S07.E01: Dragonstone

[Constantinople]

The throne on Dragonstone was impressively large, but ugly.  Which isn't to say I'm objecting to the work done by production design people.

I'm guessing the Dragonstone throne was built before Aegon conquered the Six Kingdoms.

By the way, if it's unfair to deprive Alys Karstark and WhatHisName Umber of their family lands because of what their fathers did, shouldn't everyone have sworn obedience to Viserys back in the day and/or be falling over themselves to bow before Daenerys?

[Hanahope]

So I too was hoping Ayra would move north after taking out the Freys to reunite with Jon and Sansa.  But its possible that she thinks they'd not let her continue her killing ways if she did so.  And she still has her list.  I know Cersie and the Mountain are on it (and the Mt. will be a tough nut to crack), was there anyone else left?  Was Jamie on the list too?  I don't think anyone else is still alive.

I agree with a poster above that Jon should have demanded a betrothel between the heirs of Karstark and Umber to two loyal families who don't have castles, given the young ages of those heirs.  That would reward two loyal families, plus keep the keeps in Karstark and Umber hands.  Win for all.

I'm worried about what Euron is going to do to prove his worthiness to Cersei, assuming that's what he plans to do.  AFter all, Cersie is probably too old to birth any more children, so can't really create a dynasty with her.  But she might be an interim solution for Euron.  I presume it'll be something close, either an enemy from the south, east or west.  I can't see him heading north, at least not yet.

I was a bit surprised that given her skills, Ayra is riding out in public as an unaccompanied young woman.  She could easily take on the vise of a man, which might be easier to travel.  While she seems to have been "lucky" in running into some decent soldiers, certainly all are not going to be like that.  She has to recall the Lannister troops while she was with Gendry and Hotpie.

We didn't see Melisandre, where will she pop up?  

Sam's internship intro went on a bit too long.  But glad that he figured out how to get some good info finally.  

I guess we're down to two contestants for fulfilling Cersie's prophecy of the younger, more beautiful queen, Sansa and Dany, though I'm pretty sure its Dany that really takes her place or ultimately defeats her, Arya or not.  While I hope Arya survives, I can see her dying while making some big sacrifice (perhaps against the Mt.).  I will certainly be sad about that and hope that somehow she does survive.

[FnkyChkn34]

12 hours ago, nodorothyparker said:

Still, Jaime?  So even the last dead kid and smoking hole where the sept was wasn't a deal breaker for you?  You're making it hard to remember how much I love your book counterpart.

This.  I was just about to ask to confirm - in the books, Jamie is over Cersei and wants nothing to do with her anymore, right?

[NYCNJbear06]

Jon and Sansa's "disagreement" stems from them coming from the point of two different enemies.  Jon see's the enemy as the Army of the Dead from Beyond the Wall which will need ALL northerners to be on the same team hence his building bridges instead of burning them as Sansa would do to the Kalstarks and Umbers.  Sansa sees the enemy as the Lannisters from the South. 

[anamika]

1 hour ago, Hana Chan said:

Sansa would have a much stronger leg to stand on if she gave Jon some real concrete information that he could actually use in a substantive way, not just vague generalities. Cerci is a direct threat to him? How? What method has she used to take out her enemies? What agents does she still have at her command? Who are her direct allies that are in position to cause Jon trouble? It was the same as it was with Ramsey, where she couldn't give Jon anything that would really help him (number of men at Ramsey's command, whether he depended more on archers or cavalry, etc).

This is my problem with the character exactly. Everyone is calling her some genius who knows all about politics because she spend some time with Cersei and Ramsay, but her so called 'advice' is useless. What does she want him to do with regards to Cersei? Like does she want Jon to go attack Cersei? Send men south? Hire security guards to protect against Cersei's ninja assassins? Send men to the Neck? Say something useful Sansa!! Dammit.

Edited July 17, 2017 by anamika

[Francie]

  but not so much so that the plan needs to have the timing of a French farce.

My critique is not about the timing. 

I get, and like, the concept of a faceless assassin. They come in, they infiltrate into the house or workplace of the target, and they move about as that person. They keep that persona while there.

Here, none of what Arya did went that way. Where is getting the poison? How is she just able to move about the castle putting this all into place? She does have to be a servant girl carrying the body ... somewhere. She either has to don the Walder mask -- which she creates herself without the help of the temple -- to order the banquet or she has to have enough authority as the servant girl to order it done. 

And poor servant girl. I sure hope she just happened to die and Arya took her face. And not that Arya just stone cold killed her to get her face. 

They've made this faceless assassin scenario too grand and unbelievable for me. 

[Tikichick]

Maybe Arya needs to head south to reunite with someone?  Gendry?  The Hound?  Nymeria?!!

[Happy Harpy]

52 minutes ago, Constantinople said:

At what point did Sansa advocate physically and mentally abusing Alys Karstark or that the rest of her family be murdered?  Because that was the treatment to which Sansa was subjected.

You'll notice that I didn't mention Joffrey and Meryn Trant. I was talking of Sansa alone in front of the court, facing people like Lancel (IIRC), who thought/advocated she should be blamed and punished because she was the daughter of a traitor. Those two kids were in the same situation, they were facing a hostile assembly who thought/advocated they should be blamed and punished for the sins of their fathers. The principle is the same. I'm disappointed that Sansa didn't see herself in Alys Karstark, didn't remember how she was once in her shoes, and didn't show more empathy than when she was a "silly girl".

