Wilnova

Members
  • Content count

    208
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Wilnova

  • Rank
    Squire

Recent Profile Visitors

735 profile views
  1. I do agree that some of their scenes were written and framed in such a way that we are supposed to come out siding with Sansa. For example the Jon-Sansa argument before BOB, where Sansa could have spoken up without being asked to, but Jon apologizes for not asking her opinion - telling us that Jon is wrong and Sansa is right. But i would think that the intent of the writers is also that Jon is a good leader who has a great story this season going from being dead to being King. I don't see any fans blindly supporting this. Jon got so much criticism for doing almost nothing this season, for his resurrection being anti-climatic, Battle of the bastards (BOB), for having PTSD. Sansa got all the credit. As much as it was the writers intent to prop up Sansa as some great game player, I don't think they intended to show that Jon was unfit to be a leader- how would that justify their KITN plot? Most forums, fans and blogs damned Jon Snow as a horrible commander after Battle of Bastards and praised Sansa for actually holding back information about the Vale because Jon would have wasted the advantage. The mental gymnastics that went into explaining Sansa's actions by almost everyone even went so far as to equate Sansa to the second coming of Tywin, using Jon and the wildlngs as bait to draw out Ramsay and then use the Vale army. And she got praised for doing that!! And after all that, according to Sophie, the idea behind holding back the info was just because she wanted the credit and it looked good on screen. I think Sansa has a special group of fans who, like the actress who plays her, tend to exaggerate and add hyperbole to anything she does. This is true of her books fans as well who often claim she is a far better player and political expert than people like Jon and Dany, who have been groomed to rule, and yet fail to justify these claims when questioned on the text. They take for granted that she will be some super diplomat and power player sometime in the next two books, take that as accepted fact and then continue to argue from there. Despite Sansa having done absolutely nothing in 5 books and 6 seasons to demonstrate that she is skilled game player or politician. Next season we will have Sansa siding with LF, and we will still have fans justifying her actions and supporting it because Jon's too dumb or something.
  2. Nice straw man attack there. I was more taking into account that Dany is a 13 year old and that Sandor is 27 years old, but sure it's all about looks. Also, why should we give Sansa a pass for falling for Joffrey's bullshit when she was 11, right? She should have known better than to betray her family so that she could become queen. She is as horrible as Dany is. No age excuses for these characters. Maybe Sansa does deserve Sandor after all. So Sandor who has served Joffrey and Cersei thinks that these are good people who are telling him the truth when they ask him to go kill a child? Tywin tells Gregor to go terrorize the RL and Cersei tells Sandor to go kill a child. These guys then follow orders. I doubt very much that the Hound believes that Joffrey was telling the truth - the Hound knows Joffrey very well. And yes, by his own admission, the Hound has killed innocent people before - including women and children. Thank you for providing the full quote - and what extra information does it give us? That the Hound continues to be unapologetic about killing women and children because he is a knight? That he likes to brag about killing innocent people? I also like how every time the Hound lists out his crimes, you give him a pass by saying that he is mostly bullshitting. Yeah right! Yes, as usual he did not care if he was murdering an innocent child or not. He was just following orders - orders given by someone like Cersei. Again, I am not excusing Dany for giving an all encompassing order. I do not condone collective punishment. I see her as a 13 year old Queen who sees other 13 year old slavers as being as responsible for their actions as she is for hers. She sees her fight as being against masters who own and degrade other human beings. And in fighting that evil, she does some terrible things as well. I see Sandor, a 27 year old man, who murders a poor butcher's boy on Cersei's order, shoves down this child's body cut in half from his horse and then laughs and jokes about it to Ned as being a rather repulsive, unsympathetic human being and would not want this man anywhere near Sansa. There's plenty of textual evidence. It's only Sandor fans wanting readers to overlook the textual evidence because poor Sandor is only covering up his poor sensitive soul and over powering love for Sansa with his witty remarks. Where have I given a pass for Dany's actions unlike you continually trying to justify Sandor