Season 8: Speculation and Spoilers Discussion

[Wouter]

An audio recording of the infamous statue statement has turned up: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0YBXhvzHxYI (from around 8:40)

Turner starts her statement by "we did this promo...", suggesting the statue-like thing is promotional in nature, maybe like the faces from a couple of seasons ago.

[SimoneS]

1 hour ago, Wouter said:

An audio recording of the infamous statue statement has turned up: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0YBXhvzHxYI (from around 8:40)

Turner starts her statement by "we did this promo...", suggesting the statue-like thing is promotional in nature, maybe like the faces from a couple of seasons ago.

So after all the insistence that any mention of a statue means that Sansa will die, it turns out that Sophie was referring to a statue from a season 8 promo. Oy!

Edited October 17, 2018 by SimoneS

[anamika]

19 minutes ago, SimoneS said:

So after all the insistence that any mention of a statue means that Sansa will die, it turns that Sophie was referring to a statue from a season 8 promo. Oy!

Blame the fan who completely left out the part where Sophie clearly says - we did this promo for season 8 and explains it - and made it seem like Sansa gets a statue at the end of the GOT. She was probably trying to hype Queen Sansa and lied about it. Sophie mentions nothing about likeness either. No wonder no media people mentioned it. Some folks were speculating that it could be for a hall of faces kind of promo.

Well, that's cleared up now.

Edited October 17, 2018 by anamika

[Clark Kent]

1 hour ago, SimoneS said:

So after all the insistence that any mention of a statue means that Sansa will die, it turns that Sophie was referring to a statue from a season 8 promo. Oy!

Oy, indeed!  At least now we know.  Maybe this most recent episode will encourage everyone to step back and take a deep breath when evaluating new information about next season, and to refrain from posting definitive statements based on hearsay.  We really need a surprise trailer to give us something more definitive to discuss, but I'm not holding my breath.

[SeanC]

I’m impressed that they carved actual stone statues just for a promo.  High production value.

[anamika]

1 hour ago, SeanC said:

I’m impressed that they carved actual stone statues just for a promo.  High production value.

I think we will be getting a whole lot of big, made up promos this season - they can't show much from the show without giving something away. I would think everything right from episode one is going to be very spoilery with all the characters in new places, with new reunions and interactions, fights in different locations etc.

[OhOkayWhat]

Instead of looking for clues in something that we can barely call a spoiler/leak, we should try to calm down and wait until we get a teaser trailer.

Edited October 18, 2018 by OhOkayWhat

[OhOkayWhat]

1 hour ago, Clark Kent said:

Oy, indeed!  At least now we know.  Maybe this most recent episode will encourage everyone to step back and take a deep breath when evaluating new information about next season, and to refrain from posting definitive statements based on hearsay.  We really need a surprise trailer to give us something more definitive to discuss, but I'm not holding my breath.

Agree.

[nikma]

11 hours ago, Wouter said:

An audio recording of the infamous statue statement has turned up: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0YBXhvzHxYI (from around 8:40)

Turner starts her statement by "we did this promo...", suggesting the statue-like thing is promotional in nature, maybe like the faces from a couple of seasons ago.

 

On 10/11/2018 at 8:17 PM, nikma said:

It will be really funny if that statue isn't part of the show at all. 

 

 

I said it. 

 

Sophie is not that stupid to say that she wanted to take part of Sansa's grave, she would never spoil something like that. 

Edited October 18, 2018 by nikma

[Minneapple]

13 hours ago, Wouter said:

An audio recording of the infamous statue statement has turned up: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0YBXhvzHxYI (from around 8:40)

Turner starts her statement by "we did this promo...", suggesting the statue-like thing is promotional in nature, maybe like the faces from a couple of seasons ago.

Could you point out the timestamp of when she starts talking about this? Thanks.

Sophie looks very pretty btw. Her hair and makeup are fantastic.

[merrick715]

36 minutes ago, Minneapple said:

Could you point out the timestamp of when she starts talking about this? Thanks.

