GertrudeDR

See and I think that who takes the thrones eventually, or if it evens exists is less interesting than how all these players come together and wipe out the threat. I think the threat in the North will be dealt with before the throne, actually. I'm maybe thinking that Aegon takes it, Dany wants it, but she realizes that the Others are what is actually important and leaves that to be dealt with later. Or maybe it's all destroyed by the time Dany gets there (her House of the Undying vision in the show) After the realms of men are safe again, I think the throne is more or less settled by the power players who saw what happened and judged their leadership against the Others. I don't have solid theories as to what happens, but I see the actual throne as anti-climactic. It's all about the magic and myth for me. The power-struggle is very good and exciting and I like it too, but it's the obstacle that was created to make the real threat more intense.

It's almost like they made this stuff up because they needed something to happen at the Wall because they screwed up the pacing. Nah, the story is tight and thought is given to each part and how it interconnects with other arcs and itself, right?

I think it's beyond Shae having a hard life. Some people can overcome adversity, but Shae doesn't even have a framework to imagine that rape is traumatic. She has probably lived with rape in one form or another for most of her life, so why can't Lollys get over it? To Shae it must seem like Shae is made of stronger stuff and Lollys is just weak. That's why I see her as almost irreparably damaged. Anyone with a remotely positive influence or framework for human relationships would feel sorry for Lollys on at least some level. As to the dangers of war - Shae really hasn't seen war first hand. The land has been at peace since the rebellion when she was only a toddler. She may have seen some fighting, but nothing serious. She meets Tyrion right as the fighting starts and it hasn't touched anyone but the soldiers so far. I don't find it hard to believe she might underestimate the dangers, or believe that she might be able to survive somehow because that's what she's been doing her whole life. She wants her new toys because they are nice - and if she's thinking long term, they are her security for the future. I tend to think she wasn't thinking particularly long-term, however. Those lottery winners you hear about who wind up in debt because they can't manage money? That's how I envision her. But this is all getting a little off-track. My main point was that Book and Show Shae only have a passing acquaintance with one another. It did surprise me that Show Shae threw Sansa under the bus because in the show, Shae was not the opportunist she was in the books. In some cases I can impose Book motives on Show characters, but not in this case at all.

Absolutely. Shae was a straight up mercenary in the books. That was pretty clear. She hit the jack-pot with Tyrion and I'm not surprised that she let her new-found wealth and security cloud her judgement in regards to her personal safety. The house and jewels and silks were right here, right now - the dangers of war were ... maybe out there somewhere in the future. Also remember that Tyrion is a very generous patron - she's gonna tell him whatever he wants to hear and rake in the bonus for being enthusiastic about her role as 'lover'. I think Book Shae is a very damaged person. When she makes that comment about Lollys, it's very disturbing. I can't even call her a horrible person because I just think she's had a shitty life and honestly doesn't know any better, doesn't actually know how to love or have a bit of empathy. Obviously I don't think she's a good person, but I don't think she had any positive examples to show her how to be. (just me projecting my thoughts onto her) In the show, they didn't go that route with Shae, and that's why when she throws Sansa under the bus it falls so very flat. Show Shae and Book Shae have the same name, but that's about it. Show Shae turns down a fortune in diamonds from Varys because she loves Tyrion and wants to be with him, the very opposite of an insincere opportunist.

I can't be bothered to get worked up about all the things I think the show dropped the ball on, but Shae is one of those issues that still upsets me. As Shimpy said, she's terribly uneven. I can't believe they had a vision for her at all and just wrote whatever came into their heads at the moment, only knowing that eventually, she had to end up on the stand and in Tywin's bed. Screw whatever happens between her introduction and that.

