Sophia Wilson17@yahoo.ca

why was Ladystoneheart cut out

1,319 posts in this topic

4 hours ago, The Bear Who Knocks said:

Beric, the hound, benjen (although he could be considered not to have been dead) and the mountain

So Beric (the precedent ) and the mountain. A secondary character turned into a zombie type monster.

I don't know where u got the hound being resurrected from either ? When was he dead? 

And no Benjen wasn't resurrected.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Jack.Stark said:

So Beric (the precedent ) and the mountain. A secondary character turned into a zombie type monster.

I don't know where u got the hound being resurrected from either ? When was he dead? 

And no Benjen wasn't resurrected.

A dead character returning is still the same thing that you said would cheapen Jon's nap time. Changing the criteria because you personally didn't care for LSH is silly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, The Bear Who Knocks said:

A dead character returning is still the same thing that you said would cheapen Jon's nap time. Changing the criteria because you personally didn't care for LSH is silly.

I said it would cheapen his resurrection if another (major) character was resurrected. But yeah what ever . I don't care for the idea of Catlyn being resurrected or for the LSH character in general .

but to say 4 other characters have been resurrected is just dishonest . None of the ones you mentioned apart from Beric were resurrected .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

8 hours ago, The Bear Who Knocks said:

Yeah I agree that it was unnecessary.

Well the red wedding already becomes less important after it happens since only two house gives two hoots about them on the show and we've had Four characters other than jon be bought back from the dead so how lsh makes it any cheaper is beyond me.

Yes.....it was an unnecessary cut, especially when you know it would have been an interesting plot, that would have made Jaime and Brienne be together, the season had a lot of hints that were considered as foreshadowing for those who were still thinking she could appear, nobody would have expected it after Jon (shocking) but at the same time it's not illogical since the fantasy theme has emerged in the show/asoiaf at this point with little steps in the forms of people coming back from the dead or being something in between: Beric, Benjen, The Mountain.... as you point out, and as I said, there were a lot of hints....

So that comment was especially unnecessary considering they know there is a huge fan base of LSH fans.

Edited by Meera of Tarth

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Meera of Tarth said:

Yes.....it was an unnecessary cut, especially when you know it would have been an interesting plot, that would have made Jaime and Brienne be together, the season had a lot of hints that were considered as foreshadowing for those who were still thinking she could appear, nobody would have expected it after Jon (shocking) but at the same time it's not illogical since the fantasy theme has emerged in the show/asoiaf at this point with little steps in the forms of people coming back from the dead or being something in between: Beric, Benjen, The Mountain.... as you point out, and as I said, there were a lot of hints....

We won't know if it was a necessary or unnecessary cut until we receive the next book. As it stands right now, LSH was only in 2-3 pages and has done absolutely nothing to warrant an inclusion into the show. 

There was nothing in the show to indicate that LSH was coming. All the hints that you see come from your book knowledge. That's not the same thing as foreshadowing.

As for the bolded, only Beric was truly resurrected. I may be misremembering, but I thought that Benjen was only on the edge of death when the Children saved him, but he didn't actually die. I don't see the Mountain as being alive. He has no thoughts, no emotions, no memories of who he was. He's only a puppet who does what he's told.

26 minutes ago, Meera of Tarth said:

So that comment was especially unnecessary considering they know there is a huge fan base of LSH fans.

It's possible they were trolling. Or maybe they simply enjoyed working with Michelle Fairley and miss the actress. Only the two of them know for sure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

55 minutes ago, Dragon in the North said:

We won't know if it was a necessary or unnecessary cut until we receive the next book. As it stands right now, LSH was only in 2-3 pages and has done absolutely nothing to warrant an inclusion into the show. 

There was nothing in the show to indicate that LSH was coming. All the hints that you see come from your book knowledge. That's not the same thing as foreshadowing.

As for the bolded, only Beric was truly resurrected. I may be misremembering, but I thought that Benjen was only on the edge of death when the Children saved him, but he didn't actually die. I don't see the Mountain as being alive. He has no thoughts, no emotions, no memories of who he was. He's only a puppet who does what he's told.

