So I'm told ....

I must say the older I get in general the more I feel out of the demographic stuff is designed for - things like music and movies it can be quite noticeable.

For example my wife wanted to check out "The Scorch Trials" so we went to see that at the movies last year. Neither of us got it at all. It had high production value but despite being a scifi and so on which I've traditionally liked - it just didn't connect with me at all.

So yeah I take your point!

I also think though that some shows are victims to their own success.  Like i was saying about "lost" - it was fun for a few years by having a few twists and turns - then it got famous for having mysteries and shocking "wtf" twists - then it was so successful that people would speculate on the outcome for years in advance then ask the writers in interviews and so on. As a reaction to that the show started to have more twists than before, and it was obvious certain plot points were re-written so as to come up with something that wasn't the well known fan-theories on the ending. We winded up with a mess.

I feel Game of Thrones is similar - it's getting interactive. It's become famous for killing people, and nudity - so they've increased both. Then there's been a reaction to the violence, rapes,  and male-behaviour - and since that became a trending thing on facebook - it's like they've decided to increase the girl-power and the penis shots and whatever else.

I'm really enjoying it but I just feel it is succumbing to the peer pressure to conform to the audience's opinion of how the story should evolve. It's made worse that the source material isn't complete so there's room to move too.

I ask myself - if the show was a cult thing - followed by only a small number of people late at night on a small cable channel would the plot-line be the same? would sana's dialogue be the same? Would tyrion still be alive?  I feel the fact it's this worldwide phenomenon is causing them to write it based on what we want to see.

yeah don't get me wrong I love and enjoy the the show - I'm just starting to feel it's begun to pander to the audience and to me that is the downfall of many a good show - Lost for example.

I hesitate to say this as it's going to sound controversial, but is it me or has the tone of the show massively shifted since the public outrage over the Sansa rape last season? I've not read the books so I don't know how accurate it is - but the subtext seems to have got more prominent.

For the record I have nothing against strong female characters, and certain characters such as Daenerys and Ayria were obviously designed from the outset to shake up the male-dominated world they live in - which is no doubt going to be a source of a lot of great entertainment.

That said, I feel like Sansa's character has underdone a fairly massive transformation - she was basically ignorant to the perils of the world and a victim to both jeoffrey and ramsey's abuse - and previously manipulated by littlefinger easily and also could have been by Tyrion where he not somewhat kind to her.

Suddenly she's standing up to littlefinger, she's outclassing John in matters of strategy and warefare, she's the one who finally kills Ramsey...

I guess some would respond to abuse by learning independence and 'toughening up' and defending themselves and so on, but i've known both men and women in rough situations and it's also quite common for them to become more like Reek sadly. I guess my real issue isn't even with her experiencing these changes - it's the execution of it - her dialogue as sounded a little forced to me - like I feel that the speaches she gave to John about Ramsey's abuse were designed to pacify the outrage of the audience - and most of her dialogue in the past few episodes feels like it's from a political rally and designed to get a pop from the audience. They could make her strong but it's like they're pointing out the feminism in every line just incase we're too dumb to get it. It just feels obtuse to me.

Obviously in shows it is normal for there to be a character ark and characters to grow and change - but I think my problem with Sana's development is there's already so many other warrior females on the show that it's starting to feel unrealistic even for a fantasy world. I've liked how with the male characters some are mentally strong, while others are physical champions, some are loyal, some are not, some are brave others are not - but the females don't seem to be showing so much diversity of character this season - it just seems everyone is a badass.

In itself they're all small things...but I kind of notice...you add sansa to this context

*Ayria's whole character is about challenging stereotypes since season 1 - and her only real threat of late has been the waif assasin who was female.

* Daenerys has basically destroyed anyone she comes into contact with and humiliated a bunch of powerful men.  I don't mind this in itself but it's sort of more than enough when combined with Ayria - you add in Sansa and it's like a show with 5 terminators.

* The women from the play knowing medicine because she frequently stabbed her husband and patched him up. Small thing I know but it fits with the theme - there's no female version of Samwell for instance.

* Yara Greyjoy - again a cool character in herself - and quite plot logical given where she was raised - but again it's about the delivery. I felt the scene with Daenery's was a bit awkwardly written - like because they are both females they have to instantly be friends and stand around bagging men - when you think actually they may not get on so well given the level of ambition both of them seem to have.

Anyway, I guess this sounds prejudiced, like I say I don't mind strong females happening, but I just feel the show has moved from cleverly written to being VERY VERY unsubtle about what it's trying to portray.

Am I alone?

It's a bit late too. Like I mean it's been a meme for like 3 years or more. The time to strike was long ago if even trying to attempt it. I agree it's giving it even more publicity. My facebook feed is mostly music/rock stuff and there were several articles about it today - when the focus had been on the Ac/Dc success and the possibility of wider GNR touring.

I see what you are saying but we also have to factor in the irrelevance of new material for most of the classic acts.

New albums don't do the sort of numbers that makes it worth the expense as most of the audience at the big shows is there for the hits and the nostalgia - all except the true hardcores just don't really need new music to get their rocks off.

GNR is a perfect example. I will poo my pants when they drop a new single. But when I go to the alleged GNR show in January here it's going to be a room full of people waiting for SCOM so they can relieve their first date or whatever.

Aerosmith is another. I dug Music from Another dimension. The critics told them they can't make a good album since toys in the attic. The fans record sales agreed with the critics. The band said it's not doing records anymore. But when I saw them live last time it's not Beautiful that brings the house down it's Last Child and Walk This Way.

THe only real reason for these legacy acts to keep making music is to get their own rocks off, or in some cases they follow a modified version of the old cycle like ac/dc in order to revamp the show a bit. New album = another hits tour with changing up which songs are the new addition and some fun rebranding and stage design to keep people coming back out.

Obviously the money is in the shows but you can't keep milking it every year or you over saturate yourself. Metallica has done a good job of playing the festivals every summer without a new album but it's really starting to push it.

I think once you flood the earth with a product as saturated as something like this "Rock or Bust" tour is you need to take a year or two off to let your fans re-set. Then they'll come back out for the next one. Otherwise people will get like "oh I saw Ac/Dc last summer" and they're not going to be able to keep doing stadiums.

That said maybe they will speed up the time line a little. I mean Angus must know he doesn't have too many years left. Then again - these guys have hundreds of millions of dollars and play for fun. Might want a bit more family time than life of the road too. I think Ac/Dc has been a lifestyle act for a while. Drop an album, tour for 18 months, enjoy it, come home with $200m and hang with your family for a few years. Then repeat!