Sophie looks very pretty btw. Her hair and makeup are fantastic.

 

It starts around the  8:45-minute mark

[SeanC]

44 minutes ago, Minneapple said:

Sophie looks very pretty btw. Her hair and makeup are fantastic.

The kind of support you get when you’re the spokesmodel for a haircare products company.

[Wouter]

6 hours ago, Minneapple said:

Could you point out the timestamp of when she starts talking about this? Thanks.

Sophie looks very pretty btw. Her hair and makeup are fantastic.

As Merrick said.

I had actually included the timestamp in the original link (the underlined part of the post), but I guess it's easy to overlook it there.

[nikma]

19 hours ago, anamika said:

No wonder no media people mentioned it.

Next time people shouldn't make conspiracy theories about this .

And I will say this again, no matter what your interpretation of that outline from 1993 is, in the context of the show Sansa's death makes no sense. 

[OhOkayWhat]

19 minutes ago, nikma said:

And I will say this again, no matter what your interpretation of that outline from 1993 is, in the context of the show Sansa's death makes no sense.

People should stop using an outline from the past millennium to predict the show.

And I will go further, because we are waaaay beyond ADWD, and because "it will be the same" (about Book and Show endings) can mean anything in the minds of D&D, we should stop using the books like something super relevant to the Show!Endgames.

Edited October 18, 2018 by OhOkayWhat

[nikma]

5 minutes ago, OhOkayWhat said:

People should stop using an outline from the past millennium to predict the show.

And even the books.

[glowbug]

12 minutes ago, OhOkayWhat said:

People should stop using an outline from the past millennium to predict the show.

And I will go further, because we are waaaay beyond ADWD, and because "it will be the same" (about Book and Show endings) can mean anything in the minds of D&D, we should stop using the books like something super relevant to the Show!Endgames.

GRRM confirmed that the endings would be the same at the Emmys. Not everything is going to be exactly the same but I don’t think he would say it was the ending he came up with if they altered it significantly. 

[Minneapple]

51 minutes ago, Wouter said:

As Merrick said.

I had actually included the timestamp in the original link (the underlined part of the post), but I guess it's easy to overlook it there.

Ah yes, I see it now. Thanks!

Thinking about it, it's a little absurd to think that HBO had that much pull that they could force a bunch of entertainment outlets to not release spoilers, especially ones that have already been released in a public forum. 

[nikma]

Thank the god that this nonsense with the statue is over. I feared we will have to listen to that bs until April. 

[OhOkayWhat]

1 hour ago, glowbug said:

GRRM confirmed that the endings would be the same at the Emmys. Not everything is going to be exactly the same but I don’t think he would say it was the ending he came up with if they altered it significantly. 

There are 2 fundamental problems with that.

1- We have not any book ending right now. At all.

2- This is art. "The same" can mean anything. 90% the same 10% different? Maybe 80% and 20%? And if that is the case, what D&D will include in that 20%, what in that 80%?

Therefore, even the books are kinda irrelevant to guess the endgames in the show.

Edited October 18, 2018 by OhOkayWhat

[nikma]

The books are a bit irrelevant in any case Lol

[SimoneS]

1 minute ago, OhOkayWhat said:

There are 2 fundamental problems with that.

1- We have not any book ending right now. At all.

2- This is art. "The same" can mean anything. 90% the same 10% different? Maybe 80% and 20%? And if that is the case, what D&D will include in that 20%, what in that 80%?

D&D has said the characters that Martin knew the endings for would have the same ending on the show (the five main ones for sure) and he confirmed this. They obviously would take liberties with the characters who fates Martin didn't know about.  I don't think that it is possible for come up with a percentage for this.

[OhOkayWhat]

1 minute ago, SimoneS said:

D&D has said the characters that Martin knew the endings for would have the same ending on the show (the five main ones for sure) and he confirmed this.

I don't remember D&D giving any number. 

 

3 minutes ago, SimoneS said:

I don't think that it is possible for come up with a percentage for this.