killing a child because he was only following orders. I do give Dany some leeway compared to a child murdering henchman because I think that she thinks she is delivering justice and doing so for the greater good. That she draws a line at killing children - who she defines as being younger than 13. That she herself is a child who was brought up by Viserys. Would you see Sansa as being as terrible as Sandor because she betrayed her family to the Lannisters? Why does Sansa always get a pass because she is a child but characters like Dany, Robb and Jon are held to higher standards? They are all children are they not? Sure Sandor also had a traumatized childhood. But he is bloody 27 years old. It's harder for me to give characters like Sandor and Jaime a pass when they have been inflicting pain and suffering on other people just because their life sucks. Sandor mowed down an innocent child because 'orders'. Yes, his style. I am not a fan of his style of taunting traumatized children about killing their friends and raping their sister. I am not a fan of his gloating about killing 'women and children' . I would rather he just shut up and show some remorse for doing horrible things to other people. I do consider him to be rather nasty. Epic fail on your part here. The point remains that Sandor Clegane did walk away and desert, successfully, when he wanted to. Sure, he was traumatized by the fire and did not want to fight any more. So he just walked off. Something he could have done anytime when Cersei Lannister was asking him to murder children. But as the Hound has stated - ' yes, and women and children too—they’re all meat, and I’m the butcher. ' - he really does not care. Jesus! Who frigging cares about his bravado?! He keeps taunting Arya about killing Mycah! He taunts her about raping Sansa! Why do you keep justifying his nasty behavior towards Arya and Ned? Why does Arya deserve to be constantly taunted with Mycah's death? He never once shows any regret or remorse for cutting down an innocent child in half! What? His taunts require praise or something? Bullshit. He ruthlessly slaughters an innocent child. He has killed children before, by his own words. Because apparently that's what knights do. He physically and verbally assaults Sansa. Sure the context here is that Sandor is just 'bullshitting' everyone because really, poor guy just wants to show his bravado! I sympathize more with a 11 year old Arya having to put up with his cruel taunts than with a 27 year old child murderer Sandor being at a 'low emotional point'. But that's just me. I am glad Arya left him to die and gave him no mercy. He was not deserving of any from her. Sandor is a person who has done some terrible things in life and instead of expressing some remorse for what he has done, all he does is take pleasure in continuing to cruelly taunt his victims. Maybe he will realize what a horrible person he has been after his sojourn at Quite Isle. Maybe we will see a Sandor who acts his age and understands that adults don't take out their angst on children to 'show off their bravado' or some such nonsense. Pretty much. And fans give him a pass because like you said he's apparently 'bullshitting' and somehow that makes it all okay.
  3. Arya understood that the Hound was really a poor, misunderstood soul and was just too shy to express some remorse for murdering a child? Was that why she left him to die a painful death? Atta girl!! One of Arya's finest moments leaving him there to die. Unfortunately it looks like he got saved by Al Swearengen on the show. Not sure what he will do in the books, but I get the feeling GRRM may hand out some tidbits for the SanSan shippers since he seems to to be a fan of the 'forced seduction' trope considering that he thinks Dany/Drogo is romantic.
  4. He may not have forced her to kiss him, but Sansa was terrified of what he would do to her: How is any of this romantic? This is a scared, terrified girl, scared that the Hound is going to sexually assault her. He wrenches her arm, throws her on the bed and shoves a knife into her throat. Imagine it : A 28 year old man, manhandling a 12 year old girl... How is this any better than what Tyrion does to Sansa? Tyrion also sees the repulsion in Sansa's eyes and decides not to enjoy his marital rights. Tyrion was married to Sansa, Sandor was not. But unlike Drogo raping Dany on her wedding night, Tyrion at the least had the decency to not force himself on Sansa. Same with LF. LF is not overtly pushing himself on Sansa. He is grooming Sansa to accept his little touches and kisses : Do we see her vociferously complain about kissing LF? No. Basically I don't like all three relationships, because they all have elements of forced coercion in them, I am not a fan of the 'forced seduction' trope and and I think Sansa is too traumatized and too young to make decisions about her life partner. i would pity Sansa if she got together with any of those 3 characters.
