Tormund GiantsMANE Posted July 24, 2014 Share Posted July 24, 2014 It's their fault they didn't mitigate the spoilage, though. If we had been given a decisive word on the matter, it would have soothed the outburst/rush of articles and posts. Leaving it to MF to give awkward interviews where we over-analyze her wording hardly seems like being respectful to her, if that's truly part of the reason they wanted to leave LS out. If they had given a "decisive word" and thus spoiled the reveal? At this pace, the amount of reactionary tweets/posts and general anger will makes LSH's appearance in s5 a surprise all over again. I dunno that she's in or out, but MF taking other jobs that may of may not interfere with her filming scenes (of unknown length in unknown settings) for AGoT. I dunno that MF's interviews come across as awkward, unless you account for her taking pains to NOT say that she's NEVER coming back to AGoT. I can't comprehend how anyone would think she's been treated disrespectfully what with all the attention she's getting. In fact D&D are prolly doing her a solid by not having her listed for S5 (especially if she doesn't do much like in the books), this way she still gets a ton of gigs without scaring folks off with her commitment to AGoT. She's been on fire since they killed Cat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FreeParking Posted July 24, 2014 Share Posted July 24, 2014 anyone seen this? http://thetaylornetworkofpodcasts.com/2014/07/24/maisie-williams-departing-game-of-thrones/ is there nothing but lies, secrets ect.. for this show Daario Neharis...seems legit. Don't believe everything you read on the internet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Beyond the Firewall Posted July 25, 2014 Share Posted July 25, 2014 anyone seen this? http://thetaylornetworkofpodcasts.com/2014/07/24/maisie-williams-departing-game-of-thrones/ is there nothing but lies, secrets ect.. for this show This was originally reported in the National Reporter. Which is a spoof news site. Usual lazy internet journalists not bothering to do research. If Masie was leaving you can bet she'd say so on her Twitter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lordsteve666 Posted July 31, 2014 Share Posted July 31, 2014 The way I think about it, they are pulling stuff from future books into the series early so there should not be an issue doing to opposite and delaying some stuff until later in the series, provided it doesn't mess the plot about. With LS she appears at the end of book 3 and then not again until the end of book 4. So a delay in revealing her in the series could still make sense and work fine. It gives time to get other parties in place ready for a big reveal. They can get Brienne & Pod and possibly Jaime in place if they leave her reveal until later. Plus it gives you the whole of S5 to drop some pretty nice rumours and hints of dark goings on in the Riverlands. Builds up the tension nicely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tormund GiantsMANE Posted August 1, 2014 Share Posted August 1, 2014 The way I think about it, they are pulling stuff from future books into the series early so there should not be an issue doing to opposite and delaying some stuff until later in the series, provided it doesn't mess the plot about.With LS she appears at the end of book 3 and then not again until the end of book 4. So a delay in revealing her in the series could still make sense and work fine. It gives time to get other parties in place ready for a big reveal. They can get Brienne & Pod and possibly Jaime in place if they leave her reveal until later.Plus it gives you the whole of S5 to drop some pretty nice rumours and hints of dark goings on in the Riverlands. Builds up the tension nicely.I agree. I think her lack of on page activity gives writers an out for not exposing her early. Plus non readers would be expecting to see her as a recurring character once she's revealed and that's not really the way it goes down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steelborn Posted August 2, 2014 Share Posted August 2, 2014 I agree. I think her lack of on page activity gives writers an out for not exposing her early. Plus non readers would be expecting to see her as a recurring character once she's revealed and that's not really the way it goes down.Except that Alex Graves said he couldn't see the purpose of including a "murderous zombie".I don't know if his opinion will change after Winds now that LSH's storyline may have a major impact on main characters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Konradsmith Posted August 2, 2014 Share Posted August 2, 2014 His opinion about s5 doesn't matter because he's not involved in s5. Also, he didn't say that he thought that there was no purpose to bring Cat back, he said that about LSH while speculating whether it was worth having Michelle Fairley play that part given how great she is etc. He was only justifying why she didn't appear in 410, an episode he directed, not a larger cut that he wouldn't known about. That doesn't mean that she's in, but his interview wasn't conclusive evidence that she's out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JustAnObsessedFan Posted August 2, 2014 Share Posted August 2, 2014 his interview wasn't conclusive evidence that she's out.There hasn't been an interview with anyone involved in the production that has explicitly stated that LSH has been cut. This makes me think they're are going ahead with that storyline, but simply don't want to spoil it for fans. If they had infact cut her, I'd assume they'd have confirmed it given the anger on social media from fans after the S4 Finale. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Konradsmith Posted August 2, 2014 Share Posted August 2, 2014 Hopefully, but they tend not to address their creative choices in interviews anyways (at least not in detail). I think fan outrage is too potent a force for them to even try to control. Addressing the choices only angers the constantly angry folks even more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FreeParking Posted August 2, 2014 Share Posted August 2, 2014 Moreover it will make people feel like they can get an explanation for everything. Some things they can't because of future stuff. And as you said, the angry people will not likely change their opinion on it. At Comic-Con they were asked about the Tysha thing. They answered. I haven't heard the bitching about it change. