kimim

Members
  • Content count

    2,918
  • Joined

  • Last visited

3 Followers

About kimim

  • Rank
    Council Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Female
  • Location
    Madison, WI

Recent Profile Visitors

1,723 profile views
  1. Actually, I have no problems with the most obvious plot points on this show. LF sent Sansa North, because he wanted the North. As far as anyone's aware, Sansa is the heir . He wanted inside her skirts, too, but his drive for power has always been stronger than his drive for anything else. Sansa went, because LF told her that she's been passive too long, and here was her chance to take revenge. Initially, I had no problem with the decision, because this was, supposedly, the new Sansa, educated by LF, able to manipulate. Had that Sansa shown up at WF, she still would have been raped and abused (that is Ramsay's character) but she also would have been able to manipulate the Boltons to her advantage. They're not in an unassailable position: they're hated, isolated. Stannis is coming. The father and son are not in agreement. Ramsay is insane. The commoners at WF are unhappy. Brienne is around. I don't write scripts for a living, but imagine what Olenna as a young woman would have done in the same position. Problem was the lack of follow through. Sansa went to WF and did nothing but suffer. Her passivity nullified any reason for sending her North except as a gross plot point. Re LF asking for Cersei's permission: I agree that was unnecessary, esp as he doesn't even use that to take the Vale North. Maybe he was covering himself? If his Vale and North plots failed, he could return to KL.
  2. - I'd cast someone else for Dany. Natalie Dormer, for instance, would have added an edge to her that Clarke can't manage. Clarke is too sincere for me: if she's supposed to be fierce, she does textbook "brave, fierce" thing, which is almost embarrassing to watch. - I'd keep plot points the same: Sansa goes North. Sansa hides the Vale. Arya turns against Sansa. I'd just make sure the show remembers its own plot: Sansa's supposedly the "new Sansa." Don't just say it between seasons. Show it. - Give Dany a reason not to move against Cersei. Instead of overpowering her beyond belief, which makes the decision impossible to comprehend, maybe make her a tad less powerful. Have Cersei hole up with a bunch of innocents at the Red Keep. Something. - Keep Tyrion cunning. There's no reason to further idealize Dany by erasing Tyrion's intelligence. Tyrion could have prepped Meereen for its siege. That would have given him something to do, and taken nothing away from Dany's entry with the dragons. Same on Westeros. - Keep Jon the imperfect character he's been so far. I loved the fact that he made numerous mistakes, leading to disaster at the Battle of the Bastards. Keep him imperfect. Do not idealize him to make him a match for the already hyper-idealized Dany.
  3. It could have been explained. Sansa returned to WF, facing abuse and rape, in order to avenge her family's tragedy. That's how LF first sold the marriage to Sansa, and I bought it, as it all happened after the show started talking about the "new Sansa." The problem, as usual in the later seasons, was that the show didn't follow up on it. Sansa married Ramsay and did nothing against the Boltons other than escape them. This was the "new Sansa," acting exactly as the old Sansa might have done--passive, helpless victim whose only power is in getting others to take pity on her. Where was the "new Sansa" in all this? Where was her revenge? It's thanks to her helplessness and passivity that her entire experience of WF can be reduced to being raped, why the North thinks of her as a Bolton. Then, of course, Sansa finally did do something: hid the Vale, nearly getting her brother killed, causing massive casualties among the wildlings. Had Sansa been Olenna or Cersei or Tywin, the explanation would be obvious: she wanted Jon and the wildlings dead as she wanted the North for herself, so she acted. But no, as again the show failed to follow up. Sansa did this crazy thing, then season 7 excised the ending to season 6 from its history. Season 7 Jon trusted Sansa, for reasons I can not fathom. Arya never found out, never used Sansa's decision against her. It's crazy.
  4. I don't know what happened. In my show head canon, she did it because she was, for the first time, acting like the "new Sansa": she wanted to destroy brother and wildlings, and nearly succeeded. But the show didn't follow through. They could have at least brought it in this season, as the reason for Arya to turn against Sansa. Nope. My other problem this season was Dany's decision to spare Cersei and ask for an armistice. She could have destroyed Cersei in an afternoon. Cersei was too unreliable and insane to be a decent ally. She was too weak to be useful against the Walkers. She was too unpopular and divisive to unite Westeros. Yet the season revolved around this decision, incomprehensible in itself.
  5. I react knee-jerk to any theory on what a good fiction should be, lol. Anyhow, without coming up with a theory, I do agree that the problem with the show is that the characters are forced to act in false ways in order to achieve a plot point. Now...this is not making a judgment on whether character-centric fiction is superior to anything else. Problem here is grade school: If you're going to have Arya turn against Sansa, then provide a motivation. Just having Arya come up and attack Sansa, out of the blue, is ridiculous. Shittiest (in my opinion!) show will do that much. If you're going to have a character do something extreme--Sansa hides an entire army from her bro--then come up with a reason, and follow through. This is the kind of thing the the worst soap opera is capable of, but the show forgets all about it. If you're going to tout the "new Sansa," down to having her parade around in her black feathery outfit, then WRITE THAT SANSA. And if you can't write her into the script, do not tout the new Sansa. Basic stuff. Nothing deep. The show kept failing on the most basic level. It's frustrating.
