Game of Thrones Season 5 Finale(Spoilers)

[Hobojebus 11,341]

Actually no it was necessary sansa has been a very passive character little more than an object to be acted upon by others, by giving her adversity to overcome they've changed that giving her an inner strength she's severely lacked.

Now she has agency.

Now it's valid to dislike the r word as a plot device but it's far better that she becomes a fleshed out character than remain a pawn, plus it's not like she was the first person he did this to, theon suffered a far worse form of violation and broke because of it, then there were the girls he used and then hunted down for sport it's his modus operandi to abuse others for amusement.

[TasteTheRainbow 8,726]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/game-of-thrones/11632939/Game-of-Thrones-sexual-violence-in-Martins-novels-is-far-worse-than-in-the-show.html

[Fuego Estelar 401]

 

[WarriorPoet 352]

My wife and I have already read them all, but we're listening to the whole series on audiobook now.

I've read the books, and my wife is listening to the audiobooks (nearly at the end of Storm of Swords), and first of all, the quality of narration and character voices is astounding (I heard Varamyr Sixskins' voice for the first time today, and got shivers up and down my spine!). As I'm occasionally in the car with her, I'm hearing bits and pieces of the story, and it's interesting to me just how graphic it is. I've speculated that this is due to having read them, so I could speed ahead through those parts, rather than having to wait for a narrator to finish the scene.

Edited June 18, 2015 by WarriorPoet

[Vigil 687]

Actually no it was necessary sansa has been a very passive character little more than an object to be acted upon by others, by giving her adversity to overcome they've changed that giving her an inner strength she's severely lacked.

Now she has agency.

Now it's valid to dislike the r word as a plot device but it's far better that she becomes a fleshed out character than remain a pawn, plus it's not like she was the first person he did this to, theon suffered a far worse form of violation and broke because of it, then there were the girls he used and then hunted down for sport it's his modus operandi to abuse others for amusement.

She's had nothing but adversity ever since she left Winterfell. 

And she was beginning to gain a sense of agency and maturity in the books under the 'tutelage' of Littlefinger while in the Vale. 

It's also not the first time the TV show has taken something and made it r___. See also, Dany and Drogo's first time and Cersei and Jaime's last time (conveniently, this was also in this last season): Both instances of consensual sex in the books turned into r___ in the show. 

So I think the criticism that the show is exploitative (sexploitation?) is a fair one. 

(I don't understand why that word is censored, but whatever.)

Edited June 18, 2015 by Vigil

[Gadge 4,294]

exactly Vigil.

 

Dont get me wrong i like both the books and the adaptation but i think the books convey sansa journey , vulnerability and 'use' as a playing piece far better without going for a shock tactic.

 

But it is pretty unnecsary a lot of the time in the tv show, like mellisandre gets her breasts out pretty much everytime she says hello to some one.  Im pretty sure in the books she's quite seductive too but i seem to remember her being a little classier

[FTS Gecko 24,135]

Take the sansa/ramsey 'non consensual intercourse' to avoid using the censored R word plot.

 

Totally unnecessary , not in the books, purely to titillate a tv audience.

 

Wrong.  It WAS in the books - it just happened to a different character.  And in the books Theon found himself actively involved in that sordid little scene, rather than just being an unwilling spectator.

 

As pointed out earlier in the thread, all the TV show did with that plot point was streamline the books - instead of having Sansa and Littlefinger miss a season of TV along with Bran (because in the books, they're still at the Eyrie doing nothing of note), they simply switched characters.

 

Because what would be the point of reintroducing Jayne Poole (masquerading as Arya Stark) to the TV audience when all she had was a blink-and-you'll-miss-it cameo in season one, when you can keep one of the main characters involved in the story in a prominent role instead?

 

But it is pretty unnecsary a lot of the time in the tv show, like mellisandre gets her breasts out pretty much everytime she says hello to some one.  Im pretty sure in the books she's quite seductive too but i seem to remember her being a little classier

 

Meh, you want to talk about unnecessary, how about the book pairing Daenerys and Missandei off together, or Qarth and Meereen's "traditional dress" involving exposed breasts?