And that's exactly my point. We don't know that. And therefore that makes the books, more or less, irrelevant at this point.

[BadAssRobinArryn]

1 hour ago, nikma said:

And I will say this again, no matter what your interpretation of that outline from 1993 is, in the context of the show Sansa's death makes no sense. 

IMO, if the White Walkers destroy Winterfell, and it looks like they will, one of the Stark children perishing in it would make a lot of sense on a symbolical level. Though IMO the most likely candidate is Bran as the heir of Winterfell.

[OhOkayWhat]

2 minutes ago, BadAssRobinArryn said:

IMO, if the White Walkers destroy Winterfell, and it looks like they will, one of the Stark children perishing in it would make a lot of sense on a symbolical level. Though IMO the most likely candidate is Bran as the heir of Winterfell.

There is not so much use of symbolical elements in the narrative of the show.

[SimoneS]

4 minutes ago, OhOkayWhat said:

I don't remember D&D giving any number.

Hasn't Martin several times said that he knows the ending for the five main characters? It isn't a stretch to conclude that the ending for these five characters will be same as in the book.

[OhOkayWhat]

7 minutes ago, SimoneS said:

Hasn't Martin several times said that he knows the ending for the five main characters? It isn't a stretch to conclude that the ending for these five characters will be same as in the book.

"Same" is not "=" . "Same" is a very open word. This is art.

[Wouter]

20 minutes ago, SimoneS said:

Hasn't Martin several times said that he knows the ending for the five main characters? It isn't a stretch to conclude that the ending for these five characters will be same as in the book.

I don't think he has ever specified a number. He knows the ending of "the main characters", which would seem to include not only Sansa, but also Jaime and Cersei besides the five from the original outline.

[SeanC]

24 minutes ago, SimoneS said:

Hasn't Martin several times said that he knows the ending for the five main characters? It isn't a stretch to conclude that the ending for these five characters will be same as in the book.

He’s said he knows the ending for the Stark kids, Jon, Dany, and the Lannisters, among others.

[SimoneS]

17 minutes ago, OhOkayWhat said:

"Same" is not "=" . "Same" is a very open word. This is art.

Well, you aren't alone not believing D&D or Martin.

[SimoneS]

2 hours ago, SeanC said:

He’s said he knows the ending for the Stark kids, Jon, Dany, and the Lannisters, among others.

Liam Cunningham hinted that Martin told him Davos' fate on the set early on. Since D&D said that Martin told them the ending (which he has confirmed several times) and that they set up these characters so that they would have the same on the show even if they get there differently, I might not like how the show ends, but I will finally know ending of these characters' arcs in the book which might never be written. 

Edited October 18, 2018 by SimoneS

[OhOkayWhat]

10 minutes ago, SimoneS said:

Well, you aren't alone not believing D&D or Martin.

It's not that I don't believe them on that. It's that I believe only they know what they mean when they say "the same".

[nikma]

It doesn't matter what "the same" means. Martin will never finish his book, You are speculating about something that will never happen. The only "Dream of Spring" that will ever happen will be the last episode of S8, if Benioff and Weiss decide to give it that name. 

[anamika]

On 10/18/2018 at 11:41 PM, nikma said:

Next time people shouldn't make conspiracy theories about this .

We are free to make any theories in here and we did based on what the fan said. And once the recording came out, our 'conspiracy' theories were debunked. Feel free to ignore our theorizing.

On 10/18/2018 at 11:41 PM, nikma said:

And I will say this again, no matter what your interpretation of that outline from 1993 is, in the context of the show Sansa's death makes no sense. 

Why is show Sansa immune to death?

As to whether the 1993 outline or the books are relevant for the show's ending, well we have all this:

In a 2011 interview before the show premiered:

Quote

Weeks before Game of Thrones will premiere on HBO, fanboys of George R. R. Martin's enormously popular fantasy books are already worrying about how the show is going to end. The author recently told The New Yorker he doesn't want to "do a Lost" and mess up the ending.