 

She appears in a few pages but she has an interesting story with other major characters as I pointed out. at least it's very interesting to me.

I disagree with no foreshadowing. I don't remember if I discussed it with you or with another poster recently (if it was with you forgive me, but I have talked about this so many times so I can't remember it) and I gave a long list of the reasons why we think they are foreshadowing that LSH could appear, in this thread. And the list is about show verse, nothing from the books it's involved. They were similar to the ones they gave to foreshadow Cersei's burning the Sept in terms of subtility. And if they were not foreshadowing, they could still be interpreted as such if we rewatch the season with that on mind. It's not far fetched, many people have agreed with me, and this thread is the proof of that, lots and lots pages discussing them during the season. So we can agree to disagree.

as for the bolded, I wrote fantasy theme and said returning from death or something in between, so I have not said they were all resurrected, by kind of, very close to that. In fact, Benjen was half dying/or half becoming a wight (it's difficult to say what happened, he was attacked by them) and the Children stopped the process making him be half human/half another supernatural thing, being that half part his skin and appearance, he is still human inside, though we don't know if he will be able to live normally. As for the Mountain, I disagree. We saw him being dead and some blood transfusions and other stuff he resurrects being kind of a Frankenstein. So I think that he is alive, but even if he does what their masters tell him and doesn't behave normally he still kills people on his own, like The Mountain. So he probably has some emotions still inside. When Pycelle complains about him, I think he understands what he is talking about, though now he obeys Cersei and Qyburn because he has been programmed this way. It's a resurrection with consequences mixed with science fiction elements. 

 

Quote

It's possible they were trolling. Or maybe they simply enjoyed working with Michelle Fairley and miss the actress. Only the two of them know for sure.

If they were trolling that makes the phrase even more painful for the fans, but we don't know. But we know what LSH represents for the fans as they were constantly asked about her in the comic cons and the media talked about her during s6.

Edited by Meera of Tarth

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

54 minutes ago, Dragon in the North said:

 

There was nothing in the show to indicate that LSH was coming. All the hints that you see come from your book knowledge. That's not the same thing as foreshadowing.

I'd argue that Bran's recital of the Rat Cook in S03E10 was foreshadowing of supernatural vengeance for the red wedding. Bran wasn't aware of the RW then but the audience would have read the intention clear enough. They of course couldn't have linked that to the resurrection of Catelyn Stark (who could?) but it certainly would have built in some kind of expectation. 

I find it hard to believe that was them foreshadowing Arya the faceless assassin cooking herself some Frey 3 years in advance. 

At the very least I think that was them keeping their options open at the time. Like they didn't want to use LSH but perhaps at the time didn't know GRRM's plans. Once they did hear his plans for LSH they either decided they didn't need her presence or could shift things in a manner where they could drop her.

I'm indifferent to it all at this stage as I only began to read the books before Christmas  (on AFFC now) and can see the show and books as two completely separate things now. But I could have done without the stuff last season such as the use of Lemon cloak for no reason whatsoever. They could have done a "Locke" on that like they have repeatedly before but nope, they just wanted to troll the fan base (see also the Hound pissing in the river too in the aftermath of Beric's return).

I can absolutely see someone's indifference to the character but to suggest people are just seeing slights where there are none is something I respectfully won't accept. 

 

Edited by Ser Matt Dayne

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The simple answer is they cut Stoneheart because they wanted to.  Since they have made up many plot lines and characters if they wanted LSH they could have invented anything they wanted for her,  like they did for Ramsay, and Marg and the rest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Cas Stark said:

The simple answer is they cut Stoneheart because they wanted to.  Since they have made up many plot lines and characters if they wanted LSH they could have invented anything they wanted for her,  like they did for Ramsay, and Marg and the rest.