 

The series may have added a few brothel scenes and side characters (usually for character exposition, like Oberyn and Ellyria's introduction in season 4, or Littlefinger's background and scheming in season 1), but it's also removed a fair bit of unnecessary content as well.

[Gadge 4,294]

 

Take the sansa/ramsey 'non consensual intercourse' to avoid using the censored R word plot.

 

Totally unnecessary , not in the books, purely to titillate a tv audience.

 

Wrong.  It WAS in the books - it just happened to a different character.  And in the books Theon found himself actively involved in that sordid little scene, rather than just being an unwilling spectator.

 

 

 

 

So it didnt happen to sansa then did it

 

I think we're going to have to agree to disagree.

 

I'm all for certain plot changes when for narrative purposes its better to *see* robs campaign then just have someone read out his letters but im just less happy about dumbing down the plot and making substituions to help dim people who can't remember more than 20 characters at a time.

[WarriorPoet 352]

... im just less happy about dumbing down the plot and making substituions to help dim people who can't remember more than 20 characters at a time.

I think you just eliminated something like 90% of TV viewers.

[FTS Gecko 24,135]

So it didnt happen to sansa then did it

 

I think we're going to have to agree to disagree.

 

I'm all for certain plot changes when for narrative purposes its better to *see* robs campaign then just have someone read out his letters but im just less happy about dumbing down the plot and making substituions to help dim people who can't remember more than 20 characters at a time.

 

So what you're saying is you would have been totally fine with that particular story arc if it played out almost identically, with the sole change being a new female character that hasn't been seen before in the series with no prior narrative connection to Theon gets introduced in Sansa's place, while Sansa vanishes from the screen completely until next year (at least)?

 

Sounds legit.

 

Again, the changes made for TV make perfect sense to me.  Pairing established characters with pre-existing on-screen relationships together makes much more sense from a viewing perspective than introducing totally new, never (or rarely) seen before characters for the sake of continuity with the books.  Sansa and Theon makes much more narrative sense moving forward than Jayne Poole & Theon.  Jamie & Bronn is a better paring than Jamie and (the totally mute) Ilyn Payne.  The Iron Islands story arc is pretty pointless and would make awful viewing.  Hardhome on the other hand made amazing viewing, but didn't appear in the books.  Have D & D got everything right in the series?  No.  But neither has George RR Martin either.

Edited June 18, 2015 by FTS Gecko

[Gadge 4,294]

Like i say you don't get it, that's fine.  lets agree to disagree.

 

I honestly don't care enough about it to keep repeating myself.

[FTS Gecko 24,135]

R + L = J is about as close to true as the books get. If it's not true then a significant amount of dialogue was just there to distract us with a completely beliveable and obvious truth that every character somehow fails to see.

 

Rheagar + Lyanna?  Nah, not convinced.  One of Jon's parents being a character we've never actually met in the books/series I can understand, but BOTH parents?  Nah.  Let's take a trip back in time and see why:

 

 

We're introduced to the family Stark lots of pretty and likable (and soon to be dead) kids - and the dark-haired Jon Snow, "Eddard Stark's bastard son", who his wife despises.

 

On the other side of the continent we met the snowy-haired Targaryen siblings.  More on them later.

 

The royal family Baratheon shows up.  (King) Robert Baratheon abandons his wife and children immediately on arrival at Winterfell to visit and weep over Ne'ds dead sister, Lyanna Stark's tomb.  He angrily declares his love for her and how she should have been at his side, not his actual wife, Cersei Lannister.  And who can blame him?  Cersei's the kind of girl who liks to "keep it in the family", so to speak.  In any case, I think it's fair to say that Robert Baratheon and Lyanna Stark HAD A THING.

 

Jon Snow leaves for the Wall and the Night's Watch.  Ned tells him he'll explain who his mother was next time he sees him (whoops, sorry about that Jon), and trundles off with the king's retinue.  En route to King's Landing, Ned and Robert have a heart to heart, reminiscing about their old warring days.  Robert questions Ned about Snow, and Ned goes silent.  SEKRITS.

 

On arrival at King's Landing, Ned is appointed King's Hand and immediately gets embroiled in a plot regarding... Robert Baratheon's ever-growing multitude of bastard offspring.  Robert's legitimate offspring are all blond (hey, so are his wife and her brother!  What a coincidence!) while the rest of Robert's ENTIRE FAMILY LINE are dark haired.  Medieval genetics, bro.

