FnkyChkn34

Fair enough, but that still makes her a vigilante. Maybe that's the difference between revenge vs. avenge? Either way, I still don't believe it's up to her to take matters into her own hands, only deciding what she sees as right and wrong, and I don't like the character. :-)

Can't he just be unrelated? Like Nicole and Chloe were when they first came to town.

But she has an urge for revenge, soo... yeah. Sorry, same thing in my book, especially because there could be plenty of other ways to get revenge, but she's chosen to do so only through murder.

And to follow up on that, I can't believe that Tormund was so quick to listen to Jon, follow his orders, and agree to go man the Wall at Eastwatch-by-the-Sea. The whole point of the Wildlings is that they live free and don't take orders, isn't it? I guess they changed their attitudes when they realized that the WW would kill them all if they didn't align with the people south of the Wall?

Totally agree, @Chas411. Jesse Lee Soffer posted an Instagram story panning up from the cover page of episode 1's script to his name plate on the table. Ruzek's name was in the background. They are back at work and having their first table read. I'm going to assume that they are in Chicago... and Sophia is clearly still in LA based on her Instagram posts.

Or their motive is because they are sociopaths and they like killing. Their motive is to make themselves happy. Serial killers can be explained (or not explained) in many, many different ways. I think all of the above can be correct because each circumstance is different.

Good, I'm glad she's improving, even if it is only slowly.

I always preferred Jason Cook as Shawn-D, but I don't dislike BB, so I'll take the character back any way I can get him. Shawn-D is one of my favorites (when written well, of course [let's ignore that crap with Lani and pretend it never happened]).

Tomorrow, and the episodes are on NBC.com about 24 hours after they air, I think. Maybe not that long, but not immediately.

Oh, has her acting miraculously improved in the two weeks I've missed? I never like to bring up the actor or actress in my discussions and try to keep it only to the characters, but I can't with Lani. The actress is just too bad, in my opinion, for me to even see the character or care about her.

I don't think having Jon made any difference to how people treated Ned (afterall, everyone still thinks he's just Ned's bastard) - but the fact that Ned actively fought right along side Robert in Robert's Rebellion and helped to put Robert on the Throne mattered a lot. Best friends or not, Ned was an active participant in overthrowing the Targaryans.

I haven't watched for at least 2 weeks, and I agree that the only person I care about in that list is Theo. Lani needs to go back to Miami...

He has Dany's gold, doesn't he? I assume she has a lot, somewhere and somehow.

Won't the women who Arya left alive tend to the dead and bury them? It's not like the Twins is now completely deserted but for dead bodies. And if they are buried, the Night Prince may not be able to find them.

I have a bit of a stupid, off topic question, so I didn't want to put it in the popular main discussion threads but maybe someone will see it here and help me out... Who is running Casterly Rock? Cersei is the queen, Jaime is by her side, Tyrion is with Dany, Tywin is dead, Kevan is dead, Lancel is dead...

Right, I know. But I was just weighing in on how ridiculous it would be if she did/does.

I'm not going to belabor this, and we can agree to respectfully disagree, so this will be my last post on this topic. I don't want to unnecessarily drag something out. But my counterpoint to this is that there are probably hundreds of thousands (millions?) of viewers who have never read the books, so a massive amount (a majority?) of the audience just wouldn't know to make those comparisons and reactions. I only read the books after the show came out, so my view of characters was already influenced by the actors' portrayals and the show's characterizations. This could also be the case for many people.

Ed Sheeran has quit Twitter, and everyone is speculating that it's because of the insults he received from trolls over his GoT appearance. So congrats, a-hole trolls... Why can't people just leave the poor guy alone?

He's also described as being a Stark, looking like a Stark, mannerisms and acting like a Stark, etc. (And, I understand we're in the "book talk" forum for the show, but we are still ultimately talking about the audience's reaction to the character on the TV screen, are we not?)

But until just last season, the audience was supposed to think that Jon is a Stark, not a Targaryan. I don't see that as a fair comparison because it wasn't confirmed that he is a Targaryan. Now that we know he is, maybe people will start to view him differently (or he'll be written differently).

I would never have called Westeros "progressive." I know this isn't a real time period in actual history, but if it was, it would be middle ages/medieval times - so way less progressive than even Victorian England.

But let's not forget that Dany literally has "madness" run in her family. I don't characterize her that way, and I see her as equal to any other male contender, but if someone else does it could be because of her family history - not just because she's a woman.

I see your point, but I guess I have to still respectfully disagree - because that's the way some shows and plots have to work. It's just a fictional television show (based on books) afterall. And for example, the part I bolded, it's a show about warring kingdoms; so of course some characters are leaders and give orders, and some characters are soldiers and follow orders. Sam is a soldier tasked with becoming educated, but that doesn't make his mission any less important. Were his scenes a bit boring? Sure. But I can't just discard him. He had his character moments in previous seasons.

There's your reason why it's different, in bold. Jaime and Robb and even Ned all did things during a time of war, and sometimes at the order of someone else (at least in Jaime's case). Arya is acting alone as a vigilante. (As a comparison, would we call a modern day member of the military a murderer, or someone who was just doing their job during time of conflict? An army lieutenant, for example, is just doing their job. Is Arya in an army?)

If Arya really kills 7 Lannister soldiers for no reason other than them being Lannisters, then she's irredeemable to me. That act alone proves, at least in my opinion, that she's a clear sociopathic murderer and not just someone who is avenging her family. Those soldiers did nothing to her, killed no one she knew, and even said they didn't want to be there. Absolutely no reason to kill them.