Television Vs. Book: Why'd They Make [Spoiler] Such A [Spoiler]?

[spottedreptile]

5 hours ago, proserpina65 said:

It waxes and wanes in importance, but does date back at least as far as the 14th century, when Edward, Prince of Wales (son of Edward III) needed a Papal dispensation to marry his cousin, Joan of Kent.

Even further than that. William the Conqueror needed a papal dispensation on the grounds of 'affinity' in order to marry Matilda of Flanders. They were very remote cousins, and it's possible there were political (i.e. money) motives behind the edict, as William immediately built a large Abbey as 'penance' to the Pope, but it does show that cousin marrying was a no-no to varying degrees in medieval society.

[Umbelina]

http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-20782442

Yet in 1840 Prince Albert, first cousin to Queen Victoria wed.

[spottedreptile]

2 hours ago, Umbelina said:

Yet in 1840 Prince Albert, first cousin to Queen Victoria wed.

I don't quite see the relevance. Victoria and Albert were not a medieval couple. Prince Charles was going to marry a number of his first cousins, despite various 'squick' articles in the British press about it and the ugly examples of inbreeding in the Royal family over the generations. Obviously the rules, both religious and social, have changed since medieval days. 

Edited June 2, 2016 by spottedreptile

[proserpina65]

17 hours ago, Umbelina said:

http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-20782442

Yet in 1840 Prince Albert, first cousin to Queen Victoria wed.

Like I said, it waxed and waned.  But the taboo of marrying closely related cousins was NOT a modern construct; that was my point.

Interesting enough, in the Victorian period, there was less of a prohibition against marrying a cousin than there was against marrying the widow/widower of a deceased sibling, even though the in-law was unlikely to be a blood relative.

Upon doing further research (basically Googling), I discovered that the Romans had very specific rules about how closely related people could be and still marry.  Not very, apparently, although there were exceptions among the rich and powerful.

Edited June 2, 2016 by proserpina65

[Eyes High]

D&D stated in April in a Variety interview that they were aiming for having shortened seasons in Seasons 7 and 8, with seven and six episodes (respectively), for a grand total of 73 episodes. Over the years, when giving a length estimate for the series, they have given numbers ranging from 70 to 80 hours. Jack Bender also stated in a recent interview that the seventh season will only be seven episodes long. However, D&D have always said that there isn't 10 seasons' worth of story to tell.

I'm wondering how it is that ASOIAF is going to take two or even possibly three books to finish while D&D appear to be supremely confident that they can wrap the story up in 13 episodes after Season 6 (or 17 episodes from now, counting Season 6's remaining eps), to the point where they seem to bristle at the idea of going over 80 episodes. One possible answer is that the ASOIAF Aegon/Arianne plot was so big that by cutting it, a very large portion of the material needing to be adapted will fall by the wayside. It's just surprising that as Anne Groell has been more and more cagey in recent years about needing more books, D&D have remained very confident not only that they can wrap up the series in less than 80 episodes, but that there isn't enough story for more than 80 episodes. Is the remaining material really so bloated that there isn't more than 10-20 episodes' worth of story left after Season 6? Have D&D made so many adaptation changes eliminating plotlines that there isn't all that much left to adapt? Bit of both?

[nksarmi]

I would guess that D&D cut a LOT of story by cutting Arienne/Aegon out. I think Martin will also go through a lot of story in the Vale just to get Sansa in a similar place (on Team Jon) as she is now. Bran's Three Eyed Crow story is probably very extensive in the books, but it would have been difficult to translate into a visual medium. There might even be a detailed Meereen plot while Dany is dealing with the Dorthraki. I also got the sense that there is something coming with the Citidal/Maesters and how they deal with Dany in the books that the show probably will leave out altogether.

I suspect when D&D say they don't have more than 80 episodes total of material - it has to do with choices they made for the characters and the story they choose to tell and how they think the story will pace itself. I mean can you imagine them trying to put the breaks on things or stretch things out now that Jon has been resurrected, he and Sansa have joined forces against Ramsey, and Bran has become the Three Eyed Crow? We were all wondering what the hell the Night's King was waiting for as is!

[ElizaD]

Considering the pace of the TWOW preview chapters, the showrunners may have eliminated half the material by using Littlefinger's teleporter: there may be a couple of character-building scenes on the way to wherever, but character A will meet character B. Even Dorne, as bad as the execution was, had a basically solid one-season structure of road trip chats that said something about a main character, other characters knowing about the situation he was coming to deal with and having their own responses to it, Jaime making his move, Doran putting an end to this phase of the conflict, and Ellaria making her final move in a way that had major consequences: now Myrcella is dead and peace is out of the question. Meanwhile, Arianne is... going to meet someone and do something. Some day.

IMO, GRRM isn't prepared to kill his darlings (travelogues and worldbuilding) now that he's so big that the editor can't get him to remove a few words are winds, but the showrunners have a different approach where big deaths and shocking twists are their darlings, and that helps them move faster once characters are in a decent enough position to be sent to their next big plot (so Dany/Tyrion and Jon/Sansa have already met on the show, for example, as I expect they will do in late TWOW).

[Umbelina]

Simply cutting out all of the red herrings and travelogues and history lessons would be enough.  Honestly, this tale is so completely bloated that when you get right down to it?  None of that matters.  None.  Zip.

[FemmyV]

7 hours ago, nksarmi said:

I also got the sense that there is something coming with the Citidal/Maesters and how they deal with Dany in the books that the show probably will leave out altogether.

There was the Citadel intrigue involving Pate and someone who resembles Jaq'en. ...

[SeanC]

8 hours ago, Eyes High said:

I'm wondering how it is that ASOIAF is going to take two or even possibly three books to finish while D&D appear to be supremely confident that they can wrap the story up in 13 episodes after Season 6 (or 17 episodes from now, counting Season 6's remaining eps), to the point where they seem to bristle at the idea of going over 80 episodes. One possible answer is that the ASOIAF Aegon/Arianne plot was so big that by cutting it, a very large portion of the material needing to be adapted will fall by the wayside. It's just surprising that as Anne Groell has been more and more cagey in recent years about needing more books, D&D have remained very confident not only that they can wrap up the series in less than 80 episodes, but that there isn't enough story for more than 80 episodes. Is the remaining material really so bloated that there isn't more than 10-20 episodes' worth of story left after Season 6? Have D&D made so many adaptation changes eliminating plotlines that there isn't all that much left to adapt? Bit of both?

I think it does mainly come down to D&D massively condensing GRRM's story.  They were talking circa Season 4 of that being the most disparate the show's storylines would get, a promise they mostly fulfilled, at the same time GRRM's story was mushrooming.  No Aegon/Arianne is the most obvious change, but, e.g., Euron in the show appears at this point to be a mundane dude who'll be providing transportation rather than the books' insane sorcerer-pirate king with an apocalyptic agenda; there's a whole plot involving the maesters, Faceless Men, etc. that looks set to be majorly streamlined if not outright removed, depending on what exactly Sam is going to Oldtown for in the show; the show pretty much skipped over Sansa's mentorship by Littlefinger in favour of dumping her into the deep end of the pool almost immediately and flipping her player skills on and off as they feel like it; ADWD is setting up a whole bunch of KL intrigues that the show has bypassed; the whole Daenerys plot looks like she is literally going to remake the whole Essosi economic system, in a way that the show is probably only going to echo cursorily; and the apparent omission of Stoneheart and the whole resultant Jaime/Brienne conflict.