(On a side note, I loved how this scene established Jon as the anti-Joffrey. Courts follow their King's mood, and Jon's humanity held on his vassals' hostility whereas Joffrey's cruelty encouraged his vassals to taunt the "accused".)

Moreover, wouldn't the Umber and Karstark heirs become destitute if deprived of their respective castle, which is the source of income for noble families? It isn't as if they have a trade, and based on their attitude before Jon spoke, I highly doubt that the loyal Northern lords would have reached for them, if only for fear of displeasing an unforgiving KITN. They weren't as openly cruel as Lancel and all, but imo everyone in the room knew what the punishment meant, concretely. Alys Karstark, at the very least, wouldn't be left with but one way of earning a living and I don't think that her situation would be more enviable than Sansa's back then.

Edited July 17, 2017 by Happy Harpy

[anamika]

I am not usually a fan of the Hound. Find him to be boring, but I rather enjoyed his scenes this episode. Arya with the soldiers and the BWB scenes were the ones I enjoyed the most.

The Hound scenes with the brotherhood had a nice mix of humor, discussion of religion, justice, visions in the fire and the Hound trying for some redemption. I think the brotherhood scenes this season are going to be a lot of fun.

[GrailKing]

4 minutes ago, anamika said:

How was he being too trusting? So you are saying, from now even if the children of traitors come ask for forgiveness they must be punished and stripped of their lands? What if the children go off and come back for revenge like Arya? Karstark switched sides because Robb executed his father. What if Alys does the same?

These children are now in charge of castles that are the first line of defense against the WW. They have more important things to do than planning rebellion. The WW are an impending threat and that's going to be the focus of the North.

He is being too trusting and no where am I saying they be killed or throne out in the wilds and neither is Sansa, they should be wards and people loyal to house Stark in charge until both children come of age, he should also remove the existing person in charge of those children  as they (regents ) can't be trusted not only to care for those children but also their loyalty to Winterfell.

Alys could do the same whether Jon's plan or Sansa's plan is enacted, the better alternative is a blend of Sansa's and Jon's plan this would placate total hard liners as Royce and also match with Sansa's loyalty proposal, it would also give Some houses pause before they think of betraying the Starks again as both styles are there, it's a good reminder that you could get the sword and not the olive branch. 

Again it comes down to two POV that are correct; if one place themselves in each persons shoes. Both have valid points neither is wholly right and neither is wholly wrong and both made errors which could have been avoided with proper communication ;as chosen leader of that ship, it falls on Jon not to do everything in a vacuum and lay out plans, ask for other ideas ,and make a decision and finally let his team know that decision. 

[anamika]

5 minutes ago, GrailKing said:

He is being too trusting and no where am I saying they be killed or throne out in the wilds and neither is Sansa, they should be wards and people loyal to house Stark in charge until both children come of age, he should also remove the existing person in charge of those children  as they (regents ) can't be trusted not only to care for those children but also their loyalty to Winterfell.

No, Sansa was not suggesting that they be wards. She was demanding that they be stripped of their lands and titles and that be given to someone else. So yes, Sansa was asking for them to be thrown out into the wild.

And no one was in charge of those children. Those children are in charge. Just like Lyanna Mormont and they have pledged support to Jon and be his first line of defense against the WW.

Edited July 17, 2017 by anamika

[stagmania]

1 hour ago, jeansheridan said:

But she can't just sit on her tush doing nothing.  And I don't see dissatisfaction exactly.  I see a woman trying to figure out angles.  Sophie has a grumpy resting face and her thinking face is a bit stern.  She is thinking, trying to plot, trying to figure out how to reach Jon.  And Cersei is as real to her as the Night King is to Jon.  Jon should try to learn from her. If Robb had listened to his mother at key times, no Red Wedding. 

I mean, sitting on her tush prettily doing nothing was exactly what Sansa wanted once upon a time. I'm not saying she should still feel that way, but there has been no clarity around what she wants now that those dreams are over. She seems to want a leadership role, but she doesn't really know what to do with it. As has been pointed out many times, she never has any specific idea about what should be done or how to collect and use information in a practical way-she just has instincts about who is a threat. They're decent instincts and Jon should hear about them (though if she was able to articulate them better, he might actually be able to do something with her observations). But the position she already has is pretty much all she needs to accomplish that.

And Robb definitely made stupid choices, but he never would've had to go to war in the first place if it wasn't for Catelyn's stupid choices. My takeaway is that war and vengeance are bad and everyone makes bad choices when they're in their thrall.

41 minutes ago, WatchrTina said:

Upthread someone wished for a future scene with Brienne training Sansa and young Lady Mormont.  I agreed but I said I didn't think Sansa would agree to be trained.  Now I'm re-thinking that.  Season 1 Sansa would certainly never agree to pick up a nasty sword and train with it like a boy (ew, gross!)  But season 7 Sansa? Now I'm thinking it likely that she's going to be getting some training in her bedroom on the handling of knives and how to protect herself in close-quarters combat.  Brienne's already lost one patron to a sneaky assassin. I'm hoping she'll decide that training Sansa in self-defense is part of her duty as sworn sword.