In the moment, I agree, Jon's reason for joining Mance was better in the show. However, it ignores something important. Jon witnesses an Other take a child and Mormont's response is, yeah, we know. What? You know about the White Walkers? So this has been happening for a while, huh? And if Mormont knew about it, Benjen should have at the very least and then so should Ned and him calling the NW deserter a mad man makes no sense. Let's assume Mormont knew that Craster was leaving his sons to die in the woods, but not why. Jon tells him he saw a thing take it. Mormont doesn't seem surprised, so it's not that clear if he already knew that the Others were around and taking the babies, or if he just put two and two together when Jon told him that and the recent run-in with the wight. I wish the writers had taken a few moments to make that clearer because I had a problem with it when it aired. It absolutely looks as if Mormont had known all along. If I'm being generous and assume he didn't, then he takes the news like a champ and doesn't even break stride. So one of those two is a bad writing moment. bleah - In my recent posts I fear I am coming off as a book purist and show hater. That's not the case. I just don't like sloppy writing. (It's why I became disillusioned with Lost). I don't mind when the show veers away from the books, and understand most of their choices, but when they do that, they really have to work at making their story clear and consistent. The story is complex and when you pull at a thread, you have to take extra care to not unravel the tapestry or fray the edges. And even if there were little things like my example here and there, it would probably not bother me. I think it happens too often, though, and I kind of hit critical mass where every little example now annoys me. I still like the show, I just wish I could love it.

Now for my comments on season 5. I get that each season has to have an satisfying arc and conclusion of some sort. I don't think each storyline needs to have a BIG HUGE ending, though. Personally, I would have loved to see the siege of Castle Black over several episodes to ratchet up the tension and give Stannis a bigger win. This means you don't get Ygritte hanging around uselessly for a full season only to die in Jon's arms as Olly gives him the thumbs up. I can live with that. Kill her in episode 2 and done. Have Jon's confrontation and the Stannis save be the big ep. I also think one of the main problems the show has is that butterfly effect. For example, leaving the battle for Castle Black until the end of the season makes for a lot of filler, as mentioned above. This bleeds into season 5 with the pacing issues. The showrunners are inconsistent and sloppy with their own material and as long as they keep trying to hit plot points without the journey, or even an attempt at a journey between them, it's going to fall flat. It shouldn't be unreasonable to expect that, even in a bridge season, which I think it's fair to say this was.

Yeah - that's the only proper way to watch the Theon/Ramsey scenes. Even knowing where it was leading to while watching it it was too much. I understand why they made the choice to show it - different medium, keeping actors employed, etc. I really think we didn't need to see so gosh darned much of it. Leave a little to the imagination, huh folks? (I might say that about the female form as well, but I digress) This next bit is going to sound weird, but I didn't like how little time they actually took to break Theon to being Reek. The concept of letting go of Theon and naming him Reek was introduced at the very end and Theon refused once, maybe twice, then rolled over. Yes, I know we just watched the whole process of Ramsey breaking him in body and spirit, but I really do think that if the concept of Reek had been introduced a little earlier and Theon fought longer to keep his name, it would have been a more earned moment when Theon finally let go of all sense of self. Instead we get Ramsey as the Joker, which I'm not overly fond of. Also - Jaime. *sigh* my Jaime. I won't let go of my book version because aside from season 3, they haven't even begun to do him justice. I wasn't sold on NCW as Jaime at first because he didn't match my visual image of him, and I didn't like how much of a sneering villain he was being played as (the things I do for love comes to mind). NCW has won me over, though, and I love how he plays him with a good amount of swagger and snark, but not too much. He's doing a great job with poorly written material, IMO.

This is also a very good point. Lots of Cat fans were raging over this season and I certainly was disappointed that Cat was reduced to an afterthought. The Qhorin stuff was so very disappointing. Again, it was like they sacrificed Qhorin for the sake of more Ygritte sassing Jon. In the end, it just makes Jon's act of killing Qhorin look half-assed. It wasn't made clear why he killed him in that moment - there was plenty of room to interpret it as impulsive rather than a rational choice. Season 2 was generally regarded as the weakest season until season 5. I think 5 had more good moments than 2, but was overall worse. I will agree that Blackwater was a beautiful episode. Cersei was fantastic.