  5. Because I do have context for Dany's action. The people she goes after are those she thinks responsible for the cruelty against the slaves. Which is why I mentioned that her story arc has elements of the road to hell being paved with good intentions. She is not murdering people because someone asked her to or because an innocent child dared play with a sword. What she does, she thinks she is doing for the greater good. Like, Stannis burning people because he thinks that the survival of westeros depends on that. We may not get Stannis POV, but we can still feel his regret, his burden. What is the context of the Hound running down a child and killing him because Cersei orders him to? He is a henchman, no different to the Mountain, mowing down innocent people because he was told to. What is the context here? Does Sandor think that Mycah was guilty and was that why he ran down a fleeing child and cuts him almost into half? Or does he not care that he is murdering a child? Where is his remorse or sadness at doing what he was ordered to do? Who is defending her actions? Did I say she was justified. I am talking about her intent and feelings on the matter. Does she laugh and joke about having those women tortured? She orders the torture in a fit of anger after she loses one of her men. The shavepate also asks her to kill her child hostages which she refuses. As for Astapor: Dany is specifically asking her unsullied to kill slavers. As someone who is a queen at 13, maybe she does not hold 13 year old slavers wearing tokars as being innocent. From her point of view she does not order the deaths of minors, she orders the death of those equal to her in age and responsibility (or so she assumes) and spares the minors. Her intentions here are freedom for the slaves and death for their masters. Why should I not take what he says at face value? Just because he is touchy about murdering a child and laughing about it, he should get a pass? Does he ever show any remorse to Arya? Instead he keeps taunting and teasing Arya about killing Mycah again and again. He is a nasty, nasty man and I have no idea why anyone tries to justify his taunting people like Ned and Arya about killing a child as him being 'touchy'. Ugh. This is the Hound: Sandor is a killer of defenseless children and has been for a while. So, how come Sandor Clegane can desert his post after blackwater because he is scared of fire and does not want to fight anymore? So the realities of feudal societies does not hold true when it's his life on the line does it? It's no problem when he has to kill children and jeer about it as part of his job. But when it comes to Sandor Clegane facing a little fire, oh no! All that soldier training by feudal societies goes out the window right? So Sandor covers up his heart of gold by acting nastily to everyone? That must really be the truth of it. When he cruelly murders a child, cuts him almost in half, shoves his body off the horse and then joked about this poor child trying to escape, he was just trying to cover up his shyness by making small talk. Damn Ned and Arya for not understanding the real Sandor. I mean Arya should have understood that Sandor was just covering up his emotions when he says things like : Real nice guy there. Trying to cover up his sensitive, shy soul with some snark. No big deal, taunting a traumatized little girl about killing her friend and wanting to rape her sister.
  6. I don't mind going down this road. Dany's story is about the road to hell being paved with good intentions - she asked that the innkeeper's daughters be tortured to get information on her dying soldiers. Her order in Astapor was against the slave masters. At no point did she LAUGH and JOKE after doing these things - instead she is filled with guilt, remorse and self doubt about much of her decisions. And let's not start with the 'he was only following orders' nonsense. He did leave when he wanted to and he could have done so any time. He not only killed Mycah but he kicks down Mycah's body and jokes about it to taunt Ned. No one - not Tyrion, not Dany, not Stannis - takes pleasure in the horrible things they do. Sandor does. And that makes a difference to me.
  7. Have they run down and killed a scared, fleeing child and then laughed about it? If not, then no. Dany, especially, someone who has a soft corner for children cannot be compared to the Hound. She fights for the weak and helpless. Sandor Clegane killed the weak and helpless. Agree, I find it rather creepy that people ship Sansa with a drunken, abusive asshole who sexually, physically and verbally assaults her the whole time she is in KL and was part of the cabal that held her captive and killed her father's men (Including Jeyne's father). I have mentioned this before, but some people are into the whole 'forced seduction' trope which was is also the theme behind the actual 'beauty and beast' fairy tale where the beast kidnaps belle and hold her prisoner and she falls in love with him. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forced_seduction Which is fine. People are free to ship whatever they want - but let's not pretend that SanSan is somehow better than Sansa/LF shipping or Sansa/Tyrion shipping just because poor, abused Sansa responds to the tidbits of kindness the Hound shows her while she is a prisoner. I have found SanSan shippers to be a very hypocritical bunch who castigate and criticize Tyrion and LF as Pedophiles because they are attracted to Sansa, but have no issues with a 27 year old Sandor who falls for 11 yr old Sansa. I can understand the Jon/Sansa shippers who are mainly Sansa fans and who want her to find a nice guy. It may not be canon and I don't think it will happen on the show, but I can see why they ship it. I would prefer that Sansa end up with a nice guy too. And GRRM does seem to have run into problems without the 5 yr gap and making these characters too young. I think his story has changed in some aspects because Arya is too young at 11 to be romantically involved with either Jon or Gendry. Maybe he feels the same way about Sansa at 13.