This is an intriguing possibility. I would love to see Sansa being open to broadening her horizons in this way. She's never going to be a warrior, but she could be of more practical use in this fight if she picked up a few skills. And it would be some actual character development for her that we could see with our own eyes, versus growth that the show just keeps trying to tell us has happened.

[GrailKing]

2 minutes ago, anamika said:

No, Sansa was not suggesting that they be wards. She was demanding that they be stripped of their lands and titles and that be given to someone else. So yes, Sansa was asking for them to be thrown out into the wild.

No, those kids could stay part of the castle, just not rulers or they could be placed somewhere else with people who lost children and are willing to raise them.

Again both Jon and Sansa had valid points and both sides of the fandom have valid points, we will have to see if either point of view comes back to bite one or the other.

I'm still on page three so I'm done on this topic as I feel both of us have valid points and unless we get some form of answer from the Gods of show and book all our points will be moot.

[jeansheridan]

8 minutes ago, stagmania said:

And Robb definitely made stupid choices, but he never would've had to go to war in the first place if it wasn't for Catelyn's stupid choices. M

I had kind of forgotten Catelyn's impulsive taking of Tyrion.  So good point.  I used to joke Ned was too stupid to live but maybe that is true of Catelyn too.  Flawed characters make a good show.

[Enigma X]

I have had some time to digest last night’s episode.

My sentiments run along the same lines as most here.

I am very proud of Jon. I see both Jon and Sansa’s point and think they both could be right. While everyone seems to be bickering on basically whose idea is better, which seems to be based on whom they like better, not many are acknowledging that neither stance is black or white and both have the same amount of potential to bite them in the ass. I am not going to harbor too much on this. Others can and will do that. Cersei is crazy but that is not new. Jamie is crazier if he does not do something for self-preservation. I was a bit shocked that Cersei viewed Tommen as a traitor though. I thought that she would be a bit more sympathetic. Euron really did remind me of some dude in a club. I don’t see him lasting long; although, I don’t doubt he will do something devastating to the “good guys” before he is disposed of.

I knew it was Arya before she spoke. Since this really is a fantasy show with a lot of political plot, I am not weighed down too much by how the faceless thing works. I don’t like it much and adore fantasy. This is what it is though.  I know who Ed Sheeran is but did not know that was him before reading the forum. I just remember thinking that guy looks sickly.

Jorah! I knew it was him the moment I heard the Scottish brogue. Ser Jorah of the Friendzone lives!

Dany coming home! This was awesome, and their wardrobe was great! Dany, Arya, and Sansa had the best single lines of the night.

Edited July 17, 2017 by Enigma X

[jeansheridan]

33 minutes ago, FnkyChkn34 said:

This.  I was just about to ask to confirm - in the books, Jamie is over Cersei and wants nothing to do with her anymore, right?

Jaime in the books is being betrayed by Brienne to save Poderick so he is pretty much screwed by both women in his life.  Heh.

[anamika]

7 minutes ago, GrailKing said:

No, those kids could stay part of the castle, just not rulers or they could be placed somewhere else with people who lost children and are willing to raise them.

Which is something that Sansa did not say. She wanted them to be stripped of their lands and titles and those given away to someone else. Those children would have nothing. That was Sansa's punishment for them for the betrayal by their fathers. Who as Jon mentioned are already dead. The right people have already been punished.

The point is she was still all for punishing them for something they themselves didn’t do. Their fathers were the ones who aligned with the Boltons, and now both those kids fathers are dead. Turning them into possible enemies doesn’t help. Not with that is going on now.

16 minutes ago, stagmania said:

This is an intriguing possibility. I would love to see Sansa being open to broadening her horizons in this way. She's never going to be a warrior, but she could be of more practical use in this fight if she picked up a few skills. And it would be some actual character development for her that we could see with our own eyes, versus growth that the show just keeps trying to tell us has happened.

I hope not. She is already Arya-lite at this point with Arya's book narratives and dialogue, a needle hanging around her neck and feeding people to hungry dogs. What does she even have in common with her book version at this point other than a severely dumbed down LF hanging around? Female characters can do plenty other than fighting - Cersei, Catelyn, Dany. They can be thinkers. The problem with Sansa is that she is so badly written, she comes off as an idiot. I doubt that picking up sword training is going to improve the character.

Edited July 17, 2017 by anamika

[GrailKing]

12 hours ago, kittykat said:

She's also never seen the walkers and it's been shown that anyone who hasn't seen them are skeptical.  

Yeah, but she never saw giants either until she went to Castle Black, so I think she's less skeptical then most, I just think she feels the wall may give them extra protection when compared to the southern problem.

[MV713]

12 hours ago, hypnotoad said:

 

Wait so Euron got 1000 ships built already?!? How and with what?!? Honestly I could so do without Euron and Little Finger.

 

Yes, this was quite ridiculous and annoyed me.  I'd like to see him scorched by Dany's dragons ASAP.

