A Balanced Review of Show Stannis [Book Spoilers]

[RoamingRonin]

More upset with their portrayal of Selyse. I really wanted to hate her.

[The Drunkard]

Stannis is not one of my favorites - book or show. In both though, I always got the feeling Stannis does not really believe in the Lord of Light, but he sees it as a means to an end. Doesn't he burn people when they are in the North though, for not converting to R'hllor? So maybe they are advancing that plot a bit with burning people now.

The behind the scenes with D&D for this episode sheds some more light on the intent behind the Stannis scenes. While watching it, I could hear the StanStans protesting. It's pretty clear it was not written by GRRM.

No. He burns either Mance or Rattleshirt for non-religious reasons, and he burns the three cannibals for their cannibalism and a potential murder (this is after refusing repeated requests from the queen's men to burn an unbeliever, by the way). The closest he comes to imposing religious restriction in the North is making the wildlings burn a piece of weirwood if they want to enter the realm.

Do you know where I could watch the behind the scenes video, by the way?

[Guard of the Rainking]

Stannis is not one of my favorites - book or show. In both though, I always got the feeling Stannis does not really believe in the Lord of Light, but he sees it as a means to an end. Doesn't he burn people when they are in the North though, for not converting to R'hllor? So maybe they are advancing that plot a bit with burning people now.

The behind the scenes with D&D for this episode sheds some more light on the intent behind the Stannis scenes. While watching it, I could hear the StanStans protesting. It's pretty clear it was not written by GRRM.

IIRC he burns Mance because he was a deserter and a few southern soldiers who turned to cannibalism during the march to Winterfell.

[David Selig]

Yeah, this was stupid. The showrunners are creating a very different and nowhere near as interesting Stannis than the one in the books.

And what's with the "they are in a better place now" and "Hell is here on Earth" nonsense? I don't recall this from the books, though I may be wrong, the Red God's religion has never interested me much. But Melisandre never talked souls in the books.

[Bold Barry Whitebeard]

I'm viewing this through rose-colored glass because I'm such a Stannis fan, but here are my thoughts:

"I told him to take them down and he disobeyed." - The reason he at least tells himself why they had to be executed. I'm sure Mel and Selyse pushed for it because they're infidels, but at the end of the day, Stannis gave an order and it wasn't followed.

"I put up with a lot of things I don't like." - That's a zinger to the Red God and burnings right there! At least, I hope so.

[Tori Targaryen]

I take the show version of Stannis as a highlight of where he's going ultimately. I wasn't fond of him in the books, and if anything, the show made me like him more than I originally did.

[Rooseman]

I'm not a Stannis fan, and I never really understood the complaints about Show!Stannis until last night. Even for me that was a bit over the top. Maybe they're doing it so his rescue of the NW will be all the more surprising?

Maybe, but that's a stupid reason.

They did a similar thing with the Red Wedding, where it all seemed much more pleasant, so the shock would be bigger when it finally happens. Even if I don't agree with that, I can understand it.

But with characters it doesn't work that way. You simply can't make him more despicable, so that his redemption will have a stronger effect. As Stannis himself said, a good act doesn't wash out the bad. So whatever he does when he comes to help at the Wall, he'll still be a man who burned people alive for not believing in the right god. You can't erase that.

"I told him to take them down and he disobeyed." - The reason he at least tells himself why they had to be executed. I'm sure Mel and Selyse pushed for it because they're infidels, but at the end of the day, Stannis gave an order and it wasn't followed.

That would work, but they really didn't portray it that way. They should have let Stannis say "He disobeyed a direct order, I can't have that, he has to die" to really drive the point home that this was his reason. Not let him use the word "infidel"

"I put up with a lot of things I don't like." - That's a zinger to the Red God and burnings right there! At least, I hope so.

Yeah I'm pretty sure about that. But what does that really say about Show-Stannis? He doesn't like it, yet he does not have the balls to tell them "No!" That does make him seem like Melisandre's bitch. Not sure if I'd rather have him be a bitch or an asshole, but preferably neither.

[Señor de la Tormenta]

I just gave up all my hopes about he saving the Watch.

What D&D are doing probably has more to do with Jon and Mance almost reaching and understanding when Stannis comes and starts butchering all wildings, specially women and children.