[benteen]

Cutting down the travelogue and world-building definitely has to free up a lot of space but it's clear that they are jettisoning a number of GRRM plots and I'm absolutely fine with that.  D&D have done a good job cutting through a lot of GRRM's shit to set a clear end date.  I'll give them that.  It has further shown how bloated GRRM's stories have become.

I suspect Dany's Dothraki storyline will be much bigger in the books and GRRM's comments back this up (the Dothraki will be back in a big way, Dany and Tyrion won't meet for quite a while, etc.)

I'm very happy we'll be doing an end game although with how pleased I am in regards to Season 6 so far, I wouldn't mind a few more than 13 episodes for the final two seasons.

It's interesting about them doing 7 episodes in Season 7 and 6 in Season 8 if it stays that way (I'm sure HBO will try to convince them otherwise).  I remember many years again HBO announcing that a season of Sex and the City would only be 8 episodes long due to Sarah Jessica Parker's pregnancy that year.  Around that time, Emmy rules changed saying a show only had to do 8 episodes to qualify for the Best Comedy or Best Drama category.  So technically, a GOT show of less than 8 episodes would be considered Emmy-wise to be a mini-series instead of a regular series.  Unless the rules have changed in the past couple of years.

[Eyes High]

2 hours ago, benteen said:

It's interesting about them doing 7 episodes in Season 7 and 6 in Season 8 if it stays that way (I'm sure HBO will try to convince them otherwise). 

I think the die is cast for Season 7 in terms of the episode number. The episodes will be mostly written by now. If HBO tried to convince them to do another 10 episodes for Season 7, they failed. It seems like the compromise that's shaping up is that HBO gets their eight seasons, but D&D get shortened seasons. Your point about the Emmy rules is an interesting one, though.

Edited June 3, 2016 by Eyes High

[stillshimpy]

Also, it's definitely a testament to the absolute lack of potential ships on this show if you've got people finding arguments why marrying your first cousin really isn't that bad over two characters who were last seen together when one of them was a child and was a bit pissy towards the other one.

I think it's also because of that "here, let me outline the plot of these three books" letter George Martin sent to his...agent? editor? I forget which....in which he addressed doing precisely that with the Stark kids in the form of Jon and Arya.  So I think that is part of the fixation on Jon and Sansa.  Plus, the actors are exceptionally pretty people and they've never actually shared familial scenes, so I think it's kind of easy to forget that they were raised in the same household as half-siblings.  That said?  Every other line out of either of their mouths pertains to their familiar connection.  "My brother's army"  etc.  

 

On the whole "historically, marrying blood relatives..." waxing and waning, etc.   So much of that came from the Catholic church, which was obsessed with all things they could deem sexually perverse.  These are the same giddy folks that brought us "Sex, only for procreation!"  "No birth control! It's against the Sky Guy's Rulebook!"  and my personal favorite "Masturbation?  That too is bad!  Very bad! Bad indeed.  Sure, nearly every person with nerve-endings will engage in this at some point, but really our main goal is exerting as much power over the populace as possible, so that's kind of the point....the more likely you might be to do it?  The worse it is!"   So the rulings of the "no fair having fun while having sex!" group aside for a moment, there's an awfully good reason that it is viewed quite dimly in modern times.  

Queen Victoria's marriage to her cousin ended up decimating many of the royal houses of Europe, was a key-player in the Russian Revolution and kneecapped several royal lines, because she had a shit-ton of daughters and they all had a deadly gene lurking in their DNA.  Thanks inbreeding! 

So the evidence of "why this is bad" was sort of easily recognized by many.  Even if it turns out to not be a given that it's genetically taboo, it has become societally taboo to the extent that...it seems awfully likely Martin would happily wade into it as part of his plot.  Besides, with the house structures, good look finding someone to marry who isn't rather closely related to you.  

As for what the show will do?  The Starks tend to be the good guys in this show and Jon's animating force tends to be angst, guilt and self-doubt.  

I can't decide if that makes a relationship with Sansa more or less likely, but I'm going to vote less likely because truly, this show and book series needs to plug the idea of plugging someone outside of your direct gene pool.  Good grief.  

 

Also, I assumed this thread would be wall-to-wall "What the hell are they doing with Jaime's characterization and storyline?" by now.  

Dude's set to run into Brienne at Riverrun, yo.  Don't give up on him yet. 

[SeanC]

2 hours ago, benteen said:

Unless the rules have changed in the past couple of years.

The minimum is six episodes according to current rules (page 47).

[benteen]

14 minutes ago, SeanC said:

The minimum is six episodes according to current rules (page 47).

Thank you for clearing that up.  So they can still submit as Best Drama.

[SeanC]

11 minutes ago, Hecate7 said:

Maybe they condensed Sansa's "mentorship" because she's not so much being mentored as duped again, and used, by Littlefinger in an even longer con.

They didn't do that, though, because they're now claiming Sansa is "pretty good" at playing the game and that she's had all these mentors, which they never really showed.

I haven't really been impressed with how the show has handled any of the Stark kids' training arcs.  With Sansa we're basically being asked to assume she learned to play the game between scenes, because the show never really bothered to dramatize any sort of growth arc; she was played as little more than a dunderhead all through her time in King's Landing and lost her major plot there,  suddenly had player skill in 408, which had vanished by the time we saw her next, and were absent the whole season, only to get switched on again in 604.

With Bran, when the writers explained the reasoning for skipping a season they argued very explicitly that training montages, etc. were boring and that we'd pick up with a much more advanced character, but when Bran actually returned he really hasn't shown much sign of having learned anything off-camera.  He didn't even know how to guide himself through the weirnet.  And then he abruptly gets the Three-Eyed Raven's memories or whatever downloaded into him, which is the most literal case of switch-flipping yet.

Arya has had the most textually faithful training arc, but there's minimal sense of skill progression.  Indeed, the one time I really felt like she was learning something was in 603 when we got a literal training montage, but the next time we see her it's back to the Waif kicking the shit out of her without much effort.  Virtually all of her training has involved seeing her get beaten with sticks or washing corpses. and the most notable development in Season 5, trying on one of the face masks, happened off-screen.  When you compare that with all the stuff she learned in the books (languages, poisons, acting, stealth, etc.), it's not all that impressive.

Quote

I think the show has combined Arianne and Ellaria.

There's really no overlap between Arianne and show!Ellaria, beyond that they were in conflict with Doran at some point.

Edited June 3, 2016 by SeanC

[Edith]

1 hour ago, SeanC said:

They didn't do that, though, because they're now claiming Sansa is "pretty good" at playing the game and that she's had all these mentors, which they never really showed.

I haven't really been impressed with how the show has handled any of the Stark kids' training arcs.  With Sansa we're basically being asked to assume she learned to play the game between scenes, because the show never really bothered to dramatize any sort of growth arc; she was played as little more than a dunderhead all through her time in King's Landing and lost her major plot there,  suddenly had player skill in 408, which had vanished by the time we saw her next, and were absent the whole season, only to get switched on again in 604.

With Bran, when the writers explained the reasoning for skipping a season they argued very explicitly that training montages, etc. were boring and that we'd pick up with a much more advanced character, but when Bran actually returned he really hasn't shown much sign of having learned anything off-camera.  He didn't even know how to guide himself through the weirnet.  And then he abruptly gets the Three-Eyed Raven's memories or whatever downloaded into him, which is the most literal case of switch-flipping yet.

