|
SPOILER WARNING If you only watch the show, this thread will spoil you of future events in HBO's Game of Thrones. Thread contains discussion of all books of the series A Song of Ice and FireClick Here for the spoiler-free thread. |
On June 06 2014 05:07 karazax wrote:
I expect Lady Stoneheart to be the closing scene for the season, though whether it involves Brienne and completely skipping all of her Feast for Crows content (most of which won't work now since there is no Shagwell the fool, Rorge or Biter for her to fight), or just Lady Stoneheart hanging some Frey like in the storm of Swords epilogue I'm not sure. Brienne should have at least one more scene, but at this point her story will be significantly different from the books no matter what.
Not saying they're not jumping straight to UnCat, but just because some entirely unimportant sidecharacters are dead doesn't mean that they can't make up other entirely unimportant sidecharacters for Brienne to fight and waste a few episodes with.
|
They could, though it would certainly beg the question of why kill off Rorge and Biter in a completely meaningless and suspenseless way if you are going to have to make up new people we have never heard seen before for Brienne to fight? Maybe they have Brienne fight the Hound? Spoiler regarding a scene that Brienne said they shot, but hasn't happened on the show yet:+ Show Spoiler +Brienne said that she bit someone's ear off this season, so unless that scene was cut, it should be in the next 2 episodes. The question is, who's ear?
|
They're going to wrap up tyrion's King's Landing arc in episode 10.
Whatever else they do is of minor consequence. From what I have gathered, this will be the one twist that show goers definitely DO NOT see coming.
They could also have some aftermath stuff from the battle at the wall, some final thoughts on Mereen for the season (possibly that Yunkai will be going to war) and finally the LSH reveal.
|
On June 06 2014 05:46 Vindicare605 wrote:
They're going to wrap up tyrion's King's Landing arc in episode 10.
Whatever else they do is of minor consequence. From what I have gathered, this will be the one twist that show goers definitely DO NOT see coming.
They could also have some aftermath stuff from the battle at the wall, some final thoughts on Mereen for the season (possibly that Yunkai will be going to war) and finally the LSH reveal.
Show only friends of mine are super bummed right now, not because they loved Oberyn, but because Tyrion is going to die...
LSH in the last episode seems plausible to me, given the episode title, but it seems like a lot for one episode.
|
On June 06 2014 05:42 karazax wrote:They could, though it would certainly beg the question of why kill off Rorge and Biter in a completely meaningless and suspenseless way if you are going to have to make up new people we have never heard seen before for Brienne to fight? Maybe they have Brienne fight the Hound? Spoiler regarding a scene that Brienne said they shot, but hasn't happened on the show yet: + Show Spoiler +Brienne said that she bit someone's ear off this season, so unless that scene was cut, it should be in the next 2 episodes. The question is, who's ear?
Why does it even matter? No show watcher remembered Rorge or Biter until Arya recognized one of them. They're just random faces, just like the other guys who get killed by Brienne will be random faces. It literally does not make a difference. It only makes a difference to us, who know Rorge and Biter, but will not know the other guys.
|
Well I guess it matters to me because Biter, bites off half of Brienne's face, and the fight was much more dramatic than Arya and the Hound's pathetic encounter. Probably won't matter to non-readers, just annoys me when the show changes things for no apparent reason. If it doesn't matter, why not have the Hound and Arya kill the no name guys? Why change things just for the sake of change? Now if Brienne doesn't do any of her feast for crows wandering, then that may not be a change I like, but it at least makes sense that the characters have no other possible purpose in the story.
|
On June 06 2014 06:05 karazax wrote:
Well I guess it matters to me because Biter, bites off half of Brienne's face, and the fight was much more dramatic than Arya and the Hound's pathetic encounter. Probably won't matter to non-readers, just annoys me when the show changes things for no apparent reason. If it doesn't matter, why not have the Hound and Arya kill the no name guys? Why change things just for the sake of change? Now if Brienne doesn't do any of her feast for crows wandering, then that may not be a change I like, but it at least makes sense that the characters have no other possible purpose in the story.
Because Arya is more important than Brienne, and they wanted Arya to personally tick off one guy from her list. At least that's my guess. And did you really think that anyone in the show would bite off half of Brienne's face after Tyrion got a cool-ass scar instead of losing his nose? She'll, at most, get some scar and that's about it. And it truly doesn't matter what random guy (who's going to die right after) is going to give it to her.
