TheCasualObserver

Members
  • Content count

    872
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About TheCasualObserver

  • Rank
    Council Member
  1. Rant and Rave Without Repercussions - Includes Season 6 Spoilers

    Serious question - is Dany wearing jeans in those promo picks beneath her dress? Because it really, really looks like it. 
  2. Rant and Rave Without Repercussions - Includes Season 6 Spoilers

    Except of course that in a show interested in historical accuracy, Sansa no longer has political capital to anyone but the Boltons. She went to the wedding voluntarily and despite what we, the 21st century audience understand, is neither the victim of rape nor a legitimate claimant in Westerosi eyes. She is now the property of the Boltons by all the laws of Westeros. I have no doubt that, as a show committed to delivering historical accuracy, GOT will depict Sansa being used simply as a political hostage against the Boltons, as would be the case in a realistic patriarchal society. And it would the behavior of a cynic to point out that when this doesn't happen, it exposes the show as using historical context when it suits it in order to avoid criticism about it's dubious treatment of sexual assault throughout its entire run.
  3. Rant and Rave Without Repercussions - Includes Season 6 Spoilers

    On the subject of costumes, I find myself torn It's not that I don't agree that the costumes could look better, it just occurs to me that this was something that could have affected the Unsullied audience more than me. We don't mix up characters or factions because we know the books so well, but I've commonly heard that those who haven't read the books often struggle to distinguish certain characters (perhaps a more pronounced problem in earlier seasons) and there's even a Cracked video from when the show first started that lampshades this problem. For me, costumes will never make or break a show, but for those unfamiliar with the story, a greater range of costumes and brighter more recognizable sigils would have done wonders to help, not to mention adding to the world building without needing dialogue. A criticism of GRRM is that he spends to much time on this stuff but the show wouldn't have needed to be constrained in a visual medium. So when it comes to costumes, most audiences will miss the drab heraldry on display in the show, if it's there at all. If the audience already recognized that the flying fish was an emblem of Catelyn's family, the introduction of the Tully's come season 3 would have been much smoother. Nobody would have been confusing Jeor Mormont and the Greatjon if the former always wore black and the latter wore bright crimson. These are important visual clues that can help an audience latch onto a character; yet time and again the opportunites are missed. Varys is always wearing robes - that seems to have worked. The Lannisters with their red cloaks and samurai helmets sort of succeeds. Why not have more of this? What's weird is that this isn't one of GOT's critical problems. No amount of angst can rescue the character of Tyrion from his whitewashing, no wickedness can erase how innocent Cersei appears, no amount of exposition dialogue can cover up the widening holes in the plot.  But costumes can be swapped out before the new season and characters can be given costume changes. More northern lords next year? Give them proper heraldry! This doesn't make me hate the show (plenty of that elsewhere) it's an area that I genuinely believe we could see proper improvement in - they've certainly got the budget for it.    
  4. Ramsay in S6

    The problem I see there is that I don't know why the Bolton's would trust LF. Surely the phrase "there's no such thing as a free lunch" has a Westerosi equivalent. LF has given the Bolton's everything they want - they must assume he has an ulterior motive. And if LF was always planning this, did Sansa need to go to Winterfell? Without that, both Bolton and LF are supposedly loyal agents of the crown, so they would theoretically expect to work together anyway.   And if you think Ramsay is going to die, you've sorely underestimated the power of the twenty good men.
  5. The Brienne one is probably my favourite. "I'm going to kill Stannis." *Six episodes later, she kills Stannis.* It's like they weren't even trying. Shireen might best be described as "floating foreshadowing." There is literally no character in the entire show with her decency, sweetness or naivete. It was like she'd stumbled in from a kids cartoon show. So even if we didn't know precisely when, we did know that the show would eventually stamp on her. So yes, when Rickon and Sansa reunite, we all know what's going to happen.
  6. Who will Brienne kill in s6 finale?