Arya has had the most textually faithful training arc, but there's minimal sense of skill progression.  Indeed, the one time I really felt like she was learning something was in 603 when we got a literal training montage, but the next time we see her it's back to the Waif kicking the shit out of her without much effort.  Virtually all of her training has involved seeing her get beaten with sticks or washing corpses. and the most notable development in Season 5, trying on one of the face masks, happened off-screen.  When you compare that with all the stuff she learned in the books (languages, poisons, acting, stealth, etc.), it's not all that impressive.

About the Stark kids' and their mentors this season..

Bloodraven is dead, Arya is ditching the house of B&W, so I wonder what does it means for Littlefinger...

Look Tywin, who did a lot of awful things but it was what he did to Tysha, this low born daughter of a farmer (if I recall correctly), the cause for Tyrion to kill him. So what if this is also the reason for the fall of Littlefinger, not what he did to Ned, Cat, Etc but to Jeyne Poole. We know she's on her way to castle black and that eventually Jon and Sansa are going to be reunited in TWOW and he could tell her what happened to Jeyne. 

Now on the show Sansa is Jeyne. Different roads but with the same result at the end. Also it could be one of the reasons of why off all of the storylines in ADWD, it was so important to do this one.

[WindyNights]

By cutting Euron this extensively and leaving out Aegon, they're pretty much kicking out half of Act II and III.

It's like if we glued The Fellowship of the Ring to the last half of Return of the King.

No Theoden, Eowyn, Eomer, Grima, Saruman etc.

14 hours ago, benteen said:

Cutting down the travelogue and world-building definitely has to free up a lot of space but it's clear that they are jettisoning a number of GRRM plots and I'm absolutely fine with that.  D&D have done a good job cutting through a lot of GRRM's shit to set a clear end date.  I'll give them that.  It has further shown how bloated GRRM's stories have become.

I suspect Dany's Dothraki storyline will be much bigger in the books and GRRM's comments back this up (the Dothraki will be back in a big way, Dany and Tyrion won't meet for quite a while, etc.)

I'm very happy we'll be doing an end game although with how pleased I am in regards to Season 6 so far, I wouldn't mind a few more than 13 episodes for the final two seasons.

It's interesting about them doing 7 episodes in Season 7 and 6 in Season 8 if it stays that way (I'm sure HBO will try to convince them otherwise).  I remember many years again HBO announcing that a season of Sex and the City would only be 8 episodes long due to Sarah Jessica Parker's pregnancy that year.  Around that time, Emmy rules changed saying a show only had to do 8 episodes to qualify for the Best Comedy or Best Drama category.  So technically, a GOT show of less than 8 episodes would be considered Emmy-wise to be a mini-series instead of a regular series.  Unless the rules have changed in the past couple of years.

Some of these jettisoned plots affect the endgame immensely though like Euron unless Show Euron is pulling the wool over our eyes.

[jjjmoss]

The Emmy episode limit had to do with the tape system. It went down to 3 different tapes instead of 4 back in 2004, so the minimum for a series was set to 6 episodes. See: Mad Men Drama nominee with 7 episodes twice. Breaking Bad Drama Actor winner with 7 episodes. Extras Comedy Actor winner with 6 episodes.

But they just changed the rules so the tape system isn't really that applicable, and supposedly if a show previously established as a Series wants to cut down to 3-5 episodes to play dirty, they'll still be placed in Series. This could prevent things like The Big C stealing Elisabeth Moss's Emmy for Top of the Lake, or Treme finally getting a somewhat major nomination. 

As for that LOTR reference, I read the books a few years ago yet don't even remember most of the names mentioned. But I also didn't like my reading experience, so.

Edited June 4, 2016 by jjjmoss

[Chris24601]

12 hours ago, WindyNights said:

By cutting Euron this extensively and leaving out Aegon, they're pretty much kicking out half of Act II and III.

It's like if we glued The Fellowship of the Ring to the last half of Return of the King.

Or, its like leaving out Tom Bombadil out of the movies. Tolkien was a more focused writer than GRRM and put most of his world-building in the appendix or other books so the main narrative stayed on target. As such there wasn't nearly as much fluff that needed to be cut out.

How many chapters did GRRM spend telling us the story of Quentyn Martell, the guy whose only actual purpose in the main narrative was letting the dragons loose? Are you absolutely certain Aegon and Euron are another Jon, Dany or Tyrion and not just another Quentyn?

Because the showrunners know the ending and we don't and they've chosen to leave Aegon out entirely and greatly reduce the role of Euron.

If they knew that Aegon/Arrianne was just going to unseat Tommen and rule for a short time before Dany comes in and burns them alive then I could see why the showrunners would skip Aegon and Arrianne. Instead they just folded the role of king/queen beloved by the common people and in alliance with the Faith into Tommen and Margery. It saves screen time, avoids repetition (Tommen usurped by Aegon, Aegon usurped by Dany) and requires fewer actors to accomplish the same ends.

Frankly, I suspect that the showrunners probably could have distilled the narrative down even further than they did if they'd actually known the details of the ending from the start (I believe it wasn't until after season four was written that GRRM filled them in on all the endings), but I'd have to actually know the ending myself before I might be able to suggest how.

Here's one example though... they could have just removed Myrcella entirely and likely skipped the Dorne arc entirely for all the role they seem to be playing. They also probably could have written out Rickon, Shaggydog and Osha and had the Reeds show up in time to get Bran out of Winterfell when Theon took over. Gendry feels pretty skippable overall at this point too. They certainly could have skipped the Robb/Talasia arc (that wasn't even in the books) and the season four stalling leading up the Battle for the Wall.

Yeah, some of those are cool characters... but if the producers knew in season one how thin the story for Rickon, Shaggy and Osha was actually going to be I think they would have dropped them and spent more time developing Jojen and Meera instead and I think that would be a pretty solid adaptational choice to make.

[glowbug]

Completely agree about Rickon. Regardless of Rickon's importance or lack their of in the books the show certainly could have cut him. He serves zero purpose. He's been a non-entity since season one and his role now, which seems to be to motivate Jon to fight for Winterfell, is completely unnecessary. Jon has enough reason to go after Ramsay without Rickon. And it's not like we needed any more proof of how awful Ramsay is. 

Edited June 6, 2016 by glowbug

[Eyes High]

I have the impression that the only information D&D had for the first three seasons other than the books was GRRM telling them who winds up on the throne at the end. They only got the rest of the information about the endgame in the April 2013, i.e. when Season 4 was in the process of being written. By the time I assume they found out about Rickon, Myrcella, and possibly Gendry being narrative dead ends, it was too late. It wasn't too late, however, to do something about Aegon and Arianne.

I agree that if D&D had had the information from the get-go that GRRM gave them in the spring of 2013, the series would likely be very different. For all intents and purposes, though, for the first three seasons D&D, apart from knowing the endgame ruler, knew about as much as the readers did.

[Umbelina]

If the only real point of the Iron Islands story was ships for Dany, then I wish they'd cut the whole damn thing.  Honestly, a couple of scenes to establish they are there, then show up with the ships.

I hate the damn pirates so much.

I hope whichever one arrives with ships for Dany (and honestly, I don't give a damn who it is) should give her the salt wife crap, and Dani accepts the ships and then has Drogon burn them all to a crisp.  Since they've apparently dropped the horn?  Who cares?  It's nice to know that apparently that has no real importance.