Series executive producers D.B. Weiss attempted to further calm their nerves, telling TVGuide.com, "We've talked through what the final episode, the final season will be." Executive producer David Benioff adds: "We can't wait to write that episode. Of the many different fears we have about the show, long-term momentum is not one of them. We're very confident."

"I think it's a legitimate concern because it's potentially 60-70 hours of your life you're investing," Weiss says. "It's fair to want to know that there's somebody at the wheel and that it's going to lead you to a place where you feel that ultimately it was worth investing that time."

Fortunately for fans, Martin has been serving as an available advisor for producers, and they say the partnership, however loose, has given them inside knowledge about what lies ahead for Jon Snow, Daenerys and the other denizens of Westeros. "George has proven through the discussions we've had that he's always known in the rough, broad strokes where this is going to end up," Weiss says."And we think it's going to end up in a way that is uniquely satisfying."

"It's not some 'it was all a dream' story," Benioff clarifies. "It's not an M. Night Shyamalan movie where there's a massive twist at the end. It all actually makes sense. You can kind of feel in the roughest sense where it's moving towards. It's going to a fantastic place."

https://www.tvguide.com/news/game-thrones-lost-1031645/

Quote

"You have to remember that I started writing this story in 1991 and I first met David Benioff and Dan Weiss in 2007. I was living with these characters and this world for 16 years before we even started working on the show. They’re pretty fixed in my mind and I’m not going to change anything because of the show, or reaction to the show, or what fans think. I’m just still writing the story that I set out to write in the early 1990s." - George

Quote

"Yes, I mean, I did partly joke when I said I don't know where I was going. I know the broad strokes, and I've known the broad strokes since 1991. I know who's going to be on the Iron Throne. I know who's gonna win some of the battles, I know the major characters, who's gonna die and how they're gonna die, and who's gonna get married and all that. The major characters. Of course along the way I made up a lot of minor characters, you know, did I know in 1991 how Bronn, what was gonna happen to Bronn? No, I didn't even know there'd be a guy named Bronn." - George

Quote

The story I set out to tell in 1991 is still not done. Some major characters — yes, I always had plans, what Tyrion’s arc was gonna be through this, what Arya’s arc was gonna be through this, what Jon Snow’s arc is gonna be. I knew what the principal deaths were gonna be, and when they were coming. That would be the closest thing.

Quote

 My original concept back in 1991 was, I would start with these characters as children, and they would get older. If you pick up Arya at eight, the second chapter would be a couple months later, and she would be eight and a half and [then] she’d be nine. [This would happen] all within the space of a book. 

Quote

“Last year we went out to Santa Fe for a week to sit down with [Martin] and just talk through where things are going, because we don’t know if we are going to catch up and where exactly that would be," Benioff says in the April issue of Vanity Fair. "If you know the ending, then you can lay the groundwork for it. And so we want to know how everything ends. We want to be able to set things up. So we just sat down with him and literally went through every character.” - D&D

Quote

Luckily, we’ve been talking about this with George for a long time, ever since we saw this could happen, and we know where things are heading. And so we’ll eventually, basically, meet up at pretty much the same place where George is going; there might be a few deviations along the route, but we’re heading towards the same destination. I kind of wish that there were some things we didn’t have to spoil, but we’re kind of stuck between a rock and a hard place. The show must go on. . .and that’s what we’re going to do. - David Benioff

Quote

And yes, more and more, they differ. [The show v Books] Two roads diverging in the dark of the woods, I suppose... but all of us are still intending that at the end we will arrive at the same place. - GRRM

Quote

Maisie Williams: I mean, the boys (D&D) are great they're incredible at what they do and I am so pleased with the story. I think the ending has just the right amount of sweet and bitter. There's a lot of pressure on the finale but I think the boys have always known how they've wanted it to end, so they've been working towards that rather than making it up as they go along.

Maisie Williams has also talked about how she mapped out Arya's arc with a beginning, a middle and an end:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZJdjC-uOE2U

(starts around 3.30. Maisie also talks about how her X-men character is not a leader - nothing like Arya)

David and Dan have also talked about there being changes and that it was not possible for everything to be the same:

Quote

To what degree do you feel it needs to be perfectly congruent with the vision of the endgame of the novels that Martin presented to you?