 

 

Over in Mongolia. obnoxious white-haired Targaryen fella gets a hot melty golden helmet, and dies screaming.  I guess you're just not dragon, bro.  His little sister is now ostensibly the last of her line.

 

Up at the wall, Jon Snow protects his commanding officer from the Walking Dead, burning himself badly in the process.

 

Back at King's Landing, Robert karks it through a combination of excessive amounts of alcohol, bad aim and 500+ lbs of angry, bristling pork (and a suspicious and malicious wife).  Ned has severe reservations about the line of succession, and promptly loses his head over it (but not before letting Robert's brother, Stannis Baratheon in on the SEKRIT, and getting the fruit of Robert's loins the hell out of dodge).

 

Sole surviving Targaryen sibling takes a firey bath and emerges unharmed, birthing a trio of cute little winged lizards in the process.

 

Stannis is annoyed.  Knowing what he now knows, he believes the throne should be rightfully his.  He's not wrong, either.  His younger brother ain't so keen on the idea, though, so he gets his witchy woman to shadowshank him.  This witchy woman, by the way, believes that the Baratheons are the rightful rulers as well.  Not only that, she believes the Baratheon's bloodlne has magical powers (and proves it) and that the Baratheon bloodline hold the key to saving Westeros from the coming darkness.

 

Lots of stuff happens, mostly bad things to good people.  Lots of beheadings and mutilations and regicide.  Eventually, Stannis and his witchy woman make their way up to the Wall, and meet Jon Snow (and another ancient, blind, white-haired Targaryen).

 

Witchy woman does a double take.

 

Turns out she got the right house and the right bloodline (as successful magic being succesful proved)...just the wrong representative of it.  Turns out there was a Baratheon hidden away up there in the North already, who knew exactly why the night was dark and full of terrors and has been fighting it with sword and fire for the last five seaso... er, indeterminate amount of time.  The same fella has been trying to unite the people of the North against the common enemy (just as you'd expect a true king to do).

 

Only problem is, by the time she figures all this out and ditches poor old Stannis, Jon's been et tu Brute'd by his own crew...

 

...and, scene.

 

So what do we know about Jon Snow?

 

Well, he's clearly got a royal bloodline - hence Melisandre's immediate interest.  And he's clearly not Eddard's son - Ned was far too honorable and devoted to his wife to sire a kid with anyone other than his wife.

 

He's also clearly not got the "blood of the Dragon" like Danerys - he's used fire to his advantage, sure, but hurt himself in the process.  And unlike every known Targaryens, he's got dark hair.  Medieval genetics bro - they never fail.

 

So Ned was covering up Jon's heritage for someone - his sister Lyanna Stark is the obvious suspect when it comes to the mother.  Who's the papi?  Dark hair, king's blood, where've we seen that before, oh yeah, Robert Baratheon... who HAD THAT THING with Lyanna Stark.

 

The formula's still right, but one of the players is wrong.   Robert + Lyanna = Jon.

 

R + L = J.  QED.

Edited June 20, 2015 by FTS Gecko

[TasteTheRainbow 8,726]

Robert and Lyanna were actually betrothed, but she did not care for him at all. In one of Ned's flashbacks she makes it pretty clear that she is not and won't be happy with Robert.

Robert questions Ned about Jon's mother, not Jon. Ned changes the topic because he doesn't want to tell Robert that Lyanna ran away with Rhaegar(instead of being "kidnapped" for several (9ish?) months like the official lore says) . Lyanna had very dark hair as well.

Having the blood of the dragon doesn't make you immune to fire. It makes you more susceptible to firey dragon magic stuff. If Dany stuck her hand in a random fire she would get burned just like anyone else.

Edited June 20, 2015 by TasteTheRainbow

[FTS Gecko 24,135]

If Dany stuck her hand in a random fire she would get burned just like anyone else.

 

Only, she did just that, and she didn't get burned.  She put the dragon eggs in a brazier and plucked them back out again without any ill effects.  Her handmaidens were awed by it.

 

...and then of course, there's the entire Khal Drogo funeral pyre...