[SeanC]

4 hours ago, Chris24601 said:

 They certainly could have skipped the Robb/Talasia arc (that wasn't even in the books) and the season four stalling leading up the Battle for the Wall.

I'm not sure I follow on Robb/Talisa.  That arc was the show's version of the initial downfall of House Stark, and the writers already knew how that ended when they started writing the series, seeing as it was over in the books.

[Umbelina]

I thought that whole thing made Robb look even more idiotic on the show than the books.  Both Robbs were beyond stupid, but honestly, show Robb was worse.  Also, in the book, the wife wasn't killed right?  So we had the red herring of a possible Robb baby out there.  I'm glad the show killed the wife too, rather than have another tangent out there, but still.  At least book Robb's motivations for wrecking everything were somewhat more believable than "I fell in lurrrvvve!"

[Chris24601]

My bet is that the April 2013 meeting probably did not have much of an effect on season four's writing. By the time you're into the writing of the actual scripts you've already broken the season down, assigned directors and other departments are working on hiring, props, locations and FX pre-production. The amount they'd have to scrap would have been cost prohibitive.

Setup and writing for season five is probably the first point where they'd really be able to fully use the info they'd gained and its when we really started to see a lot of characters skipping big chunks of their book material or having their stories altered significantly. For example they cut Tyrion's endless wandering right out because clearly their only actual purpose in GRRM's books was to be a giant stall on his joining up with Dany. They dropped Sansa's whole Vale arc and gave her Jeyne's story instead because I feel pretty safe saying that the Vale was just another narrative stall to keep Sansa from heading North to team up with Jon and retake Winterfell.

The one distressing thing for me in that regard is that they've left Arya mired in a story that extremely decompressed and meant to be a stall for all of season five and it looks like most of season six. This lack of movement even when everything else was accelerating suggests to me that there probably just ISN'T that much of Arya's story left to tell if they have to stretch out the content this much.

Since it seems she won't actually become a true Faceless Man and based on word that Sandor is returning here pretty soon, they probably could have just skipped the Faceless Man plot entirely and had Sandor never fight Brienne and keep on with Arya as his sidekick while he teaches her how to fight, while exacting vengeance on Lannisters and Freys and buying every chicken in the inn with the money looted from their corpses. Maybe had them both go back to the Brotherhood without Banners and have Arya take over Lady Stoneheart's role or something (except they left her out too because apparently she doesn't really accomplish that much either). At least two seasons of Arya and the Hound delivering vigilante justice in the Riverlands might have provided some black comedy relief from everything else that was going on in the narrative.

Arya has been off in own solo sideplot since the start of season two (and even most of season one was only peripherally connected to anyone but her fencing instructor). I hesitate to say it, but if her only role in the endgame ends up being killing some key players, then I'd be forced say that, if I'd been in charge and known that from the beginning I would have left her out of the adaptation right along with Rickon and Myrcella. It sucks saying that, but her story at this point may as well have been a spin-off series for all the relevance it has to the rest of the narrative... while Jon, Sansa, Bran, Dany and Tyrion are all pretty centrally involved.

Heck... at this point, freaking YARA (who's appeared in maybe a dozen episodes total) is more relevant to the main narratives than Arya is. For some reason I get the feeling that the only reason Walder Frey has been brought back is so Arya will have someone to kill this season... but if all she's going to be doing is killing off people half the audience had probably forgotten about then there really wasn't any point to the Braavos arc at all... two seasons of literally nothing.

1 minute ago, SeanC said:

I'm not sure I follow on Robb/Talisa.  That arc was the show's version of the initial downfall of House Stark, and the writers already knew how that ended when they started writing the series, seeing as it was over in the books.

The point was that they could have done the downfall without needing to do a season long romantic arc to set it up. This is one rare case where the book was more efficient. Have Robb get wounded, knock up a girl he barely knows while recuperating and marry her because his honor demanded it, executes Lord Karstark for killing the Lannister hostages, etc. and then the pissed off Walder Frey gives them the Red Wedding.

The point was that the story of Robb Stark and the downfall of the Starks could have probably been an entire season shorter (or had time to deal with other elements).

Actually, when you pull the stalling out of Jon's story (between end of season three and the Battle of the Wall at the end of season four), Dany's story (a big chunk of Mereen and Quarth), Robb's story, Arya's story, Bran's story (his being missing an entire season), Jaime's story (the divergence to Dorne) and so forth you could have probably chopped an entire season off the show and lost nothing of any importance to the narrative.

But they weren't able to do that because GRRM didn't share the ending with D&D prior to 2013. Which is why someday, say 20 years from now, I'd love to see someone do another serial version of ASoIF where it is known from the start how the series is going to end... just to see the adaptation choices if nothing else.

[Umbelina]

I hope Arya's training with the Faceless men is about a lot more than simply how to kill people, or change appearance (although that could be a really useful thing!)  I would have been bummed if they didn't include it, but yes, it stalled, I think in part because the entire series of books have stalled.  In a way I think HBO and D&D really were, at least hoping, that GRRM would publish WoW by the time they were writing the episodes, they stalled the show a bit to give him a bit more time/impetus.  Pointless but a kind gesture.

I can even buy Sansa being given to Ramsay, but only if I really squint and block my ears.  I'd love to think it was to fast forward her more knowing edge, instead of just to add more torture and rape scenes, because obviously someone loved the detailed Theon/Reek torture, not just in the books, but on the show.

They are honing in on what is relevant in the bloated floundering books though, so applause for that.

[SeanC]

16 minutes ago, Chris24601 said:

Setup and writing for season five is probably the first point where they'd really be able to fully use the info they'd gained and its when we really started to see a lot of characters skipping big chunks of their book material or having their stories altered significantly. For example they cut Tyrion's endless wandering right out because clearly their only actual purpose in GRRM's books was to be a giant stall on his joining up with Dany.

Much of what they cut from Tyrion's arc was setting up Aegon VI; the rest was all about his darker turn in personality, which the show didn't want anything to do with.

Quote

They dropped Sansa's whole Vale arc and gave her Jeyne's story instead because I feel pretty safe saying that the Vale was just another narrative stall to keep Sansa from heading North to team up with Jon and retake Winterfell.

I...rather doubt it.  Sansa's time in the Vale has been set up as a place for her to learn to play the game of thrones, with its own factions, etc. for her to navigate.  I'm sure she will go north eventually, but it would require considerable rushing to put her in the Northern story in time to have a role in the stuff with the Boltons.  If that were the point, we'd have seen much more development in AFFC.

Quote

The one distressing thing for me in that regard is that they've left Arya mired in a story that extremely decompressed and meant to be a stall for all of season five and it looks like most of season six. This lack of movement even when everything else was accelerating suggests to me that there probably just ISN'T that much of Arya's story left to tell if they have to stretch out the content this much.

Since it seems she won't actually become a true Faceless Man and based on word that Sandor is returning here pretty soon, they probably could have just skipped the Faceless Man plot entirely and had Sandor never fight Brienne and keep on with Arya as his sidekick while he teaches her how to fight, while exacting vengeance on Lannisters and Freys and buying every chicken in the inn with the money looted from their corpses. Maybe had them both go back to the Brotherhood without Banners and have Arya take over Lady Stoneheart's role or something (except they left her out too because apparently she doesn't really accomplish that much either). At least two seasons of Arya and the Hound delivering vigilante justice in the Riverlands might have provided some black comedy relief from everything else that was going on in the narrative.