BENIOFF: It’s already too late for that. We’re already well past the point of it jibing 100 percent. We’ve passed George and that’s something that George always worried about — the show catching up and ultimately passing him — but the good thing about us diverging at this point is that George’s books will still be a surprise for readers who have seen the show. Certain things that we learned from George way back in that meeting in Santa Fe are going to happen on the show, but certain things won’t. And there’s certain things where George didn’t know what was going to happen, so we’re going to find them out for the first time too, along with millions of readers when we read those books.

GRRM has mentioned the show killing off characters still alive in the books. The endings of most of the major houses - Tyrell, Martell, Baratheon (possibly Tully, Arryn) - will be different. We know Sansa's story has changed from the books in a plot David & Dan admit was cooked up to give Sophie Turner more to do considering GRRM had only written 3 Sansa chapters in the Vale over two books.

Quote

And it’s because of Turner’s strength, Benioff continued, that it made sense to give Sansa a dramatic storyline this season and to use Ramsay’s engagement for that very purpose. In fact, the showrunners first thought about putting Sansa and Ramsay together back when they were writing season 2. “We really wanted Sansa to play a major part this season,” Benioff said. “If we were going to stay absolutely faithful to the book, it was going to be very hard to do that. There was a subplot we loved from the books, but it used a character that’s not in the show.” 

Writer-producer Bryan Cogman had some insight, as well. “The seeds were planted early on in our minds,” Cogman said. “In the books, Sansa has very few chapters in the Vale once she’s up there. That was not going to be an option for one of our lead characters. While this is a very bold departure, [we liked] the power of bringing a Stark back to Winterfell and having her reunite with Theon under these circumstances.”

http://ew.com/article/2015/04/26/game-thrones-sansa-ramsay-interview/

So if there is any major character who could possibly not end up in the same place as the books, it's Sansa - considering she's entirely removed from her book plot on the show in what Cogman says is a 'Bold departure'. It remains to be seen if they can connect her with her book plot ending - whatever that maybe.

And finally we have this:

https://youtu.be/54epNT20W44

I would say that we are definitely getting Jon, Arya, Tyrion, Dany and Bran's book endings that GRRM came up with some twenty years ago on the show. And as Benioff says - 90% of what we see next season was planned a long time ago

Quote

So right now we’re outlining the final season. I’d say 90 percent of it was stuff that we knew was going to happen. It’s just necessary for us to make the series work. Otherwise, there are just too many plot threads, and the idea of trying to bring it all together at the very end would make me go crazy because if you try to figure out how to end this story at the end, it would never work.

 https://winteriscoming.net/2017/11/07/game-of-thrones-showrunner-david-benioff-changing-novels/

So 90% same stuff as the ending GRRM is heading towards but not 100% jibing with his vision of the endgame.

Edited October 20, 2018 by anamika

[nikma]

Quote

We are free to make any theories in here and we did based on what the fan said.

I think it was did based of wishful thinking. Info from some random person on internet became more important than 7 seasons of the show. 

So when they accept that Sansa won't die in the show, her haters will convince themselves that Benioff and Weiss are just her fanboys and that they've changed her ending from Martin's original plans for the future books? So in the books she will die and be punished because she was mean to Arya and in the show she will rule the North, because Benioff and Weiess are in love with that character? Ok. 

Another conspiracy theory. But that's Martin's fault. If he finished the books we wouldn't have this kind of conversation.

Edited October 20, 2018 by nikma

[OhOkayWhat]

1 hour ago, anamika said:

So 90% same stuff as the ending GRRM is heading towards but not 100% jibing with his vision of the endgame.

It seems the 90% is not about GRRM ending, it's 90% of whatever D&D had originally planned. What if whatever D&D had originally planned was only 90%  GRRM ending? Then it's more than 10% the final difference between the ASOIAF ending and the GOT ending

In my opinion, I think the books are mostly irrelevant because still the 2 fundamental problems remains:

1- We have not any book ending yet. 

