| Forum Index > Media & Entertainment |
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 Fire Click Here for the spoiler-free thread. | ||
|
DickMcFanny
Ireland1076 Posts
On May 25 2016 00:01 The_Red_Viper wrote: GRRM confirmed that the Hodor reveal will have a different context in the books btw Of course, it has to. That reveal only works in an audiovisual medium. | ||
|
Wuster
1974 Posts
On May 24 2016 23:26 Logo wrote: I agree the have to go back reasoning on its own is weak. I think it's better to think of it as Blood Raven having a good last lesson for Bran. He teaches him that he can influence people through his dreams, but as far as the past is concerned he can't actually change history from what he has known to pass (I.e Hodor is going to become Hodor). Both are pretty important lessons for him to learn before he goes out on his own. The behind the scenes spot had D&D talking about how that was meant to be part of Bloodraven furiously showing Bran everything he could before it was too late. Instead of a supercut that would convey the rush of information hitting Bran.. they showed us that. And I don't disagree that it was more impactful the way they did it, it didn't actually present what they wanted (which would make more sense for Bloodraven to be doing). Anyways, I posted this in the other thread, what happened with Wylis/Hodor is pretty close to a known paradox. You can accept them as they are, but thinking about it too hard isn't going to help you much (paradoxes you know?) http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/entertainment/82188-tv-hbo-game-of-thrones?page=1503#30048 | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On May 25 2016 02:14 DickMcFanny wrote: Of course, it has to. That reveal only works in an audiovisual medium. Yeah, you can't have quick cuts to different perspectives in his narrative style. | ||
|
Acrofales
Spain18404 Posts
| ||
|
blade55555
United States17423 Posts
On May 25 2016 02:43 Acrofales wrote: They have basically embraced Littlefinger teleporting, haven't they. How the fuck did he get past Moat Cailin that is held by the Boltons? I mean the simplest answer is that each frame is a different timeline. When you saw Littlefinger in the vale, doesn't mean no time has passed. Sansa nitted two sweaters which takes time. Over in Mareen, it's noted that it's been 2 weeks since the peace with the masters. I haven't watched it again, but I believe the Vale has already taken moat callen (I know I spelled this wrong and I may be wrong). So I guess his army teleports as well, or time has passed  . | ||
|
Wuster
1974 Posts
| ||
Yhamm
France7248 Posts
On May 25 2016 02:43 Acrofales wrote: They have basically embraced Littlefinger teleporting, haven't they. How the fuck did he get past Moat Cailin that is held by the Boltons? using a boat? Moat Cailin is only good at stopping an army (and it's even held by the Vale army now, as he said) | ||
|
brian
United States9642 Posts
On May 24 2016 09:19 Plansix wrote: Them never talking would be interesting as long as the unanswered questions about their intent can be inferred through other silent scenes. I think a silent villain that we barely understood be interesting. Them talking would reduces a lot of their menace. I guess I disagree a little, I'd like it for that same reason. giving him(or all the WW) a little extra something to make them less PURE EVIL feel fits better with the theme of the books, at least the theme I've read into them that nobody/no people is 'pure' anything. | ||
|
Logo
United States7542 Posts
On May 25 2016 02:23 Wuster wrote: The behind the scenes spot had D&D talking about how that was meant to be part of Bloodraven furiously showing Bran everything he could before it was too late. Instead of a supercut that would convey the rush of information hitting Bran.. they showed us that. And I don't disagree that it was more impactful the way they did it, it didn't actually present what they wanted (which would make more sense for Bloodraven to be doing). Anyways, I posted this in the other thread, what happened with Wylis/Hodor is pretty close to a known paradox. You can accept them as they are, but thinking about it too hard isn't going to help you much (paradoxes you know?) http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/entertainment/82188-tv-hbo-game-of-thrones?page=1503#30048 I don't think the episode was an example of that paradox. That paradox would, for example, be if Bran received a powerful sword then later on traveled back in time to give himself that very sword. The sword would have no origin. It effectively appeared out of thin air; the