Dolorous Gabe

And that's fine. As I said, you're entitled to value good production values as you wish. I may disagree that it's worth that much to the overall quality of a film or a TV show, but I'm not going to dictate to you that your way is in any way wrong. I reserve the right to rate a film 1/10 even if it had great production values, because to me the content is vastly more important than the surface-level aesthetic. Also, sheer entertainment movies don't have to be brainless. Hollywood will be delighted to hear they don't have to even attempt to be intelligent. edited to add: to clarify, I didn't rate this episode a 1. I've only ever dished out one 1 rating of a GoT ep.

Depends how much value an individual puts in production values. You're entitled to feel that production values can give something 5/10 by default. Personally, I think 5 is an awful lot of credit for something mostly technical and easy to achieve with considerable financial backing. Just take a look at Michael Bay or Zach Snyder movies. Fine production values but utterly dreadful movies as a general rule. By your rule of ratings these films are already half-decent before you even get into what they're about. I cannot agree with such an approach. By the way, cinematography is not necessarily linked to production values. For example, Breaking Bad had much lower production values than GoT, yet its cinematography was infinitely superior. That said, I think a 1 rating for any episode this season is harsh. But then, a 10 rating this season so far seems equally OTT to me, perhaps even more so. To me the story takes precedence over everything else. For the most part the storytelling is woeful in GoT.

Not remotely. The storytelling in every scene was woeful in that episode. Production value means precious little to me. Like... Wow... They've got money to spend on making it look good. Well done. Some of the worst films I've ever seen had good production values. By the same token, some of the best films I've ever seen had relatively poor production values.

For the show overall, this is true. For individual episodes, GoT has come pretty close to deserving both 10s and 1s. It's a very long time since it deserved anything close to a 10 though. I've only ever dished out the singular 1 rating and that was for S5:09 The Dance Of The Dragons. I strongly believe that episode deserved a 1. My last 10 rating was probably in season 3 if it wasn't for Blackwater.

Certainly better than episode one but still a mix of good and bad stuff.

I gave it a 4 and felt fairly generous doing so.

I did :D And of course, you have been given due reverence for the brilliant idea :cheers:

She would definitely make an entertaining Cersei. I gotta say though, I like Lena and think it's the writing of the character that has led to Carol (Larry too, NCW was excellent when he was actually playing Jaime). I think Lena could have pulled off the transition to crazy Cersei very well if the writing had actually gone that way.

I thought parts of GoT season 5 (particularly Dorne) were absolutely as bad as True Blood got. Plus, at least True Blood had Pam coming out with some entertaining snark even when it was at its worst.

Well she lied to save LF when she took him as the devil she knows as opposed to the devil she doesn't know. Now she has had an horrific experience which she wouldn't have had without LF.

I think they're one of the oldest Houses of Westeros. I don't recall any confirmation on whether they're of the First Men though.

I never said she can't have an interesting character arc in the future. You're putting words in my mouth. She has been serving D&D's requirements by being a moron. If/when she finally starts to realise how to stop being a pawn and create her own destiny, I'll evaluate her character development at that point and take it into account in my analysis of the season in which it finally happens, but it won't legitimise the startling idiocy and lack of character growth she has displayed this season. If anything, her development regressed from the end of last season.

I dislike the very idea that a major character should never learn from her mistakes. It's not a character arc she's on. What is the point of her KL experience and LF's teachings about pawns and players if she just becomes a pawn again? It's a bad character arc. She has been portrayed as being perennially stupid to serve others. As long as she remains under LF's spell, as you put it, it's a bad character arc for someone who is supposed to be a major character.

I see what you're saying. That there's no point in criticising new episodes individually based on problems of previous episodes. That's fine, I understand that way of thinking. I just think however LF's plan turns out he's not going to achieve what he intends and it will end up being his downfall and the only way you can justify LF making such an error of judgement is if you assume he has a total blind spot when it comes to Sansa. It just seems ludicrous to me that LF wouldn't expect an issue with Sansa after having put her through Ramsay's Winterhell.

Do you really think Sansa would agree to marry LF? Really? She's more likely to kill him, but I suppose you could argue that LF might have a considerable blind spot when it comes to Sansa. The thing is, the battle of Winterfell was going to happen regardless of whether Sansa was there. Her presence at WF has not done anything for the overall plot, since there have been no Northern Lords plotting to free her. She has once again been a pawn in someone else's story. And if LF ends up ousting the Boltons, I would expect Sansa to inform the other Northern Lords about how LF handed her over to the Boltons. I literally cannot see any way LF ends up Warden of the North. Either the Northern Lords will kill him or Sansa will. He may still have the Vale's support, but then what was the point of it all? Edit: please don't forget the power that Sansa actually has over LF. People seem to forget that all she has to do to turn the Vale Lords against him is tell them the truth about Lysa's death.

I don't feel it makes sense in the show's own context, regardless of the books. It seems to me I'm perfectly within my rights to analyse the show critically. Also, unlike some others who are critical I haven't completely given up on the show and feel this season could just be its lowest point. I admit I consider it an extremely low point but still...

If Sansa lives, there is literally no way Sansa would agree to marry LF. The Northern Lords will back her as warden (or more likely Rickon if/when he turns up). She's watched him murder his last wife and marry her off to Ramsay. Why would she agree to marry him? If she dies, I severely doubt the Northern Lords would agree to LF as warden even if he had played a part in the downfall of house Bolton. It's a hopeless plan.

It still seems very hazy to me. Don't get me wrong, I see what you're saying. It kinda annoys me though how easy it was for LF to gain the full backing of the Vale and I'm not sure why the Vale would actually agree to give him an army to attack the Boltons and claim WF. Added to which, what on earth have the Northern Lords been doing while all this is going on? I suppose LF could try to gain their support the way Stannis does in the books but why would they agree to LF after refusing Stannis, who did after all go to the aid of the NW in their time of need?

And even if he takes WF, does he really expect all the Northern Lords to be okay with him being Warden of the North? I doubt it. Oh yeah, I forgot. There are no other Northern Lords :dunno:

I'm pretty sure a huge amount of GoT fans think it has a place amongst the very best TV shows ever. Using the word "art" skews your comparison.

Yep, and having Sansa there clouded the situation, as did making it essentially a showcase for Iwan Rheon. As you said, Alfie Allen was excellent but he was wasted because that storyline became more about Ramsay than Theon or Sansa.