2- This is art. "The same ending" (phrase used in the interviews) can mean anything. 

Edited October 20, 2018 by OhOkayWhat

[nikma]

6 minutes ago, OhOkayWhat said:

I think the books are mostly irrelevant because...

...because Martin lost control of the story 18 years ago. I don't care what he is going to do in his version of the story. Without Benioff and Weiss his books would be already forgotten. And we are here to discuss the show. 

Edited October 20, 2018 by nikma

[nikma]

We should keep in mind that after season 4 Benioff and Weiss did their best not to openly criticize Martin and his writing. 

Of course they said that they gave Sansa bigger role because they like Sophie, what you expect them to say? The truth? That they had to change a lot from the last two books because they are unedited mess? That moving Sansa to the North eliminates her almost non existent storyline in the Vale that even Martin doesn't know what to do with? That it eliminates boring and pointless Brienne's storyline? Thet  eliminates need to create a female character that's only purpose is to be raped and tortured, so Theon can save her? 

Of course they will give these PR statements. Like when they described why they speed up Tyrion's storyline in S5 and why they put him in Meereen. They could't say that Tyrion's storyline in the books was mess without any culmination and that 345 characters in Meereen are unnecessary. Or when they  described why they created Hardhome. They could't say because it clearly doesn't make any sense that after 5 extremely long books White Walkers still didn't have any real confrontation with a major character and that it doesn't make any sense that their last appearance would be the beginning  of ASOS. 

Because only a hack would structure a story like that, only a hack would write 7-books series without any outline, any detailed plan.

Edited October 20, 2018 by nikma

[BadAssRobinArryn]

On ‎18‎.‎10‎.‎2018 at 10:13 PM, OhOkayWhat said:

There is not so much use of symbolical elements in the narrative of the show.

There totally is. Jon Snow's resurrection is the most glaring example. But also Arya almost literally having to find her identity, Stannis starting his house's downfall by burning his child, the death of Tommen as basically the end of Cersei's humanity, even the end of the Children of the Forest by the thing they created.

2 hours ago, anamika said:

 

So if there is any major character who could possibly not end up in the same place as the books, it's Sansa - considering she's entirely removed from her book plot on the show in what Cogman says is a 'Bold departure'. It remains to be seen if they can connect her with her book plot ending - whatever that Maybe. 

I think we should be honest enough with ourselves to admit that we'll probably never know Sansa's book ending. Or that of Arya, Dany or Tyrion for that matter. And Jon Snow may stay dead in book canon forever. I'll concede that it's possible that Martin will finish one more book, but I have no hopes that he'll finish two.

I for my part choose to believe that the ending of the Stark children will be the same as it would have been in the books. They are crucial characters since the beginning.

39 minutes ago, nikma said:

Because only a hack would structure a story like that, only a hack would write 7-books series without any outline, any detailed plan.

I disagree that he's a hack. The first few book showed that he isn't. But I do agree that he lost control over his plot and that it was an almost impossible task for the show makers to film his last few books. Given the source material they had to work with, they did reasonably well. 

[WindyNights]

1 hour ago, nikma said:

We should keep in mind that after season 4 Benioff and Weiss did their best not to openly criticize Martin and his writing. 

Of course they said that they gave Sansa bigger role because they like Sophie, what you expect them to say? The truth? That they had to change a lot from the last two books because they are unedited mess? That moving Sansa to the North eliminates her almost non existent storyline in the Vale that even Martin doesn't know what to do with? That it eliminates boring and pointless Brienne's storyline? Thet  eliminates need to create a female character that's only purpose is to be raped and tortured, so Theon can save her? 

Of course they will give these PR statements. Like when they described why they speed up Tyrion's storyline in S5 and why they put him in Meereen. They could't say that Tyrion's storyline in the books was mess without any culmination and that 345 characters in Meereen are unnecessary. Or when they  described why they created Hardhome. They could't say because it clearly doesn't make any sense that after 5 extremely long books White Walkers still didn't have any real confrontation with a major character and that it doesn't make any sense that their last appearance would be the beginning  of ASOS. 