You should give the writers some benefit of the doubt. They have a reason for what they do. You may not like it or agree with it or even know it, but they will have thought about it and they made the conscious decision to change things.
|
Again, the actress who plays Brienne has said that she bites someone's ear off that season. Since we have so much ground to cover in episode 10, I don't think they'll have a scene where she has a random fight with a random for no reason, so I'm pretty sure she'll fight with the Hound while Arya escapes on her own to Braavos. Gives an occasion for a scar on Brienne, gives Sandor a "death" before going to the monastery, creates a climax at this point for their storylines when there was none otherwise. Makes a lot of sense to me...
The other possibility is if she's there when they introduce LSH
|
Agreed, it will probably be a Brienne v Hound fight that has the ear bite. There just isn't anybody else of note for it to be, and it contributes well to Sandor ending up with festering wounds.
The problem is how do they end up disengaging and separating? Arya shouldn't be going anywhere with Brienne. Arya should end up alone with Sandor again after he is mortally wounded. Brienne must be the victor of a fight with Sandor, because she can't die. Brienne would not give up pursuit of Arya once she had sight of her, so even if Arya assumes Brienne is an enemy and escapes wouldn't she still have Brienne and Pod right behind her? There is no easily speculated and highly probable way to square all that together.
I guess I'll go with something along the lines of:
1. Both Brienne and Sandor mess each other up pretty badly, to the point that they cant fight and Pod/Arya end up dragging their respective partner away.
2. Sandor and Arya split like the books.
3. Brienne and Pod are taken by the BwoB to LSH.
4. All four characters land in spots that match where they were in the books (though not quite at the same times) as things stand at the end of S4.
|
On June 06 2014 06:35 Conti wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2014 06:05 karazax wrote:
Well I guess it matters to me because Biter, bites off half of Brienne's face, and the fight was much more dramatic than Arya and the Hound's pathetic encounter. Probably won't matter to non-readers, just annoys me when the show changes things for no apparent reason. If it doesn't matter, why not have the Hound and Arya kill the no name guys? Why change things just for the sake of change? Now if Brienne doesn't do any of her feast for crows wandering, then that may not be a change I like, but it at least makes sense that the characters have no other possible purpose in the story. Because Arya is more important than Brienne, and they wanted Arya to personally tick off one guy from her list. At least that's my guess. And did you really think that anyone in the show would bite off half of Brienne's face after Tyrion got a cool-ass scar instead of losing his nose? She'll, at most, get some scar and that's about it. And it truly doesn't matter what random guy (who's going to die right after) is going to give it to her. You should give the writers some benefit of the doubt. They have a reason for what they do. You may not like it or agree with it or even know it, but they will have thought about it and they made the conscious decision to change things.
Rorge and Biter were not names on her list, she didn't even remember their names. The Hound asked if they were on her list and she said "No, but they could be."
I agree that they wouldn't have Brienne lose half her face, but even if it just ended up with a neck bite like the Hound recieved it would have been a better scene than what Arya and the Hound had. If Brienne fights the Hound and none of her Feast for Crows content matches up until she gets captured by Lady Stoneheart, then they have a reason to change it. Whether or not it's a good reason depends on what they come up with instead. Just changing things because "it doesn't matter" is a pretty poor reason though.
It's hard to give the writers much benefit of the doubt when their completely original material is usually bad. Is there really anyone that thinks Rorge and Biter vs the Hound and Arya was as good or better than Rorge and Biter vs Brienne?
|
I JUST STARTED READING THE FIRST BOOK AND NED STARK JUST DIED FUCK!
THE WRITING IS VERY GOOD THO AND EVEN THO GOOD OLE NED DIED I STILL LIKE THIS BOOK, FUCK THO.
CANT READ ANYTHING IN HERE DON'T WANNA GET SPOILED
Sorry I'm excited to continue reading this series forgot TL frowns upon all caps. But now its not all caps :D
|
On June 06 2014 08:35 jaybrundage wrote:
I JUST STARTED READING THE FIRST BOOK AND NED STARK JUST DIED FUCK!
THE WRITING IS VERY GOOD THO AND EVEN THO GOOD OLE NED DIED I STILL LIKE THIS BOOK, FUCK THO.
CANT READ ANYTHING IN HERE DON'T WANNA GET SPOILED
Sorry I'm excited to continue reading this series forgot TL frowns upon all caps. But now its not all caps :D
Was about to hit report when I realized you were serious!
