I haven't read the HR book yet, mostly because I started with GC and I don't find engaging at all.
Mostly because I did believe Scott was a decade older and his book was about the pressure and the heartbreak of having to guide his sexuality and the anxiety and even trauma that Ep3 showed... But there was none of it.
This is to say, I wondered if HR changed some of my "critics" of the show format. Which was how the cuts from episodes don't make sense? I think.
I understand they wanted to make the first 3 episodes end in sad notes so that the last two had a bigger emotions support... But like, how did Shane and Ilya went from the Vegas scene - where Shane is clearly heartbroken and crying on the elevator, and Ilya is cleaning his tear as Shane gets up from bed and dissociates afterwards too... A montage of them having sex over the next years? The same happens with Scott. Scott and Kip broke up before Sochi, fev 2014. And Kip, his dad and BFF are there for his victory in 2017?! Are they together? Did Kip wanted to be there for his ex of 3 years?
Even ep 1 suffers from this. I was really confused. Because they begin texting Jan 2011 but hook up in 2013? The show makes it seem they didn't do it in 2011 because of the Snow that delayed the game... Okay what about the other half a dozen games afterwards? It is never explained. Some people seem to think they were having meeting but not having sex?
Its just, I really don't vibe with GC book. I didn't get the Kip hype either, and I have a lot of problems with the way Elena wants to put pressure on a two months relationship like Kip and Scott have been together for years. And the book has the exact same plotline. The hockey culture plays little party as we barely see it been show negatively.
And I did find that for a show that sold Shane and Ilya romance as "they are the only ones who understand what its like to be on the top"... They never actually speak about it? Or connect over it? Does the book show this?
I just let out a very long sigh in preparation of responding to this lmao because like. There are multiple things going on here, all of them stupid and avoidable.
The cuts in the show mimic the book. Reid does not like conflict. She doesn't know how to introduce conflict. She doesn't know how to build conflict. She doesn't know how to resolve conflict. A lot of the time, what she ends up doing, is introducing a conflict only to solve it instantly, usually in a way that is enormously convenient. But in hr, her strategy was more often to just. Not solve it. Lmao. She would create conflict between Ilya and Shane, have them separate for however much time, and then reunite and act like nothing happened. In theory this is a dynamic she could have purposely given them and written it as part of the conflict but the way she writes it is truly like she just didn't want to deal with resolving the conflict. Because like, she doesn't even have their internal monologues address the fact that they always pretend shit didn't happen.
So that's one thing. But then Tierney made it his whole deal to stay "faithful" to the books and so he is just doing what Reid is doing a lot of the time only it works even less in a show because a show really highlights its absurdity in a way the book can't really. We don't have their inner monologues, and so we are analyzing the characters' actions in a way that isn't necessary in a book, as in, we are trying to interpret what is possibly going on internally while watching a show in a way we don't have to in a book, and this causes us to pay a lot more attention to the fact that the last time they talked it ended poorly and now they're acting like that didn't happen. We're left trying to figure out what piece we missed to get a peek into what going on in their heads when the truth is that there's nothing going on lmao. Tierney just skipped over resolving conflict the same way Reid did.
But with Tierney it's also worse because he condensed a show that needed seven or eight episodes into six episodes and then threw one of those episodes away on skip and so we end up with a story that is at parts too condensed and at other parts missing shit it should have had.
It is funny to me that Tierney's whole thing is staying faithful to the books, as though that's his process, when in reality it seems clear to me that staying faithful to the books is actually his crutch. Tierney knows how to write a scene and up the stakes but one thing he is very bad at is narrative continuity, and he relies on the books for that but the problem with that is Reid is also not very good at narrative continuity. Tierney is able to come up with the entire funeral scene in which Ilya fights with Alexei and the Russian monologue, both of which were well written, contextualizing Ilya's character for us, adding stakes and drama - but he's rarely able to go from a fallout between Shane and Ilya to the next reunion in a way that feels like a natural continuation.