They could, but Ramsay was a major plot point way back in book 2 that was took the home castle of most of the major characters back from the Greyjoys, was holding a POV character hostage, and was before the tv series even started was pretty clearly shaping up to be a major antagonist. And it was pretty easy to predict what was going on with Ramsay. Marg likewise was married to three seperate kinds and was one of the catalysts for everything Cersei did in KL. They were around everything, they just weren't expanded upon in the same way by Martin because you heard so much about them.

That isn't true for LSH. 

The reality is that if they did LSH the same way they did in the books, she would have showed up end of season 4 (so a full year after the Red Wedding) and had maybe two scenes in season 5 and season 6. So the novelty of it is kinda wasted and by the time you ever get into the plot GRRM had in mind you are already onto Dany coming to Westeros, the reveal of Jon's heritage, and the consolidation of most storylines. Meaning those are more prevalent and fresh. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, lancerman said:

They could, but Ramsay was a major plot point way back in book 2 that was took the home castle of most of the major characters back from the Greyjoys, was holding a POV character hostage, and was before the tv series even started was pretty clearly shaping up to be a major antagonist. And it was pretty easy to predict what was going on with Ramsay. Marg likewise was married to three seperate kinds and was one of the catalysts for everything Cersei did in KL. They were around everything, they just weren't expanded upon in the same way by Martin because you heard so much about them.

That isn't true for LSH. 

The reality is that if they did LSH the same way they did in the books, she would have showed up end of season 4 (so a full year after the Red Wedding) and had maybe two scenes in season 5 and season 6. So the novelty of it is kinda wasted and by the time you ever get into the plot GRRM had in mind you are already onto Dany coming to Westeros, the reveal of Jon's heritage, and the consolidation of most storylines. Meaning those are more prevalent and fresh. 

They brought the Blackfish back just to have his own men kill him.  And Osha to be killed.  Ros got a lot of screen time for someone who was a show creation and added nothing to the plot except for one scene.  They introduced Doran only to kill him off.  So, it's absolutely accurate that they could have put in LSH if they wanted to, and could have changed her story or done her story the way the books will or done whatever they wanted to in expanding it.  The rationale is:  they didn't want to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, Meera of Tarth said:

She appears in a few pages but she has an interesting story with other major characters as I pointed out. at least it's very interesting to me.

I disagree with no foreshadowing. I don't remember if I discussed it with you or with another poster recently (if it was with you forgive me, but I have talked about this so many times so I can't remember it) and I gave a long list of the reasons why we think they are foreshadowing that LSH could appear, in this thread. And the list is about show verse, nothing from the books it's involved. They were similar to the ones they gave to foreshadow Cersei's burning the Sept in terms of subtility. And if they were not foreshadowing, they could still be interpreted as such if we rewatch the season with that on mind. It's not far fetched, many people have agreed with me, and this thread is the proof of that, lots and lots pages discussing them during the season. So we can agree to disagree.

We don't really know what her story is, though. All she's doing at the moment is hanging Freys, mostly offscreen, with no end goal in sight. Sure, she sent Brienne after Jaime, but we don't know what's going to happen or the consequences of what does happen. There's too much we don't know. I can't decide whether cutting her is a mistake until the next book, where we hopefully will see where her story leads.

It was me, and there's no apology necessary. I understand. They followed the books very closely in dealing with Catelyn's death, which is why people probably saw this as foreshadowing. Her throat was slit to the bone and she was thrown in the river, just like in the books. Without the books, however, this is simply a colorful way of describing Cat's death. It in no way foreshadows her resurrection. I believe another example you used was the mentioning of Catelyn after her death. But it's only natural that her loved ones would remember her and mourn her death. It happened with Ned, as well as other characters. Maybe I'm missing something, but I don't see anything from the show that would indicate Catelyn would be raised from the dead. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Meera of Tarth said:

Yes.....it was an unnecessary cut, especially when you know it would have been an interesting plot, that would have made Jaime and Brienne be together, the season had a lot of hints that were considered as foreshadowing for those who were still thinking she could appear, nobody would have expected it after Jon (shocking) but at the same time it's not illogical since the fantasy theme has emerged in the show/asoiaf at this point with little steps in the forms of people coming back from the dead or being something in between: Beric, Benjen, The Mountain.... as you point out, and as I said, there were a lot of hints....

