HBO's House of the Dragon is receiving high praise, but its stilted pacing leaves me worried for its future.
By Simona Zaunius
Milly Alcock and Emily Carey as the close friends Rhaenyra and Alicent in House of the Dragon / photo : HBO
HBO’s new fantasy series House of the Dragon is a prequel to their hit show Game of Thrones. The immense popularity of Game of Thrones made it inevitable that the two would be compared. House of the Dragon is very aware that it exists as a legacy of Game of Thrones; the opening theme remains the same and the marketing makes sure the viewer is aware this is “A Game of Thrones Story”.
Though set in the same fictional universe, the source materials for the respective shows could not be more different. George R R Martin’s A Song of Ice and Fire (ASOIAF) novels, on which Game of Thrones is based, are organized via varying character’s POVs. Every character is complex and multifaceted. Readers have access to their internal dialogues, each colored by their relationships with other characters and by their respective pasts. Fire and Blood, the source for House of the Dragon, reads more like a historical text, an account of different events throughout this specific family’s history and rule. Almost akin to a textbook, it is careful to detail names and dates of the Targaryens, yet in terms of characterization, there is but the occasional quote, or what fictional “sources” state the general perception of the person was. It’s a different project for Martin, a known history buff, and an interesting work in its own right. But when it comes to adapting it for the silver screen, the processes must vary extensively from its predecessor.
David Benioff and Dan Weiss, the main showrunners for Game of Thrones, had a plethora of character work to base their adaptation on. House of the Dragon has far less. Unlike the Game of Thrones showrunners, House of the Dragon showrunners could not benefit from ASOIAF’s hand holding, from having every character’s thoughts at their disposal. They have only a recounting of events. In a certain sense, the format of Fire and Blood gives showrunners a unique and exciting opportunity to “fill in the blanks” character wise.
House of the Dragon focuses on a time in Targaryen history called “The Dance of the Dragons”, where protagonist Princess Rhaenyra Targaryen presses her claim to be the ruling monarch of Westeros. The Dance of the Dragons is an intertwined, writhing knot of a story, centering on the infighting of this singular family. In the beginning of the premiere episode of House of the Dragon, an older Rhaenyra remarks, “the only thing that could destroy house Targaryen was itself.” Brother fights brother. Incest, infidelity, and incredible violence abound. Fire and Blood does not delve into its characters with its commitment to be a historical text, but with the events that occur, it is clear that every single character has a unique, complex relationship with every other character. It’s an opportunity for a deeply emotional and intense story. The great challenge for the showrunners is to convey this.
The first episodes of House of the Dragon have been compared by viewers to the early seasons of Game of Thrones. Though some argue Benioff and Weiss failed when they no longer had Martin’s books to lead them, they adapted the multitudes of Martin’s characters well during the earlier seasons. The first season of Game of Thrones is slow and deliberate. It’s filled with long scenes of dialogue between characters, verbal barbing, and the small councils of the king discussing where to take the realm. Sword fights are less important than the sparring of words. Conversations, arguments, and ponderings between friends, family, and rivals are given ample time in the first season of Game of Thrones. There are no big action pieces (perhaps due to a lack of budget), yet it keeps its audiences invested via character dynamics.
House of the Dragon is attempting this type of storytelling as well. The first few episodes spend a lot of time on small council scenes and arguments or negotiations between characters (particularly the current king, Viserys). This direction incited general excitement. Many on social media were remarking that, “Game of Thrones is back!”. And then the second episode premiered, and viewers had to adjust to a time jump of a couple months. Such a skip was uncommon in the earlier seasons of Game of Thrones, but acceptable. For the third episode, however? A jump of nearly three years.
The first season of Game of Thrones, which contains ten episodes, covers about a year. These first three episodes of House of the Dragon have already spanned three. The pacing of the episodes themselves seems slow and deliberate, yet the timeline is moving at lightning speed. Having read the source material, it is understandable, as there is a lot to cover. But the story is, at its heart, about a family. A family whose relationships and alliances with each other are constantly shifting and morphing and twisting, from before war breaks out to long after. And yet the show spends strikingly little time on these relationships.
Spoilers ahead for the first three episodes of House of the Dragon.
