MrJay

Members
  • Content count

    129
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About MrJay

  • Rank
    Sellsword
  1. That's what I did. Don't regret it at all. Fair warning. If you hit a brick wall with the fourth book and want to vent, be prepared for backlash.
  2. Agreed. This may as well be renamed why do you love Sansa and agree with a erything she has ever done? The amount of hand waving and excusing her early ignorance is astounding. Oh well. At least it's better than trying to be critical of Daeny. At least Sansa supporters don't take personal offense if you claim to not love their girl to the point of tattooing her name in your forehead. +1 for that. This needs repeating Not liking a character does not mean that they should not exist. Hardly anyone likes Joffrey, but who in the right mind would say that he should be deleted from the story? I don't like the old Sansa, but I get it. Not every Stark child is a super smart badass fighter. That isn't remotely realistic, and yes, her upbringing and her actions make sense. That don't mean I have to like her. I don't even like Arya to be honest, and Jon Snow is wearing on me. That's because they are not one dimensional cliche characters that are focus tested to appeal to mass audiences. They are as real as you can get considering they don't really exist. I like to think I am a pretty mellow fellow and I have been called an asshole to my face before. That's how people work. So when I say that I dislike "X" character, that doesn't mean I am suggesting they be removed from the story or killed off (despite me wanting it at times, lol). I am just saying that I would shake the living hell out of book#1 Sansa until her pretty little teeth fell out of her head or she grew have a damn brain. And I'd probably do worse to Ned cause that level of ignorance was just rage inducing. But I understand why he was how he was and his being that way was extremely important to the story. Don't mean I gotta like him or I am just nitpicking for no real reason. It's an opinion. I get that. It may seem like I don't, but I do. That was worth a lot of leeway for me and I totally see why she adored Joff so much and thought everyone was nice and war didn't exist. However, my gripe with her is that it took her sooooooo long to learn. Like, if you were raised to believe that no one lied, it makes sense you trust everyone right? But when someone lies to you, you have a choice. Either acknowledge that it happened and learn from it, or ignore it and continue on like a fool. Sansa did the latter. Without even going that deep into the story, when Joff showed he was a little jerk to Arya and her friend Sansa could have been honest. A lady is supposed to be honest and she should not lie to the king or her father. Not only that, she should have been loyal to family. What did she do? She curled up inside herself and let the lie continue and had her wolf get killed and Arya's friend murdered. Why? Was it because she was a dainty lady? I don't think so. I think it;'s cause she is an extremely weak willed and selfish person who cared more for living out her fairy tale life and would have ignored any and all evidence of reality so long as she got what she wanted. As bad as that was, I forgave her and hand waved it. But then she continues and continues and continues and only wises up when she starts getting abused. Key word there, SHE. I fully believe that so long as she never directly felt the repercussions of her actions (or inaction) she would remain ignorant and in Joff's palm. That's why I disliked her. And yes I get she was a child. However, children are very selfish at times too. If I see a child bullying another or torturing an animal I am not gonna just stand there and claim that little Joffrey is a good little angel and any naysayers are wrong about him.
  3. Technically: Whoever has the strongest army and can plant their rear on the Throne. Legally: Stannis. Also legally : Joff. Son or not, Rob claimed him as heir. So he is heir.
  4. In the beginning : She would get you killed. She is one of those types. Like friends in horror flicks who open the door for strangers. That's why I hated her. She was so naive and stupid that she would actively get you killed by her just being near you. Look. I don't have to like you. Go be useless and that is fine with me. You can even be kinda dumb. Bit Sansa is so bad, so retarded, so unbelievably God awful that she actively aids the villains despite supposedly being a good or at least neutral character. Now I like her. That goes to show you. She hasn't done squat except be a pawn for others, and it's such a vast improvement over how stupid she was that I love her now. All she has to do is realize she is jacking things up for her family and friends, find a corner, and sit down. That would have been magnitudes greater level of common sense and intelligence than what she had in book 1. And yes, I get it. She was a child. Yet for some reason her other siblings were no where nears that stupid. That means that Ned and Cat either... 1. Purposefully raised Sansa to be a retard while teaching their other kids that life isn't a made up fairy tale (seriously even Bran and Arya got those lessons). 2. Or they did teach Sansa but she was so self centered that she is willing to get her family murdered so she can marry so blonde haired prick and be queen. Anyways. I like her now as I said. But I still don't read her chapters because the hate from before still simmers within me.
