Byfort of Corfe

  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Byfort of Corfe

  1. I think that something that is often overlooked is how much the other franchises you mentioned were groundbreaking. Star Trek broke TV ground by exploring racial and gender equality as well as other topics, right up to the nature of God. Star Wars was unlike any other Sci-Fi franchise we had ever seen. I think you had to have seen it at the time to truly understand what it was like. King Arthur examines the nature of sin and are we doomed by fate.In LoTR Tolkein attempted to create an entire Mythology. In contrast GoT and ASOIAF are really pretty run of the mill fantasy.
  2. Just curious and I'm not certain of the timeline but doesn't the birth of Lyanna's baby happen after Rhaegar's Death and after Aerys and Elia have been murdered? The baby may have been named Aegon by Lyanna with the knowledge that the other Prince Aegon is dead.
  3. Truly fascinating to speculate on the nature of the others.I have often wondered about the "do they come with winter or do they bring the winter?" conundrum. Anyway, I am greatly enjoying this thread.
  4. Well, if the Jon that I have seen is the best than the quality of swordsmanship has pretty much hit rock bottom. Jon had better hope that Daario doesn't show up to challenge him for Dany's hand. How about Brienne or maybe even Arya? Both are living in Westeros and both could probably slice and dice "the best swordsman who ever lived".
  5. Just my opinion but based on what I have seen (and realizing that Jon is as good as the writers need him to be) he definitely could not have won against pre-amputee Jaime. He would have also lost to the Clegane Boys, Sylvio would have sliced and diced him. I don't think that he would have stood a chance against Sir Arthur Dane and probably would have lost to Barristan Selmy in his prime. He might not even have been as good as Eddard Stark. To take it outside of Westeros and ASOIAF I think that you would have had to go deep into the Round Table before you found someone he could actually beat. Of course any of Dumas' Four Musketeers would have easily taken Jon's Lunch Money, as would Rochfort. (I include Dumas because that is essentially the fencing that Silvio is teaching Arya). A Japanese samurai would also probably have won. Frankly I was surprised at what Ramsay said about Jon's skill as nothing that I have seen so far in the series has shown Jon to be particularly outstanding. He always seems to win by luck, he is always rescued at the last second.
  6. To be fair it isn't up to anyone to prove that it isn't, rather it is up to you to prove hat he is. Eye color and height, that alone will be pretty hard to get around.
  7. You left out people like Mance and Tormund, as well as Tyrion's Barbarians.
  8. I have to say that this "prequel" whatever it is, will have to grab me on its own merits. I won't automatically watch it.
  9. I used to be on "Team Sansa" but even when I was I never expected that she would be Queen. All of the Baratheon/Lannister line would have to die, as well as Dany and whatever Targs might be around, as well as the fact that she would have to take on and kill Jon. Even then she isn't a legitimate heir, she would just be the last one standing. I not only don't think it could happen I also don't want it to happen. The only way that I see it happening is if the Night King kills her, marries her, and then she plunges an obsidian dagger into him.
  10. Better edited than the books. Look at books 4+5, pretty much just a colossal waste of time, they could have easily been condensed, with good editing, down to one book. And lets see, the series has Dany done with the East which was always a side story and moving to the west, the series has the rise of the Others for what is supposed to be the great showdown, where are they in the books? You claim that the last two seasons were all about the rise and fall of Ramsay, here I'll use your words, "laughable". Did you even watch the last two seasons? Oh and what is going on in book 5+6? The rise and probably subsequent fall of Euron and company, evidently with a ton of child abuse of various forms thrown in as backstory. Oh and chapter after chapter based on Sansa, excuse me "ALAYNE" and some bravo sierra with "Harry the Heir". Gee, isn't that intriguing? Here's the reality, the series is pushing to the end, GRRM isn't even close, in fact he's moving in the opposite direction.. Which is something he no doubt realizes and which is why I doubt he will ever write book 7 and I'm not sure that he finishes book 6.
  11. And maybe he's just sick of these characters and truly wants to move on to something he enjoys. Do you actually though expect him to come out and say it? As for me I'm okay with where it stands, nothing that I have seen from the advanced chapters of book 6 makes me want to read it.
  12. To me the major piece of news is that we may not see the finale of the series until 2019 or later. That's a long time to wait for 6 episodes.
  13. But do most show fans really have any idea who these people actually are? I still think that GRRM is sick and tired of ASOIAF and Dany and Sansa and Jon and LF and all the rest. He wants to, IMO, get as far away from them as possible. It's why I think we will never see book 7. And I'm okay with that.
