Well, you have to consider the fact that unlike most TV shows, there is no story of the week. This is not a procedural show with a new case and independent story for each episode. Structurally speaking, this is pretty much a massive movie cut into 10 sections. You might prefer TV shows where each episode is an individually contained story, so I can understand you or others being used to weekly conclusions, but because a show does not follow that pattern does not mean its bad, weak, or overly full. And its certainly not due to there being so much going on - one of my all time favorites, Sons of Anarchy does this, and its cast and narratives is half of what GoT is. The story, ideas and characters actually have the chance to breathe in a show like this their arcs and the overall tale is spread throughout the length of the season, instead of being forced to find some sort of conclusion each week.
Sort of. What I prefer is that each episode
has an individually contained story (as opposed to
being an individually contained story... there's a difference). There should be very good reasons why an episode chooses to start and end where it does and that reason shouldn't simply be 'because we ran out of time'. My view is that a story should have a beginning/exposition that leads to a rising action that leads to the climax followed by a falling action and resolution as below:
For a television show, that goes for both - over the course of each season
and over the course of each individual episode. On top of that, each episode should be paced to accommodate where the commercial breaks are going to take place. In short, over the course of the entire season, the plot will have multiple mini-peaks (with mini-climaxes for each episode), with the baseline tension gradually rising until reaching the season climax.
Without this, the plot winds up feeling like it is meandering about and directionless. Take Season 1 Heroes for example: although the season was one big story with one episode starting where the last left off, each episode did feature an A-plot that has its own development and climax.
As for the comment that each season is really like a really long movie, then that suggests to me that it isn't very suited to a direct translation when being
adapted into television. Different mediums have different requirements and tools for narration and the point of an
adaptation is to change it to suit the new medium. For instance, if someone was to try adapting say... Diablo III into a TV show, they would need to change the story a little and not simply have episode after episode of the main character smashing his way through an endless demonic horde.
Indeed, the reviews I've come across for Game of Thrones' 2nd season has mostly praised the technical aspects (sets, costumes, locations, etc), the acting and especially the chemistry and interaction between the actors. Less is being said about the story itself; with criticisms being made against Daenerys' storyline. Which tells me that the show's success is partially in spite of its accurate translation rather than because of it.