[ElizaD]

Ned's death is blamed on him wanting to spare the lives of innocent children despite the crimes of the parents. Robb is blamed for executing Lord Karstark when he did murder Lannister children. So clearly, Jon should have learned from this and killed innocent children because of the sins of their relatives. Yet even as the show reminds us of how Ned and Robb paid for their honor, Jon showing mercy to the children of his enemies is somehow supposed to be a good decision rather than him failing to correct the mistake of his predecessors? Trying to act with honor and save the lives of children has earned the Starks nothing but contempt. So, following the show's own logic, Jon should have killed the little heirs or at the very least stripped them of their lands. The North chose to support Ramsay over Jon; now he had a chance to win the North's loyalty by making them fear and obey him as they feared and obeyed Ramsay. Yet his decision is not actually being presented as yet another huge mistake even though everything we've seen suggests that mercy wins no respect or loyalty and that not condoning child murder has led to horrible things happening to the Starks. It's incredibly hypocritical to now pretend that wanting to spare children is suddenly a good thing because Jon, rather than Ned or Robb, is the one who won't do the politically convenient thing. Again, most of the lords in that hall refused to stand against Ramsay, who flayed a lord to make a point about obedience: compared to that, Jon did absolutely nothing to give the lords a reason not to abandon the Starks again. Support Ramsay, support Cersei, try to take Winterfell yourself - no biggie, just pick a scapegoat and his death means the rest of your house won't have to face any consequences for your crimes.

After the first viewing, the lack of logic in the fate of the heirs is my only major problem with the episode, which was very satisfying for really getting the endgame started.

Arya's Frey slaughter got rid of a problem, though we don't hear if there's a little Frey boy who's now the Lord of the Twins with all the adult men dead - in that case, even she didn't go far enough.

Most improved: Euron. I actually find him horribly try-hard and heavy metal in the books, rather than genuinely intimidating and well-written, so I'm fine with the new show interpretation that's a bit more Jack Sparrow and far more entertaining than last season's introduction. Two hands thumbs up!

Best surprise: Sandor. I've been mostly indifferent to him, without rolling my eyes like I do at Book Euron; he just hasn't interested me that much. But now it felt like there was more sincerity to him, he wasn't just an opportunity to include some badass lines.

[Constantinople]

2 minutes ago, ElizaD said:

Most improved: Euron. I actually find him horribly try-hard and heavy metal in the books, rather than genuinely intimidating and well-written, so I'm fine with the new show interpretation that's a bit more Jack Sparrow and far more entertaining than last season's introduction. Two hands thumbs up!

I enjoyed Euron's scene in this episode much more than I did his scenes last season.  Showed more personality and I got a better sense of why the Ironborn would choose him as their king.

I also agree about BookEuron

[that one guy]

So the show got me with the Jon/Sansa conflict. While they were debating what to do about the Umber and Karstark castles, I was yelling, "She's right, Jon!" But then I saw Alys Karstark and how Sansa-like she was (great casting!) and realized that Sansa was just trying to deal out what had been done to her.  The Karstarks betrayed them for the same reason the Starks rebelled against the throne - their patriarch was beheaded by their king for doing what he thought was right. Pot, meet Kettle. On the one hand, these noble families don't have the right be have power over everyone else and maintain their social standing no matter what they do, they have responsibilities. On the other hand, these new lords are just kids and their elders' actions weren't their fault. On the third hand, these new lords are just kids and Jon might be better served by having experienced warriors in these positions. I guess maybe I'd split the difference. Little Ned Umber should take the black, Alys should be married to a loyal retainer?

It's a tough call, anything you do feels off somehow. It would be much easier on Jon if these families were extinct and he could ensconce House Giantsbane or whatever at Last Hearth. They both have pretty good points to make, I think.

The rest of the episode was about what I expected with the exception of Arya's cold open. But I really expected Melisandre to be in the room with the map table at Dragonstone, still looking for a messiah to serve. As it is, rather than thinking about the table as Aegon's map, I was distracted by the fact that that's where Mel and Stannis made the shadowbaby. The perils of adaptation . . . I think Mel has always known about Jon's parentage. Rewatched the whole show over the past couple months, the scene where she tries to seduce Jon at Castle Black, in retrospect she was obviously trying to make a new shadowbaby to kill Ramsay, which I totally missed the first time around. [ETA: I guess it was Roose at that point, not Ramsay who held Winterfell]

Edited July 17, 2017 by that one guy

[magdalene]

13 hours ago, nodorothyparker said:

Still, Jaime?  So even the last dead kid and smoking hole where the sept was wasn't a deal breaker for you?  You're making it hard to remember how much I love your book counterpart.

I have long since given up considering books Jaime and show Jaime as the same guy - much less frustrating for me. I think it's safe to assume if he hasn't turned from Cersei by now he is not going to.

[Helena Dax]

Although I disagree with Sansa, I don't think she wanted to punish those kids for their fathers' bertrayal. It wasn't about revenge, it was about protecting herself and Jon. She wanted to send a message to everybody else: do not cross us. She knows these guys aren't afraid of being killed in battle, but they might be afraid of ruining their kids' lives. 

[nodorothyparker]

They didn't seem to be in a particularly good place with each other last night even if he's still inexplicably by her side for the time being.