  14. If you're looking for a major character I would bet on Sansa. My guess is based on the fact that while shooting went on for quite a while, Sophie Turner was photographed over and over in NYC and LA and London.
  15. Or the show is actually a tighter, better edited narrative. Simply put, whether there is a "second dance of dragons" or not it doesn't affect the end of the book or show, which is to finally tell us who wins "The Game of Thrones. And good lord, assuming GRRM actually will write 2 more books, which I really doubt, when is he going to put in two more wars? And if you want to talk about a mess of a story look at the books. Books 1-3, a logical progression of the story, then books 4+5, pretty much a waste of time, story lines that go nowhere, useless characters dropped into the story for no logical reason, just to leave a few chapters later, just as illogically.
  16. Mark Twain blamed the Civil War on the fact that too many Southerners were hooked on Sir Walter Scott's fiction, it's why the burning steamboat in Huckleberry Finn is named the Sir Walter Scott. Of course he was speaking about the "romantic notion of war" a notion that would lead to the deaths of some (this is the current estimate, higher than before) 750,000 soldiers.
  17. And while the South had success on Eastern Battlefields a quick look at the west shows the depths of Confederate Military disaster, a list of important battles from 1861-62 reveals: Wilson's Creek, Aug 1861- Confederate Victory Ft Henry Feb1862-Union Victory Ft Donelson Feb 1862- Union Victory Valverde Feb 1862- Confederate Victory Glorietta Pass Mar 1862-Confederate Tactical/Union Strategic Victory Pea Ridge Mar 1862-Union Victory Shiloh Apr 1862-Union Victory Corinth Apr-May 1862-Union Victory Island #10 Apr 1862-Union Victory Iuka Sept 1862-Union Victory Corinth Oct 1862-Union Victory Perryville Oct 1862-Confederate Tactical/Union Strategic Victory Stones River Dec 1862-Union Victory This is not a comprehensive list of all engagements fought but it is representative of the fighting. Note that the is almost constantly pushing deeper and deeper south. Many people have an "Eastern-centric" notion of the Civil War. There is also a line of thought, equally incorrect that the North only won because the weight of it's population and industrial might eventually crushed the South after the South had "taken " all the early battles. Now I have also limited it to 1861 and 62 on purpose, rather than going through the Tullahoma and Vicksburg Campaigns and beyond. There are almost no similarities between Robb's Rebellion, fought because of what the Lannisters had done to the Stark Family, and the American Civil War. Rather I believe that we should take GRRM at his word and accept what he has said that the inspiration for the Dynastic Struggles in Westeros is drawn primarily from the Wars of the Roses and other, similar Dynastic Wars in Medieval Europe.
  18. This, in the books the matter is open to debate, in the series it is quite obvious that BenJen is "playing the part" of Cold Hands. And I look for him to play a bigger part in the war with the others, as we now know that he was transformed by the Children of the Forest.
  19. I guess that my difference comes in the fact that while I think that GRRM is an above average writer and I enjoy much of his writing I don't feel that he is any more than that. Admittedly I don't read all that many fantasy stories but I certainly wouldn't put in him the class of Mary Stewart and her "Merlin" series or (admittedly not fantasy) Patrick O"Brian's Aubrey/Maturin series or C.S. Forrester's Hornblower books. And from what I have heard about the tales of abuse perpetrated by Euron on his younger brothers, well, I have zero interest in reading any of that.
  20. I agree, specifics in the show won't necessarily cross to the books, for example Tommen's suicide, Selmy's death, Stannis's death, etc. What we do know, apart from things like R+L=J are characters and story arcs in the books that don't matter. Aegon, fake or not won't matterin the end. Neither will Ramsay or Roose Bolton. Victarion doesn't matter either. The whole Dornish thing is basically a dead end. Margaery and Loras don't matter either. The Alayne part of Sansa's story is also a dead end, Harry the Heir doesn't figure into it. And all the Tyrion and Penny stuff doesn't matter. As someone who was first a book person some of this is good and some bad. I never cared for Euron and Victarion or for Dorne or Aegon, fake or not. The bad news is that means that whatever GRRM had cooked up for Illyrio and Varys as a grand conspiracy doesn't matter either. I was also curious about exactly what part Aegon was going to play (despite not really caring for the story line), after all Varys and Illyrio had gone to great lengths to protect Dany and yet here they have someone with a better claim than hers that they have been protecting all along. I was interested in Sansa as Alayne but more as being a protégé of Petyr's rather than the whole Harry the Hair thing that seems to play and important part in WoW. And I guess that it calls into question my buying and reading Books 6&7 as well.
