Ser Maverick

Members
  • Content count

    148
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Ser Maverick

  1. Good job strawmanning my argument into what I’m literally arguing against. Writing scenes with acting talent in mind, such as not writing a long, emotional monologue for Shae, doesn’t compromise the story and seems pretty common sense. George did, however, give a long, emotional monologue to Lena Heady in Blackwater that was unlike anything in any of the books.
  2. There's really something unique to hate about all the past three seasons. I personally disliked s5 the most because there was nothing even remotely interesting about the Sparrows, Harpies, Sand Snakes, or Olly. I'm somewhat surprised they didn't lose viewers after that because even casual viewers I talked to thought those storylines slowed the series way down.
  3. He seems very confirmation biased to be. Show writers will talk about writing scenes with acting talent in mind, something I would assume is common in television writing, and he makes a long-winded over-analysis of it. Never seen any real evidence for his theory that they write the entire plot to advertise the actors. Maybe I should check this one out before passing judgement. I couldn't bring myself to watch anything over the 20:00 mark; really wish he'd write a script.
  4. I disagree with the evidence but agree with the conclusion. There are many examples where people point out George taking ideas from a particular history, mythology, etc. that a lot of people seem to get the idea that he's basically doing some kind of retelling of that history/mythology. It would be somewhat weird for Sansa to be based off a Tudor when the Starks are already somewhat based on the Yorks. I've personally theorized that the Tyrells are somewhat based on the Tudors. I still think there's a strong possibility that Sansa will have some type of major power role in the end, based on the fact that the original working title for book 7 was A Time for Wolves, and Sansa is learning from the best in terms of climbing the social ladder and being a devious genius. Littlefinger has basically gotten everything he wants so far without repercussions so I can see Sansa channeling this later on.
  5. I try my best not to do this but I'll be somewhat shocked if: -There isn't a conspiracy that the COTF are trying to get rid of humanity -There isn't an elaborate Dornish Master Plan -Littlefinger's story gets wrapped up long before the end -Jaime doesn't make it to the end/near-end of the story -Brieaime doesn't happen -Dany doesn't have dragons stolen -Aegon doesn't take control of KL -Euron survives the series -Sansa dies
  6. Yeah I always see people referencing this channel, but I can't understand the appeal. His theory for explaining the show's bad writing decisions seems very baseless and unconvincing. I also see he has two ~1:30:00 videos talking about the wight hunt episode.
  7. Pyp if there's any justice in the world.
  8. I think once George left the series HBO stepped in to fill the void and have really strong-armed D&D's creative control. This is why the overall effort into the show has seemed to go way down and D&D have no interest in returning for any of the spin-offs. GoT is likely by-far HBO's biggest cash cow and they're going to milk it dry. The biggest problem is that they have no idea what made the show click for audiences in the first place. They saw all the buzz the show got after the Red Wedding and thought that it was character deaths and shock value, so in the following two seasons we were bombarded with it. Now we're left with all the characters they didn't have the balls to kill off and the story has become so barebones that it barely resembles the earlier seasons. Character development, interesting storylines, schemes, consequences for actions, character driven plot, all the things that made the show what it was for me has been almost nowhere to be found since season 4, and what there has been has fallen flat. Everything that raised the show above typical fantasy stories is gone and it's basically just picked up the worst elements of generic fantasy in its place.
  9. Book logic and show logic are two separate entities. According to George, Beric is supposed to be a walking corpse with no beating heart or flowing blood. In the show, Beric is clearly not that. So extending this to Jon, I would say he's not intended to be a wight and I don't think his death will have any more significance than it has already.
  10. I think people like Bran the Builder, Brandon of the Bloody Blade, and Garth Greenhand were intended to just be legends and shouldn't be taken any more seriously as a historical account than something like the Iliad in our own world. Not sure if you're aware but other noble houses are rumored to have descended from Garth and all have different last names. "Stark" was likely chosen based on some of it's meanings in our world and the way it sounds.
  11. Really? I consider her the most interesting Stark.
  12. Because Jon's stabs were so clear and descriptive.
  13. This made me lol but I don't see it as contradictory. I think his point is that because Gandalf just comes back later on and even more powerful than before, it really cheapens his death and makes it worthless drama. This fits with his own work as he's established that LSH is not Catelyn and therefore her death still had a purpose. So, in regards to Jon, I think it seems very implausible that if he's dead, that he will return in his body somehow, or else GRRM would be a hypocrite. We still have at least two novels left, I'm not sure where this is coming from.
  14. ok
  15. I know, what a ludicrous idea. http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/nyc-crime/man-brooklyn-survives-multiple-stab-wounds-article-1.2300255 http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/man-survived-38-stab-wounds-7648285.html http://fox2now.com/2016/12/07/man-survives-being-shot-and-stabbed-nearly-20-times/
