not North America. It’s not anywhere. The world of “Game of Thrones” is a free-floating patchwork quilt of customs and styles and animals and weaponry from a range of human history, tossed together with a vague sort of religion (“gods” are mentioned) and an ecology of winters and summers that vary wildly in length.

The erratic weather is a big plot point — “Winter is coming” is constantly intoned — but this planetary irregularity is not explained.

But this is fantasy, so you’re not supposed to ask. You can have kings and queens and keeps and knights and horses and extinct dire wolves and winters that last ten years and whatever else there is, just because the author said so.

The other negative review comes from TV/film critic Caryn James, who has the same reasons for disliking the show as O’Hare: because it is fantasy. While James’ review is much better written and even admits to the series having “genuine narrative pull,” it still manages to work in a few shots such as calling it “fanboy silly.”

Set in a vaguely Arthurian time and place, the saga involves a complicated set of feuding families vying for power and the right to sit on The Iron Throne. Yes, this is the kind of fantasy that invents realms and thrones and magical petrified dragons’ eggs even though dragons are extinct, and … you can see, you really need to have a taste for this kind of thing. And while the series does have lots of grownup drama, much of it lurid and some very sinister – incest and a plot to kill a small child among them – the entire project has a heart of geek that never lets the rest of us in.

Winter Is Coming: This was what some of us feared might happen. People not even giving this series a chance because it is “fantasy.” Hopefully not everyone will be this close-minded. It is just a shame that some people will miss out on this great story because they can’t get past a few made-up words.

UPDATE: The Wall Street Journal adds its voice to the chorus of negativity and geek-bashing (infantile? really?). They write:

The production has a satisfyingly brooding, ominous look and it’s possible to see the basic appeal for role-players and other fans of a realm that provides a limitless playing field for their own imaginations.

“Thrones” also has wolf pups, which is always cool. But then we’re back to the familiar favorites of the infantile:, e.g., spurting blood and gore, bastard sons, evil vixens, blond nymphets, quasilesbian action, crude talk among men about their private parts, incest, rough couplings and more random bare breasts than any other contender in the adolescent-boy-action-show contest this month.

• Published on 04/08/2011 at 10:29 AM CDT
• Last updated on 04/08/2011 at 11:10 AM CDT