What did it say?

I personally think that the tv show butchered the revealing of the Others, not only in how they look(I always imagined them to be other-worldly, non-physical beings), but also in how they completely rewrote the situation Sam was supposed to be in at the time of their attack. The books also did a much better job at subtly building up to the mutiny of the men in the Night's Watch that occurred at Craster's Keep. In the actual story, some the men were planning to mutiny before the battle and in the early morning, Sam Tarley was supposed to be one of the first targets to die, not only because he was annoying but also because he held the only means of communicating back to Castle Black. One of the men is basically standing over Sam with a knife when the horn blows and when Sam wakes up, the mutiny is cut short. When the second horn blows, the guy uses it as an excuse for why he has his knife out and says that there's probably a wildling blade readied just for Sam. Then the third horn blows, and the guy literally pisses himself while Sam is still trying to comprehend it all.

That's how it was in the book IIRC. It's not a perfect retelling but it's quite concise. The mutiny, and how Sam and the other men survived was never really given much thought. I still don't know how the tv producers could reconcile Sam getting away by hiding behind a rock but I guess it's better not to have an explanation as it would probably make the plot hole even larger.

HOLY SHIT! GREAT EPISODE!

I thought tonight was the season finale the way things went down. Glad there is 1 more episode.

I should have clued in when Bolton let Jamie Lannister go a few episodes ago that shit was going to hit the fan. A few real funny moments this episode between all the carnage. Season 3 was already my favorite season by far. Cant wait for next week.

what a massacre, gut wrenching. now tyrion is the only honorable man left

that shit was straight out of Shakespeare. I really liked how they filmed it, with the music, the simple setting.

dope az fuk.

Apparently the most intense scene in last night's episode is the one that inspired the producers to make the show in the first place.

Quote: (06-03-2013 03:27 AM)Caligula Wrote:  

Apparently the most intense scene in last night's episode is the one that inspired the producers to make the show in the first place.

Yeah, it's very sad, moving and climactic. It ties together with Eddard Stark's story for one of the most haunting and unexpected shifts in a fantasy novel.

Personally, I think the plot goes downhill from this point on because there are not enough people to root for left.

Fuck this show.

You know something my friend warned me, he said reading the game of Thrones was the biggest time wasters he did in college & wouldn't watch the show.

And without giving me specifics he stated this in an email years ago "some people do things different because it creates value, they see a way to improve. others be different just for the sake of being different. It's un-creative & trivial. Just being the opposite of something doesn't make you the better of that something. The author thinks he's being clever by having 'stark' changes (you'll get the pun later ) but his big "i'm different" moment does not add value to his story, instead it wastes your time"

And I just talked to him last night & he said to me you think it's bad watching it imagine reading it. Look at the popular reviews on amazon on the dragons book. Nothing is added to the story, new characters are introduced but none of them has the value that the starks did

Yes people who want the generic heroic fantasy hero won't like Got, that was a given from the start. Obviously tired tropes are not keeping the series in top on bestsellers lists AND in reviews.

I'm gonna watch it now, I fell asleep last night.

Quote: (06-03-2013 06:01 AM)Handsome Creepy Eel Wrote:  

Personally, I think the plot goes downhill from this point on because there are not enough people to root for left.

I am not rooting for any one. I like the show because it breaks the conventional molds of most TV shows/movies and the dialogue and character development is amazing. Last night tells me that no character on the show is safe which adds another level of excitement to it.

Quote: (06-03-2013 07:40 AM)PhilE Wrote:  

Fuck this show.

You know something my friend warned me, he said reading the game of Thrones was the biggest time wasters he did in college & wouldn't watch the show.

And without giving me specifics he stated this in an email years ago "some people do things different because it creates value, they see a way to improve. others be different just for the sake of being different. It's un-creative & trivial. Just being the opposite of something doesn't make you the better of that something. The author thinks he's being clever by having 'stark' changes (you'll get the pun later ) but his big "i'm different" moment does not add value to his story, instead it wastes your time"

And I just talked to him last night & he said to me you think it's bad watching it imagine reading it. Look at the popular reviews on amazon on the dragons book. Nothing is added to the story, new characters are introduced but none of them has the value that the starks did

I don't see how you can say nothing is added to the story, I am reading the books now. But that is another arguement entirely.

