Jump to content

Recommended Posts

40 minutes ago, RedShirt47 said:

Sorry haven't read the 17 pages. I made a thread to ask this but it has disappeared.

Any idea what the Hound meant when he said to the Mountain "You know who's coming for you"?

CLEGANEBOWL! Get Hype! Lol

He was referring to himself, because apparently his goals in life have not changed since season 1.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, RedShirt47 said:

Sorry haven't read the 17 pages. I made a thread to ask this but it has disappeared.

Any idea what the Hound meant when he said to the Mountain "You know who's coming for you"?

I took it pretty clear at its surface value that the Hound means to kill him in revenge.  When the time is appropriate, of course, not at a peace negotiation.  I guess you could read more into it than that if you want, but it didn't sound that deep to my ears.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, kukukazoo said:

Nope. Lyanna ran off with Rhaegar without telling her family, so her brother charged into King's Landing looking for answers (and demanding her back), Aerys captured him instead, and when Ned's father came Aerys murdered them in horrific ways, and demanded Arryn give up his wards. So the rebellion was based on Aerys being mad, and Arryn sticking by Ned Stark and Robert Baratheon. Saying it was "based on a lie" implies they weren't justified.

 

1 hour ago, Greg B said:

A lie of omission, and a fairly substantial one at that! Kinda rude to let the realm descend into a catastrophic civil war while you're off on your months-long honeymoon.

Technically, in the patriarchal feudal society that is Westeros, Lyanna's permission is irrelevant. Rhaegar took Lyanna without Rickard's permission (as far as we've been told in the books). That's all that matters - regardless of Lyanna's feelings, whether she went willingly or not, without Rickard's permission it IS, legally, technically, kidnapping and rape should he choose to pursue it as such. Which he did. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Ashes Of Westeros said:

I really hope you meant it as sarcasm.
For me it sounded that The Hound just let it go. So no Cleganebowl

He says " is that even you anymore, your uglier than I am now. It doesn't matter, you know who's coming for you, you've always known brother."

Thats screams foreshadowing that the hound will kill him, he hasn't let go of anything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Bulldawg2010 said:

He says " is that even you anymore, your uglier than I am now. It doesn't matter, you know who's coming for you, you've always known brother."

Thats screams foreshadowing that the hound will kill him, he hasn't let go of anything.

Foreshadowing doesn't scream. Foreshadowing is always subtle. 

If Sandor says "it isn't even you anymore", why would he threaten him? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Ashes Of Westeros said:

Foreshadowing doesn't scream. Foreshadowing is always subtle. 

If Sandor says "it isn't even you anymore", why would he threaten him? 

And then proceeeds to say it doesn't matter if it's him or not.

If the hound was over the whole wanting to kill his brother, he would have never said " you know who's coming for you, you've always known."

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Jak Scaletongue said:

 

Technically, in the patriarchal feudal society that is Westeros, Lyanna's permission is irrelevant. Rhaegar took Lyanna without Rickard's permission (as far as we've been told in the books). That's all that matters - regardless of Lyanna's feelings, whether she went willingly or not, without Rickard's permission it IS, legally, technically, kidnapping and rape should he choose to pursue it as such. Which he did. 

M'kay. Legally, technically, Rickard (and Robert) might have had a grievance. Still might have been nice of Lyanna to let her family know what was going on before they got themselves burned. Might have been noble for Rhaegar to mention it to someone. Maybe they didn't anticipate a civil war, but set that aside. It's almost as if they spent months never even considering their own future. Maybe they planned to hide away in the Tower of Joy the rest of their lives. It's almost as if the author never really gave any thought to what they were doing or thinking all that time...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Greg B said:

M'kay. Legally, technically, Rickard (and Robert) might have had a grievance. Still might have been nice of Lyanna to let her family know what was going on before they got themselves burned. Might have been noble for Rhaegar to mention it to someone. Maybe they didn't anticipate a civil war, but set that aside. It's almost as if they spent months never even considering their own future. Maybe they planned to hide away in the Tower of Joy the rest of their lives. It's almost as if the author never really gave any thought to what they were doing or thinking all that time...

I am certain that we will get an extensive backstory on all that in the books. Further, I think that Tywin plays the LF role in causing Robert's rebellion, setting Areys against Rhegar and then the Starks and Baratheons, all to put his grandchildren on the Iron throne.

But D&D are probably right not to go there. At least not now. I think the book will be very different and tie everything together in a very different way. All we have got in the show is we know that Robert's rebellion was based on a lie. But we did not get the prophecy that drove Rheagar.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, nara said:

Overall, I enjoyed the episode.

The end of Lord Baelish was predictable.  But to be honest, I’m not sure if that was just because I am active on this board.  I’d be curious to know what others thought.  I did not like that he was a little tearful at the end—I felt he should be strong until the end, playing the game.  For a moment, I thought that he was faking tears to play on Sansa’s emotions, but I think that he was shown to be really afraid.  Also, Ned Stark would have said the (wo)man who passed the sentence should swing the sword.  Sansa should have killed him herself/ And they should have done this in episode 5.  