[roxWolfox]

Stannis is my favorite character from the books, because he is, like myself, a purist of the "right". In the books he's certainly driven by Melisandre, because she proved to him that her faith is powerful (shadow brother killing and stuff). That's why in the book he tolerates (and that's the key word) Mel's burning shit. Have you stop to analyse Stannis intonation when he say's that the guy was a "infidel" in yesterday's scene? Did He really mean when he called the guy "Infidel" or was he "tolerating" Mel's burning shit again?

It's an honest question, because I really love the actor portraing him and I think that in his conversation with Davos he's merely repeating words and not believing in what he's doing. But it could be my love for Stannis seing things wrong.

Don't blame completely for my poor english. It's not my first language and I'm bad in the first one to begin with...

Welcome! :)

And I agree that Stephen Dillane is a very capable actor. Perfect for Stannis imo, but few actors can come across as sympathetic if they have weak lines.

I am praying they don't allow Stannis to go back to that horrible desperate creature that was begging Melisandre for her 'favours'. Man, that hurt my heart to see him portrayed in such a manner. I'm far from being a Stannis fan, but the man has serious backbone in the books, none of which was evident in his tv scenes. Grr.

"She is my daughter. You will not strike her."

or something to that effect, a few minutes after his snarky comment to Davos gave me hope that the Stannis we've read of is finally given a chance in the show.

[Sarah Lannister]

Stannis looked tired, and like he was just going through the motions during the burning scene. Selyse's anger towards her daughter seems new. I thought Selyse was more protective of Shireen, claiming that she was Stannis' heir.

[Enosh]

I think the scene was fine. Sure he called them "infidels," but he didn't seem like he really believed it. Rather, it sounded like he was trying to convince himself that it was fine to do; and that's the important part. There just isn't time to properly introduce the idea that they were traitors, and to just say that they are is rather abrupt.

bullshit

it wasn't a fine scene, not in the context of comparing to the book character and not even in a show only context

telling he is a traitor who tried to sell daughter to the lannisters behind his back takes all of 2 lines more, but we are cutting into Podrik or whatever the kid is called staring at the dancer time and that's just important development we can't miss :rolleyes:

I don't know why the fuck we have to rehash the same argument about motivations mattering every damn year, I'm not sure if people just don't understand or if they choose not to understand because the character in question is an antagonist to their favorite Dany or Tyrion

but MOTIVATIONS MATTER, end of story, him burning a guy because he is a non believer is completely different than him burning a guy because he tried to betray him by selling his own daughter, if people can't see that i don't even know what to say

but whatever, lets ignore the character assassinations of a book character and just look at it form a pure 100% show perspective

okay, here you have a guy, burning people because they follow a different religion (and that's the only reason every stated in the show)

but if you think about it, his hand, one of his most trusted advisers some dare say friend that is standing right besides him at said burning has multiple times openly proclaimed that he still follows the seven, how the fuck is that not problematic? it makes him into a giant hypocrite, that's bad writing even if we completely ignore the existence of the books, it will be even worse in season 5 or 6 when half his army will be made up by similar non believers

[Penguin king]

Why are people getting so worked up over that one word? Stannis has always paid lip service to the Red God It's a key part of his character. He sticks a symbol of rh'llor on his family crest, brandishes a magic sword, burns septs, and forces conversions and no one bats an eye lid. But he calls a man an Infidel and suddenly his whole character is ruined....

What am i missing here?

[Widows_Blood]

Why are people getting so worked up over that one word? Stannis has always paid lip service to the Red God It's a key part of his character. He sticks a symbol of rh'llor on his family crest, brandishes a magic sword, burns septs, and forces conversions and no one bats an eye lid. But he calls a man an Infidel and suddenly his whole character is ruined....

What am i missing here?

You're not missing anything. Just ignore the usual reactionaries.

[MyLittleDirewolf]

No. He burns either Mance or Rattleshirt for non-religious reasons, and he burns the three cannibals for their cannibalism and a potential murder (this is after refusing repeated requests from the queen's men to burn an unbeliever, by the way). The closest he comes to imposing religious restriction in the North is making the wildlings burn a piece of weirwood if they want to enter the realm.

Do you know where I could watch the behind the scenes video, by the way?

Thanks. I must have been confusing the queen's men's request and Stannis burning the cannibals, putting them together as one thing.

The behind the scenes is called Inside the Episode. I can find the one for S4E1 on YouTube, but E2 must not be up yet. If you have HBOGo (or a login to use) it's on there.