  5. Took me two reads to notice you quoted me. Lol, I'm tired. I should have been clear, and I did notice this when I first wrote it. I just get fired of editing via cell. When I say field of fire 2.0, I mean the half baked way they set it up. I agree that it should and would happen. But the way it happened was the most ham fisted and forced way possible. But I'm fine with disagreement there. It's one of the weaker examples. My big boy examples I bolded. But really. The hound all but said "Clegane bowl confirmed! Get hyped!" (Air horns blare)
  6. Why even be there then? He could have just left and no one would be aware of what his intentions were. Even if they found out he went to essos, it could be for anything. - Abandon cersei cause she's losing - going on another adventure - looking for exotic poon. - looking for some super secret God weapon. - Stopped caring and just decides to leave. - stole something. Fleeing. And remember, that's if they knew where he was heading. There was no point to the act. None at all. It made no sense in universe. Also:. Anyone find it weird/sweet how he is sticking by cersei? The guy must really want her. For a supposedly insane uncaring guy, he's standing by her when she is basically finished and still trying to marry her. Not murder her as he did his brother, but marry her. Confirmed. Euron is in love with Cersei and wants go have a family if one eyed krakens with lion manes. Lol
  7. *Dragons and tits And yeah, they definitely hammed all that up. However, that is all toned WAY down these latest seasons. I think it was mostly for eye candy in attracting views, but now they don't need it. Since these latest seasons are basically from D&D, it's easy to see (or assume) that they probably would never have been that gratuitous had it been up to them.
  8. My take. They knew of dragons, but the dragons didn't go all over westeros. So Amy rumors beyond where they went were seen as just tales. So the folks that new if them considered them no threat since nothing happened for 100 years. It was just a thing that was. Then the fire nation...i mean, the conquest came. Which was a suprise.
  9. Hi. Guess what I had to do for my story? Yup! I had to look into nobility and how it worked. Here is my Opinion (cause I'm no historian) While Martin doesn't go into much detail, it's actually a good choice. Why? Cause noble ranks are not as straightforward as you think. Here's an example. Before the war of roses was the 100 years war. During that time, the king if Britain was technically a vassal of the king of France. Yes that happened. How? Let's say I'm in charge of two lands and so are you. I'm Duke of land A and Baron of land B. I hold both titles at the same time. You are Earl of land B and I am your vassal despite holding a higher rank. You are also a baron of land B. You can technically call me to aid you in war of you were bold enough. This was the case with the two kings. The king of Britain also held some land in France. Hence, he was a vassal. So with that in mind you see why naming ranks would confuse things a bit. So why name them? Just make them all lords and be done with it. The above assessment is a good one. I'd go different in some cases, but it's all just opinion so I can't claim to be correct. My only change would be to add in the rank of dukes and and marquis. But again, that's confusing as hell. Example. Dukes can be sovereign. The idea that kings and above alone are rulers if countries is false. Some countries today are founded by sovereign Duchys. And again, Archdale and grand Duke are a thing. You also have prince's who are sovereign too. It's one huge mess to be honest. You have to remember, people made all these titles up as they went. So best not for look too deep into it cause it could honestly be many things. If Martin really wanted to mess with people he'd make a lord paramount a king, but have that king hold land to a count and be sworn to him, and have that count also have land that is a principality so he'd be prince along with the crown prince, but sworn to another Duke. One last thing. IRL, the amount of soldiers you command is important, bit doesn't effect your title. The land is where your title comes from. And a county/March could be tiny, to larger than a Duchy. There is really no hard and fast rule for all this.