I know, I know.  Waiting for Jaime to join his book counterpart and wash his hands of the whole thing is my particular wall to bash my head against as a bookreader.  I accept I very well may still be waiting when the last credits roll.  That doesn't stop me from hoping though.

[Shanna Marie]

I think they were playing with our expectations in the Jon vs. Sansa debate. We start out thinking Sansa probably has a point because mercy typically hasn't gone well for characters on this show. Jon looks naive and trusting, and we can see him going down the same path as the other Starks. But then they bring out the heirs, and they're kids, which Sansa surely knew, and it twists our perceptions around. These aren't adult sons who maybe didn't fight alongside their fathers with the Boltons, but also didn't fight with Jon. They're kids. So maybe Sansa has learned a bit too much from Cersei, and that looks a bit ominous.

It's basically like they were saying in that video posted in the media thread that showed how this series builds emotional engagement. It's a constant string of emotional pivots. We wouldn't have been as engaged in the scene if they'd just brought out the kids from the start so that we felt Sansa was wrong the whole time.

I think the scene with Arya and the soldiers was along the same lines. Up to now, that scene would have gone one of two ways, based on this show's patterns: either the soldiers would have tried to rape Arya or Arya would have slaughtered them on sight. Even though there's no inherent tension or conflict in that scene when taken out of context, in context of this series it takes on tension based on the show's patterns. They're sitting there talking about their homes, their lives, what they want out of life, and we're holding our breath, waiting for at least one of them to demand sex from Arya or for Arya to pull out a sword and kill them all for being allied with the Lannisters. But neither happens, and that creates its own kind of tension because it feels like the world has been turned upside down. Arya is acting like a human being, surrounded by people who are acting like decent human beings. How long has it been since that's happened? The closest she's come in years to that kind of interaction was when the actress tended her wounds, and even that had its own kind of tension and danger surrounding it because Arya was supposed to have killed her.

[GrailKing]

12 hours ago, anamika said:

Yes. Sansa was paranoid this episode, sort of like Cersei with her us vs them mentality.

Jon was doing something different to Ned. Funnily enough, he was following the philosophy of the person who orchestrated the Rains of Castamere

That's why Sansa asking him to not be like Ned, made no sense.

Well she has a right to be paranoid she lived through it,  ALONE; not only Cersei, but LF and Ramsey not something that is going to heal in a day,months or years and she, Jon,Arya and Bran like others will always have these memories in the back of their minds always the best they can hope for is support from family and friends.

Sansa wasn't privy to Tywin's philosophy, so from her POV and experience she made perfect sense.

[GrailKing]

12 hours ago, anamika said:

But he really did not do much other than sing. I though Arya with the Lannister men was a nice moment. It humanized the Lannister soldiers and Arya herself was enjoying a nice, quite moment - missing home, sympathizing with the soldier etc. I liked it.

I'm not getting the whole hating on ES thing, I also liked this part, it showed what average people miss gave Arya a chance to get away from her vengence for a bit,put extra thinking into her actions.

[Alapaki]

2 minutes ago, GrailKing said:

I'm not getting the whole hating on ES thing, I also liked this part, it showed what average people miss gave Arya a chance to get away from her vengence for a bit,put extra thinking into her actions.

I agree.  And I think that scene was effective in conveying a lot of information.  Besides what it did internally re: Arya, it demonstrated the thinness of the Lannister forces if they're reduced to sending such relatively young soldiers.  It conveyed the squalid state into which Kings Landing has fallen under Cersei.  And it gave some insight into the way that the upper crust's wars chew up and spit out the commoners, even those in their armies.

[Inquirer]

Here's something I don't get: there's this huge debate going on about the ethical ramifications of punishing two kids due to the sins of their parents and whether Sansa or Jon is right in the matter.  Fine, I get that.  But nobody seems to be questioning if MAYBE Arya's little opening stunt wasn't morally justified?  That murdering every son based on the sin of their parent might be needlessly excessive? Seriously, I keep hearing "SO BADASS" responses to that scene and I'm like "really?"  I get satisfaction at Walder's death, but every Frey male in the House?

Edited July 17, 2017 by Inquirer

[Francie]

1 minute ago, Inquirer said:

Here's something I don't get: there's this huge debate going on about the ethical ramifications of punishing two kids due to the sins of their parents and whether Sansa or Jon is right in the matter.  Fine, I get that.  But nobody seems to be questioning if MAYBE Arya's little opening stunt wasn't morally justified?  That murdering every son based on the sin of their parent might be needlessly excessive? Seriously, I keep hearing "SO BADASS" responses to that scene and I'm like "really?"  I get satisfaction at Walder's death, but every Frey male in the House?

Seemed like it was every Frey adult male. And Walder was so prodigious are we to believe that he had no sons, grandsons, or great-grandsons under the age of adulthood? They exist in the books. He had plenty of granddaughters and great-granddaughters who were teen aged or younger. 

So, what was Arya's cutting off point? 18? 15? 13? And didn't she just leave a bunch of young boys whose fathers were slaughtered? Boys who might one day go seek revenge on the north. Didn't she just not heed her own advice to take out all Freys root and stem. 

There just wasn't a lot of serious thought given to this incident. 