 

In any case, from the point of view of the books Rheagar might, potentially be a viable candidate as Jon's father (still ridiculous for such a big reveal to be two characters we've never, ever met in the series - talk about emotional detachment), but from the point of view of the streamlined TV series, much less so.  Rhaegar's barely mentioned in the series.  "Oh yeah, your father was a random Targaryen bro" would be a complete and utter asspull.

 

Not saying you're wrong, just explaining the reasoning behind my own opinion on the lineage. (we'll find out soon enough anyway!   Jon's potential Baratheon lineage was right there from book one/season one/episode one, for me Rheagar seems more of an added-later red herring.

 

End of the day, the Baratheon line and Targaryen line both have legitimate claims to the throne, and both houses have a vital role to play if Westeros is going to survive the coming winter.  Jon + Danerys ruling together = Baratheon (& Stark) + Targaryen ruling together = profit for Westeros.  Simples!

Edited June 20, 2015 by FTS Gecko

[TasteTheRainbow 8,726]

I grew up in a family that camps. I can pluck stuff out of a pretty hot fire that people think will burn them too. I can guarantee I am not a Targaryen.

If Dany could pick up burning coals or stand in a fire without getting burned she would be doing it left and right to show people how boss she was.

In the books they are mentioned pretty often. All we need is Bran to see what really happened in the show.

[FTS Gecko 24,135]

I grew up in a family that camps. I can pluck stuff out of a pretty hot fire that people think will burn them too. I can guarantee I am not a Targaryen.

 

Bit of a difference between juggling a coal-cooked baked potato and picking up a red-hot glowing stone egg without getting burned.

 

Or walking out of a bonfire unharmed, for that matter

Edited June 20, 2015 by FTS Gecko

[TasteTheRainbow 8,726]

Dragon eggs don't retain heat. They take it in. The egg she pulled out was cool.

It's pretty clear in the books that she is not immune to fire, but if you skimmed here's boss-man:

George_RR_Martin: Granny, thanks for asking that. It gives me a chance to clear up a common misconception. TARGARYENS ARE NOT IMMUNE TO FIRE! The birth of Dany's dragons was unique, magical, wonderous, a miracle. She is called The Unburnt because she walked into the flames and lived. But her brother sure as hell wasn't immune to that molten gold.

Revanshe: So she won't be able to do it again?

George_RR_Martin: Probably not.

Edited June 20, 2015 by TasteTheRainbow

[WarriorPoet 352]

FTS, I liked your analysis ("medieval genetics," indeed - The seed is strong!), but rather than repeating what TTR (you cool with that abbreviation, good sir?) has already eloquently stated for textual evidence, I'd like to address the logic of the Targaryen-fire argument. Here, we have clear evidence for argumentation on either side:

Bit of a difference between juggling a coal-cooked baked potato and picking up a red-hot glowing stone egg without getting burned.

Or walking out of a bonfire unharmed, for that matter

Dragon eggs don't retain heat. They take it in. The egg she pulled out was cool.

However, both examples you give are of Targaryens interacting with some sort of magical fire (i.e., dragon eggs in a brazier or a funeral pyre with dragon eggs {and Mirri-Maz Dur}). Therefore, the logic problem of the argument is that when you say Targaryens are immune to fire, you cite instances of magical fire not effecting them, which proves the point that they aren't immune to fire (as the GRRM statement clarified), just select magical instances of it.

Again, I'm not trying to belabor the point or gang up on you; I found your Snow-ancestry argument intriguing, but I don't think it's precisely accurate.

[FTS Gecko 24,135]

Dragon eggs don't retain heat. They take it in. The egg she pulled out was cool.

 

Don't know where you pulled that little factoid from, but the sizzling of her handmaiden's flesh and her reaction says you're wrong.

 

But hey, if boss man says something in an interview outside the books, I guess it's canon. 

 

 

However, both examples you give are of Targaryens interacting with some sort of magical fire (i.e., dragon eggs in a brazier or a funeral pyre with dragon eggs {and Mirri-Maz Dur}). Therefore, the logic problem of the argument is that when you say Targaryens are immune to fire, you cite instances of magical fire not effecting them, which proves the point that they aren't immune to fire (as the GRRM statement clarified), just select magical instances of it.