And why you are saying the Starks are out of play? Bran and Rickon are alive, and don't forget Jon Snow, as well as Arya.

I never really saw the Starks as "good" in the first place. In one of the very first scenes in the series, Ned beheads a deserter, saying how the person who passes the sentence should be the one to carry out the execution(huh?)

Ned wasn't particularly smart, he doesn't listen to littlefinger when he suggested backing Renly's claim to the throne when Robert Baratheon died, and instead goes to Stannis, turning the 7 kingdoms into a state of perpetual war and gets himself imprisoned and finally executed. If he doesn't know how to play the political game, he should at least admit that, and listen to people that do know how to play that game.

Rob wasn't that smart either(sends Theon back to his father which results in Theon switching sides and ultimately sacking winterfell and burning it to the ground.)

He also beheads Rickard Karstark instead of imprisoning him when he killed 2 of the Lannister prisoners, which causes half his army to leave, which makes him crawl back to Walder Frey. Whoops!

Jon Snow, Bran and Rickard and I guess Arya and Sansa are still living Starks so they are far from out of play.

While Ned and Robb were good warriors and unbeatable on the battlefield, they weren't really good at making the important political decisions, which ultimately made them bad leaders.

Ultimately, some of the most compelling characters(to me) are the ones that are less than perfect physically: Tyrion(dwarf) and Bran(crippled). Since they are so flawed physically, they have to make up for that by having an exceptional mind and decision making. Also, Bran is a warg.

Just finished yesterday's episode, and wow. When the show started I did kind of see the Starks as "the good guys" and it wasn't until the beginning of season 3 that I started to see all of the different families and factions (minus Danaerys) as all more or less equals. However the Starks did have a different mix of virtues and faults that balanced out the others. I'm very surprised by this turn of events.

The Danaerys storyline is incredibly annoying at this point. Everything she does is a little too perfect and none of her actions have bad consequences, unlike everyone else on the show. And then last episode when that assassin guy swore undying loyalty to her after a mere two and a half sentence exchange..... smh.

Quote: (06-03-2013 01:50 PM)MattW Wrote:  

Just finished yesterday's episode, and wow. When the show started I did kind of see the Starks as "the good guys" and it wasn't until the beginning of season 3 that I started to see all of the different families and factions (minus Danaerys) as all more or less equals. However the Starks did have a different mix of virtues and faults that balanced out the others. I'm very surprised by this turn of events.

The Danaerys storyline is incredibly annoying at this point. Everything she does is a little too perfect and none of her actions have bad consequences, unlike everyone else on the show. And then last episode when that assassin guy swore undying loyalty to her after a mere two and a half sentence exchange..... smh.

It was a great episode, the Starks seem to be positioned as being "honorable" to a fault while the Lannisters are a win at all costs type of family. If the goal is to turn that whole "good guys always prevail" cliche on it's head, then they are succeeding.

I haven't read the books so I may be way off, but I get the feeling Danaerys's compassion is going to be her ultimate downfall. She has the most advantage towards a claim for the throne at this very point but she seems obsessed with freeing slaves and fighting for social justice. Hopefully nobody spoils it, but if that ends up playing out that way and she squanders her advantages due to her pursuing these "noble causes" driven by emotion and empathy, it would ultimately be her female traits (read: weaknesses) that kept her from succeeding.

Quote: (06-03-2013 11:39 AM)master_thespian Wrote:  

I never really saw the Starks as "good" in the first place. In one of the very first scenes in the series, Ned beheads a deserter, saying how the person who passes the sentence should be the one to carry out the execution(huh?)

I get the idea behind this and think it has some merit. The idea that someone who passes a sentence should be able to carry it out (understanding the consequences of that sentence and what it means to meet it) isn't one of Ned's worst.

Quote:Quote:

Ned wasn't particularly smart, he doesn't listen to littlefinger when he suggested backing Renly's claim to the throne when Robert Baratheon died, and instead goes to Stannis, turning the 7 kingdoms into a state of perpetual war and gets himself imprisoned and finally executed. If he doesn't know how to play the political game, he should at least admit that, and listen to people that do know how to play that game.

Rob wasn't that smart either(sends Theon back to his father which results in Theon switching sides and ultimately sacking winterfell and burning it to the ground.)

He also beheads Rickard Karstark instead of imprisoning him when he killed 2 of the Lannister prisoners, which causes half his army to leave, which makes him crawl back to Walder Frey. Whoops!

