‘Game of Thrones’ season 4 debate: What would you be okay with losing?

For “Game of Thrones” thus far, one of the benefits of having a show versus a movie is that you are able to cram so much more in. That means that while George R.R. Martin’s books would be gutted at the seams were they turned into a three-hour film for each chronicle, they have a little bit more time to really play out and develop here.

However, that may still not matter too much once you get around to season 4. Why? You are dealing with novels that are massive and stuffed full of detail, and there are literally hundreds of characters to keep track of. Thus, it becomes a little bit of trade-off on how faithful to the books you can be, and how devoted do you remain to the cast you already have.

A few key notes here to consider:

1. Given that the young actors age fairly quickly, there is a certain bubble of time to get this done before things take a turn for the unrealistic. Sansa already looks much older than her character really is.

2. If every remaining book was turned into two seasons, we’d be waiting for a solid nine years when you throw in the second half of A Sword of Swords. When you look at contract negotiations, the cast may not stick around that long.

3. Even though Tyrion may be absent from a full one of the books, you don’t want to lose Peter Dinklage from the show.

So with all of this information in mind, something has to give. There will be characters who don’t appear in the show or have a tiny role, and there will be scenes forgotten.

What story lines would you be okay with missing out on? This is where we want to hear from you below! Of course, be warned that there could be spoilers in the comments, given that we are talking about the future of the series.

If you want to check out who some among the “Game of Thrones” cast has submitted for a Primetime Emmy Award, be sure to head on over to the link here.

Photo: HBO