sword has no forger or creator and materials were never consumed to create it. In terms of information if Bran traveled back in time and told himself "The password to the door is 'XYZ'" that would be about the same. He's telling himself something he only knows because he told himself, the information is created from nothing. In this episode we don't have that. Bran travels back in time and 'creates' Hodor, but everything has an origin. Hodor is created from Bran's influence (origin of Hodor), but there's no information being pulled back or stuck in a loop. The information here would be "Hold the door", but that's not being created out of no where, it's origin is what's happening as Hodor dies. "hold the door" is created then sent back in time which is perfectly fine and not part of the bootstrap paradox because the item/information *is* created at a particular point. An example of the paradox would be if Hodor traveled back in time and tormented his previous self by saying "Hodor" over and over again until his past self only said Hodor. The origin of the information "hodor" is non-existent. The paradox isn't about the core idea of predetermination/stable time loop. It's about within that system having items or information that are created without an actual origin (i.e person says something that they only know because their future self told them). | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On May 25 2016 04:56 brian wrote: I guess I disagree a little, I'd like it for that same reason. giving him(or all the WW) a little extra something to make them less PURE EVIL feel fits better with the theme of the books, at least the theme I've read into them that nobody/no people is 'pure' anything. I have never seen them as pure evil, just alien with a lack of empathy which translates to malice. Their intent is not known and I would also prefer it never be known. Even if we know where they came from, we don’t understand how they were created or what happened. We just saw they were created as a desperate act during a war that backfired. But the exact nature of it backfiring and what lead up to where we are now hopefully will never be filled in. Much like the Wall, I don’t need to know about the white walkers beyond what I know now. Someone built that wall for a reason. That exact reason is explained by the people in the world, but it isn’t’ clear if they are reliable or have the true information. Because claim that it was created to keep the wildlings makes it seem like the most massive overreaction of all time. | ||
|
Pwere
Canada1557 Posts
Jojen also knew how he was going to die, yet could do nothing about it. This is as simple as Hodor having a vision of his future death, and this messes him up, and Bran just happened to be watching at that moment. Maybe you can't change the past, and BR just wants Bran to stop wasting his time. Maybe you can, but BR learned that it only gets worse. Either way, I still don't get how Bran is supposed to have learned "everything" from that. Unless that stunt was for BR to escape, Warg into Coldhands, and teach Bran that he won't stay a cripple forever, as long as he wargs into a whitewalker or a dragon or something weird. It would make sense for the Whitewalkers to have been a simple weapon for the Children until some First Man figured out how to warg into it, and has been controlling it ever since. Maybe Bran is supposed to take over. | ||
|
ObeseHydra
Brazil196 Posts
| ||
|
Spaylz
Japan1743 Posts
On May 26 2016 00:16 Plansix wrote: I have never seen them as pure evil, just alien with a lack of empathy which translates to malice. Their intent is not known and I would also prefer it never be known. Even if we know where they came from, we don’t understand how they were created or what happened. We just saw they were created as a desperate act during a war that backfired. But the exact nature of it backfiring and what lead up to where we are now hopefully will never be filled in. Much like the Wall, I don’t need to know about the white walkers beyond what I know now. Someone built that wall for a reason. That exact reason is explained by the people in the world, but it isn’t’ clear if they are reliable or have the true information. Because claim that it was created to keep the wildlings makes it seem like the most massive overreaction of all time. Funny, I completely disagree. To me, a villain without a motive seems pretty lame. Obviously, their current motive seems to be "destroy everything", but still. Given their backstory, I would be disappointed if we didn't find out more about how things got to where they are now. Different strokes, I suppose. | ||
