scotcat Posted September 14, 2014 Share Posted September 14, 2014 Don't panic! I'm not saying there was a problem with the actor, only that it can be one of the reasons why things get cut. If an actor has earned a reputation for being difficult to work with, it can lead to show runners working with them less (or getting them off the show entirely). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sati Posted September 15, 2014 Share Posted September 15, 2014 Don't panic!I'm not saying there was a problem with the actor, only that it can be one of the reasons why things get cut. If an actor has earned a reputation for being difficult to work with, it can lead to show runners working with them less (or getting them off the show entirely). But Michelle is not difficult to work with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Konradsmith Posted September 15, 2014 Share Posted September 15, 2014 They didn't have any problems with Michelle. Quite the opposite. People always have great things to say about her on the commentaries, D and D in particular. That's one of the reasons why I still don't think she's been cut. They found a way to bring Momoa after all and in this case, they don't really have to find a way, do they? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scotcat Posted September 15, 2014 Share Posted September 15, 2014 For the last time. All I did was give a list of reasons that will typically lead to an actor being cut from a show. Top of the list being that the person in question is hard to work with. I didn't say there was a problem with this particular actress - I, too, have listened to the commentaries & know that lots of nice things get said about her. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonCon's Red Beard Posted September 15, 2014 Share Posted September 15, 2014 Even if they had problems with Michele Fairley, they won't say it and keep mentioning how great is to work with her. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beric175 Posted September 15, 2014 Share Posted September 15, 2014 It's the same as with Ramsay. They'll introduce her once they are sure that they absolutely need her. If Jaime kills her the first time he sees her in the books then you might as well cut her character entirely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shitmouth the Wise Posted September 16, 2014 Share Posted September 16, 2014 I don't see how they'd pass up the shock factor of Catelyn's resurrection. They've stated repeatedly that their biggest inspiration for making the show was being able to put the Red Wedding on film (which is slightly discouraging, btw, but that's beside the point). That's what they like. And to me, the SoS epilogue was the most shocking moment of the entire book series (so far) after the RW and Ned's execution. I also think, cynically, that even if the character isn't important to the greater story, it would not stop them from including her, if only for the buzz it would generate. Unless they have some greater plans for her reveal, I think it was a huge misstep on their part to not include her at the end of last season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FreeParking Posted September 16, 2014 Share Posted September 16, 2014 I think a lot of book readers overestimate how well Stoneheart would be received. Then there is the issue of repeated resurrections in a series known for killing off main characters. Beric is the only character of significance that we have seen do this on the show, and Mel even looked surprised when she found out about this, which lets us know that this is serious stuff. You need to avoid over using it. Especially for someone who went out in one of the most memorable ways in one of the most memorable scenes. And D&D saying that the RW was their biggest reason for wanting to do the show shouldn't be discouraging or surprising. For many book readers it still remains one of the most powerful moments in the books. That doesn't mean that they don't care about the rest of the books. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starkfaithful85 Posted September 17, 2014 Share Posted September 17, 2014 the reason why i believe that they cut it out is because I think a LS reveal at the end of a season would leave too much time in between seasons for an explanatioin of the motives of the character. it would be better from a storytelling standpoint if they did it in Season 5 episode 2-4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trevelyan Posted September 17, 2014 Share Posted September 17, 2014 I think a lot of book readers overestimate how well Stoneheart would be received. Then there is the issue of repeated resurrections in a series known for killing off main characters. Beric is the only character of significance that we have seen do this on the show, and Mel even looked surprised when she found out about this, which lets us know that this is serious stuff. You need to avoid over using it. Especially for someone who went out in one of the most memorable ways in one of the most memorable scenes. Why do you think a little bit of Red Wedding retribution wouldn't be well received? The show has already established that resurrections are possible, that magic is a real, albeit rare, thing. And it's not like any other of the dozens "major" deceased characters have been resurrected - Catelyn is actually the first and (so far) only one. Yeah sure, it's "serious" magic, but it's absolutely plausible, that the BWB found Cat's body at the river and that Beric Dondarrion decided to use the same magic, that has brought him back to life so many times, to resurrect her. Lady Stoneheart might actually add a lot of a drama to a season, that would probably benefit from a little bit of drama. I mean, I enjoy all the books, but Book 4 in particular had only a handful of storylines that I found really interesting - a lot of chapters were kinda ... meh, especially in comparison with the masterpiece that is A Storm of Swords. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thenorthremembers74 Posted October 5, 2014 Share Posted October 5, 2014 In my opinion it would be a bad mistake to cut LS from season 5. In the books she plays a huge part. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beric175 Posted October 5, 2014 Share Posted October 5, 2014 Oh yes, she has to kill random Freys...however would you achieve that without her? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
onceaskrull Posted October 5, 2014 Share Posted October 5, 2014 Beric is the only character of significance that we have seen do this on the show, and Mel even looked surprised when she found out about this, which lets us know that this is serious stuff. I interpreted that scene as her being surprised by how many times he was brought back. After all, she specifically asks how many times the Lord of Light has brought him back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steelborn Posted October 5, 2014 Share Posted October 5, 2014 I think a lot of book readers overestimate how well Stoneheart would be received. Then there is the issue of repeated resurrections in a series known for killing off main characters. Beric is the only character of significance that we have seen do this on the show, and Mel even looked surprised when she found out about this, which lets us know that this is serious stuff. You need to avoid over using it. Especially for someone who went out in one of the most memorable ways in one of the most memorable scenes. And D&D saying that the RW was their biggest reason for wanting to do the show shouldn't be discouraging or surprising. For many book readers it still remains one of the most powerful moments in the books. That doesn't mean that they don't care about the rest of the books. But they are not overusing it, we've only seen it once and it could certainly be a "foreshadowing" for Stoneheart, so her ressurection won't feel like out of the blue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FalseKnight Posted October 5, 2014 Share Posted October 5, 2014 But they are not overusing it, we've only seen it once and it could certainly be a "foreshadowing" for Stoneheart, so her ressurection won't feel like out of the blue.They already showed the beginning of UnGregor, and they will do UnJon at some point. There is the distinct possibility of UnHound too. Three is stretch credibility, and four might be the tipping point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trevelyan Posted October 6, 2014 Share Posted October 6, 2014 They already showed the beginning of UnGregor, and they will do UnJon at some point. There is the distinct possibility of UnHound too. Three is stretch credibility, and four might be the tipping point. Ok, but we never saw the Hound dying, so if they bring him back for some reason (which I doubt, by the way), they'll just have to explain how he survived his encounter with Brienne, nothing supernatural about it. Also "UnGregor" is so much dumber than Stoneheart. Catelyn was resurrected by magic, that is already established in the show. The Mountain on the other hand was brought back to life by "Science!", which makes him a Frankenstein's Monster type of characters (without a head, seriously?) - it kinda shatters my suspension of disbelief. If they want to make the show more realistic and get rid of certain supernatural elements, I'd say get rid of Robert Strong, not Stoneheart. As for Jon, we don't know if he's dead or not. Maybe he could be healed by some sort of magic, before he died of his wounds, we just don't know yet. But the fact that Jon lived through the attack (which is pretty much confirmed by GRRM at this point, right?) doesn't have to mean that he was "resurrected" the same way Catelyn was, there are so many other possibilities how he could have survived. So no ... I don't think they're overusing the resurrection thing, not at all, actually. So many characters die constantly in the books and in the show - and the fact that two of them (Beric and Catelyn) have been brought back through magic makes complete sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grrrod Posted October 6, 2014 Share Posted October 6, 2014 BLACKHEART Just saying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.