  16. Not really. He's repeatedly discussed his disagreement with Tolkien killing off Gandalf just to bring him back in the next book, and his version of resurrection can barely be considered "resurrection". He also recently stated that Lady Stoneheart and Lord Beric are wights, and not the same as they were before death. So if Jon's corpse gets revived, he wouldn't really be Jon anymore and therefore is still dead.
  17. Judging by your username, you may be a bit biased on the matter. I'd somewhat agree, although I trust that George wouldn't have done it unless there was some massive way it impacts the story. At the same time, I struggle to picture Jon's story having ended like that. Since reading ADwD, I just assumed that Jon actually survives his wounds, but I think George has recently confirmed that he dies, so what do I know.
  18. Cersei's fate is still pretty ambiguous but I don't see this happening. Daven is a second cousin to Cersei and has a much weaker claim than Myrcella or one of Kevan's children as heir but it's probably up to Tommen to decide, or Mace Tyrell (who is likely Lord Regent now) telling him who to name. Cersei's power in KL is gone forever I think and if she loses Casterly Rock, she has no other allies to side with her.
  19. We have to remember that George is known for breaking tropes, not following them. Jon's status as a main character gives him no precedence to outlive or outshine a newer character. Aegon being introduced into the story, just to die off in the next book, seems like it was pointless to even bring him into it and results to not much more than a minor inconvenience to the other characters.
  20. Pretty much everything I was going to say has been covered, but something that really bothered me that doesn't get mentioned much was the anticlimactic Dany's war of conquest. It's basically something we've been waiting for since the beginning of the series and been overhyped the previous couple seasons and what we got seemed like less of a war and more random incoherent battles/strategies where teleportation is a factor and scouts aren't. I get that D&D can't write the military aspect of the show but it's something I think would improve it tenfold. In the earlier seasons with Robb, you really got the sense that this was a war, even though it didn't show much due to budget. From the moment Dany sets foot on abandoned Dragonstone, a castle right outside King's Landing's bay, everything was so damn stupid. The relative sizes of each army is intentionally left undefined. The Sand Snakes and Olenna get killed and then their armies are suddenly out of the picture. Jaime defeating Highgarden by teleportation there in an episode and "flower knight are bad fighters" was really dumb and lazy. The Lannister army get defeated in the field of fire, and they don't ever give any indication of how this affects the Lannisters' overall forces in any way, but we just know that they need them for the battle with the Others.
  21. On a somewhat unrelated note: I like how Littlefinger already has control over the Riverlands, the Vale, and is asking for the North and no red flags are going off in Cersei's head.
  22. I'm not much of a regular on these forums, so I can't speak for this community, but in my experience most people seem to expect a generic fantasy ending (r+l=j, targaryen restoration, good guys beat white walkers, the whole deal) albeit with a lot of character deaths/destruction, so nothing you've said is really groundbreaking honestly. I think that whatever the ending is that George is planning, it will be very dark but in more of a cerebral way than a bloodbath way. Major character deaths aren't even something to hype up at this point in the series and I think what he's planning will be philosophical or have some type of commentary to read into. In terms of character deaths though, I basically agree with your prediction, although I guarantee some POVs are going to make it (Sansa is definitely going to survive lol), or how else will we know what happened? I don't think the logic of who survives will have anything to do with morality like a lot of people might expect, such as Cersei or Littlefinger dying because they're bad and they just have to. I could easily see them making it along with some of the more heroic characters.
  23. I just think there's not enough there to come to these conclusions. The connection between Jaime's dream and the game of faces seems somewhat flimsy and as you pointed out, already connects to the Rains of Castamere. Tywin not wanting his children to be laughed at and Needle reminding Arya of the laughter of Winterfell's people seems to have no connection. Tyrion's threats he made in book 3 just seems more like character development rather than foreshadowing, especially when you consider his feeling toward Jaime eventually become more conflicted later in book 5, and while the idea of Tyrion being the reverse-Tywin by destroying House Lannister sounds cool, I just don't see the setup for it. I also agree with what Ferocious Veldt said that it's inconsistent with other examples of foreshadowing in the series (such as Roose Bolton hunting wolves in book 2 for example) and way too subtle. Even if it did turn out to happen exactly like you predict, I never would have seen these examples as setting it up. I also think it's worth noting that we know very little about the Faceless Men and whether Jaime's face can be "worn". There's a theory I find very convincing that only skinchangers can become Faceless Men and only other skinchangers' faces can be used by them. I would also say that it would be very unsatisfying to have two of the most major characters' stories ended by a cookie-cutter revenge plot by Arya and Tyrion, especially Jaime who's had basically no interaction with Arya.
  24. First paragraph of link you directed me to:
  25. Most likely the Aegon cause if they're not already. I've heard it speculated that they're already secretly backing all the contenders for the throne, which honestly seems more plausible than putting all their eggs in Stannis' basket.