  10. On my cell so this won't be as detailed as I like. Just gonna give the overview of my opinion. D&D are just not as good. I'm not insulting them to insult either. I've had enough if that. What I mean is they are not "authors", for lack of better words. They write, sure, but anyone can do that. Anyone can make a string if scenes with explosions and characters being all super awesome. Kids do that. However, an author does that and has it naked sense within the universe they created. I have listened to their interviews and it's clear they care not for the actual characters or story. What they care about is showing off their favorite actor and doing "fan service". I do not use this word lightly, but this is legitimate fan fiction. What we are seeing now are people thinking, "wouldn't it be cool if..." and then making it so. Its essentially what happens if you have someone watch the show for 4 seasons then tell them to make up what they want to see and then do it. Everything in between is just fluff designed to get to the next cool scene. Not even good fluff. When I watched season 7 (and some parts of the previous) I truly felt like the writers have been looking at our memes and discussions and picking things that people talked about. Davos and "fewer" Gendry and his rowing Jon and Dany hooking up. Aegon and Lyanna secret wedding. LF "trial" Feild of fire 2.0 Commando misson to the north The hound and "you know what's coming" (airhorns) Arya and Brienne fight The list goes on. It's all just spectacle and no substance.
  11. Well, this depends entirely what kind of twins they are. Usually, it's one egg that gets split in two. Or it's (what I think you imply) two eggs that just happen to form at the same time. I think it's highly unlikely. If one sperm made it go an egg, chances are one other of the millions will fertilize the other. The chances of one sperm making it while the others give up, die, or get lost is slim. But I suppose it's possible. This is a made up story after all.
  12. Logged in to second this. That guy is easily one of the best actors on the show. It kinda saddens me that people talk of how they hate Joff, but rarely give the guy his dues. He honestly played the part if the charming prince so well that I honestly see why Sansa would love him. I saw a video of him out if context and he legit came off as a sweet guy. Then he shows how messed up Joff is. Spoiled rotten, entitieled, not stupid (surprisingly) and utterly sadistic. Ramsay was bad, but kinda cartoony bad. Like someone who watched the show and wanted to "out villain" Joff. But Joff came off like a real person. Someone who looks prestine in public, but tortures animals and people behind locked doors. And even when he let his evil ways show, he always came off as a spoiled rotten rich kid, which he was. Jack Gleeson is a top notch actor. And that's even more inoressive given his age. (of course the source was just stellar, but he sold it 100% and stood toe to toe with established actors)
  13. You can't just drop that in here without further explanation. Explain yourself Aaand emote! Yeah that's the face. Let's get 30 minutes if just closeups of them looking at one another all intense like D&D
  14. Her plans didn't change though. She is just buying more soldiers. The only thing that changes her plans is that meeting when decides to backstab Jon and Co. Jaime tried to tell her they would be stomped even without dragons and she specifically points out that it doesn't matter. So the battle really had no purpose except to be a cool battle. Which is fine I guess. Not every battle in real life results in a decisive change.
  15. Yes and no. There are always issues when adapting works. I think most of us get that. And yes some nitpicks are just that, gripes that are just poking at the inherent flaws apparent in any adaptation. However, the reason you see so many with this show (and this season especially) is because we have seen how good it can be. There were always flaws with the shows logic, but these were minimal and and the rest of the show made up for them easily. Think of it like going from gourmet meals prepared by a renowned chef to eating at Applebee's. I like Applebee's. Nothing wrong with it. But I also didn't get get used to top quality meals. Someone used to such meals is gonna have a lot to say about what some chain restaurant serves. Before it was the odd steak cooked well done vs medium. We overlooked that cause the rest of the meal was good. Now our orders are getting messed up and we are sitting there for nearly a half hour waiting for a refill. So of course people are gonna start finding all the things wrong now. They are unhappy. Unhappy people do that. In my opinion, the biggest flaw of the show is getting people used to top quality content. If they had never done that, followed Martin's writing as best as they could, then only the people who care about flashy lights and cool one liners would be watching, and they would be happy with all that. Unfortunately, a lot of folks who watch for the tight plots and foreshadowing also watch this show. So take all that away and start giving them Michael Bay levels of entertainment and of course they are gonna get upset. When I go watch transformers (when I used to watch it) , I don't nitpick. I know what it's gonna be. Just loosely strung together cliches and the odd sexy girl bending over in between robot fights. Then splash in some slow motion and Walbergs signature fast talk and you got a film. But if transformers reeled me in with espionage, backstory and deep flawed characters, I'd be pretty pissed to see everyone become generic action heros and slow mo explosion dodgers. Maybe it's just me. I could be wrong. I just think that all of these gripes come from a place of feeling led on. So now no quarter is given and every flaw will be pointed out mercilessly.