  6. I still find this an all-encompassing definition of fan fiction. If the author is dead, obviously she can't license the adaptation, which places every adaptation of a dead author potentially in the realm of fan fiction. Adapting from the written genre into visual involves huge changes and additions, casting actors who rarely resemble the characters in the original. Again, every such adaptation is potentially fan fiction.How much diversion qualifies as "wild" diversion? How to define "variation"? It's too uncertain and subjective, and erases fan fiction as a genre. Your definition of character driven fiction is also too broad in that I can think of no work of fiction, of any quality, that does not fit. Characters do things and x happens. X happens (this fits, as you include setting as a character) and characters do things, and that leads to other characters doing other things. Possibly what you mean is that you're less interested in characters "doing" things than in characters just being or developing. I find this a deeply subjective take on what makes for great fiction, but then I don't believe that there's a definition of great fiction. If you ask me what work will be remembered in the future, I'd say hope for an afterlife in which to find out. There's no way of telling right now.
  7. Your definition is still much too wide. You must include some type of "license" there, as without it, every adaptation of a work without the involvement of the original creator is fan fiction. There is no such thing as a "pure adaptation." All adaptations change something, and trying to figure out how much "impurity" is allowed in order to point out what is "fanfic" and what is not is a fruitless exercise. Re characters driving the plot: There is no such rule that I'm aware of for "good fiction." Fan fiction, I agree, is intensely character driven, mostly because in my experience of the genre, the fan fiction author is writing in the first place because they are fascinated by a certain character/couple/group of characters in the original work. There's no need to move from there to a place where that becomes the definition of acceptable fiction. Asoiaf, at its best, is beautifully paced, plot driven, with character development and plot extraordinarily well linked. Where Feast and Dance fail for me is that GRRM loses the plot while introducing/developing too many characters. The show fails in the opposite way, forcing characters to act in ways that are false to them in order to achieve a certain plot point. Neither is an ideal for me.
  8. Did D&D say this to imply that the rebellion was without cause, or did they mean something else? Certainly in an honor-shame-patriarchal culture, a married prince having an affair with the daughter of a major family would be a scandal, but it wouldn't necessarily turn into a civil war. The consensual relationship would implicate the woman, more than it would the man. The Starks would be dishonored less by Rhaegar, more by the behavior of their daughter. What drives the situation is the mystery of Rhaegar's disappearance, and the Stark-Baratheon insistence that Lyanna was raped, which the disappearance makes possible. By stressing rape, they take away the shame that would fall upon their house because of the behavior of their "immoral" daughter, which frees them to go after Rhaegar and the Targs. A consensual relationship would, instead, humiliate them. I believe that sexual double standard is why the KG fight Ned and his men at toj. The KG have every reason to believe that Ned would punish his sister and her baby for the humiliation of their house.
  9. Favorites among the living (as my favorites are now dead): Cersei, Jaime, Brienne Least favorites among the living: Dany (haven't liked her since season 1), season 6-7 Tyrion, who has taken ineffectiveness to new highs, and season 6-7 Arya, who is reduced to badass. She has more potential than that, but they're wasting it.
  10. I agree that the quality has gone down, but not because it deviated from the last two novels, which I feel were as bad as the show is today. Problem is the writing, which sucks. Character motivation is gone, leading to all manner of weirdness from Tyrion, Arya, Sansa, Dany. Tyrion the cunning, brilliant dwarf trusts the slavers to do the right thing (season 6) and then gives Dany advice which nearly leads to her defeat, season 7. This is clearly not the same Tyrion who defended King's Landing. Dany decides not to move against Cersei, a decision that is never really explained, but which determines everything for season 7. Sansa hides the Vale army from Jon, leading to his men's massacre at the end of season 6. No real reason is given, and everyone's forgotten about it, season 7. Arya turns against Sansa and pulls a dagger on her. Next scene, they've made up. No reason for either state is given. It's crazy bad writing no amount of production values could wipe away.
  11. They're not identical twins. Re inner beauty--difficult on the show, easy in the novels. Depends on what Jaime does after leaving Cersei. Does he go back? Does he fight the NK? He's unpredictable.
  12. Which daughter? Gilly is prettier than Jon. I think. Though if I had to pick the prettiest person on this show, it'd be a tie between Missendai, Jaime, and Marg. Tragically, Marg is dead. Jaime could be both valonqar and the YMB(something).
  13. GRRM and no one else set up a cliche plot, in which zombies and demons are coming to get humanity, which is too embroiled in its wars and politics to notice. Humanity will have to put all that aside if it is to defeat the zombies. Where GRRM's work stands out is in giving a lot of space to the politics. At some point, though, demons and zombies will get past the Wall, and humans will have to put aside their differences and fight them. It's not like GRRM hasn't already spent a huge amount of time on politics and their consequences on the innocent. The entirety of volumes 1-3 was given over to the War of the Five Kings. Arya's two journeys through the Riverlands underlined how these "games" affect the commoners caught up in them. Sooner than later, GRRM will have to bite the bullet and send in the monsters, as he's got two books to solve the convoluted mess he created in Feast and Dance.
  14. Oh that would be cool! Brienne has already slain Stannis, who was the rightful king, if you accept Robert as a rightful king. If she kills Cersei, she could be Queenslayer and Kingslayer, one-upping Jaime. ...and yeah, "another younger and more beautiful" is never qualified as a "queen." So it could be a man.
  15. You can take away everything that makes life worth living for a person, without taking that person's place. Dany, I think, has already taken Jaime from Cersei, without becoming Jaime's lover. Dany can go on to defeat Cersei, remove her from the throne, then (let's pretend) put "x" on the throne--she wants to break the wheel, and taking the throne herself is the opposite of that. ...or Jaime can rekindle whatever he was feeling for Brienne. Brienne can then kill Cersei, without wanting or taking the throne herself. ...or anyone on Dany's side can manage it. The only physical, non-metaphorical thing in the prophecy is that this person has to be younger than Cersei.