Darkstream

Members
  • Content count

    2,637
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Darkstream

  1. Well, I can't answer for this in regards to the show, but in GRRM's case; He is a masterful wordsmith, who's brilliant talent would be wasted on a bunch of characters with a vocabulary of just one word. ...hmmm, after hearing some of the dialogue that d&d have written, I'm thinking this wouldn't be such a bad idea for the show.
  2. Just place your cursor at the end of the paragraph where you want the break, and then quickly double click the enter/return key. Sorry, I have to run right now, but I'll try to address the rest of your post when I have the time.
  3. When the logistics of something conflicts with prior established rules or facts, for the sole purpose of moving the plot in the direction that the show runners want it to go; You know, "creatively it made sense to us because we wanted it to happen". It has been established in world, that DS is a small rocky island that has limited resources of no value. So much so that "Queen Cercei" - a ridiculously illogical concept in of itself - deemed DS to be of so little importance that it was left abandoned for months on end, despite its strategic military location, and now, apparently the resources to sustain an army of a hundred thousand soldiers. If I am to assume that DS has the resources to sustain this large army, then it must be explained why such a resource rich island was left abandoned. Yes, it is logical that dragons can fly. That is an established fact in the world of ice and fire. In fact, GRRM had rejected the original concept art of HBOs dragons on the grounds that they did not adhere to proper evolutionary rules; the original dragons were to have four legs. You are attempting to build a straw man argument here. The issue is not that everything isn't explicitly shown or explained. One could easily assume that a trip from Slavers Bay to Dragonstone took the required amount of time to make the trip, without the show explaining or showing that it did. The issue is that the time lines are not consistent or plausible in reference to other time lines in the show. If I assume that it took a month for Danny and her army to travel to DS, then why has only a day or a week passed in other parts of Westeros? That would be acceptable if it wasn't already established that they don't have the resources to survive.
  4. Wait, I wasn't ready. Ok, staartiiing...NOW!
  5. Well, I'd be the wrong person to ask that question, as I'm not one to watch much television, and haven't seen many of the programs that would be comparable to GoT. The only reason I started watching this show was because of my passion for the source material, and the excitement and curiosity of seeing one of my favorite stories of all time being adapted to a visual medium. Contrary to what I expected, the show runners did an excellent job in the first couple of seasons, and I considered GoT to be substantially better than any other shows on television. Were there issues with the show, and decisions they made that I didn't like? Sure, but they were understandable considering the medium, and not nearly as prevalent as they are now. So, if I were to use any show in comparison when rating the episodes from this season, it would be to that of Got in the first few seasons. While my ratings for the first 20-30 episodes would have varied from probably 6-9, and possibly one or two 10s, using that as a standard, I cannot justify giving any episodes from the past three seasons a rating any higher than a 1-2, with maybe the odd 3 in there. See, and that is what I was like during the first three seasons. I couldn't wait for Sunday night, and was filled with excitement and anticipation, even though I already knew what was going to happen. Now, I don't know what is going to happen, but lack the desire and motivation to sit down for a full hour to watch the show. So, for me, using that as a measuring stick, I cannot justify giving this show a passing grade.
  6. Ha!! Idle threats. I don't believe you are inept enough to come up with anything as cringe worthy and painful to endure as the Sandsnakes dialogue, that has unfortunately, already infested my mind. If I was able to survive the drivel that d&d gave us, there's nothing you can come up with that would force me to submit.
  7. I cry at the end of every episode... Tears shed for what could have been.
  8. I'm going to have to respectfully disagree with you there. Sure, the show is successful, but that is not indicative of good story telling. Do you honestly think the show would be as popular as it is if they had a substantial smaller budget to work with? Would as many people tune in if there were no CGI dragons or battle scenes? If they didn't have amazingly elaborate sets, and beautiful locals to film their story at? A large majority of viewers tune in for the spectacle that is GoT, not because of the quality story. Would you say that movies like the Transformers are telling a good story, or programs like Jersey shore and the Kardashiawhatevers? All very popular and successful programs.
  9. Wow, atrociously corny and contrived writing. I would say that this show has officially jumped the shark, however that moment has long since passed. With this episode, d&d have officially jumped the Megalodon. As with many past episodes, I feel like this deserves a negative rating, however, having absolutely no expectations of seeing a quality program coming in, and feeling generous: +1 for the CGI; essentially a point for the budget, nothing to do with the show runners. +1 for Davos' retort to Tyrion when coming ashore KL. Tyrion: "Last time I was here I killed my father." Davos: "Last time I was here, you killed my son with wildfire." First time I was genuinely amused by a line in GoT in a long time. Gotta love that Davos. 2/10 ...and I'm shocked with myself that I rated it this high.
  10. ...You know nothing, Jon Snow Free Northman Reborn. A true man steals a woman from afar, t' strengthen the clan. Women who bed brothers or fathers or clan kin offend the gods, and are cursed with weak and sickly children. Even monsters." Quite frankly, I think what would be preferable, is for Jon to keep it in his pants while engaging in a relationship with any family members, regardless of the degree of relation.
  11. Not at all. I believe you may have missed the context of my original comment. Other posters were comparing the attitudes toward incest today, to the persecution of homosexuals in the past. Thus, my comment was referring to the views held in the past. With the knowledge we now have, I think it's fair to classify those past (or somewhat medevil) beliefs to be quite ignorant; whether they be religious beliefs, or just societal perceptions in general. I hope that clears up the misunderstanding.