  8. If GRRM changed some aspects of his story because of the lack of the gap, then it will be reflected on the show. We will more or less get the same endings for the 5 main characters on the show - which means if there is a Tyrion/Dany/Jon love triangle in the books, then there will be one on the show. Besides Dany has dumped Daario who she really did not love and there is strong foreshadowing in the books for Dany/Jon (Blue rose on the wall with the sweet smell) and strong setup on the show - Tyrion saying that Daario won't be the last to love her (The way he looks at her when he says this makes me think that maybe he is hinting at himself too). On the show there is really no one else for her to love.
  9. Remember that Tyrion/Arya/Jon love triangle in the original outline? I think it has become Tyrion/Dany/Jon in the current version after GRRM possibly decided that Arya's age was an issue and she was too young without the 5 yr gap. It did look like Tyrion was feeling some rather strong emotions in his scene with Dany and there were some looks he shot at her which made me think that there's something going on there. It could be that he falls for her and then Dany and Jon meet and Bam! They fall for each other and we have Jon and Tyrion possibly at odds with each other.
  10. Are you talking about the books? I can see Sansa being important as a political alliance on the show where Rickon is dead and there is no Robb's will. But in the books, it's a whole different ball game. Sansa is way - way down the inheritance chart, even below Arya. By Robb's will she is currently disinherited (Robb's will is known to and signed by Edmure, Maege Mormont, Galbart Glover etc.) The same will has also legitimized Jon and named him KITN. So we have Manderly supporting Rickon and some houses possibly supporting Jon. We also have the mountain clans marching with Stannis for Arya. Meanwhile Edmure is expecting a child. The Riverlands go to him and his descendants. The Vale goes to SR or to Harry the Heir. So in effect, Sansa's political worth in the books is zero. Marrying her may give someone the support of her siblings but that's about it. Jon certainly does not need to marry Sansa in the books for any alliance. Just looking at the witnesses to Robb's will, we see that the Riverlands had no issue with Jon being named KITN. Or with Sansa being disinherited. Jon already has the North and the Riverlands. If Sansa marries SR or HH, then she could convince her husband to help Jon with a Vale army. Other wise she has no control over the Vale either. Her marrying Jon is not going to get Jon the Vale. Plus, Sansa is still married to Tyrion. On the other hand, Arya is still in line to inherit WF (If Bran and Rickon die). Jon marrying Arya makes more sense than marrying Sansa. They have basically confirmed more or less the same thing on the show. The North overlooks Sansa and names Jon KITN despite the true heir Sansa sitting right there. Even the Vale seems to support him. The Blackfish is dead. Not sure about Edmure. But on the show, they seem to be indicating that Jon does not need to marry anyone for the North, Vale or Riverlands. Which means he needs to marry for the South and the Iron Islands. And who is bringing him those armies along with some fire breathing dragons? I think the show has pointed the arrows clearly towards Jon and Dany tying the knot.
  11. No way, Lena Headey's 10 minutes an episode can compete in lead actress category with other lead actresses who are in like 40 minutes of an episode. Besides, I thought Sophie was rather mediocre this season. I can see why she did not get an emmy nom. But they are not handing out acting emmy noms for story lines! I feel that Maisie deserves that nom just because she did the most with shitty writing. Sure Arya's plot was boring. So was Cersei's till the very end. I feel both actresses did a great job though. Same goes for Dinklage. They did not give him much to work with, but what he did was great as usual. Emilia and Peter both delivered in their scenes together.