Also... TL Mafia, so cannot report you <3
Have fun with the books and avoid this thread like the plague 
|
its ok. jon snow finds all the dragonballs and revives his dad
|
On June 06 2014 13:33 jinorazi wrote:
its ok. jon snow finds all the dragonballs and revives his dad
But his father is actually Joffrey
|
On June 06 2014 00:07 karazax wrote:
Yeah here are some of the quotes I found:
"He is dying of the venom, but slowly, and in exquisite agony.”
– Qyburn to Cersei Lannister
“The flesh mortifies and the wounds ooze pus. Even maggots will not touch such foulness. His convulsions are so violent that I have had to gag him to prevent him from biting off his own tongue. I have cut away as much tissue as I dare, and treated the rot with boiling wine and bread mold, to no avail. The veins in his arms are turning black. When I leeched him, all the leeches died."
- Pycelle to the small council
Thanks. I've stopped reading the series. But, as I remember, Gregor was on the path to becoming Zombie Gregor. Was he not? And this would tie into Jaime's dream (or was it Sandor's?) where he (and another, Sandor?) would fight Gregor.
|
On June 06 2014 01:35 andrewlt wrote:I find it sad that there are a lot of people who accuse George Martin of having a nihilistic view of the world. Many of those people wouldn't say the same thing about other stories like Hunger Games and Divergent, sci-fi stories aimed at much younger audiences that show a really fucked up future. I've noticed that mainstream Western audiences seem to prefer their sci-fi dystopian and their fantasy utopian. That mentality is just really weird to me. The medieval times sucked ass and George is just being faithful to the historical source material that provides inspiration for his setting. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wars_of_the_Roseshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_of_the_Spanish_Successionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hundred_Years'_WarAlmost every atrocity in the book has a historical parallel, sometimes multiple historical parallel. Seems to me like your average Westerner has a really, really warped view of the middle ages.
This is a very interesting observation. Thank you.
I've never watched the TV series, primarily because I don't see anything attractive in the glorification of violence in the show. However, I did enjoy the books very much until Feast for Crows where I thought GRRM was literally losing control of the story.
|
On June 06 2014 15:50 aZealot wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2014 01:35 andrewlt wrote:I find it sad that there are a lot of people who accuse George Martin of having a nihilistic view of the world. Many of those people wouldn't say the same thing about other stories like Hunger Games and Divergent, sci-fi stories aimed at much younger audiences that show a really fucked up future. I've noticed that mainstream Western audiences seem to prefer their sci-fi dystopian and their fantasy utopian. That mentality is just really weird to me. The medieval times sucked ass and George is just being faithful to the historical source material that provides inspiration for his setting. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wars_of_the_Roseshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_of_the_Spanish_Successionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hundred_Years'_WarAlmost every atrocity in the book has a historical parallel, sometimes multiple historical parallel. Seems to me like your average Westerner has a really, really warped view of the middle ages. This is a very interesting observation. Thank you. I've never watched the TV series, primarily because I don't see anything attractive in the glorification of violence in the show. However, I did enjoy the series very much until Feast for Crows where I thought GRRM was literally losing control of the story.
I hate it so much, i hate it with a passion this fucking need of some people to make parallels with IRL events and stories.
Just NO, NO, NO.
Yes, the Lannister-Stark war is inspired to some extent by the war of the roses. Yes, the Wall was inspired by Hadrian's Wall in UK, Ancient rome resembales Old Valyria etc.
Are Starks = Yorks? NO
Are Wildlings = Scottish? Absolutely fucking not.
Name any kind of dynastic twist, be that incest, fraticide, userping, King being puppeteered by advisors, Queen's family being dominant in the court, or anything else, I will give you an example for it from European history, because everything fucking happened except for Dragons. That doesnt mean GRRM took those events and made Westeros versions of it.