Take the friendship between Alicent and Rhaenyra. They are established as intimate friends in the first episode (the actresses even confirm applying a touch of homoeroticism) and have a scene together in the second. The second episode focuses less on the two girls and more on Rhaenyra’s father King Viserys’ dilemma in choosing a new wife. At the end of the episode, he forgoes the politically strategic choice (Laena Velaryon) and announces he will be marrying Alicent. Rhaenyra is shocked, upset, almost in tears… and then two years pass by.
Paddy Considine and Emily Carey share an intimate moment in episode 3 of House of the Dragon / photo: HBO
For a character-driven story, House of the Dragon glosses over many years’ worth of character development. Two years is a long time, and much has happened since we last saw the protagonists. Rhaenyra’s former friend and sole confidant has married her
father and has given birth to a child (and a new threat to Rhaenyra’s status as heir), Aegon II. Alicent’s demeanor has completely changed, but in order to emphasize Rhaenyra’s defiant nature, there is no room for conversation between the two. Instead a lot of the third episode is spent on the question of succession.
But what has happened between Alicent and Rhaenyra, who last we saw, were still very close? How does Rhaenyra feel seeing her former best friend give birth to a son, the very thing her mother died trying to do? What is Alicent’s relationship with Viserys like? We are left confused. Where does everyone stand with everyone?
This is but one example of the disservice these time jumps do to the story of House of the Dragon. One would expect a story with such significant jumps to be treated like the opening scene of the series, in which we hear an older narration of Rhaenyra detailing what happened at the Great Council of 101. This is more in line with the pacing of the book, and yet the facial expressions of Viserys and Rhaenys in that brief Great Council scene tell a story regardless.
House of the Dragon is neither a historical recounting nor a character-driven plot. It is something in between. The juxtaposition of the slow-paced episodes with the time jumps leaves me as a viewer puzzled. If this story is supposed to span years in only a couple of episodes, then why is so much time spent on slower small council scenes? If this is supposed to be a primarily character-driven plot, like the first season of Game of Thrones, then why are we skipping events (such as the aforementioned royal wedding and birth of a prince) that would alter character dynamics so fundamentally?
Sometimes the airtime for these slow scenes are exchanged for the splendor and visual candy of a battle. It is here where the lack of character development is felt the most. The “War of the Five Kings” in Game of Thrones lasted two seasons, with the entire first season existing as set-up for this war. Seasons afterwards are dedicated to the fallout and the impact on each of the characters. Compare this to House of the Dragon, in which the potential of war in the Stepstones is introduced in episode two, and we witness the final battle of the war in episode three (years later).
Watching the battle, it becomes clear that it was shown to develop Daemon’s character. It was to show his bloodlust, his battle prowess, his hatred of being pandered to. Yet the battle itself was not emotionally impactful. Daemon ends this war that has lasted for years once and for all. But do we as watchers feel that? No. We see a cheer-worthy moment as he slashes through dozens of Essossi single-handedly. Daemon feels the desperation, but we do not.
There are other characters that have stakes in this battle as well. Corlys Velaryon, (husband to the king’s cousin and member of the king’s council) and his son, Laenor Velaryon, are on the battlefield. But the former has only talked politics at the small council and the latter has only been seen in brief shots in the pilot episode, portrayed by a younger actor. These are instrumental figures of the Dance. Each has their own complex relationship with the main Targaryen family and yet, do we feel any fear for them? Do we even know what they stand to lose or gain with this battle? This war in the Stepstones is far from the flashiest thing that will occur over the course of this series, but the lack of stakes leaves me apprehensive about the emotional impact of future events.
As Game of Thrones moved on, there were often more jaw dropping moments and climactic action sequences across a couple episodes than in the first couple seasons combined. They did not lack for at least some emotional impact, due to the previous seasons of meticulous character development. Even so, the overuse of action set pieces and lack of well-crafted dialogue scenes did not go unnoticed by committed viewers. A raging battle in the third episode of House of the Dragon, while visually spectacular, is an interesting choice considering the limited time before character dynamics shift once again.
Scenes from House of the Dragon’s various trailers hint at how far in the story this singular season will go. I am hesitant. And wary. A television adaptation of the Dance of the Dragons could have been something quite great. It still could. But they need to stick to one form of storytelling. Either this is a mythological-esque tale where things move rapidly or this is a conflict driven by the characters, in which case we need to see a lot more of them.
House Targaryen’s words are “Fire and Blood”. Though we have seen the fire, the blood – the family – is missing.
Well Written Great Take on the show 🙌🏽🙌🏽
Profound