 

Mmmhmmmnn.  Fair enough I suppose.  How about the boiling water in her wedding bath though?  Was that magical too?

 

But hey, this is still just a single point of my analysis you're finding contentious; there's plenty more points I've raised which you haven't addressed.  We'll find out the truth when George Dubba Arr gets a wiggle on and ends his series, I guess.

 

Assuming he lives that long, of course.

[TasteTheRainbow 8,726]

Yea that scene didn't really go down like that in the book. There was no sizzling of any skin. The books make you think she's a bit heat-tolerant but there is no suggestion that she can just walk through fire unless blood/dragon magic is involved. Pushing some eggs down into coals is not like actually picking up a piece of burning wood.

I guess it's just a point where the show and books diverge.

Edited June 20, 2015 by TasteTheRainbow

[WarriorPoet 352]

But hey, this is still just a single point of my analysis you're finding contentious; there's plenty more points I've raised which you haven't addressed.

Sorry, I thought I'd made it abundantly clear that I liked most of your analysis.

Taste The Rainbow has already explained the Rhaegar-Lyana concern precisely as I would have, and since you two were still going back and forth about blood and fire, I thought I'd hop in for a sec. Believe me when I say I'm not here to troll...

[FTS Gecko 24,135]

Yea that scene didn't really go down like that in the book. There was no sizzling of any skin. The books make you think she's a bit heat-tolerant but there is no suggestion that she can just walk through fire unless blood/dragon magic is involved. Pushing some eggs down into coals is not like actually picking up a piece of burning wood.

I guess it's just a point where the show and books diverge.

 

Yeah, in the books Danerys places the eggs in the coals then leaves them there until the brazier's gone out and is cold again.  The series however goes to great lengths to show that Danerys has some kind of special connection with heat/fire (praise R'hllor) pretty much from the first moment we see her.

 

In both the series and books, however, she mocks Viserys' death with the line "He was no dragon; fire cannot kill a dragon".

 

 

Taste The Rainbow has already explained the Rhaegar-Lyana concern precisely as I would have, and since you two were still going back and forth about blood and fire, I thought I'd hop in for a sec. Believe me when I say I'm not here to troll...

 

Fair enough!  The blood/fire magic is more of a footnote anyway, as like I pointed out Danerys seems to have some form of protection or immunity, but Viserys clearly didn't.  No reason to think that all Targaryens do - unless of course there's some kind of dormant power in their blood which needs to be understood/controlled.  In both the books and series, Danerys certainly seems to instinctively know what to do, and when.

 

Melisandre's interest in Jon Snow - and her abandonment of Stannis - is pretty interesting though.  She proved there was power in royal blood, and her prophecies and visions are clearly focused on the Baratheons rather than the Targaryens.

Edited June 20, 2015 by FTS Gecko

[WarriorPoet 352]

Melisandre's interest in Jon Snow - and her abandonment of Stannis - is pretty interesting though.  She proved their was power in royal blood, and her prophecies and visions are clearly focused on the Baratheons rather than the Targaryens.

I'll grant you the first point there, though I think that's only in the show (?).

For your second point, I'll contend that Melisandre had originally misinterpreted the prophecy about Azor A'hai (see: dead -frozen- Stannis), so I don't know that she's the most reliable prophetess in Westeros.

[TasteTheRainbow 8,726]

Yea she hasn't strictly abandoned Stannis in the books, but she DID stay at Castle Black while he ride to the hardest battle of his life.

Her obsession with the only surviving Baratheon may have ended.

[FTS Gecko 24,135]

Yea she hasn't strictly abandoned Stannis in the books, but she DID stay at Castle Black while he ride to the hardest battle of his life.

Her obsession with the only surviving Baratheon may have ended.

 

Wouldn't call it a a battle, exactly.  More of a slaughter (or in the books, a slow, uncomfortable, hopeless endeavour).

 

Ah well, it's all much of a muchness anyway given Jon's "for the Watch" shanking.  The only hope he has at this point - books or TV - is if his Wildling buddies catch what's going on and get him to the Red Priestess before he croaks.  Of course, on TV, Tormund's around and might be willing to step in, but in the books he's at Hardhome.  I guess that leaves Wun Wun.  Save Jon, Wun Wun, you're our only hope...