I don't know if I can put why I didn't like her into words. Part of it, I am sure, is because it was a difference from the books. They had been pretty faithful in season 1 and we were primed for a faithful adaptation. It was different than, say, the differences in Dany's story. Dany didn't have much so it was understandable that they had to give a TV character something to do. Talisa wasn't something added as filler - she was changed for no discernible reason. It's also how Robb's decision was so tied up in his grief over the boys, but the show never bothered to even give him or Cat this news, so that was also tied up in my dislike. I was also watching her side-eyed because I wasn't sure what her angle was. What were they taking from the book and what were the leaving on the floor - was she a Lannister agent? (the Honeypot theory was a thing). Her being anachronistic was problematic for me mainly because she stuck out like a sore thumb. This is harder to explain, but it wasn't even her sassy, independent persona. It was that they tried really hard to show us why Robb would throw away a Kingdom for this girl but I never felt like she was a real person in this world. She was a package of attractive traits and a delivery vehicle for lines. This is probably because of all the other problems I had with her insertion into this story, but I never bought into her as her own person. I disliked her, but didn't hate her. I was mainly confused and disappointed at the decisions that led to having her there instead of Jeyne. I do think Talisa was a big change and an easy thing to focus on if you were disillusioned in the way the show was headed, so some people probably voice hatred of Talisa because it's easier to shorthand everything they dislike by pointing to an obvious example.

I don't think the average viewer remembers Loras as a great fighter. I do think people would equate jousting to fighting in general, but the last scene we saw of him actually fighting was early in season 2 and Brienne had just whupped him. They have showed him in armor practicing, but mostly i think an audience will remember him romping around in bed, or moping about fringed sleeves. The character is irretrievable damaged. Having said that, it's a show that likes to take shortcuts instead of earned moments, so if they just have someone talk about what a great fighter Loras is, he's a great fighter and that's that. They can also say that he's been weakened by imprisonment ala Jaime and that's that. Whatever the show wants or needs, it will do.

Oh, I don't disagree at all. I was just commenting on the introduction of Loras as a schemer, not anything else about that cringe-worthy scene. From the books, Loras and Margaery seem about on par as far as scheming manipulators go - They are both Tyrells, Marge manipulates Tommen with kittens whereas Loras manipulates the Mountain's stallion with a mare. OK, neither of them is unfamiliar or uncomfortable with a bit of underhandedness (Loras moreso than we actually see from Marge). There is a lot of room in the books to project whatever you want into their motives. In the Show scene after Renly's death, Loras and Marge seem like equals in this particular scheme. Going forward, however, Loras is uneeded once Gma Tyrell rolls in and he's reduced to a device to move the plot along with no agency of his own. Gma needs a pawn to marry to Sansa, check. LFinger needs to get info, check. Cersei needs to take down Marge, check. And in doing so they completely threw away the little work they did do in developing Loras. So my actual problem is not only that he is reduced to a stereotype, but that he is reduced to cardboard after beginning to flesh him out. They treated him like a disposable character when it wouldn't have taken too terribly much effort to have him buy into the Sansa marriage (he is the heir, after all) or make it clear that he turned to Olyvar in grief rather than flirty fun. Instead he is just a mope who likes fringed sleeves and forgets Renly at the drop of a helmet. It's infuriating, even moreso because ROS superwhore gets so much screentime. If only Loras had tits.

I didn't really mind Loras' introduction as a manipulative schemer. It jarred me at first, but then I assumed it was to gradually introduce the Tyrells as players. Then when we met Marge, it made a lot more sense. Unfortunately, it was just about that time that they completely dropped that aspect of Loras. Once G'ma Tyrell hit the scene, all Tyrell men were brainless idiots. So while I don't think it was a horrible addition to Loras's personality, it ended up badly because it shows the lack of long-term planning the showrunner usually have. For the record, when reading, I never got the impression that Marge was overly ambitious. Granted, there is a lot of room for her to be anything you want to see in her in the books, but I always imagined she was a good little pawn in the Tyrell family, but not particularly ambitious for herself. That's just me, though, and Show Marge plays better on screen to spark conflict. I never connected with Show Finger. All the reasons listed above - he just ... no, he's much better as a non-entity lurking in the background until you get to 'Only Cat.' I get that Show Finger needs something to do, and the Finger/Varys scenes were fun to watch, but overall I wrote him off early as a very different character.