135 replies to this topic

[DizoakiusMaximus]

The_Halfhand, on 27 April 2011 - 07:01 PM, said:

No, Ned uses Ice to kill Lady in the book.  It's the sword he uses for all his executions, and because its Valaryan Steel, it can cut a head off with one swing to make the death quicker and cleaner than an average blade.

  "Shortly, Jory brought him Ice. When it was over he said, "Choose four men and have them take the body north. Bury her at Winterfell."

Now, I'm not trying to start any trouble. But that's an exact excerpt, and like I said, it never specifically states that he used Ice. Just that he told Jory to bring it to him.

Like I said before, overkill to execute a docile wolf-pup. I don't understand why they wouldn't have had Boromir Stark use Ice to execute Lady in the episode, except for maybe people unfamiliar with the books would say the same thing I've said: that it's overkill. Besides, they went to all the trouble to make a badass Ice replica for use in the series and we'll likely only get to see it maybe one more time...

At any rate, this is one of those things that I file under "too minor to make a difference in my appreciation of this show."

EDIT: Ghost was in it, albeit from a distance. They show the campsite of the NW guys and Ghost is sitting there. He's sorta hard to see at first, but look for white; he's there.

Edited by DizoakiusMaximus, 27 April 2011 - 07:34 PM.

[Xenophon]

DizoakiusMaximus, on 27 April 2011 - 07:24 PM, said:

"Shortly, Jory brought him Ice. When it was over he said, "Choose four men and have them take the body north. Bury her at Winterfell."

Now, I'm not trying to start any trouble. But that's an exact excerpt, and like I said, it never specifically states that he used Ice. Just that he told Jory to bring it to him.

Like I said before, overkill to execute a docile wolf-pup. I don't understand why they wouldn't have had Boromir Stark use Ice to execute Lady in the episode, except for maybe people unfamiliar with the books would say the same thing I've said: that it's overkill. Besides, they went to all the trouble to make a badass Ice replica for use in the series and we'll likely only get to see it maybe one more time...

At any rate, this is one of those things that I file under "too minor to make a difference in my appreciation of this show."

EDIT: Ghost was in it, albeit from a distance. They show the campsite of the NW guys and Ghost is sitting there. He's sorta hard to see at first, but look for white; he's there.

Yeah, how do you even use a greatsword on a wolf?  Have someone else hold it down, I guess.  But a knife to the heart or throat sounds cleaner, and made for better TV, IMO, as he's down at her level, and there isn't much of a shift from Ned petting to killing her.  Very dramatic.

Re. Ice, I wonder if they'll re-use the prop, by re-dressing the hilt.  Are there any other Valyrian Steel greatswords? Or perhaps they'll just get rid of the whole re-forging Ice plot, and just have the Lannisters rename Ice.

[DizoakiusMaximus]

Xenophon, on 27 April 2011 - 07:47 PM, said:

Yeah, how do you even use a greatsword on a wolf?  Have someone else hold it down, I guess.  But a knife to the heart or throat sounds cleaner, and made for better TV, IMO, as he's down at her level, and there isn't much of a shift from Ned petting to killing her.  Very dramatic.

Re. Ice, I wonder if they'll re-use the prop, by re-dressing the hilt.  Are there any other Valyrian Steel greatswords? Or perhaps they'll just get rid of the whole re-forging Ice plot, and just have the Lannisters rename Ice.

There's Hearts Bane (which is definitely a great-sword) owned by the Tarly's and also Ser Harras Harlaw's Valyrian sword (which I believe is a great-sword) called Nightfall.

[The_Halfhand]

DizoakiusMaximus, on 27 April 2011 - 07:24 PM, said:

"Shortly, Jory brought him Ice. When it was over he said, "Choose four men and have them take the body north. Bury her at Winterfell."

Now, I'm not trying to start any trouble. But that's an exact excerpt, and like I said, it never specifically states that he used Ice. Just that he told Jory to bring it to him.

Like I said before, overkill to execute a docile wolf-pup. I don't understand why they wouldn't have had Boromir Stark use Ice to execute Lady in the episode, except for maybe people unfamiliar with the books would say the same thing I've said: that it's overkill. Besides, they went to all the trouble to make a badass Ice replica for use in the series and we'll likely only get to see it maybe one more time...

If you want to think that GRRM wrote that Ned summoned his executioning sword just to have it stand by and not be used, even though the deed isn't done until the sword is brought to him, that's up to you.

I think its pretty obvious that in the book, he used Ice to execute Lady.