So far, they haven't had the queen's men in the Stannis plotlines. Which, I felt showed Stannis to be less of a fanatic, because at least he's not like those guys.

[The Prince of Newcastle]

D&D personally hate me and this is why they butcher Stannis.

It is a personal vendetta against me.

[Widows_Blood]

bullshit

it wasn't a fine scene, not in the context of comparing to the book character and not even in a show only context

telling he is a traitor who tried to sell daughter to the lannisters behind his back takes all of 2 lines more, but we are cutting into Podrik or whatever the kid is called staring at the dancer time and that's just important development we can't miss :rolleyes:

I don't know why the fuck we have to rehash the same argument about motivations mattering every damn year, I'm not sure if people just don't understand or if they choose not to understand because the character in question is an antagonist to their favorite Dany or Tyrion

but MOTIVATIONS MATTER, end of story, him burning a guy because he is a non believer is completely different than him burning a guy because he tried to betray him by selling his own daughter, if people can't see that i don't even know what to say

but whatever, lets ignore the character assassinations of a book character and just look at it form a pure 100% show perspective

okay, here you have a guy, burning people because they follow a different religion (and that's the only reason every stated in the show)

but if you think about it, his hand, one of his most trusted advisers some dare say friend that is standing right besides him at said burning has multiple times openly proclaimed that he still follows the seven, how the fuck is that not problematic? it makes him into a giant hypocrite, that's bad writing even if we completely ignore the existence of the books, it will be even worse in season 5 or 6 when half his army will be made up by similar non believers

Except did HE burn them or was it Melisandre? Did Stannis allow the burnings because he feels that Melisandre is his only chance at claiming the throne. No army, navy or support outside a few on Dragonstone. Context matters. To assume that Stannis today is 1:1 with Stannis in season 5-6 is ludicrous.

[The Abominable SnowOther]

i havent read any posts yet. MUST VENT RAGE, AHHHH!

Okay, So is he the villain? if thats what they are doing than fine! fuck 'em

What i dont get is why they have to make us hate him, So!

In the books, its very possible that he may end up going there eventually (fuck that shit, haha) but still, thats alright. They have replaced every redeemable quality he has WITH BULLSHIT! He's not even a compelling character he's just some fuckin lapdog bitch!

He's just a cartoony caricature of everything we hate in, well...anything!

[averde]

I watched show Stannis burn his brother in law alive for being an infidel. I don't think any character could recover from that kind of blatant evil.

I'm not even that big a fan of book Stannis but all the great elements that make the character interesting and dynamic are gone. It would be the equivalent of show Theon having no love for the Starks from the very beginning and never being friends with Robb. It just ruins an entire aspect of that character that can never be recovered.

I would also like to note that I found the whole infidel scene to be especially offensive because of the way American viewers will interpret Stannis after hearing it. After 9/11 and everything else in the Middle East infidel is a word most Americans know and attribute to "evil" people.

[Penguin king]

Except did HE burn them or was it Melisandre? Did Stannis allow the burnings because he feels that Melisandre is his only chance at claiming the throne. No army, navy or support outside a few on Dragonstone. Context matters. To assume that Stannis today is 1:1 with Stannis in season 5-6 is ludicrous.

It seemed pretty obvious to me that Stannis was far less interested in the burnings than Mel and Selyse. He's got a look of distaste on his face practically the whole time and can't wait to turn away. Cut to him pushing away his roast meat in the very next scene. Dispite his flimsy justifications to Davos, he's clearly uncomfortable about the whole affair.

How anyone can look at the Stannis portrayed in this episode and see a religious zealot i've no idea. Everything about his behaviour, his expressions, his body language said the opposite. It's one word vs a mountain of subtext.

[averde]

It seemed pretty obvious to me that Stannis was far less interested in the burnings than Mel and Selyse. He's got a look of distaste on his face practically the whole time and can't wait to turn away. Cut to him pushing away his roast meat in the very next scene. Dispite his flimsy justifications to Davos, he's clearly uncomfortable about the whole affair.

How anyone can look at the Stannis portrayed in this episode and see a religious zealot i've no idea. Everything about his behaviour, his expressions, his body language said the opposite. It's one word vs a mountain of subtext.

He could have easily called the man a traitor, instead they had him burn the man for being an infidel. How do you think all the American viewers saw that? It's almost offensive that they are at a point in the show that they want to invoke the current American "enemy" the Taliban in reference to Stannis as a character.