    Did you guys forget? Brienne's specialty is killing those who could potentially protect the girls she is trying to protect. Stannis, LF's soldiers and the Hound were all directly or indirectly trying to help the Stark children. I'd guess that Brienne will claim she can protect Rickon better than Osha and hack off her head. That, or she will come across Bran and Hodor, claim that a simpleton cannot protect a young Lord and kill Hodor while he cowers on the ground. Because killing defenseless people makes for more compelling drama than a seven on one fight to save a group of orphans.
  7. What will potentially be the most annoying possible moment for you guys in season 6? I'm plumping for the inevitable scene in which Sansa meets the Northern Lords and they pledge their allegiance to her. Why? Because the show and its defenders were so quick to point out that rape within marriage was an accepted cultural more in medieval society - so it is in Westeros. Anyone who tried to argue against Sansa being raped was shot down by many because "GOT is no fairytale" and the assumption that this was what medieval marriage was about. Even reputable blogs like "The History of Game of Thrones" took that angle, as if an admittedly thorough application of historical context could ever make sense of the Winterfell clusterfruitcake. But flash forward to season 6 and it's time for the Stark loyalists to gather. (Actually it was time for them to gather last season but everybody forgot). I can say with some certainty that Sansa will be some kind of rallying point for the Northern lords and it will infuriate me. Why would any Northern Lord want to help Sansa after she voluntarily marries into the house of her enemies, the house that murdered her own mother and brother? She cannot claim she was forced because the wedding was performed in accordance with Northern customs, everyone heard Sansa consent and contrary to the ever present resentment of Lannister interference hanging over the Jeyne Poole wedding, the Lannisters are not involved. In other words, even if Sansa were to tell her horrible story, the response of a noble with a medieval mindset would be to take Sansa captive and try to dictate terms with the Boltons over what to do with Ramsay's wife, treating her as a political hostae, not support her claim to Winterfell. Some psychos on the internet thought Sansa was playing with fire and got what she deserved, and though that narrative is abhorrent to me, it's right in line with how a medieval lord would approach the situation, and how he would treat Sansa.  The show used the idea that Westeros holds different values when it comes to marriage compared to modern audiences to excuse themselves of depicting several rapes. But modern audiences want to shout "the north remembers" and so will the northern lords, because historical context can be picked up and dropped by GOT at any time as long as it serves the hazy plot elements. Am I the only one who is infuriated by this? Crazy as he is, I do understand ANGRYGOTFAN's pain sometimes. #nooneunderstands
  8. At the moment we are all sulking about GRRM missing his end of 2015 deadline for TWOW, because it means that for hundreds of thousands of people, GOT will be the only version of ASOIAF they will ever see. The likelihood that  many people will continue to be invested in the books long after the show ends is pretty slim.  On the positive side, the show will now be allowed to crash and burn on it's own. Who am I kidding? Nothing stops this train. 
  9. To clarify, this board is very zealous in enforcing it's "without repercussion" part of the title. No need to take it personally.   For my part, I hated Sansa in Season 5 because it was a backwards step for the character. She held power over LF in season 4, then completely abandoned it for no reason other than because the writers demanded it. It was a really shitty use of a character and as a plotline it made no sense at all from the perspective of anyone, including Sansa, LF or the Boltons. It was there because the rape in ADWD was the part they were most interested in adapting (for some reason) and character motivation and common sense were cast aside to make it happen. 
  10. I understand that sexual manipulation was always going to take a part in the plan, but why was that a slam dunk? Sansa was a virgin - how did SHE intend to win Ramsay over? But more importantly, there are three gaping holes in the plan. 1.Why assume that Ramsay will be a pushover when it seems more likely that he will have inherited his father's cold blooded traits? Even if Sansa and LF didn't know he was a psychopath (which seems improbable considering what we have been shown) simply assuming he'd be a dumb teenager is ridiculous. 2.Even if Ramsay were a dumb teenager, Roose is still the real power in Winterfell. Was sansa planning to wait for Roose to die before taking over the North? Was she planning to sleep with Ramsay so much she manages to persuade him to kill his own father? Was she planning to seduce Roose as well? 3. Even if all these things are true, sexual manipulation does not equate to true political power. Cersei slept with Robert for 15 years, but it was only after she murdered him that she finally gained power. These are the same limitations which affect Sansa.   It's total idiocy, disguised as a "necessary step" in order to propagate this bizarre plot.
  11. Because there isn't any. What actions was she supposed to take to seize control of the situation? How could she take any power at all with no men of her own? More importantly, even if Ramsay was a pussycat, LF and Sansa and everybody else knows that Roose Bolton at the very least is ruthless, cold blooded and murderous; he was hardly likely to take kindly to Sansa trying to become a viper at his breast.   The "unpleasant but probably necessary step" is total bullshit and you won't even find the die hard fans defending it on the grounds of the internal plot. Whenever criticism rears its head, the go to response is to claim that it was necessary for the adaption, which is a separate issue, never that this was a sensible storyline in of itself.
  12. Why Did LF marry sansa off to Ramsay?

    Whilst she was obviously a victim once again this season, Sansa can at least be blamed for not asking LF any questions whatsoever about where they were going prior to getting in the carriage in episode 1, and meekly accepting a bullshit answer when they finally do. In a situation where LF is no longer her only hope of protection (with the the potent counterpoint of Lord Royce ready to help her in a heartbeat) Sansa failing to take any interest in where she was being taken up to that point is incredibly stupid and trusting. She had the leverage over LF to start at least contributing to decisions about her future and she didn't use it. Worse, the show failed to even imply that she had that leverage at all. I buy that an isolated and frightened Sansa would still defer to LF's wishes (as is the case in the book) but when she has better, more secure and more trustworthy alternatives to hand, this blind obedience is just insulting to the character.  Of course, after the carriage departed Sansa had no choice at all in the matter, no matter how much the showrunners would like you to think otherwise.  It gets even worse during their final two scenes together. Both at Moat Cailen and in the crypts LF uses logic and arguments that are very easy to pick apart, yet Sansa show no ability to do so whatsoever. Eg: "You've been running your whole life." In this instance Sansa fails to point out that her only political decision to date has been one which secured both her and LF's safety in the Vale. For the first time in a long time Sansa had actually stopped running, thanks to her own actions. "A betting man would put his money on Stannis." In this instance Sansa fails to point out that if LF was betting on Stannis he would have given Sansa to him, not the Boltons. He's clearly hedging his bets here, yet Sansa fails miserably to point this out. The show's desperate desire to paint LF as a Machiavellian genius really weakens Sansa's character, because she's constantly failing to point out the holes in his shitty plans, simply because to do so would diminish LF in the eyes of the audience. 
  13. Why Did LF marry sansa off to Ramsay?

    Yes, but she is hardly under his control when with the Bolton's either. In fact there's every reason to think she might blab to them instead of the Vale lords after she realizes she has been "pimped out" in which case Roose Bolton has dirt on LF which is even worse. Sidelining Sansa and marrying her to the Boltons are not synonymous plans.
  14. Cerseis trial by combat

    It's actually the easiest possible problem to solve with just a single change in the dialogue: "A husband who was off whoring every chance he got" becomes "A husband who had been dead for a year! I was lonely and afraid!" Instead the decision was made to offer up a modern excuse for cheating: "he was doing it too!" in order to further garner sympathy for Cersei. And in doing so they break the rules of their own story.
  15. Cerseis trial by combat

    I'll give the writers a round of applause if Cersei wins the trial and proves her innocence... before being executed anyway for already admitting to a capital crime.