  12. This discussion is still going on? Lol! Sansa’s boneheaded decision to withhold Vale info makes no sense if she truly wants Jon to win: They could have used more men to win and they could have send out scouts to check where the Vale army was located and when they would get there and plan accordingly They could have ambushed Ramsey in a better fashion with low loss of life Jon would have listened to Sansa and waited if he knew the Vale was present. In the finale he asks for her opinion on LF and respects her opinions. He was desperate for more men. They could have got more Northerners to fight for them if they know about the Vale. Glover specifically refused to join because he thought they were a lost cause. So why did they write it this way. I think this happened because the writers started from a plot point and then traced it backwards. They wanted 3 things to happen They wanted a ‘charge of the Rohirrim’ moment with the knights of the Vale and Sansa playing Gandalf They wanted Sansa to be instrumental in winning the battle. After all, this is the season where the women (Dany, Yara, Arya, Cersei, Ellaria) come out on top. How can Sansa be excluded? Plus this allows Sansa to bitch about not getting credit for the victory (As per Sophie Turner), driving a wedge between Jon and Sansa next season. They wanted to show Jon as someone who is capable of being KITN For getting the Rohirrim and Sansa being the key to victory moments, Sansa needs to keep this information from Jon. If she tells Jon this and Jon still goes ahead and fights, that’s character assassination for Jon. He’s already written as being incompetent as a leader on the show. How much worse would it be if they had written Jon as ignoring Sansa’s plea to wait for the Vale army to get there? The show would then not be able to justify Jon as KITN. Which needs to happen because it happens in the books. So Sansa keeps this from Jon. This could still be good writing, if they made this a deliberate choice. Like I mentioned earlier, if Sansa was putting LF’s plan to Cersei into action and allowing the armies to wipe each other out before the Vale gets there, her decision to keep silent about the Vale makes sense. They seem to have her siding with LF against Jon next season, so why not take this route? Maybe they chickened out of making Sansa so selfish because that could also be character assassination for Sansa. She also actively chides Jon for fighting with fewer men and keeps asking Jon to wait for more men despite keeping the presence of a large army from him. So her wanting Jon’s army to get decimated makes no sense. So in conclusion, I still have no idea why Sansa kept that information from Jon. The show has shrugged it off with a kiss on the forehead and a no worries it’s all cool from Jon. So maybe we should do the same.
  13. Now that Cersei has been unleashed as the Mad Queen who is possibly going to try to burn down KL with the Targaryens at the gates and Jaime with her, I hope this shuts down the Mad Queen Dany theories and speculations. Dany is going to take down the mad queen, not become one. I think we can safely say that Dany is now the younger, more beautiful Queen that casts down Cersei Since Tyrion is on his way, it can be either Jaime or Tyrion who will take her life Currently Dany is too OP. Even with Euron, there is no way Cersei/Euron can stand against Dany. I think the battle of Queens will be over before the first half of season 7 (Only 7 episodes) and Dany will then turn her focus towards the breakaway kingdom of the North. Cersei and possibly Jaime are gone by episode 4 or 5.
  14. Because Sansa has already undermined Jon's campaign by holding back vital info that he could have used to win. For her own selfish reasons. Sansa was in it to defeat Ramsay and get Winterfell back. Jon was in it to save Rickon and unite the North to face the Others. There's a fundamental difference in their way of thinking. I think she expected to be Queen in the North or Wardeness of the North which is what LF promised her. But the North chose the bastard born in the south as opposed to the true born daughter of Ned. As GRRM says, all families are dysfunctional. Not all siblings in every family get along. There are going to disagreements and fighting against inheritances and property. Why should the Starks be any different? Sansa as a character is different from the other Starks in that she is always looking out for number one. She has chosen the Lannisters over her family twice and even in the Vale she is not averse to her cousin being overdosed with sweetsleep (Despite the Maester's warnings) and dying so that her fiance Harry can be the heir. It's more about her survival and currently that's led to her/LF against the world. I don't blame her for only thinking about her survival. But that's her character. As opposed to Jon who would rather die and risk the safety of the NW than kill one old man at the Queenscrown. From the BTS interviews it looks like they are setting up some kind of conflict between Jon-Sansa next season. Apparently Sansa is jealous of Jon becoming KITN as per Sophie turner. If this happens Sansa is going to use whatever she learned from LF to undermine Jon. She may try to play the Northern houses against each other. But the fact that she does not understand Northern politics may be her undoing.