Sorry for the rant, not that the quoted post was specifically pronounced in favor of this line of thinking, but i had to get it out of my system.
|
On June 06 2014 16:04 Geo.Rion wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2014 15:50 aZealot wrote:On June 06 2014 01:35 andrewlt wrote:I find it sad that there are a lot of people who accuse George Martin of having a nihilistic view of the world. Many of those people wouldn't say the same thing about other stories like Hunger Games and Divergent, sci-fi stories aimed at much younger audiences that show a really fucked up future. I've noticed that mainstream Western audiences seem to prefer their sci-fi dystopian and their fantasy utopian. That mentality is just really weird to me. The medieval times sucked ass and George is just being faithful to the historical source material that provides inspiration for his setting. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wars_of_the_Roseshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_of_the_Spanish_Successionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hundred_Years'_WarAlmost every atrocity in the book has a historical parallel, sometimes multiple historical parallel. Seems to me like your average Westerner has a really, really warped view of the middle ages. This is a very interesting observation. Thank you. I've never watched the TV series, primarily because I don't see anything attractive in the glorification of violence in the show. However, I did enjoy the series very much until Feast for Crows where I thought GRRM was literally losing control of the story. I hate it so much, i hate it with a passion this fucking need of some people to make parallels with IRL events and stories. Just NO, NO, NO. Yes, the Lannister-Stark war is inspired to some extent by the war of the roses. Yes, the Wall was inspired by Hadrian's Wall in UK, Ancient rome resembales Old Valyria etc. Are Starks = Yorks? NO Are Wildlings = Scottish? Absolutely fucking not. Name any kind of dynastic twist, be that incest, fraticide, userping, King being puppeteered by advisors, Queen's family being dominant in the court, or anything else, I will give you an example for it from European history, because everything fucking happened except for Dragons. That doesnt mean GRRM took those events and made Westeros versions of it. Sorry for the rant, not that the quoted post was specifically pronounced in favor of this line of thinking, but i had to get it out of my system.
Well some characters are in fact based on real people. For example GRRM has stated that Cersei is based on Isabella of france.
These parallels are interesting, why does it upset you that people like to talk about history?
|
On June 06 2014 16:17 sc2holar wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2014 16:04 Geo.Rion wrote:On June 06 2014 15:50 aZealot wrote:On June 06 2014 01:35 andrewlt wrote:I find it sad that there are a lot of people who accuse George Martin of having a nihilistic view of the world. Many of those people wouldn't say the same thing about other stories like Hunger Games and Divergent, sci-fi stories aimed at much younger audiences that show a really fucked up future. I've noticed that mainstream Western audiences seem to prefer their sci-fi dystopian and their fantasy utopian. That mentality is just really weird to me. The medieval times sucked ass and George is just being faithful to the historical source material that provides inspiration for his setting. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wars_of_the_Roseshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_of_the_Spanish_Successionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hundred_Years'_WarAlmost every atrocity in the book has a historical parallel, sometimes multiple historical parallel. Seems to me like your average Westerner has a really, really warped view of the middle ages. This is a very interesting observation. Thank you. I've never watched the TV series, primarily because I don't see anything attractive in the glorification of violence in the show. However, I did enjoy the series very much until Feast for Crows where I thought GRRM was literally losing control of the story. I hate it so much, i hate it with a passion this fucking need of some people to make parallels with IRL events and stories. Just NO, NO, NO. Yes, the Lannister-Stark war is inspired to some extent by the war of the roses. Yes, the Wall was inspired by Hadrian's Wall in UK, Ancient rome resembales Old Valyria etc. Are Starks = Yorks? NO Are Wildlings = Scottish? Absolutely fucking not. Name any kind of dynastic twist, be that incest, fraticide, userping, King being puppeteered by advisors, Queen's family being dominant in the court, or anything else, I will give you an example for it from European history, because everything fucking happened except for Dragons. That doesnt mean GRRM took those events and made Westeros versions of it. Sorry for the rant, not that the quoted post was specifically pronounced in favor of this line of thinking, but i had to get it out of my system. Well some characters are in fact based on real people. For example GRRM has stated that Cersei is based on Isabella of france. These parallels are interesting, why does it upset you that people like to talk about history?
u misunderstand, i hate the fact that ppl depict the events as parallels. Which they arent, they bare resembalance, sure, but it's not the adaptation of historic events. I also love to talk about history, but it diminishes GRRM's work to say the plot is parallel to medieval european history
|
Yeah well, so what do you do when GRRM himself makes those connections? Blow your brains out?
It's obvious that (fairly big) parts of Martins world are "inspired by" (medieval) history. There's only so much that even a brilliant writers imagination can do. The laws, the titles, the habits, hell the architecture, the technology- pretty sure a lot of it is 100% taken from our own history. And when you read as much history as Martin obviously has, you're bound to find not only inspiration but stories and characters that are so fascinating that you "couldn't have made it up any better". You're delusional if you think even the best writers don't "borrow" from whatever good material they find.
And recognizing this diminishes their brilliant work in no way whatsoever. Chill out.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