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deadwood Posted August 2, 2014 Share Posted August 2, 2014 Hopefully, but they tend not to address their creative choices in interviews anyways (at least not in detail). I think fan outrage is too potent a force for them to even try to control. Addressing the choices only angers the constantly angry folks even more. Indeed. The best thing they can do is to ignore the squawking gaggle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FalseKnight Posted August 2, 2014 Share Posted August 2, 2014 D&D are not our bitches. They don't owe us an explanation. They know what's coming in the books (assuming GRRM actually writes them). If they cut her and think she's insignificant, they have far more reason than we do as book readers. They had the BwB to get Arya to the hound. They used the trial by combat and the resurrection so that it didn't look like they just let the Hound walk away with Arya. The BwB also broke up Arya's band of friends with Hot Pie and Gendry. Brienne's oath binds her to try to find the girls with or without LS, and that's why they featured Oathkeeper. Admittedly, I don't like the resurrection plots, so I honestly don't care about LS. D&D are not our bitches any more than GRRM is our bitch. It's ironic that fans who think GRRM owes us nothing--I agree--now think D&D owe us a character or plot that they think is insignificant. We don't even know that they think that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sati Posted August 3, 2014 Share Posted August 3, 2014 Not sure if posted, but here goes Michelle being a tease again - http://tvline.com/2014/06/25/24-live-another-day-michelle-fairley-game-of-thrones-lady-stoneheart/ :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WalkerOfWhite Posted August 3, 2014 Share Posted August 3, 2014 Not sure if posted, but here goes Michelle being a tease again - http://tvline.com/2014/06/25/24-live-another-day-michelle-fairley-game-of-thrones-lady-stoneheart/ :) How is this being a tease? I'm confused - she has said on many different occasions that she is not coming back. would she like to? why not? as would sean bean, as I'm sure mark addy would. hell - I'd imagine that anyone who has been involved would absolutely love to come back, in any capacity. but wanting isn't the same as expecting, or even hinting at the possibility. I want to go back in time and witness the building of the pyramids, the construction of stone henge, and the development of the mayan calendar, but do I ever expect that it's going to happen? lol - no - I'm stupid enough to think time travel is even possible, never mind that I'd get the opportunity... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Konradsmith Posted August 3, 2014 Share Posted August 3, 2014 It could well be that she's cut, but sati is right to point out that MF is phrasing things in an elusive manner. I wonder if the ellipsis in the article are meant to indicate pauses or parts of what she said that the reporter omitted for whatever reason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YoungGriff89 Posted August 4, 2014 Share Posted August 4, 2014 Kind of a stretch, but in FFC there was a character with the Brotherhood named Long Jeyne Heddle who was a nurse of some type. I mean maybe Michelle Fairley seriously isn't coming back. I wouldn't put it past D&D to bring back Oona Chaplin as a version of Lady Stoneheart, considering she was kind of a version of Jeyne Westerling and at the Red Wedding she didn't have her throat cut so her voice would be intact. That, and she was introduced as a battlefield healer in season 2. You want to surprise the heck out of book readers? Bring in the zombified Stark way past when they chronologically would have been introduced in the book and bring back the one that wasn't even in the book. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sati Posted August 4, 2014 Share Posted August 4, 2014 Kind of a stretch, but in FFC there was a character with the Brotherhood named Long Jeyne Heddle who was a nurse of some type. I mean maybe Michelle Fairley seriously isn't coming back. I wouldn't put it past D&D to bring back Oona Chaplin as a version of Lady Stoneheart, considering she was kind of a version of Jeyne Westerling and at the Red Wedding she didn't have her throat cut so her voice would be intact. That, and she was introduced as a battlefield healer in season 2. You want to surprise the heck out of book readers? Bring in the zombified Stark way past when they chronologically would have been introduced in the book and bring back the one that wasn't even in the book. Oh for the love of all that is good and pure please NO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Konradsmith Posted August 4, 2014 Share Posted August 4, 2014 They won't do that Talisa business. If they intend to include that plotline in some altered state there are better candidates for their alternate BWB leader anyways. As it is, for it to have the impact it needs it really does have to be Cat. I still don't think we have enough evidence to say definitively what they are going to go with next year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamesOfHouseMurphy Posted August 4, 2014 Share Posted August 4, 2014 I think the reason why in the show they had the Hound fight Brienne was to set it up for Biter attacking her, then meeting stoneheart, it will be interesting to see though what happens with the whole Vargo Hoat crew in the show, whether it will be Boltons who fight Brienne at the Inn or another group all together or even if they just skip the whole Inn part at all. I am sure though that however they do it, it will involve someone wearing the Hounds armour otherwise there was almost no reason to change the story and make brienne fight the hound. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Konradsmith Posted August 4, 2014 Share Posted August 4, 2014 Biter's already dead in the show. I think it would make the most sense for Brienne to fight some Freys in the Riverlands. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.