Arya has been off in own solo sideplot since the start of season two (and even most of season one was only peripherally connected to anyone but her fencing instructor). I hesitate to say it, but if her only role in the endgame ends up being killing some key players, then I'd be forced say that, if I'd been in charge and known that from the beginning I would have left her out of the adaptation right along with Rickon and Myrcella.

Arya's one of the original five main characters.  She's clearly vital to the final conflict with the White Walkers, and her learning magical stuff, etc. is part of that, one assumes.  I don't think the writers did a great job with Braavos, but that's another matter.

Hell, the mere fact that they kept her separate story when her siblings either got temporarily dropped from the series or merged into other plotlines shows the importance the writers place on it.

Quote

The point was that they could have done the downfall without needing to do a season long romantic arc to set it up. This is one rare case where the book was more efficient. Have Robb get wounded, knock up a girl he barely knows while recuperating and marry her because his honor demanded it, executes Lord Karstark for killing the Lannister hostages, etc. and then the pissed off Walder Frey gives them the Red Wedding.

The point was that the story of Robb Stark and the downfall of the Starks could have probably been an entire season shorter (or had time to deal with other elements).

But again, the writers already knew how Robb's story ended when they started writing the series.  They replaced Jeyne Westerling with Talisa and turned into a story about twu wuv because they felt it would make the Red Wedding more tragic.  And I really don't see how the downfall of the Starks could have been shortened by a season.  Season 2 is about the Lannisters threading the needle to survive near extinction, and Robb blundering; Season 3 is the fallout.  The pacing of the story is important to the pacing of all the other stories, as well.

Edited June 4, 2016 by SeanC

[nksarmi]

I really wish they could have cut Rickon from the start. One of the biggest things that bugged me about Caitlyn hanging out with Robb and playing war was that there was this very little boy in Winterfell who was being completely and utterly neglected. As a mother, it bugged the shit out of me that Caitlyn was sticking around to try to advise her oldest son who had plenty of people to help and guide him and was not only a man grown on the show but also a king. And frankly, I think he had better instincts than his mother. A few examples:

1. If he had treated with Frey himself rather than letting Caitlyn do it - a) he might have meet the one pretty daughter and been more committed to her and b) taken his vow more seriously because he made it himself and c) almost certainly would have gotten more respect from Frey who seemed insulted that the boy sent his mother to do his talking for him.

2. I could be miss-remembering, but I think he was prepared to back Stannis but his mother told him to support Renley instead. Ned backed Stannis and Robb didn't call his banners to be "King of the North" - he called his banners to save his father and rescue his sisters. A treaty between Stannis and Robb could have changed everything for the better.

3. If Caitlyn hadn't been there to release Jamie (which did Sansa ZERO good really) then Robb wouldn't have lost the Kastarks.

And this all says nothing for the fact that if Caitlyn had been in Winterfell to take care of Rickon and see how Bran once she heard he woke up (and again, not even her father's death should have rated higher than that in my opinion) - then perhaps Theon doesn't try to take the castle. So I really hated Caitlyn in both the show and the books. If Rickon hadn't been there and they had aged Bran up a bit, some of my ill feelings toward her would have lessoned. Now I really, really wish the show had cut the kid.

Regarding Ayra - I would have LOVED the Ayra/Hound show to go on for a couple of more seasons, especially when compared to the FM plot in Braavos. But honestly, I have hated every plot that took a character away from Westerous or prevented a character from getting there. Even Tyrion's story bores the hell out of me in book five and he was one of my favorite characters before that. I think the show has stretched her story out because they didn't want to give her a year off like they did Bran. I honestly think - or rather hope - that she has story still to tell but they had to wait until the rest of the story caught up to tell it.

[nksarmi]

7 minutes ago, Umbelina said:

I hope Arya's training with the Faceless men is about a lot more than simply how to kill people, or change appearance (although that could be a really useful thing!)  I would have been bummed if they didn't include it, but yes, it stalled, I think in part because the entire series of books have stalled.  In a way I think HBO and D&D really were, at least hoping, that GRRM would publish WoW by the time they were writing the episodes, they stalled the show a bit to give him a bit more time/impetus.  Pointless but a kind gesture.

I can even buy Sansa being given to Ramsay, but only if I really squint and block my ears.  I'd love to think it was to fast forward her more knowing edge, instead of just to add more torture and rape scenes, because obviously someone loved the detailed Theon/Reek torture, not just in the books, but on the show.

They are honing in on what is relevant in the bloated floundering books though, so applause for that.

I have a feeling that the Theon/Reek stuff was done for two reasons - first, that they had to show Theon truly break to rebuild him if he's going to be important in the books and second, that Alfie just acted the hell out of it so it became enjoyable to write for that. I imagine it's always enjoyable to write material that actors just kill.

In regards to Sansa being given the Jeyne Poole story - I actually liked it in theory. But that's because I thought we were going to get a better version of the North Remembers. If Sansa had been shown building alliances behind Ramsey's back and planting seeds that she would harvest this season - I think I would have been ok with the "what he did to me" part. I just think they skimped a little on casting to have done that story. In fact, for all it came to - I would have preferred they eliminate Dorne altogether (or abbreviated it even further) and just given me a good Northern story with Sansa.

[SeanC]

5 minutes ago, nksarmi said:

I really wish they could have cut Rickon from the start. One of the biggest things that bugged me about Caitlyn hanging out with Robb and playing war was that there was this very little boy in Winterfell who was being completely and utterly neglected. As a mother, it bugged the shit out of me that Caitlyn was sticking around to try to advise her oldest son who had plenty of people to help and guide him and was not only a man grown on the show but also a king.

Bran and Rickon were safe in Winterfell, as far as she knew.  The whole fate of their family, and her daughters, was riding on the outcome of the war in the South.

Quote

1. If he had treated with Frey himself rather than letting Caitlyn do it - a) he might have meet the one pretty daughter and been more committed to her and b) taken his vow more seriously because he made it himself and c) almost certainly would have gotten more respect from Frey who seemed insulted that the boy sent his mother to do his talking for him.

He couldn't meet with Frey himself because he would be at risk of capture.  Everyone agreed on that; that's why Catelyn was sent in.  If not her, it would have been some other emissary.  And Frey was a sour old man; he would have been disrespectful to anyone.

Quote

2. I could be miss-remembering, but I think he was prepared to back Stannis but his mother told him to support Renley instead. Ned backed Stannis and Robb didn't call his banners to be "King of the North" - he called his banners to save his father and rescue his sisters. A treaty between Stannis and Robb could have changed everything for the better.

No, that didn't happen.  Robb refused to back Stannis or Renly because Joffrey was ahead of them, and was (as far as they knew at that time) legitimate.  Indeed, it was Catelyn who suggested the mission she went on in ACOK to try to strike a deal with Renly.

Quote

And this all says nothing for the fact that if Caitlyn had been in Winterfell to take care of Rickon and see how Bran once she heard he woke up (and again, not even her father's death should have rated higher than that in my opinion) - then perhaps Theon doesn't try to take the castle. 

Why would that impact Theon?  You could just as easily say that if Robb had listened to Catelyn's advice not to send Theon to the Iron Islands, Theon taking the castle wouldn't have happened.

Edited June 4, 2016 by SeanC

[nksarmi]

1 minute ago, SeanC said:

Bran and Rickon were safe in Winterfell, as far as she knew.  The whole fate of their family, and her daughters, was riding on the outcome of the war in the South.