I agree with most of this. I think that the Starks actually are "good" and honourable, and that this is precisely their problem. They too often try to do "the right thing" and neglect the necessary things.

You've outlined several examples here already. Ned Stark wanted to try and do "the right thing" by backing Stannis instead of taking Littlefinger's advice and making the political moves that needed to be made. He even went as far as to take a righteous stand against Cersei right to her face ("I will tell the king, you must leave by then!"), as if she would just go away quietly and do nothing about his trying to expose the secret that could destroy her family and keep her son off of the throne. His "honour" got him imprisoned and put at the mercy of a sociopath (Joffrey) who killed him.

Rob wanted to do the right thing and trust Theon, who he figured was like a brother. This was somewhat understandable in a moral sense (he grew up with Theon), but foolish in a practical one.

Robb also wanted to do the right thing and marry "for love", which led to him neglecting a very important alliance with Walder Frey (and passing up what turned out to be a pretty hot bride).

Had he put the romantic BS aside and done what was necessary, he probably could have still had Talisa (or "Jeyne", as she was in the book) on the side as a mistress. Talisa may have understood, and Rob could have kept his alliance intact and had a shot at winning the war. He maybe even could have come to care for Roslin as a wife, the same way Ned and Catelyn's love grew over time.

But Rob couldn't do this-he wanted to marry for "real love", and was probably morally opposed to the idea of having a woman he loved as a side piece, even if that was necessary (and quite commonly done by men of his stature). Instead he put himself and his entire clan closer to extinction in the name of "love". It sounds honorable and romantic, but it was stupid.

Quote:Quote:

While Ned and Robb were good warriors and unbeatable on the battlefield, they weren't really good at making the important political decisions, which ultimately made them bad leaders.

This is probably the best way to characterize the Starks.

^I agree with all of this too. Arya seems to be the strongest Stark by far.

One thing that no one mentioned yet was Jon Snow riding off and leaving Igrid behind. The look on her face made me laugh really hard. Wish I could find a caption of it online.

Quote: (06-03-2013 02:58 PM)Jaylow Wrote:  

^I agree with all of this too. Arya seems to be the strongest Stark by far.

One thing that no one mentioned yet was Jon Snow riding off and leaving Igrid behind. The look on her face made me laugh really hard. Wish I could find a caption of it online.

Well at least in the book she shoots him while he is trying to escape on the horse. That ultimately would have been much cooler than standing there looking pissed.

I want more screentime for Jon, Arya and Tyrion.
I think those are the only interesting characters

OK I have a couple of questions about the last episode. Before the massacre, the older guy (that said he was the uncle of the stupid guy getting married) went to take a piss--is he still alive? And is the groom still alive?

One more thing, that young Stark girl has seen alot of family death--will she be a killing machine later in the story?

Quote: (06-03-2013 07:40 AM)PhilE Wrote:  

Fuck this show.

You know something my friend warned me, he said reading the game of Thrones was the biggest time wasters he did in college & wouldn't watch the show.

And without giving me specifics he stated this in an email years ago "some people do things different because it creates value, they see a way to improve. others be different just for the sake of being different. It's un-creative & trivial. Just being the opposite of something doesn't make you the better of that something. The author thinks he's being clever by having 'stark' changes (you'll get the pun later ) but his big "i'm different" moment does not add value to his story, instead it wastes your time"

And I just talked to him last night & he said to me you think it's bad watching it imagine reading it. Look at the popular reviews on amazon on the dragons book. Nothing is added to the story, new characters are introduced but none of them has the value that the starks did

You can't be serious. The Starks are the most woeful characters in the story, because they don't have any idea on how the game is played, that's why they get fucked. The reason he wrote it like this wasn't just to 'be different', but to show how the cliche of always having the 'good guys' stay safe and have that plot armour wasn't realistic in regards to the story he's trying to tell. If you read the books, you'll see that there are various characters that all have their own agendas, their own views on what's right and what's wrong. The line between these characters isn't as large as you'd imagine.

There is a reason for these things happening, it's not for no good reason. Having read the books, the way things connect up later on is very intricate, it's quite obvious the author has put in a massive amount of thought into making it this way. In short, don't get butthurt over the Starks, you'll come to terms with it.

who's the girl with the lost baby dragon that i see on some TV ads ???