|
SkrollK
France580 Posts
On May 26 2016 09:34 Spaylz wrote: Funny, I completely disagree. To me, a villain without a motive seems pretty lame. Obviously, their current motive seems to be "destroy everything", but still. Given their backstory, I would be disappointed if we didn't find out more about how things got to where they are now. Different strokes, I suppose. From what I get, he doesn't like no reason at all either. He likes "lots of reason stated by different characters with different POVs". You do not know which the real reason is and you make up your mind on the one you prefer. Mb I missed the point though, but it's pretty much my opinion on the subject anyway. To put it simply, I do like making up my mind on my own, and not having an omniscient POV or an omniscient information that tells me what is right or wrong. I'm fine not knowing, what I'm not fine is having no reasons at all. | ||
|
dmnum
Brazil6910 Posts
Considering we are talking about events thousands years old, it would make more sense if we didn't get an absolutely complete explanation of what drives the White Walkers. I think that a sequence of visions or an apparition of Children of the Forest to explain everything neatly would be highly unsatisfying. It also would completely destroy the mysterious aura that shrouds the White Walkers. On the other hand, no explanation would make the White Walkers your typical stupid "I hate everything and want to destroy the world" villains. Take, for example, the Dark Souls series: the lore is only explained in bits and pieces, leaving a lot to be filled in by fans, which gives the game a very distinct feeling. It's also reasonable, considering ancient events are never fully enlightened. | ||
|
Laurens
Belgium4557 Posts
 | ||
|
SkrollK
France580 Posts
On May 27 2016 12:24 dmnum wrote: I'd prefer if, rather than explaining exactly what is their reasoning or not explaining anything at all, the show/books only "half-explained" what the White Walkers motivations are. Considering we are talking about events thousands years old, it would make more sense if we didn't get an absolutely complete explanation of what drives the White Walkers. I think that a sequence of visions or an apparition of Children of the Forest to explain everything neatly would be highly unsatisfying. It also would completely destroy the mysterious aura that shrouds the White Walkers. On the other hand, no explanation would make the White Walkers your typical stupid "I hate everything and want to destroy the world" villains. Take, for example, the Dark Souls series: the lore is only explained in bits and pieces, leaving a lot to be filled in by fans, which gives the game a very distinct feeling. It's also reasonable, considering ancient events are never fully enlightened. Te, I am also inclined to that. That's basically what I tried to say above : I much prefer an incomplete and/or even subjective explanation, taking into account the fact that the information came across the centuries through oral transmission, and thus have been modified/twisted across the time from one person to another, rather than have a totally objective and omniscient explaination which leaves no place for imagination. Or having no explanation at all, which is the lamest imo. | ||
|
stilt
France2755 Posts
On May 26 2016 08:30 ObeseHydra wrote: Good episode overall. Summer's fate was lame as fuck, though. One less expensive CGI character, I guess. Agreed, the direwolves's deaths in this season are completly absurds , almost as fucked up as Doran and Areo Hotah's deaths... This is a shame because except this death, the last episod is really great. | ||
|
haitike
Spain2744 Posts
- Direwolves deaths are random. - The quality of Tyrion dialogues is worse each season. - All the Dorne stuff is ridicoulous so far. They killed all the family ruler of Dorne and nobody cares in the country. - I'm not sure if I like the path of Bolton history. They killed Roose and his wife very randomly, and now Ramsey has shitty scenes (Like the one with Asha) - The Kingmoot was stupid (I killed the king, now I command you to build tons of ships lol) and I don't like Euron actor. But the rest of the season is quite good. | ||
|
blkcoffee
35 Posts
I heard that they got rid of the awesome Jamie Lannister storyline from AFFC , do book purists still enjoy the show or will I dislike it | ||
| ||
|
|
Replay Cast
The PondCast
OSC
INu's Battles
Percival vs Cure
Classic vs Clem
Replay Cast
Escore
IntoTheTV X SOOP
RSL Revival
herO vs SHIN
Clem vs Solar
Serral vs Rogue
RSL Revival
WardiTV Weekly
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