[Bloody Ryder]

Abaddon, on 27 April 2011 - 11:00 AM, said:

I can't say I'm fond of the hair scene, but how exactly does the dagger point to the Lannisters?  In the book, Cat doesn't have any evidence to suggest it does until Littlefinger's lie.

OK, in the book it's made pretty clear that there is a direct link between the dagger and the Lannisters. When Catelyn wakes up after her four-day sleep following the attack on Bran's life, Ser Roderik Cassell tells her that the blade was "too fine a weapon for such a man" and that "a weapon like that [had] no business being in the hands of such as him." He goes on to say that "someone [had given] it to him." This news prompts Catelyn to divulge some information of her own. She tells Roderik, Luwin, Theon and Rob that she has received a letter from her sister Lysa, who believes that Jon Arryn was murdered by the Lannisters. This immediately puts the blame squarely in the Lannister camp; even before this revelation, Catelyn mused that the man had to be "one of the king's men ... or one of the Lannisters." Since Robert is a friend to the Starks, it would automatically follow that the Lannisters are more likely to be involved in the assassination attempt. Now, with the knowledge of the dagger's great value, Catelyn comes to the following realization: "It comes to me that Jamie did not join the hunt the day Bran fell ... I do not think Bran fell from the tower. I think he was thrown." Since Jamie, being the queen's brother, is a Lannister rich and prominent enough to own a distinctive dagger such as the one used by the assassin, it is only logical that Catelyn would make him her prime suspect for having caused her son's fall from the tower. After all, on the day of the crime Jamie was present at the scene. The motive is as yet unknown (it is only said that Bran must have heard something that was not meant for his ears) but Jamie has no alibi for the time of the fall.

Roderik is shocked by Lady Stark's accusation: "This is a monstrous suggestion ... even the Kingslayer would flinch at the murder of a child." Yet he also makes the connection between the attempted murder and Jamie Lannister.

Catelyn's only response is that "there is no limit to Lannister pride and ambition."

At this point in the narrative, her suspicions are based solely on conjecture and various deductions she makes, but of course there is no hard evidence to nail Jamie Lannister to the wall. Still, I think it is made pretty clear why the Lannisters, Jamie in particular, COULD be involved not only in the murder of Jon Arryn but also in the two attempts at Bran's life.

[Tywin's bastard]

The_Halfhand, on 27 April 2011 - 07:09 PM, said:

Though the sommersault does seem rather odd, especially considering the detail Martin goes into about Tyrion's deformities, I think it was meant to set up that Tyrion can indeed be physical when the occasion calls for it.  I agree that perhaps it was a bit over the top, but then again, we have dragons and zombies in the story, so I guess this bit can be overlooked, lol.

Yes, that's what I tend to do, overlook that it happened. Tyrion describes himself as his arms are strong enough (which means he can at least be somewhat capable in combat on a horse) while his legs just can't move like they should.

The_Halfhand, on 27 April 2011 - 07:09 PM, said:

Well, if you want to get into hypotheticals here... the general theory is that Rhaegar's princess and heir were at the Tower of Joy, and with the war going badly, he left the Kingsguard there to protect them.  Rhaegar marched with Barriston Selmy at his side, and one other KG I believe who was killed in the battle.  And Aerys had Jamie with him at Kings Landing.  So three Kingsguard to protect the royal family isn't that far fetched, though I'm not sure how that works exactly since Rhaegar was already married with children.

Yes, Rhaegar's real heir was from his marriage (or first marriage if you think he wed Lyanna too). You also would expect the king to have the three KG (which included the Lord Commander, and the best knight) and the possible second wife that's pregnant and far from all battles would be the one to only have one KG. Not that I'm bothered by this at all, it's just curious.

For information, Jonothor Darry and Lewyn Martell died at the Battle of the Trident.

The_Halfhand, on 27 April 2011 - 07:20 PM, said:

I'm sure if the show wins awards and has a strong following, it could go longer than seven seasons.  HBO probably would have kept the Sopranos going if they producers hadn't gotten tired of it, and other shows, like the Wire, even though it was low rated, could have gone on but the producers chose to end the shows.  And let's not even get into True Blood, which has lord knows how many novels to work with at this point. lol.

I could see HBO ordering 12 episodes for Clash of Kings/Season 2, but 2 extra hours might not be enough to get in everything that needs to be there for the larger tale.  Once Dance with Dragons is released, that gives 5 seasons worth of story for the producers to work with, but considering GRRM takes about 5 years to finish a new book, that still means the books may not be done before its time for the series to wrap up.  I wonder if they have a contingency play for that?  Seems like splitting Kings & Swords into two seasons each might help with that.