So that comment was especially unnecessary considering they know there is a huge fan base of LSH fans.

If we are going chronologically, so far in the series, Stone heart would have been the last scene of season 4 and she would have been in one scene late in season 5 or very early season 6. In the case of that latter scene, whenever you did it, it automatically puts Jamie and Brienne in a holding pattern until whenever you can resolve it. Which hasn't happened in the book series yet. There was a reason Jamie was in Dorne and Brienne was at Winterfell

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A very good case could be made that a riverlands series of segments with Brienne, Jamie, Blackfish, BWB and Stoneheart would have been a better use of everyone's time than Dorne and that Brienne was not necessary to the Sansa in Winterfell plot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Cas Stark said:

They brought the Blackfish back just to have his own men kill him.  And Osha to be killed.  Ros got a lot of screen time for someone who was a show creation and added nothing to the plot except for one scene.  They introduced Doran only to kill him off.  So, it's absolutely accurate that they could have put in LSH if they wanted to, and could have changed her story or done her story the way the books will or done whatever they wanted to in expanding it.  The rationale is:  they didn't want to.

Blackfish is secondary character who most fans only remember for shooting a fire arrow at a raft. He came back to die because it was portion of Jamie's plot. His final scenes were used as something Jamie and Brienne could play off of. 

Osha was a side character who helped Bran escape and showed her tits. She came back to die because it was portion of the Winterfell plot. Her death scene was used to play up Ramsay's sadism

Ros was a nothing character who was literally a plot device so they could give Theon, Littlefinger, and Joffrey some character building scenes.

Doran was an already named Prince in a region they were going to show anyways. He was used as a foil for Ellaria and the Sandsnakes. And died when he was neccessary.

You named 4 characters who were secondary characters (if that) from their debut on and were used primarily for the benefit of the character building of other major characters. That's like saying they shouldn't have brought Walder back to be killed by Arya. 

By contrast you are talking about resurrecting a core original original cast member whose reappearance is significant for all these other major characters: Sansa, Arya, Jon, Brienne, Jamie, Littlefinger. Her current undeveloped plot in the books, is reliant on Jamie and Brienne. And since her resurrection scene she has had one major scene and it put's those two previous cast members in a holding pattern once it happens. So you are advocating for making what at the time would be the single biggest plot twist and return in the show up until Jon's ressurection, and then making up nothing scenes for her, where she can't interact with any major characters because so far it is important to her character that nobody knows she exists. It's very different. 

Right now they could start next season with a the first official appearance of LSH and then two episodes later do the Brienne scene, and nothing would have been lost plotwise yet and you wouldn't have to waste filler time to keep her relevant. That's where we are at with that character.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Cas Stark said:

A very good case could be made that a riverlands series of segments with Brienne, Jamie, Blackfish, BWB and Stoneheart would have been a better use of everyone's time than Dorne and that Brienne was not necessary to the Sansa in Winterfell plot.

And the argument against that would be that Brienne in Winterfell and Jamie in Dorne did not change those plots all too much regardless, it just gave another familiar character something to do. And that if you did that scene in season 5, what  are you going to do with Jamie and Brienne up until now?

It's plainly obvious Jamie and Brienne were only involved in those plots because the LSH plot put a monkey wrench in their stories.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

23 minutes ago, lancerman said:

If we are going chronologically, so far in the series, Stone heart would have been the last scene of season 4 and she would have been in one scene late in season 5 or very early season 6. In the case of that latter scene, whenever you did it, it automatically puts Jamie and Brienne in a holding pattern until whenever you can resolve it. Which hasn't happened in the book series yet. There was a reason Jamie was in Dorne and Brienne was at Winterfell

Chronologically doesn't invalidate the fact they can put her when they want. Beric and the others were out of the picture 3 seasons, same for Edmure. She could have been there hiding with the BW during this time and appear in s6 when BWB appeared and/or Jaime and Brienne were in Riverrun 

Edited by Meera of Tarth

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Meera of Tarth said:

Chronologically doesn't invalidate the fact they can put her when they want. Beric and the others were out of the picture 3 seasons, same for Edmure. She could have been there hiding with the BW during this time.