[FnkyChkn34]

4 minutes ago, Inquirer said:

Here's something I don't get: there's this huge debate going on about the ethical ramifications of punishing two kids due to the sins of their parents and whether Sansa or Jon is right in the matter.  Fine, I get that.  But nobody seems to be questioning if MAYBE Arya's little opening stunt wasn't morally justified?  That murdering every son based on the sin of their parent might be needlessly excessive? Seriously, I keep hearing "SO BADASS" responses to that scene and I'm like "really?"  I get satisfaction at Walder's death, but every Frey male in the House?

To most fans, Arya can do no wrong.  I think she's a homicidal psychopath, and one of my least favorite characters.  So yeah, I hear you.  But I'm clearly in the minority.

[stagmania]

9 minutes ago, GrailKing said:

I'm not getting the whole hating on ES thing, I also liked this part, it showed what average people miss gave Arya a chance to get away from her vengence for a bit,put extra thinking into her actions.

For me, it was incredibly jarring to see a pop star suddenly appear in this fantasy universe. Kind of breaks the immersive viewing experience and takes you out of the scene.

3 minutes ago, Inquirer said:

Here's something I don't get: there's this huge debate going on about the ethical ramifications of punishing two kids due to the sins of their parents and whether Sansa or Jon is right in the matter.  Fine, I get that.  But nobody seems to be questioning if MAYBE Arya's little opening stunt wasn't morally justified?  That murdering every son based on the sin of their parent might be needlessly excessive?  Seriously, I keep hearing "SO BADASS" responses to that scene and I'm like "really?"

Well, the entire (adult male) Frey family was in on the scheme to murder the Starks and their bannermen, weren't they? So they weren't murdered because of what their father did, but because of the slaughter they actively took part in. Arya didn't harm the daughters or the servants. 

[FnkyChkn34]

1 minute ago, Francie said:

There just wasn't a lot of serious thought given to this incident. 

That's Arya's problem - she doesn't think.  She's not very intelligent, in my opinion.

[quazimodo]

9 minutes ago, Inquirer said:

Here's something I don't get: there's this huge debate going on about the ethical ramifications of punishing two kids due to the sins of their parents and whether Sansa or Jon is right in the matter.  Fine, I get that.  But nobody seems to be questioning if MAYBE Arya's little opening stunt wasn't morally justified?  That murdering every son based on the sin of their parent might be needlessly excessive? Seriously, I keep hearing "SO BADASS" responses to that scene and I'm like "really?"  I get satisfaction at Walder's death, but every Frey male in the House?

Because Sansa can do no right which is why every minor infraction she makes is debated to death even whilst Arya is killing her way through Westeros.

Edited July 17, 2017 by quazimodo

[GrailKing]

12 hours ago, anamika said:

So Cersei is going to magically transport her army north using her sheer willpower because she wants revenge? And the Lannister army can magically fight in the North because Cersei wants revenge?

Jon and Jaime are looking at it strategically. It's winter. Food is scarce. The snows have already come. Cersei cannot send an army North.

Point missing, Jon and Jamie are thinking armies, Sansa knows Cersei ,and knows she only needs a few good killers.

Hence come down to KL and bend the knee, get the wolf into the lion's den, if that doesn't work 2 or three killers can go up by ship, up river at the white knife and hitch rides to WF, or wherever they learn where Jon could be, not expensive and few would know.

He's now the leader of the North, an enemy of the "Crown" he has to be extra careful of people and places, Sansa is only trying to protect his ass, by giving him her knowledge.

He be wise to keep it in mind.

[GrailKing]

7 minutes ago, stagmania said:

For me, it was incredibly jarring to see a pop star suddenly appear in this fantasy universe. Kind of breaks the immersive viewing experience and takes you out of the scene.

You miss those other musicians who been in the series?

GOT been doing this at least since season 3 Reynes of Castamere in the Red Wedding episode. 

12 minutes ago, FnkyChkn34 said:

That's Arya's problem - she doesn't think.  She's not very intelligent, in my opinion.

Well she's intelligent, but rash.

Ned called it Wolf Blooded like Lyanna and Brandon not a good sign.

[stagmania]

3 minutes ago, GrailKing said:

You miss those other musicians who been in the series?

GOT been doing this at least since season 3 Reynes of Castamere in the Red Wedding episode. 

Let's not pretend that Sigur Ros is recognizable in the same way as Ed Sheeran. 

[anamika]

51 minutes ago, ElizaD said:

Ned's death is blamed on him wanting to spare the lives of innocent children despite the crimes of the parents. Robb is blamed for executing Lord Karstark when he did murder Lannister children. So clearly, Jon should have learned from this and killed innocent children because of the sins of their relatives. Yet even as the show reminds us of how Ned and Robb paid for their honor, Jon showing mercy to the children of his enemies is somehow supposed to be a good decision rather than him failing to correct the mistake of his predecessors?

Maybe because context and situation is important? It's not a one rule applies for all situations kind of thing. Ned went and warned Cersei because he wanted to protect children - Cersei turns to that her advantage. Robb executed Karstark for committing the murder of prisoners of war. Not sure how either of those situations apply here?