 

I think Baelish died in a way that fitted with his character. His crying was fake at first but a weasel like Baelish would cry and whimper for real when he realized his games were up and he was totally out of control. He was a worm, sneaky, manipulative little shit, not a fighter. Neither Sansa nor Arya has the strength to behead someone so they had to execute him in their own way. I think this is the justice Baelish earned and deserved. He deserved to die powerless, begging, without kin or kith, whining and laying on the floor squirming and choking in his blood. Of all the people he has screwed over, it is the Starks that he has screwed over the most, used and then infected with his presence.

When things change, like women being in charge instead of men, and women fighting alongside men, then the way an execution takes place changes too. It took Sansa and Arya working together to kill execute Baelish, the Starks passed the sentence and carried it out by working together. Sansa has not killed with her own hands, though she has killed. She does not know how nor want to use a knife or a sword. Arya on the other hand is quite good at killing and now that she and Sansa are working together, as well as Bran, they can manage the various aspects of ruling together. The weakness of one is covered by the strength of another.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, hallam said:

I am certain that we will get an extensive backstory on all that in the books.

Wow, I'm not even certain we'll get books!

I've thought a bit about how Martin could fill this hole, and I really haven't come up with anything plausible. That doesn't mean Martin couldn't, of course, if he were inclined to do so. But setting everything else aside, there had to have been a point when Rhaegar and Lyanna were together, after Rickard and Brandon were dead, presumably after Jon Arryn has refused the king's order to execute Ned and Robert, and it's clear what is about to come. And at that point, Rhaegar leaves his new bride and rides off to kill what's left of her family, and Lyanna remains silent all through the war, knowing that either her husband or her brother, or both, are going to die, until Ned eventually finds her on her deathbed.

It's a big hole.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, A Bong of Ice and Fire said:

Kind of ungrateful on Sansa's behalf.  She only escaped King's Landing and Joffrey because of Petyr.  He did actually love her, in his own twisted way.

 

2 hours ago, Alphonzo said:

She was only a prisoner at King's Landing because of Petyr's duplicity.  It's like killing somebody's puppy and then giving them an ice cream cone.  Gratitude would not be a likely or reasonable response.

People forget that Petyr only betrayed Ned after Ned refused Petyr's proposal to seize Joffrey and take power.  Petyr actually tried to help Ned, which he tried to explain to Cat in season 2.  When Ned asked Petyr to bribe the Gold Cloaks to support him, there was no way Petyr was going to go along with that stupid plan. It would have been suicidal.  Ned screwed Ned, not Petyr.

Edited by A Bong of Ice and Fire
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, A Bong of Ice and Fire said:

 

People forget that Petyr only betrayed Ned after Ned refused Petyr's proposal to seize Joffrey and take power.  Petyr actually tried to help Ned, which he tried to explain to Cat in season 2.  When Ned asked Petyr to bribe the Gold Cloaks to support him, there was no way Petyr was going to go along with that stupid plan. It would have been suicidal.  Ned screwed Ned, not Petyr.

You may be subconsciously repressing that "It was Littlefinger all along" plot twist (to use the term generously). I do that sometimes. But this is the same Petyr who, it turns out, instigated the murder of Jon Arryn by his wife, Lysa Arryn, and then persuaded her to write a letter to the Starks implicating the Lannisters in her husband's death, specifically to incite conflict between the houses when Ned was inevitably named as the replacement for the guy Petyr conspired to murder.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

D&D might be more following the book story plot than meets the eye, at surface. There are so many parallels and mirrorings.

"Aerys declared "fire" the champion of the House Targaryen. He had Lord Rickard suspended from the rafters of the throne room while pyromancerslit a blaze beneath him. As he burned, Brandon was brought into the throne room, a leather cord attached to a strangulation device was wrapped around his neck. Aerys told Brandon his father was a dead man but there was a chance to save him. A longsword was placed on the floor just out of Brandon's reach, and the more he struggled to reach it, the more the cord tightened around his throat. Brandon Stark strangled himself trying to free his father, who was roasted alive in his own armor."

Now, this looks very much like what Cersei is doing to Allaria and Tyene - Allaria having a chain around her neck just too short to reach her daughter. (What Greek tragedy does this remind me of?)

 

Secondly, Mirri Maz Duur had more to say than a prophecy/threat: "Only death can pay for life." And now that one of Dany's dragon's is dead, it could mean there is place in her womb once again. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, A Bong of Ice and Fire said:

 

People forget that Petyr only betrayed Ned after Ned refused Petyr's proposal to seize Joffrey and take power.  Petyr actually tried to help Ned, which he tried to explain to Cat in season 2.  When Ned asked Petyr to bribe the Gold Cloaks to support him, there was no way Petyr was going to go along with that stupid plan. It would have been suicidal.  Ned screwed Ned, not Petyr.

So you admit that Petyr betrayed Ned.  There was no justification for his betrayal except his own ambition.  Rather than pretending to go along with Ned and then turning on him, he could have said, "No, I am not going to play along, that is a stupid plan".  But he didn't.   He chose the path that maximized his own personal gain.

Ned is responsible for Ned's actions.  Baelish is responsible for Baelish's actions.  Trusting an untrustworthy individual does not justify that individual's actions.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, syroya said:

Secondly, Mirri Maz Duur had more to say than a prophecy/threat: "Only death can pay for life." And now that one of Dany's dragon's is dead, it could mean there is place in her womb once again. 

I really like that.

 

When did Ser Robert Strong become Ser Gregor? Or was he always Gregor on the show?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...