It's not impossible but it's a bit different with a story that already is set in length (as long GRRM doesn't feel the need to put in more books) and I'm going to assume that the rumors are true and that HBO sticks to 7 seasons at the most. If they change that I'll be pleasantly surprised and with that assumption I can only be negatively surprised if they decide to cancel the show.

When GRRM wrote about the news that season 2 was given clearance he amongst other things said "10 more episodes" and while it might not be definitive I would assume that's the number we are most likely to get.

As for the series catching up to GRRM it's a big possibility if they do 7 seasons. I don't think he will take as long to write the following books since I do think the extra time for book 4 and 5 came from the big problems he created for himself when he scrapped the idea of letting 5 years pass between ASOS and AFFC. I don't know what HBO will do if they catch up but I can certainly see D&D not being too thrilled to create a season before they've read the book.

[The_Halfhand]

Tywin, on 28 April 2011 - 06:42 AM, said:

Yes, Rhaegar's real heir was from his marriage (or first marriage if you think he wed Lyanna too). You also would expect the king to have the three KG (which included the Lord Commander, and the best knight) and the possible second wife that's pregnant and far from all battles would be the one to only have one KG. Not that I'm bothered by this at all, it's just curious.

For information, Jonothor Darry and Lewyn Martell died at the Battle of the Trident.

Okay, so Barriston, Darry, and Martell accompanied Rhaegar to the Trident, with Jamie staying in Kings Landing, and three at the Tower of Joy, which makes seven in total, so I guess that makes sense.  Aerys probably didn't need as many since he considered himself safe in Kings Landing.

Also, come to think of it, the Targaryans do have a history of marrying multiple women.  Aegon married his two sisters, so I guess Rhaegar having 2 wives is plausible.

Edited by The_Halfhand, 28 April 2011 - 03:21 PM.

[Tywin's bastard]

The_Halfhand, on 28 April 2011 - 03:19 PM, said:

Okay, so Barriston, Darry, and Martell accompanied Rhaegar to the Trident, with Jamie staying in Kings Landing, and three at the Tower of Joy, which makes seven in total, so I guess that makes sense.  Aerys probably didn't need as many since he considered himself safe in Kings Landing.

Also, come to think of it, the Targaryans do have a history of marrying multiple women.  Aegon married his two sisters, so I guess Rhaegar having 2 wives is plausible.

Yes, they are all accounted for but I still find it strange to guard a woman, second wife of the king's son or not, when the king is at war. But then again Aerys wasn't called the Mad King for nothing.

As for the marriage it's not impossible they were wed but I'm quite sure it would have had to be a secret marriage as I can't imagine that Aerys would allow Rhaegar to marry a Stark. They searched far and wide to find him a Valyrian wife but the search failed so he married Elia Martell due to the very slight amount of Targaryen blood. Lyanna had none and would definitely be unworthy.

[DizoakiusMaximus]

The_Halfhand, on 28 April 2011 - 03:19 PM, said:

Also, come to think of it, the Targaryans do have a history of marrying multiple women.  Aegon married his two sisters, so I guess Rhaegar having 2 wives is plausible.

There's also something about the Faith having nixed the polygamy in the years since Aegon the Conqueror. I'm not sure who the last Targaryen was who had multiple wives, but I don't think it was necessarily "permissible" in recent memory.

What, however, doesn't make much sense is that Rhaegar married outside the Targaryen line.

Dany remarks at one point that Viserys would have been her husband, had the Rebellion never happened, but that doesn't really make much sense because Rhaegar was the crown prince. It's doubtful that the Targaryen family would have allowed Rhaegar to marry outside the family, thus diluting the "blood of the dragons" with baser stock, and yet arrange for a more traditional marriage of the second son to Dany, who would stand to inherit nothing (thus making a traditional union pointless) even upon Rhaegar's death. (With an heir (Baby Aegon) already born to Rhaegar and Elia)

[The_Halfhand]

Tywin, on 28 April 2011 - 04:06 PM, said:

Yes, they are all accounted for but I still find it strange to guard a woman, second wife of the king's son or not, when the king is at war. But then again Aerys wasn't called the Mad King for nothing.

As for the marriage it's not impossible they were wed but I'm quite sure it would have had to be a secret marriage as I can't imagine that Aerys would allow Rhaegar to marry a Stark. They searched far and wide to find him a Valyrian wife but the search failed so he married Elia Martell due to the very slight amount of Targaryen blood. Lyanna had none and would definitely be unworthy.