A  more suitable comparison would be Robert and Joffrey trying to punish Targaryen and Stark children and Dany, Arya and Sansa escaping. Or Ned taking Theon as his ward.  Dany is on her way with her dragons, Arya took out the Freys and Sansa is doing something, I dunno. Theon betrayed the Starks. So the lesson here, seems to be that if you are going after the children for the sins of their parents, then complete the task - kill them. Letting them live seems to be a folly.

And this is where Jon quoting Ned's 'The man who passes the sentence must swing the sword' comes into play. Sansa wants to strip these children of their homes that belonged to their families for centuries - why would they not come back for revenge a la Dany and Arya? In which case she should execute them. Is Sansa ready to look these kids in the eye and chop off their heads? If she can do it, I say go for it!

27 minutes ago, Inquirer said:

Here's something I don't get: there's this huge debate going on about the ethical ramifications of punishing two kids due to the sins of their parents and whether Sansa or Jon is right in the matter.  Fine, I get that.  But nobody seems to be questioning if MAYBE Arya's little opening stunt wasn't morally justified?  That murdering every son based on the sin of their parent might be needlessly excessive? Seriously, I keep hearing "SO BADASS" responses to that scene and I'm like "really?"  I get satisfaction at Walder's death, but every Frey male in the House?

That entire room participated in the Red Wedding as evidenced by their cheers when Walder kept mentioning their kills. What's wrong in Arya murdering those traitorous bastards?

Edited July 17, 2017 by anamika

[Francie]

15 minutes ago, FnkyChkn34 said:

That's Arya's problem - she doesn't think.  She's not very intelligent, in my opinion.

I meant the writer, whether it was Dan, David or Bryan.  They went for big! fireworks! grand! twist!! but gave little damn thought to the context or mechanics. 

[GrailKing]

2 minutes ago, stagmania said:

Let's not pretend that Sigur Ros is recognizable in the same way as Ed Sheeran. 

What did having ES as a singer take away from the idea they were trying to tell, nothing, it actually enhanced that scene and it didn't matter if it was ES, SR or a nobody it was the scene NOT the singer.

[Dev F]

1 hour ago, Francie said:

My critique is not about the timing. 

I get, and like, the concept of a faceless assassin. They come in, they infiltrate into the house or workplace of the target, and they move about as that person. They keep that persona while there.

Here, none of what Arya did went that way. Where is getting the poison? How is she just able to move about the castle putting this all into place? She does have to be a servant girl carrying the body ... somewhere. She either has to don the Walder mask -- which she creates herself without the help of the temple -- to order the banquet or she has to have enough authority as the servant girl to order it done.

I agree with you that the plan is a bit dodgy up to the point when she took Walder's face. She would've had to arrange for a clean way to kill Walder, spirit away the corpse, and prepare the body for defacement while in the role of a mere serving girl. Still, we know from her interactions with Jaime during the post-Riverrun feast that she was being fairly careful, laying low and scoping things out rather than lashing out as soon as she came upon her enemies, so I guess we're supposed to assume that she'd taken her time and planned it all out . . . somehow.

But once she has Walder's face, she's pretty much got the run of the household, so any part of her plan that come after that -- procuring the poison, lacing the wine, assembling all the Freys, etc -- doesn't seem at all inexplicable to me.

Quote

And poor servant girl. I sure hope she just happened to die and Arya took her face. And not that Arya just stone cold killed her to get her face.

I wasn't sure whether we were supposed to think that she'd taken the face of an existing serving girl, or whether she brought that face with her from the House of Black and White. I suppose neither explanation is completely sufficient. On the one hand, stealing another face from the Faceless Men negates the "Here's the Waif's face, so we're square" ending to that storyline, and raises the question of why a random girl no one knows would be able to infiltrate the Twins. On the other hand, as you mention, it seems like a cheat for Arya to have murdered an innocent woman off-screen, or for a servant girl at the Twins to have conveniently died just as Arya got there.

2 minutes ago, stagmania said:

Well, the entire (adult male) Frey family was in on the scheme to murder the Starks and their bannermen, weren't they? So they weren't murdered because of what their father did, but because of the slaughter they actively took part in. Arya didn't harm the daughters or the servants. 

That reminds me: After Arya killed all the Freys, what happened to Edmure Tully? The last we heard, he was back in Walder's dungeon. Did Arya not know he was there and just leave him to rot along with any other captives the Freys might've had on hand? Did she free him but decide not to reveal herself to the only living relative she'd seen since she was a little girl? Seems like a cheat to just entirely ignore the question.

[bguy]

1 hour ago, Enigma X said:

I was a bit shocked that Cersei viewed Tommen as a traitor though.

 

Cersei has good reason to view Tommen as a traitor.  He pretty much signed off on condemning her to death when he revoked the right to trial by combat (which she was counting on to avoid being condemned to death in the High Septon's court.)      

[GrailKing]

12 hours ago, izabella said:

Cersei doesn't need to send an army North.  Littlefinger's army is already there.  All she needs is some twisted deal with Littlefinger. 

She already has that in a way, Sansa's head on a spike, throw Jon's in for extra measure.

[Enigma X]

2 minutes ago, bguy said:

Cersei has good reason to view Tommen as a traitor.  He pretty much signed off on condemning her to death when he revoked the right to trial by combat (which she was counting on to avoid being condemned to death in the High Septon's court.)      