I can only think of two examples. After Ilya ghosts Shane for those six months, Shane actually mentions that Ilya hadn't texted him in six months in the Vegas hotel. The other example is having Shane apologize for fleeing the tuna melt scene, which wasn't in the books. Both are so simple, just a single line in each scene, but they provided that narrative continuity and gave us insight into Shane's thinking. I don't know why Tierney couldn't do more of this throughout the show, or why, if he could have and simply chose not to, he didn't want to. Maybe I can buy neither of them mentioning Vegas penthouse, since addressing Vegas penthouse might hit a little too close to home, might risk revealing too much - but there are still many things that could have been done to make that transition feel more natural, and I think it's insane we don't get either of them acknowledging the fucking club like I can't believe I'm supposed to believe neither of them are ever like hey remember that time we bumped into each other at the club and it felt like a saw trap lmao like wtf. I stand by my take that since Shane apologized for fleeing tuna melt, Ilya should have apologized for the club. He should have apologized for that right after. Then both of those events would be addressed, and both characters would have taken the vulnerability step of apologizing for something, thus admitting to each other that they care enough about each other to feel bad about hurting each other.
With some of these other examples you give, it is more of Tierney being bad with narrative continuity. The jump from the end of ep. 3 with Scott and Kip apart to the Skip kiss is something that, you know, as an audience, we have the means to invent something to fill in the blank. We can say oh they must have gotten back together at some point, for example, whatever. That seems to be what we were meant to take away from it, as I believe Francois was asked about this and he said something like to him it doesn't look like they were still broken up by that time or whatever but like, that's so insane to leave out lmao. Like when you think about it, it is so insane to dedicate a whole episode to them getting together and then breaking up, and this being like, a huge deal, the entier point of their story, only to leave the part where they get back together off screen. Like, if this show wasn't adapting books that would be an insane thing to choose not to include in the show.
But this is Tierney just not knowing how to create narrative continuity again. I mean, I think the fact that the skip episode is the skip episode, as in, an entire episode for skip lumped right in the middle of the Hollanov show, is kind of already like, a strong indication that Tierney struggles with narrative continuity. There are many ways Tierney could have incorporated Skip's story in the background of Hollanov's and spread it throughout those five episodes but that's a lot harder to do than to just shoehorn in a single episode dedicated to skip right in the middle so.
As for the two-year delay in them fucking, this wasn't all on Tierney. I've been told a couple of times that part of this was because of some tv censorship rule or law in Canada that prohibits the depiction of any characters under the age of 22 from having on-screen penetrative sex unless their actors look definitively older than 22 or something and because of that Tierney couldn't just have them fuck when they were nineteen like they should have. But he still didn't go about working around this rule in a way that works very well. I think it's clear we're meant to conclude they're not fucking during those two years, but I think a lot of people headcanon or speculate otherwise because it's just pretty stupid to ask us to buy that. Like, nobody really buys that Shane would reject Ilya that many times or put off anal for that long, especially when the last time they hooked up he was apparently ready to agree to it in just two weeks. It doesn't make any fucking sense and there are about 10 million different ways that Tierney could have found a way to work around the censorship law without hindering the story or characterizations of either Ilya or Shane.
I haven't read GC, so I can't comment on the book, but I hated Elena feeling like she had a right to pressure or criticize Scott too, and I hate that Tierney kept that in. I feel kind of betrayed by him keeping that in and then not even framing it any differently. I am so sick of this bullshit romanticization of "sunshine" that makes closeted queer people out to be paranoid cowards who are just needlessly scared to come out for some mysterious reason. It is so disappointing coming from Tierney. I just want to tell him he should know better. He should fucking know better.
As for the hr book and whether or not it does a better job of showing how Shane and Ilya are at the top: No. Lmao. Hockey is about as relevant in the book as the show. We get about as much context for their situation in the book as we do the show. Actually, the show probably does it better, but neither does enough to contextualize their situation for us at all.
tl;dr Reid is a bad writer and Tierney is a so-so writer. I suspect HR the book is much better than GC the book but that does not mean it's good. Do with that what you can I guess.