Chances are, all 6 Kingsguard road with Rhaegar, but he ordered his three best to stay back and defend his love and child should the battle turn against him.  The Kingsguard is at the command of the Royal family, after all, so even if they disagreed, they'd have followed his orders.

I'm sure the marriage was probably secret, since Robert was convinced Rhaegar had kidnapped and raped her.  My guess is Lyanna was absent with Rhaegar while Aerys went off the deep end and had her father and brother killed.  Most likely they were at the Tower of Joy getting it on, lol.

[The_Halfhand]

DizoakiusMaximus, on 28 April 2011 - 05:14 PM, said:

There's also something about the Faith having nixed the polygamy in the years since Aegon the Conqueror. I'm not sure who the last Targaryen was who had multiple wives, but I don't think it was necessarily "permissible" in recent memory.

What, however, doesn't make much sense is that Rhaegar married outside the Targaryen line.

Dany remarks at one point that Viserys would have been her husband, had the Rebellion never happened, but that doesn't really make much sense because Rhaegar was the crown prince. It's doubtful that the Targaryen family would have allowed Rhaegar to marry outside the family, thus diluting the "blood of the dragons" with baser stock, and yet arrange for a more traditional marriage of the second son to Dany, who would stand to inherit nothing (thus making a traditional union pointless) even upon Rhaegar's death. (With an heir (Baby Aegon) already born to Rhaegar and Elia)

Well, the King doesn't need the Faith's permission to do anything, though it is important to have their support since so many people follow them.  I'm pretty sure that King Aerys married a non-Targaryan but I might be mistaken.  From what I understood, they intermarried as much as possible to keep the bloodline pure.  My guess is Rhaegar fell in love with Lyanna and simply married her based on that, and though King Aerys may not have approved, he did not react well to the uproar it caused from the other lords more than he cared about the match.  Heck, he may not have even known the two were married.

Viserys may have been wed to Danny had the rebellion not happened.  Then again, she might have been wed to Rheagar's heir, since she would have been of an age with him.

[Derfel Cadarn]

The_Halfhand, on 29 April 2011 - 06:11 PM, said:

Well, the King doesn't need the Faith's permission to do anything, though it is important to have their support since so many people follow them.  I'm pretty sure that King Aerys married a non-Targaryan but I might be mistaken.  From what I understood, they intermarried as much as possible to keep the bloodline pure.  My guess is Rhaegar fell in love with Lyanna and simply married her based on that, and though King Aerys may not have approved, he did not react well to the uproar it caused from the other lords more than he cared about the match.  Heck, he may not have even known the two were married.

Viserys may have been wed to Danny had the rebellion not happened.  Then again, she might have been wed to Rheagar's heir, since she would have been of an age with him.

Aerys was married to his sister Rhaella.

[Radio Changes]

Winterfelled, on 25 April 2011 - 06:53 PM, said:

I'm so bummed Sean Bean won't be a bigger part of the series. The scene when the Hound (another great performance, by the way) is walking his horse with the butcher's boy draped over the back, and Ned says "You ran him down?" the pain and horror in Sean's voice anchored the whole episode. You could really feel his frustration and confusion in that one sentence. Absolutely brilliant.

I gotta agree with this, best moment of the episode. The mood of the shot itself if great, dark, with only some torches lighting it, and the Hound posture and attitude struck me as absolutely perfect, even though it was just him standing up straight. The dead look of his face was great.

Sansa's casting is great, the girl can be wide-eyed innocent, bitchy, and sympathetic all at once. Lena Headey is also great, I won't be able to picture Cersei as someone other than her now when I reread.

I don't like the changes to Catelyn, but I can see why they made them. I think they're trying to play up the emotional aspects of Catelyn and downplaying her political saavy. But really, when you think about it, the most unsaavy move in the entire book was Catelyn kidnapping Tyrion, so who knows. But I still think they should have had her urge Ned to go down there.

[lyvyathan]

The_Halfhand, on 25 April 2011 - 01:12 AM, said:

Overall, I thought episode 2 was much better than the first one.  But still, some changes really had me scratching my head.

1.  "It should have been you."

Again, a great line that really nails the relationship between two characters, completely disregarded for no good reason.

Actually imho no I disagree with you. That was a very powerful line but in the context of the (television) medium, it would have framed Catelyn in the worse light as possible. And marked a big reference point on her way downwards - it would also have given a very dark shade of color to whatever actions she would do from then onwards.