Doing essentially nothing. 

Like I said, we could literally start next season with the Epilogue to ASOS. Then an episode later Brienne runs into her on her way back to Winterfell. And it would change nothing regarding her plot and how it effects literally everything else. And it probably gets her plot going in faster. 

Meanwhile starting it at the end of season 4, essentially means you are writing filler for her and putting her in a holding pattern for two year. Which most fans, would start wondering why this major character that just returned is dicking around for two season without any major plot development. That's how little of her story has developed thus far. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

10 minutes ago, lancerman said:

And the argument against that would be that Brienne in Winterfell and Jamie in Dorne did not change those plots all too much regardless, it just gave another familiar character something to do. And that if you did that scene in season 5, what  are you going to do with Jamie and Brienne up until now?

It's plainly obvious Jamie and Brienne were only involved in those plots because the LSH plot put a monkey wrench in their stories.

I guess I don't get your point.  The show's history of cutting/adding/changing plots, inventing new plots and new characters makes it crystal clear to me that they keep what they want and change what they want.  They could have done all kinds of things, including Lady Stoneheart, which would have had whatever impact or non impact on the plot as they wanted.  There is no reason of space, time or plot except that the showrunners didn't want to do Stoneheart.  Stoneheart could go to Winterfell and save Sansa if they wanted.  She could kill LF.  She could do anything they want her to do, even if it isn't going to be in the alleged future book story that may or not ever appear in print.

You can't even say that LSH makes Jon not dying too obvious, since they already had Beric and it was already obvious he wasn't going to stay dead.  

Edited by Cas Stark

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Cas Stark said:

I guess I don't get your point.  The show's history of cutting/adding/changing plots, inventing new plots and new characters makes it crystal clear to me that they keep what they want and change what they want.  They could have done all kinds of things, including Lady Stoneheart, which would have had whatever impact or non impact on the plot as they wanted.  There is no reason of space, time or plot except that the showrunners didn't want to do Stoneheart.

You can't even say that LSH makes Jon not dying too obvious, since they already had Beric and it was already obvious he wasn't going to stay dead.  

Because you can trace the logic behind what they did and didn't add. With Jamie in Dorne it was because he had nothing else to do and they used him to help streamline the Dorne plot into something that is simpler into getting the Dornish to declare war on the Lannisters and join Dany. With Brienne in Winterfell it was because she had nothing else to do and this was a simple way to get her close to a major plot without impacting it too much and giving her some character moments. With Ros she was used to give other major characters that would be important later on some character scenes that weren't present in the book. 

With LSH you are advocating for two years of posturing because you want a character to exist at a certain time when she has done nothing notable so far. Like I said, it makes no difference plotwise if you waited until the start of next season to do both major LSH scenes and it changes virtually nothing.

The reality is, with LSH she is a major resurrection and more importantly she simply hasn't done enough that it mandated bringing her back at any point so far. And we don't even know what she is doing in the books so far. And she isn't minor enough that the show can get away with showing her and then only giving her one scene over two years. 

So the only rational takeaway I am getting from this is for some reason you wanted LSH to appear chronologically when she appears in the books and then for the writers to just write filler around it for two years. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, you don't make sense to me.

Brienne and Jamie would have had something else to do if Stoneheart was cast, they would have been in that plotline, which as I keep saying can be WHATEVER the show wants.  They, themselves, said they almost left Dorne out entirely, so obviously, it's not necessary to the end.

I don't care if she was in or out, I only am saying that these detailed rationales for why she "needed" to be out are like more fan fiction. She was out for the same reason Arianne is out, and Val is out, and why Sansa married Ramsay Bolton...because this is what the show wanted to do.  It is not believable that they could not have created a story for her, regardless as to what happens in the books, because as I have been told so many times, the books and show are different.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now