Because only a hack would structure a story like that, only a hack would write 7-books series without any outline, any detailed plan.

 

Please, dude. You're being embarrassing here. You're just giving your own opinion and thinking that D & D would say these things when they're even more lackluster writers than GRRM is (which isn't totally their fault since they have deadlines to reach).

Will point out though that the White Walkers are there to conclude arcs and the story. Their coming means the endgame is here. They weren't intended to ever take up more than than the last 1/3 of the series. 

Edited October 20, 2018 by WindyNights

[nikma]

9 minutes ago, WindyNights said:

You're just giving your own opinion

Yes. Just like everyone else. 

But what's true is that they would never openly criticize Martin. And Martin would never openly criticize them. I can't read their minds but from creative choices that they've made, it's clear that they were not big fans of the last two books. They would never say that the last two books were unedited and that they had pointless chapters, characters or even storylines. Puting Sansa in WF for example eliminated a lot of problems from the books, but they can't say that. They will just say we like Sophie and that's it.

But you can like Sophie and still give her big storyline in the Vale. It's not like they never created original scenes or even storylines for major characters. Or give Brienne her separate storyline. And you can like Sophie but still have LSH. 

Edited October 20, 2018 by nikma

[nikma]

Some changes from the books would've been made even if Preston Jacobs and Linda were showrunners (cuting some characters from Meereen for example), but some changes  were not necessary to simplify the story. They were made with an intention to be different from the books. Why they felt the need to create Hardhome? It's not like Jon doesn't have enough chapters in the books. 

[BadAssRobinArryn]

1 hour ago, WindyNights said:

 

Will point out though that the White Walkers are there to conclude arcs and the story. Their coming means the endgame is here. They weren't intended to ever take up more than than the last 1/3 of the series. 

 

1 hour ago, nikma said:

Some changes from the books would've been made even if Preston Jacobs and Linda were showrunners (cuting some characters from Meereen for example), but some changes  were not necessary to simplify the story. They were made with an intention to be different from the books. Why they felt the need to create Hardhome? It's not like Jon doesn't have enough chapters in the books. 

[BadAssRobinArryn]

7 minutes ago, BadAssRobinArryn said:

 

1 hour ago, WindyNights said:

Will point out though that the White Walkers are there to conclude arcs and the story. Their coming means the endgame is here. They weren't intended to ever take up more than than the last 1/3 of the series.    

I disagree. The White Walkers were the very first thread we meet in the books. They are there from the beginning. And structurally, including an earlier confrontation with them makes much more sense than following pointless characters around Dorne or Meereen.

Knowing what they did at Hardhome also makes it unncessary to spend too much time on them attacking Karhold or Last hearth. We know what they'll probably do there, because they already did in Hardhome. So the showmakers don't have to Show anothe rbig battle at the very beginning of the Season, which would probably be too repetitive and can spend time and budget on the structurally more important battles of WInterfell and King's Landing. 

Edited October 20, 2018 by BadAssRobinArryn

[WindyNights]

22 minutes ago, BadAssRobinArryn said:

I disagree. The White Walkers were the very first thread we meet in the books. They are there from the beginning. And structurally, including an earlier confrontation with them makes much more sense than following pointless characters around Dorne or Meereen.

Knowing what they did at Hardhome also makes it unncessary to spend too much time on them attacking Karhold or Last hearth. We know what they'll probably do there, because they already did in Hardhome. So the showmakers don't have to Show anothe rbig battle at the very beginning of the Season, which would probably be too repetitive and can spend time and budget on the structurally more important battles of WInterfell and King's Landing. 

Consequently, they decided to make the Battle of Winterfell just a curbstomp. I don't begrudge them for what they did at Hardhome but it wasn't necessary to the story. 