The_Halfhand, on 25 April 2011 - 01:12 AM, said:

2.  Tyrion waking up in the kennel
Would have liked to have seen him in the library so the whole "Why do you read so much" line had more merrit.  But this change wasn't that bad overall.

I thought that was good too - because it brought humor and drama  ie. Joffrey's hilarious comment about Tyrion's bed mates - and then Tyrion slapping the dude.

The_Halfhand, on 25 April 2011 - 01:12 AM, said:

3.  Queen Cercei going to see Bran
This was an odd scene to me.  Yes, it fleshes out Cercei's character a bit, but the notion that she ever would allow herself to birth a child of Robert's is a complete left turn from the character as she's written in the books.  In the books, she was so full of hate for Robert she aborted the only child he ever impregnated her with.  An odd decision, though I see why they did it.

I thought this was OK too - because it made her seem more shrewd - she's winning brownie points from the Stark family by her visit (remember Tyrion's admonition to Joff?). In the book, she's one hell of a caricature, rather one dimensional there.

The_Halfhand, on 25 April 2011 - 01:12 AM, said:

4.  Lack of Direwolves, in particular Ghost.
Seriously, Ghost is kinda important, and yet he's nowhere to be seen.  You didn't even see him TRAVELLING with Jon.  Is he just gonna magically show up soon?  And no sight of Grey Wind or Shaggydog, or the fact Bran hasn't named Summer yet.  Sigh.

Yeah, I missed the howling. I agree with you here. But he does make an appearance when the footpad shows up.

The rest of the changes didn't bother me too much. I would have been really upset if they had Catelyn kill the footpad all by herself unlike the scene in the books though.

[lyvyathan]

Radio Changes, on 01 May 2011 - 05:27 PM, said:

I don't like the changes to Catelyn, but I can see why they made them. I think they're trying to play up the emotional aspects of Catelyn and downplaying her political saavy. But really, when you think about it, the most unsaavy move in the entire book was Catelyn kidnapping Tyrion, so who knows. But I still think they should have had her urge Ned to go down there.

Ah, Catelyn had political saavy??? I thought the HBO series made Catelyn more sympathetic actually.

[lyvyathan]

Bloody Ryder, on 28 April 2011 - 04:01 AM, said:

OK, in the book it's made pretty clear that there is a direct link between the dagger and the Lannisters. When Catelyn wakes up after her four-day sleep following the attack on Bran's life, Ser Roderik Cassell tells her that the blade was "too fine a weapon for such a man" and that "a weapon like that [had] no business being in the hands of such as him." He goes on to say that "someone [had given] it to him." This news prompts Catelyn to divulge some information of her own. She tells Roderik, Luwin, Theon and Rob that she has received a letter from her sister Lysa, who believes that Jon Arryn was murdered by the Lannisters. This immediately puts the blame squarely in the Lannister camp; even before this revelation, Catelyn mused that the man had to be "one of the king's men ... or one of the Lannisters." Since Robert is a friend to the Starks, it would automatically follow that the Lannisters are more likely to be involved in the assassination attempt. Now, with the knowledge of the dagger's great value, Catelyn comes to the following realization: "It comes to me that Jamie did not join the hunt the day Bran fell ... I do not think Bran fell from the tower. I think he was thrown." Since Jamie, being the queen's brother, is a Lannister rich and prominent enough to own a distinctive dagger such as the one used by the assassin, it is only logical that Catelyn would make him her prime suspect for having caused her son's fall from the tower. After all, on the day of the crime Jamie was present at the scene. The motive is as yet unknown (it is only said that Bran must have heard something that was not meant for his ears) but Jamie has no alibi for the time of the fall.

Roderik is shocked by Lady Stark's accusation: "This is a monstrous suggestion ... even the Kingslayer would flinch at the murder of a child." Yet he also makes the connection between the attempted murder and Jamie Lannister.

Catelyn's only response is that "there is no limit to Lannister pride and ambition."

At this point in the narrative, her suspicions are based solely on conjecture and various deductions she makes, but of course there is no hard evidence to nail Jamie Lannister to the wall. Still, I think it is made pretty clear why the Lannisters, Jamie in particular, COULD be involved not only in the murder of Jon Arryn but also in the two attempts at Bran's life.

By making Catelyn like Angela Langsbury, the HBO writers are making her a lot more sympathetic to us and her fate more tragic , ie. it wasn't just LF's word that convinced her spiraling towards her new profession of kidnap and jail-breaking. So I thought it was actually a good re-write - it balances it out a bit and doesn't make it so obvious that Cat has one screw loose.

Edited by Lyvyathan, 17 October 2011 - 01:08 AM.