He couldn't meet with Frey himself because he would be at risk of capture.  Everyone agreed on that; that's why Catelyn was sent in.  If not her, it would have been some other emissary.  And Frey was a sour old man; he would have been disrespectful to anyone.

No, that didn't happen.  Robb refused to back Stannis or Renly because Joffrey was ahead of them, and was (as far as they knew at that time) legitimate.  Indeed, it was Catelyn who suggested the mission she went on in ACOK to try to strike a deal with Renly.

Why would that impact Theon?  You could just as easily say that if Robb had listened to Catelyn's advice not to send Theon to the Iron Islands, Theon taking the castle wouldn't have happened.

Bran was not safe. Caitlyn's entire plot with Tyrion was because someone tried to kill Bran. Once Robb was no longer there looking out for him, he was in danger. As a mother, I would have feared for my daughters but understood they were valuable hostages - I would have needed to be with my younger sons, especially when someone had tried to murder one of them twice.

If Robb was concerned about being captured by Frey - he should have given up on his efforts then and there. You don't negotiate from a point of weakness and Robb not meeting him directly made him look weak. I thought that in the show and in the books.

I admit I could have been miss-remembering. I honestly thought they knew by that point that Ned had declared Joffrey illegitimate and backed Stannis. I have never understood why Robb didn't support Stannis - he never wanted to be king and Stannis did.

It would have impacted Theon because Theon, much like Bolton and Frey, seemed like men who looked for easy targets. Theon knew that Winterfell was being ruled by a cripple boy. I think Theon might have thought twice if he knew he would have to face off with Caitlyn to achieve his ends. Just like I don't think Frey or Bolton would have tried to betray Robb just for promises from Tywin. Robb had to be weak first. Robb had to lose Winterfell and the Kastarks before men like Frey or Bolton would stab him in the back.

[SeanC]

8 minutes ago, nksarmi said:

Bran was not safe. Caitlyn's entire plot with Tyrion was because someone tried to kill Bran. Once Robb was no longer there looking out for him, he was in danger. As a mother, I would have feared for my daughters but understood they were valuable hostages - I would have needed to be with my younger sons, especially when someone had tried to murder one of them twice.

The boys were in Winterfell with hundreds of guards.  If there was any threat to them from infiltrators (and there was no reason to think such a threat existed anymore anyway), Catelyn's presence would not have mattered.  Trying to get the girls back by winning the war or else negotiating a resolution is an entirely understandable priority #1.

Quote

If Robb was concerned about being captured by Frey - he should have given up on his efforts then and there. You don't negotiate from a point of weakness and Robb not meeting him directly made him look weak. I thought that in the show and in the books.

They were in a place of weakness.  That underpinned the whole negotiation.  Frey had all the cards -- Catelyn's sole objective was to convince him to go against his own self-interest, which he did, by siding with the Starks at a time when the odds were against them.  If Robb had gone in himself Frey could just have seized him and held him prisoner until Tywin showed up.

Quote

It would have impacted Theon because Theon, much like Bolton and Frey, seemed like men who looked for easy targets. Theon knew that Winterfell was being ruled by a cripple boy. I think Theon might have thought twice if he knew he would have to face off with Caitlyn to achieve his ends.

I don't see that Theon would have considered a woman much more formidable than a boy; and in any event, Rodrik Cassel and Luwin were running Winterfell, which he knew.

Edited June 5, 2016 by SeanC

[jjjmoss]

I personally didn't care for the Arya/Hound stuff. Perhaps because I find the Hound mostly irrelevant.

Last time I was into Arya's story on the show was the show-only Tywin interactions. Some people hated them, but I found it delightful and a good screen pairing of talented actors.

[benteen]

Quote

Regarding Ayra - I would have LOVED the Ayra/Hound show to go on for a couple of more seasons, especially when compared to the FM plot in Braavos. But honestly, I have hated every plot that took a character away from Westerous or prevented a character from getting there. Even Tyrion's story bores the hell out of me in book five and he was one of my favorite characters before that. I think the show has stretched her story out because they didn't want to give her a year off like they did Bran. I honestly think - or rather hope - that she has story still to tell but they had to wait until the rest of the story caught up to tell it.

I wasn't a fan of Arya's book storyline in Braavos (I read an interview with GRRM where he said he loved it and could write about it all day so to be speak).  But since they didn't commit to it on the show, it feels even more useless.

Agreed about Tyrion.  King's Landing is where the character is at his best and at his most interesting.  His character and storyline has suffered since he's been Essos.  I will say however that Show Tyrion and Jorah is much better than their book counterparts interaction and that we at least got Tyrion and Dany on the show.  Those have been the bright spots of Tyrion in Essos on the show.

[Hecate7]

5 hours ago, nksarmi said:

I really wish they could have cut Rickon from the start. One of the biggest things that bugged me about Caitlyn hanging out with Robb and playing war was that there was this very little boy in Winterfell who was being completely and utterly neglected. As a mother, it bugged the shit out of me that Caitlyn was sticking around to try to advise her oldest son who had plenty of people to help and guide him and was not only a man grown on the show but also a king. And frankly, I think he had better instincts than his mother. A few examples:

1. If he had treated with Frey himself rather than letting Caitlyn do it - a) he might have meet the one pretty daughter and been more committed to her and b) taken his vow more seriously because he made it himself and c) almost certainly would have gotten more respect from Frey who seemed insulted that the boy sent his mother to do his talking for him.

2. I could be miss-remembering, but I think he was prepared to back Stannis but his mother told him to support Renley instead. Ned backed Stannis and Robb didn't call his banners to be "King of the North" - he called his banners to save his father and rescue his sisters. A treaty between Stannis and Robb could have changed everything for the better.

3. If Caitlyn hadn't been there to release Jamie (which did Sansa ZERO good really) then Robb wouldn't have lost the Kastarks.

And this all says nothing for the fact that if Caitlyn had been in Winterfell to take care of Rickon and see how Bran once she heard he woke up (and again, not even her father's death should have rated higher than that in my opinion) - then perhaps Theon doesn't try to take the castle. So I really hated Caitlyn in both the show and the books. If Rickon hadn't been there and they had aged Bran up a bit, some of my ill feelings toward her would have lessoned. Now I really, really wish the show had cut the kid.

Regarding Ayra - I would have LOVED the Ayra/Hound show to go on for a couple of more seasons, especially when compared to the FM plot in Braavos. But honestly, I have hated every plot that took a character away from Westerous or prevented a character from getting there. Even Tyrion's story bores the hell out of me in book five and he was one of my favorite characters before that. I think the show has stretched her story out because they didn't want to give her a year off like they did Bran. I honestly think - or rather hope - that she has story still to tell but they had to wait until the rest of the story caught up to tell it.

But everything you've described is probably the whole point of Rickon. That, plus getting our hopes up that Rickon would come riding in on a ferocious giant direwolf and dispense Stark justice (which I never believed, possibly because I had the examples of Lyssa and Cat for how families live up to their words).

[FemmyV]

Re: Jon & Arya v Jon & Sansa, for me, this is what it always comes down to:

Over on Westeros, was a most interesting spec: what happens when/if Ghost & Nymeria mate? The show has played down Jon & Arya's warging abilities, but it's highly doubtful GRRM will let the opportunity slide by without having Jon /Arya getting it on mentally while their wolves are having at each other, physically. 