Anyways, the White Walkers are a bunch of ice demons. Their side of the story isn't that important. Their importance lies in how leaders and characters respond to them. I mean it's the only way to explain why Benioff and Weiss have said that the NK won't talk(besides deflating  him).

In the original outline, their invasion happens in the third book. GRRM could've given a lot more on them but I don't think it's necessary too because I don't think there is that much to them. 

[OhOkayWhat]

2 hours ago, BadAssRobinArryn said:

There totally is. Jon Snow's resurrection is the most glaring example. But also Arya almost literally having to find her identity, Stannis starting his house's downfall by burning his child, the death of Tommen as basically the end of Cersei's humanity, even the end of the Children of the Forest by the thing they created.

I did not mean that when I wrote about of use of symbolical elements in the show. A example to explain myself: Twyin and the deer in season 1.

[WindyNights]

2 hours ago, nikma said:

Yes. Just like everyone else. 

But what's true is that they would never openly criticize Martin. And Martin would never openly criticize them. I can't read their minds but from creative choices that they've made, it's clear that they were not big fans of the last two books. They would never say that the last two books were unedited and that they had pointless chapters, characters or even storylines. Puting Sansa in WF for example eliminated a lot of problems from the books, but they can't say that. They will just say we like Sophie and that's it.

But you can like Sophie and still give her big storyline in the Vale. It's not like they never created original scenes or even storylines for major characters. Or give Brienne her separate storyline. And you can like Sophie but still have LSH. 

The last two books aren't filmable and requires set up that they didn't have time to put in so they have to create shortcuts. Like they even talk about how there are things that they'd have loved to included into the series like Patchface but couldn't and that's a minor character. 

So Sansa's storyline in the Vale means having to create or maintain a cast of characters around Sansa to service only her storyline versus sending her to Winterfell where Ramsay, Theon and Roose are at.

It's basically "why introduce this new character when this old character can serve the same functions?"

It's why Edric/Gendry become one character, why Arya only has like two characters around her for the majority of her Braavos storyline, why Marge and the Tyrells + the High Sparrow are all eliminated at the same time, why the Sand Snakes + Ellaria are eliminated from the show etc.

They're trying to cut costs and they cut costs by combining characters, not adapting characters or killing characters off hence GRRM's statement about them killing characters that will survive past the end in the books.

[nikma]

I think by the time S5 was airing both White Walkers and Daenerys' invasion became almost a meme, something that will never happen. 5 seasons of televsion is a lot. Some shows don't even last that much. So I think they needed Hardhome. It was prime example of "show, don't tell" rule. 

[nikma]

16 minutes ago, WindyNights said:

The last two books aren't filmable and requires set up that they didn't have time to put in so they have to create shortcuts.

So Hardhome was a shortcut?

 

16 minutes ago, WindyNights said:

So Sansa's storyline in the Vale means having to create or maintain a cast of characters around Sansa to service only her storyline versus sending her to Winterfell where Ramsay, Theon and Roose are at.

It's not like they haven't done that for some other major characters like Arya, Bran, Sam, Jaime,... Why Citadel, but not the Vale? They thought the Vale wasn't worth the time and effort. But Braavos was. And Bran's cave was. And Meereen. Even Dorne. But not the Vale, not LSH, not Young Griff and so on. 

A lot of changes were made because last two books aren't filmable, but some changes were clearly there because D&D didn't like what Martin wrote. Or they thought it was pointless. Or that it doesn't work for televsion. And not only in S5, but in the first 4 seasons as well. 

For example changing Margaery's character in the show had nothing to do with simplification. It even made the show more complicated. Or keeping Robb in S2. Or Theon in S3. 

Edited October 20, 2018 by nikma

[GrailKing]

On 10/17/2018 at 6:24 PM, Wouter said:

An audio recording of the infamous statue statement has turned up: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0YBXhvzHxYI (from around 8:40)

Turner starts her statement by "we did this promo...", suggesting the statue-like thing is promotional in nature, maybe like the faces from a couple of seasons ago.

I remember guessing it could be a promo, but told maybe I'm wrong by another. : )