  12. I'm sorry, but I stand by my comment. Any religion - or moral principles - that persecutes an individual as an evil sinner for "making the choice of being gay" and uses arguments to support these beliefs, such as "homosexuals are responsible for the spread of STDs", or "a gay man is more likely to molest children than a strait man" is in fact guilty of spreading propaganda to support their ignorant religious beliefs. My comment was in no way meant to be disrespectful to anyone. However, if you subscribe to, or support these types of views and beliefs, then I'm honestly not concerned with, nor would I acknowledge what you deem to be disrespectful to others.
  13. Love.
  14. ...unless you are a Baratheon conquering a Targaryn. That is when the rules change, then the conquerer has no rights whatsoever, and is deemed an usurping criminal. The bias, contradictions, and hypocrisy in your arguments are never ending.
  15. Wait, now I'm confused. Are you Bloodraven, or are you the guy skinchanging Bloodraven, and forcing him to skinchange everyone else? Either way, my Master of Whispers will track you down. Your fate is sealed, I have seen it in the flames; Your opposition to my rule has ensured that you shall be...dead as Ned.
  16. I haven't forgotten you, you are the biggest threat to my rule after all. It's just that I don't recognize your title or authority. Now, if this was the thread of procrastination, you might have a case. Here however, you are just another treasonous traitor attempting to steal what is rightfully mine. Unfortunately, and despite any respect and admiration I might have towards you, the path you have chosen leaves me with no other option but to declare you as an enemy of the state, and call for your arrest and execution.
  17. Ah, I should've known, it's always Bloodravens' fault. So I don't need to stop you all, I just have to take out some hundred and something year old albino with a tree growing through him, and my kingdom will be in peace. The future looks good. The Queen??? But I haven't even been betrothed yet! Who is this pretender wannabe you speak of? Off with her head!!
  18. The gods be mad!!! I take a little time to go chasing after one prized whiteheart...and what do I find upon my return? A thread in chaos, enveloped by a bunch of Gaemon Palehairs and Trystane Truefyres sprouting like noxious weeds. I guess my fun is over...duty calls. This thread must be torn up, root and stem and seed, lest new traitors sprout from every corner of the interweb.
  19. DP
  20. Or, say, to necessitate an army's ability to travel a couple of leagues, in a light snowfall. ...just saying. Heh heh.
  21. And what? Did BR fall asleep during the most crucial moment in his plan? Because if Cat had ran out to the library with Robb, Summer Bloodraven would have arrived too late, and Bran would be dead. Seems like quite the risky plan, just as is counting on Bran not dying from his fall.
  22. What? So in one thread you argue that Stannis is a rambling mad man that everyone in the realm hates, making absurd claims that he has no proof of, but then to suit your argument in this thread, all of a sudden you contradict that, and state that he has a reputation of honesty, and should be trying to convince that very faction - which he is currently at war with, and of whom consider him to be a traitor - of the situation beyond the wall. This makes no sense at all.
  23. No, what's sad is your inability, or unwillingness to recognize context, circumstance, and intent. To be a treasonous traitor, one must commit an act with the willful intent to sabotage the cause of those that you are aligned to. In none of the examples you've provided - in which Jon has either broken, or walked the line in breaking his vows - was he intending to impede the cause of the Nights Watch, nor had his allegiance to the Watch faltered. And in fact, he made great sacrifice for the Watch, and had to make some very difficult decisions - of which can be argued, there was no right option - wherin he always made the choice that he felt was for the sake and benefit of the Watch, and of mankind. And what's sad is that's you don't realize how worthless these vows actually are. Sure, the intent and purpose of these oaths may have admiral goals in mind, and are all fine and dandy in theory, however, life and the tribulations that you must face throughout, are not as black and white as you would put forth, and wish them to be. The reason that GRRM reinforces the importance of these vows in AGoT, as you've pointed out, is so that he can effectively show the dire consequences of one commiting themselves to such limiting and binding shackles. Where is the honor and duty in upholding yourself to a vow your swore, when doing so inhibits you from fulfilling the purpose of taking those vows in the first place? Where is the sense in abiding by laws, put in place to establish and maintain order and civility, when doing so results in a despairing and chaotic society that rewards the vile actions of deplorable and sadistic individuals such as Ramsey and others of his like? What you don't seem to realize is that these vows are to blame for the dire state that the Watch has fallen to. Why do you think the Watch is largely made up of criminals who had no other real options, other than to serve at the Wall? What's really sad, is that due to your own personal bias, you take Jon's actions and decision that were made with the best of intentions, and made in the attempt to do what was the right thing, to the best of his knowledge or understanding, and use them to demonize and condemn him. Did he make mistakes, or let his own bias and feelings cloud his judgement at times? Of course. Who hasn't been guilty of that at some point? But to take these mistakes, and moments of poor judgement, and use them in an attempt to label Jon as a treasonous, oath breaking traitor, or to compare him to the likes of people like Daerion or Janos is just a ridiculously ignorant and asinine stance. Whether or not you agree with the decisions and moves that John made, and whether or not some of those decisions may have happened to coincided in benefiting the personal desires and bias of John, that does not change the fact that he always attempted to do what he felt was best for the prosperity and survival of the Watch, and of mankind. These are not motives and decisions of a treasonous, oath breaking traitor.
  24. Oh? And yet you keep arguing that Jon's most prudent coarse of action is to not do what he thinks is in the best interest of the realms of men, but to sit on his arse and send message after message to the deaf ears of these same Lords - just so that when the extinction of mankind is upon them, with his dying breath he can say, well, at least I didn't break any oaths, nor did I do anything unlawful. This is bs, besides, you think it's OK for him to bury his head in the sand to the threat of the Others, yet instead of accepting that he will receive no support from the Lords of Westeros, you expect him to continue in the hopes that they will finally listen - when it's too late.
  25. Well said. Although, I'm not sure how it can be argued that Bowen was acting lawfully when murdering his Lord Commander in cold blood.