I am not talking about her reasoning (which is suspect). She just seems to have always made excuses for her kids. I personally did not see Tommen as a traitor.

[GrailKing]

12 hours ago, anamika said:

Then Sansa should focus on getting rid of LF instead of advising Jon about Cersei who is thousands of miles away. The Vale will support the Starks. They don't need LF any more. Why is she not making a case to get rid of LF like she wants to punish the children of the traitors?

She is, she is also correct about cersei, what by boat a week ten days, Jon and her could be dead, less if she pressures LF  .

Sansa can't be sure of the Vale yet as she told Brienne they need them and as of now they are beholden to Robyn and LF.  I be interested to see if Royce and Sansa actually talk, we don't need to hear it, just seeing them together would be enough.

[GrailKing]

12 hours ago, J----av said:

 Well she was right telling Jon that Ramsay would set a trap for him and not to fall for it. Jon is an idiot though and of course fell for it and got thousands of his men killed. Good thing LF bailed him out. Neither Jon or Sansa are really smart enough to rule the North

Jon's not an idiot, can't fault a person for trying to save his little brother, I don't think even Sansa would think Ramsey save Rickon to set the trap, especially after seeing Shaggy's head.

[Nanrad]

9 hours ago, shireenbamfatheon said:

Arya is cheered on for killing all the men in the Frey line with a smirk and then people turn around and paint Sansa as a monster for proposing that maybe they shouldn't let the kids of the men they killed be in charge of the most powerful strongholds in the North?  

She killed the men that were actively responsible for the slaughter of her family, where as Sansa wants to hold these men's children responsible for their fathers actions. Arya literally kills those who have participating in harming/killing her family. So, shows mercy and kindness to others.

3 hours ago, Growsonwalls said:

I think if any Stark is like Cersei, it's Arya. Shoot (or poison) first, and don't even ask questions. I think many viewers remember the scrappy Arya from the first few seasons and love her fighting spirit. I do too. But the Arya of S7 is a cold-blooded mass murderer.

How? Arya is taking revenge on those who have murdered her family and not for petty/trivial reasons or to get power. Arya doesn't feel entitled to anything. Hell, most, if not all, of the people she has killed gloated in the harm they've caused her and her family.

[screamin]

9 hours ago, anamika said:

No, certainly not. Joffrey was an idiot - hence his assassination attempt on Bran.  But I thought we were talking about Cersei and her secret stash of ninja assassins that she sends around to assassinate leaders in other kingdoms that Sansa knows all about.

 

Oh dear. Who mentioned ninjas? I didn't. Only you did. Sansa certainly didn't. Nor did she mention assassination. I used that word, not Sansa, and I see now that I shouldn't have used it, because you've taken it and run with it to some pretty weird places. Sorry.

Sansa said Cersei MURDERS her opponents. Jon correctly states that a large army from the south likely won't be able to approach and besiege Winterfell successfully in the winter. This is a perfect military truth. It was also a perfect military truth that before Cersei's trial, the Lannister military forces in KL were under Tommen's control, and Tommen wanted Cersei tried and punished, and Cersei was therefore nothing to worry about from the military point of view. Cersei did not win control of KL and the Iron Throne through military battle. She won it through a spectacular act of mass murder, engineered by her competent Master of Whispers, who we see has even managed to successfully assume control of Varys' hypercompetent 'little birds.' And we see in this season that she's leveraged that to control over the Lannister armies and control of King's Landing, which is under her thumb right now, whose (surviving) leading citizens are crowning her queen and crying "Long may she reign!" even though she murdered huge numbers of her enemies and the very Pope and quasi-messiah of the poor right in front of their eyes. That is one really competent Master of Whispers she has.

Now her survival as queen depends on her capacity to strike at a distance, because she doesn't have enough armies on her side to bring battle to her enemies and vanquish them. The job of Master of Whispers does not just entail spying over and acting secretly in King's Landing...it's supposed to cover the whole country, and even further beyond at need. Only an incompetent Master of Whisperers would neglect to take over the widespread networks of a spymaster. We've seen Qyburn is NOT incompetent. The lesson? Just because Cersei is militarily outmatched (and she is) you count her out at your peril.

I wholly and totally agree with you that Joffrey was an idiot. My point in bringing him up is showing that even an idiot can hire a murderer, send him a long distance and have him nearly succeed in killing Bran AND Catelyn as a bonus. It doesn't take a ninja. The man Joffrey hired was no ninja, just some half-awake cutthroat who still managed to set a stable in Winterfell on fire and wound Catelyn in Bran's own bedroom. Joffrey was an idiot, but Qyburn (who Cersei would delegate the job to) is not. He would likely hire someone better and come up with a better plan. So Cersei does remain a peril that Jon would be unwise to discount.

[Normades]

1 minute ago, Nanrad said:

How? Arya is taking revenge on those who have murdered her family and not for petty/trivial reasons or to get power. Arya doesn't feel entitled to anything. Hell, most, if not all, of the people she has killed gloated in the harm they've caused her and her family.

Right.  Plus, she made sure the girl at the Frey event did not drink the poison.  I agree she has only paid retribution to those directly involved in hurting her family.