Edited June 5, 2016 by FemmyV

[Minneapple]

On June 3, 2016 at 0:37 PM, stillshimpy said:

Also, I assumed this thread would be wall-to-wall "What the hell are they doing with Jaime's characterization and storyline?" by now.  

Dude's set to run into Brienne at Riverrun, yo.  Don't give up on him yet. 

There's only so many ways to say "Show Jaime sucks." Sigh. Maybe the Blackfish will make him more interesting than Cersei has this season.

[Maximum Taco]

11 hours ago, Hecate7 said:

But everything you've described is probably the whole point of Rickon. That, plus getting our hopes up that Rickon would come riding in on a ferocious giant direwolf and dispense Stark justice (which I never believed, possibly because I had the examples of Lyssa and Cat for how families live up to their words).

Don't forget his army of "Cabin in the Woods" style killer unicorns.

I was really hoping for that. Way to let me down Game of Thrones.

Edited June 5, 2016 by Maximum Taco

[benteen]

As ridiculous as Sam stealing Heartsbane is, I'm rooting for Tormund to be given it.  Tormund will have a Valyrian steel sword and Brienne will have one.  Tormund seems like the right guy to have a sword like that in the war against the White Walkers.

[nksarmi]

10 hours ago, Hecate7 said:

But everything you've described is probably the whole point of Rickon. That, plus getting our hopes up that Rickon would come riding in on a ferocious giant direwolf and dispense Stark justice (which I never believed, possibly because I had the examples of Lyssa and Cat for how families live up to their words).

Oh see I kind of hoped that not having children himself, Martin just didn't understand the way Caitlyn's mind would probably have been working in all of this. First, I found it unbelievable that she would leave Bran to go see Ned in the capital to begin with. I sure as hell wouldn't have (though I freely admit I wouldn't have encouraged Ned to take the position and I would have been very hesitant about sending my daughters away - I think in Caitlyn's shoes the only one I would have been persuaded to allow to leave would have been Sansa). I would have sent a sealed letter in the hands of someone I truly trusted, but I wouldn't have left Bran or Rickon to begin with.

Of course, if Caitlyn had behaved the way I would have - the story collapses in on itself. And I think that's half the reason I dislike Caitlyn so much - because I feel like Martin had to write her contrary to what made sense to move the plot along. It's like, "I need to someone to do x so I can make y happen - oh I know, Cat will do it!" Then, "Ok now I need someone to do a so b can happen. Well why not Caitlyn!" I'd feel sorry for her if I didn't truly hate her character.

[Maximum Taco]

19 minutes ago, nksarmi said:

Oh see I kind of hoped that not having children himself, Martin just didn't understand the way Caitlyn's mind would probably have been working in all of this. First, I found it unbelievable that she would leave Bran to go see Ned in the capital to begin with. I sure as hell wouldn't have (though I freely admit I wouldn't have encouraged Ned to take the position and I would have been very hesitant about sending my daughters away - I think in Caitlyn's shoes the only one I would have been persuaded to allow to leave would have been Sansa). I would have sent a sealed letter in the hands of someone I truly trusted, but I wouldn't have left Bran or Rickon to begin with.

Of course, if Caitlyn had behaved the way I would have - the story collapses in on itself. And I think that's half the reason I dislike Caitlyn so much - because I feel like Martin had to write her contrary to what made sense to move the plot along. It's like, "I need to someone to do x so I can make y happen - oh I know, Cat will do it!" Then, "Ok now I need someone to do a so b can happen. Well why not Caitlyn!" I'd feel sorry for her if I didn't truly hate her character.

I feel the same way about other people though.

Why did Ned trust Littlefinger when explicitly told not to? I think a lot of us would've done things much differently.

Why did Robb feel the need to keep his true purpose from Edmure Tully? If I was him I'd be forthcoming to my subordinates.

Sometimes Game of Thrones feels like a horror movie. "Don't do that! Why the hell are you going in there!? Get out of the fucking castle you dumbass!"

[benteen]

Robb concealing his plan from Edmure was enraging.  I get that he doesn’t have a high opinion of him but like it or not, Edmure is his most important bannerman as the future Lord of the Riverlands.  Maybe, maybe if he had explained his plan, Edmure would have obeyed his orders.

Though I do believe Edmure was itching for a fight with Tywin’s forces because he was embarrassed at having been beaten and taken prisoner during his first campaign.

Edited June 5, 2016 by benteen

[nksarmi]

1 hour ago, Maximum Taco said:

I feel the same way about other people though.

Why did Ned trust Littlefinger when explicitly told not to? I think a lot of us would've done things much differently.

Why did Robb feel the need to keep his true purpose from Edmure Tully? If I was him I'd be forthcoming to my subordinates.

Sometimes Game of Thrones feels like a horror movie. "Don't do that! Why the hell are you going in there!? Get out of the fucking castle you dumbass!"

LMAO!!!! So very true!

[nksarmi]

Well I must admit there is this moment with Robb where I kind of lost all understanding of what he was trying to do. I mean, I totally understood it when he called the banners to go save his father and presumably his sisters. However, after Ned's death - I'm just not sure I understood it all anymore. Ned dies and Robb is crowned King of the North and King of the Trident. But other than to advance turmoil in the story - why?

So I suppose at this point, Robb's story becomes all about being King rather than saving his sisters or defending the Riverlands. I guess that is why he doesn't feel like he can release Jamie to save Sansa and Arya and why Caitlyn has to betray him. I also can only guess that Robb's betrayal of Frey is why he doesn't immediately turn North and retake Winterfell when he hears what Theon has done. But all of this nonsense is dependent on Robb's failure to save his father turning into a desire to be and remain a King.

At some point - I don't know exactly when - it becomes known that Ned declared Joffrey illegitimate and Stannis as rightful heir. I don't understand why Robb doesn't back Stannis' claim rather than getting himself stuck in the Riverlands while losing all of his advantages. If Robb doesn't decide he should be a king, then he can barter Jamie not only for his sisters, but also for peace. And Robb's desire to be king seems to come from nowhere. It's almost as illogical and breaking a marriage treaty with the person who controls the path back to your ancestral home and seat of power - even if you feel you did dishonor a young maiden. Holy crap - marry her off to one of your highest ranking bannerman and keep your word!

I think we are suppose to write off some of the really poor decision making of the Starks as "character flaws" but crap, I think Martin could have written some of their motivations a little better as well. It would have been nice if Ned was outmaneuvered rather than just outwitted (dim), if Caitlyn wasn't rash (acted without thinking) but still managed to make mistakes, or if Robb reasons for being a King (youthful arrogance) and separating the kingdoms just made a little bit more sense.

[SeanC]

55 minutes ago, nksarmi said:

Well I must admit there is this moment with Robb where I kind of lost all understanding of what he was trying to do. I mean, I totally understood it when he called the banners to go save his father and presumably his sisters. However, after Ned's death - I'm just not sure I understood it all anymore. Ned dies and Robb is crowned King of the North and King of the Trident. But other than to advance turmoil in the story - why?

So I suppose at this point, Robb's story becomes all about being King rather than saving his sisters or defending the Riverlands. I guess that is why he doesn't feel like he can release Jamie to save Sansa and Arya and why Caitlyn has to betray him. I also can only guess that Robb's betrayal of Frey is why he doesn't immediately turn North and retake Winterfell when he hears what Theon has done. But all of this nonsense is dependent on Robb's failure to save his father turning into a desire to be and remain a King.