  21. So Sansa watching as Ramsay dies isn't badass enough for you?
  22. So do people think that Caitlyn would have been the person who beheaded Tyron had she gotten him all the way to Winterfell?
  23. So she took off with a married man who already had two children and became his mistress and had his child. Yeah, that seems like a better option. Robert may not have been perfect for her but Rhaegar wasn't such a hot choice either. Robert's hatred of Targs and Rhaegar in particular stems from what Rhaegar does to Lyanna. I am always puzzled by people who read Rhaegar as the beau ideal of chivalry when he has chosen to abandon his two children and their mother to take up with another woman . He doesn't even have the courtesy to end their marriage, instead he embarrasses her by naming a girl that he never met before as his "Queen of Love and Beauty" in front of most of the nobility of Westeros. Yeah, sounds like a real gentleman to me. This is why I had hoped that GRRM and HBO would have done Robert's Rebellion, I have a feeling that had GRRM really delved into presenting Rhaegar we would have seen him for the two faced fraud he is. I always remember what Terry Jones said (and my studies have indicated) that when we think of the Knight in history we think he is best represented by Galahad or Lancelot when in reality he was a more like Tony Soprano. That's Rhaegar. And I think that we would have seen that Lyanna had more than a touch of Stockholm Syndrome.
  24. No but you have to admit that making a series from a best selling book or books is certainly easier than making one from a completely unkown commodity. And that divergence of the series from the books didn't happen (with minor differences, compositing characters, etc) until the series was well established. As for the "gritty realism" that came about because of the characters. If all that people cared about was CGI and the whiz bang effect "King Arthur Legend of the Sword" would have been a big hit. Which is true, GoT was lightning in a bottle and now they are trying to do it again. It will be very difficult to do, with a whole new cast and a whole new story. Too many folks think it's simple, "oh, we have this formula, we have nudity and swords and dragons, how can it lose?". I'm old enough to remember when "Excalibur" came out. Immediately we were inundated with sword and shield and sword and sandal movies. How many of them succeeded? Almost none. But there was a formula. You have "Band of Brothers" on HBO, a big hit, take the same great production people and make "The Pacific", respectable but nowhere near as big a hit. "Gladiator" is a big hit, let's make "Pompeii". Now as for me it took a while for GoT and ASOIAF to earn me as a fan. With a story that is basically disassociated from the current GoT they will have to earn me again. Sometimes it works. "Fargo" manages to do it withcompletely new casts and storylines every season but having said that it fails much more foten than it works. And yes, I doubt that we will ever know what exactly happened in phases of Robert's Rebellion. So I'll live without knowing that. I have more important things to worry about.
  25. CGI alone isn't going to make people watch. There will always be something better coming out. GoT succeeded because it had a large core audience of book readers and because GoT had characters that people cared about. Look, people are still talking about Hodor's sacrifice and Death. And why, because of the CGI? No, they cared because they cared about the character. Jaime's scene with Myrcella, Tyrion telling Dany about how he had given up on life, Jorah showing Dany his greyscale, Ned being executed Jon's reunion with Sansa, these scenes work because we care about the characters, not because of any CGI around them. Drama is character driven, always has been, always will be. And therein lies the problem for the projects as supposed. Unless you really pay attention to the forums and the like the characters from Westerosi "History" don't resonate. Oh sure, a lot of the GoT audience will tune in for the first or second episode but unless you give them more than dragons and blood (and here I'm going to commit the ultimate heresy, I don't think that the GoT dragons are all that spectacular particularly in the full light of day (for me the most effective scene with the Dragons was when Tyrion goes to unchain them. And even there most of the dragons are hidden in darkness which actually makes them scarier but what really makes the scene work is that we care of Tyrion is quick fried to a crackly crunch). I'm certainly not going to watch a show just because it has dragons just like people didn't go to see "King Arthur, Legend of the Sword" because it had magical Elephants. And also these "projects" really aren't going to be spinoffs. None of the characters from GoT will appear. A classic spinoff, like "Frazier" or "The Jeffersons" will take a character or two from a show and give them a show developed around them. That isn't going to happen here. And while some of the family names will remain the same pretty soon you run into the danger of people saying, yeah, they're Starks and Lannisters but I really don't know who they are. This has, IMO just become a dicey proposition because while it won't be a complete unknown quantity it will be close. This will be basing a project on an outline while GoT came from fully developed books. I know that HBO hires quality people but I do now think that far from this being a sure thing I think it has become a throw of the dice.