At some point - I don't know exactly when - it becomes known that Ned declared Joffrey illegitimate and Stannis as rightful heir. I don't understand why Robb doesn't back Stannis' claim rather than getting himself stuck in the Riverlands while losing all of his advantages. If Robb doesn't decide he should be a king, then he can barter Jamie not only for his sisters, but also for peace. And Robb's desire to be king seems to come from nowhere. It's almost as illogical and breaking a marriage treaty with the person who controls the path back to your ancestral home and seat of power - even if you feel you did dishonor a young maiden. Holy crap - marry her off to one of your highest ranking bannerman and keep your word!

I think we are suppose to write off some of the really poor decision making of the Starks as "character flaws" but crap, I think Martin could have written some of their motivations a little better as well. It would have been nice if Ned was outmaneuvered rather than just outwitted (dim), if Caitlyn wasn't rash (acted without thinking) but still managed to make mistakes, or if Robb reasons for being a King (youthful arrogance) and separating the kingdoms just made a little bit more sense.

Robb didn't particularly want to be king.  He was crowned king because the outbreak of the civil war necessitated a political solution, and once his lords had declared him king, he couldn't refuse.  From that point on he was king, he had the duty to protect his whole kingdom.  Stannis didn't declare all the incest stuff until after Robb had begun his Westerlands campaign, and by the time he returned, Stannis had been defeated at the Blackwater.

It's possible that, had Stannis won at the Blackwater, Robb would have reached an accommodation with him (indeed, Robb's strategy evolved into trying to help him win by trapping Tywin so that he couldn't rescue the city).  But that moment passed.

[Winnief]

I'm inclined to agree with the speculation that finally learning Martin's end game began to radically affect the changes D&D made starting with Season 5.  The fact that it didn't change Arya's story I think may have had less to do with the FM being such an important plot point but sadly because of Martin's fondness for that storyline and because D&D couldn't resist the screen possibilities of assassination training in Braavos.

 

For what its worth I also suspect Martins original plan was to have Jon eventually marry Arya but as the story evolved with Arya's increasing violence and without the five year gap h originally counted on he decided to transfer that role to Sansa

[Advance35]

Quote

I'm inclined to agree with the speculation that finally learning Martin's end game began to radically affect the changes D&D made starting with Season 5.  The fact that it didn't change Arya's story I think may have had less to do with the FM being such an important plot point but sadly because of Martin's fondness for that storyline and because D&D couldn't resist the screen possibilities of assassination training in Braavos.

I also think this is why Jaimie's storyline has been so drastically altered.  I question whether he will ever truly redeem himself for all he's done.  I speculate their will come a moment and when that moment comes (IF GRRM ever gets to it) a lot of Jaimie fans may be disappointed in the choice he makes.

As for Sansa, It's still a coin flip for me on whether she survives all that's coming.  I don't think she's going to reinvent the wheel and for some reason I don't see her ending up with the Hound as has been speculated repeatedly.   I do think Jon and Sansa have a surprisingly nice chemistry together.  I'm hoping we get a few more scenes with them before they start reuniting and allying with other characters.   

[Eyes High]

1 hour ago, Winnief said:

I'm inclined to agree with the speculation that finally learning Martin's end game began to radically affect the changes D&D made starting with Season 5. 

I disagree. The two biggest changes in Season 5, Jaime in Dorne and Sansa in Book Jeyne's place, were explained by D&D as having been decided upon for different reasons. Jaime in Dorne, and the Dorne storyline making it to the show in general (outside of Oberyn and Ellaria in Season 4), was Bryan Cogman's idea. D&D had wanted to scrap it and Cogman convinced them to keep it in (presumably in 2014 when they were plotting Season 5). Similarly, D&D decided to put Sansa in Book Jeyne's place back around Season 2 (written 2011, aired 2012). In light of the big GRRM endgame infodump occurring in the spring of 2013, i.e. when Season 4 was being written, this leads to some interesting inferences:

1. Dorne: D&D were planning on scrapping Dorne in 2014, i.e. after the spring 2013 infodump, until Cogman persuaded them otherwise. Whatever GRRM told them about future plot points, they were still going to go ahead and scrap Dorne until Cogman changed their minds.

2. Sansa: D&D were planning on putting Sansa in Book Jeyne's place--and by extension scrapping Sansa's Vale arc--as early as Season 2. This was when the only information they had about the endgame was the endgame ruler. That means that as early as Season 2 D&D were planning on dispensing with Sansa's big AFFC/ADWD character arc, before they even knew how important it would be or where it might lead (since GRRM hadn't yet given them that information). This would seem to rule Sansa out as endgame queen (either queen consort or queen regnant), since D&D have known the endgame occupant(s) of the Iron Throne from very early on, and I doubt D&D would have been so cavalier about switching out a major arc of an endgame monarch--without even knowing its significance or importance in the grand scheme of things--if Sansa were that person. Like a lot of instances where the show "spoils" the books (Hound living, Jon being resurrected, etc.), this isn't a big surprise, but it is noteworthy, especially with the Jon/Sansa king/queen scenarios flying fast and furious as Season 6 is airing.

Quote

As for Sansa, It's still a coin flip for me on whether she survives all that's coming.

I think the fact that she's still married to Tyrion in the books is not good. An annulment would be fine and would resolve things neatly, but when in ASOIAF has anything ever been neat? I have a strong suspicion that the only way out of that marriage in the books is if one of them dies, and if one of them must die, I have no doubt it will be Sansa and not Tyrion who goes.

Even though the show explained Sansa's marriage as automatically voided by non-consummation to facilitate the Ramsay marriage, TV Sansa's marital status remains sufficiently murky--there is dialogue in 6x07 about Lyanna Mormont having heard "conflicting reports" about whether Sansa was a Bolton or a Lannister, and Sophie Turner when asked about whether Sansa is still married to Tyrion in a recent interview pretty much said "LOL who even knows"--suggests to me that the same will happen in the show. If it's murky, the only way to clear things up (once Ramsay dies) is for Tyrion to predecease Sansa for good and all, and I believe there is virtually no chance that that will happen. If one of them dies, it will be Sansa, not Tyrion.

Edited June 6, 2016 by Eyes High

[nksarmi]

43 minutes ago, Advance35 said:

I also think this is why Jaimie's storyline has been so drastically altered.  I question whether he will ever truly redeem himself for all he's done.  I speculate their will come a moment and when that moment comes (IF GRRM ever gets to it) a lot of Jaimie fans may be disappointed in the choice he makes.

As for Sansa, It's still a coin flip for me on whether she survives all that's coming.  I don't think she's going to reinvent the wheel and for some reason I don't see her ending up with the Hound as has been speculated repeatedly.   I do think Jon and Sansa have a surprisingly nice chemistry together.  I'm hoping we get a few more scenes with them before they start reuniting and allying with other characters.   

At this point, I don't think it's about rather or not Jamie will redeem himself. I suspect he and Brienne could have a break coming in the next book that mirrors the preview we just saw for the next episode. But more than that - I think Jamie IS the one that will kill Cersei (fantastic arguements for it being Tommen aside) and because the show runners know that is coming - they are keeping them tight to heighten the shock of it all. That's why the second half of the prophesy hasn't even made it into the show yet. This way, Jamie ultimately killing Cersei won't be able her cheating on him or him switching loyalty - but it will about whatever happens in that moment to drive Jamie to that choice.