Shadow on the Wall Posted March 25, 2013 Share Posted March 25, 2013 In England, where I'm from, series = season. For example, we say 'Series 3 of the BBC's Sherlock is airing this year'.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Sherlock_episodesWhen in a hole, bardgal, stop digging. ;)Thanks for this!! Do you mind if I post the link in the thread about the interview with Michelle Fairley? We were all scratching our heads over Catelyn's upcoming section about Jon and this article offers a tantalising hint.Sure, do as you like. Don't think I have to give you permission for that. :P@briantw: Nice idea. But didn't Robb naming Jon his heir happen fairly late in ASOS part I? (I could be misremembering). Anyway, they have changed timelines around a bit this season for sure, what with Craster's keep etc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ebevan91 Posted March 25, 2013 Share Posted March 25, 2013 In England, where I'm from, series = season. For example, we say 'Series 3 of the BBC's Sherlock is airing this year'.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Sherlock_episodesWhich is weird because I read an article the other day that said "Season 3 begins at 9PM on 3/31 in the US while in the UK Series 3 begins at 3AM on 4/1"They seriously used both terms in the same sentence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord of Lannisport Posted March 25, 2013 Share Posted March 25, 2013 I think this is the main reason it will not happen this season. Tyrion's season four storyline would literally be almost 9 full episodes in a jail cell, being taken out for probably a trial and then a trial by combat. I doubt they'd want to do that. If I had to guess I'd say the wedding will be 3 or 4 episodes into the season. Tyrion can be in a cell for a bit and if they want to show the first trial, they can (I hope they do, but it seems like something that could be nixed) and then Oberyn v Gregor could be a climax of one of the later episodes. The escape seems destined to be in episode 9 given how they usually show the climax in that episode, but I think it would work better in episode 10 as the ending to Tyrion's season arc. It'd work better that way rather than having to show him in a while new environment on a ship. Pretty much just as was done with Daenerys at the end of last season.But don't forget, D&D have stated that they want the Battle at the Wall at the end of Season 4 and that it will be bigger than the Blackwater. I think that is a more likely candidate for the S4E9 Climax. I expect Tyrion's story will form the climax of episode 10. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
briantw Posted March 25, 2013 Share Posted March 25, 2013 @briantw: Nice idea. But didn't Robb naming Jon his heir happen fairly late in ASOS part I? (I could be misremembering). Anyway, they have changed timelines around a bit this season for sure, what with Craster's keep etcYeah it happened later but that's a scene that could essentially happen at any point after Robb finds out that Bran and Rickon are "dead," which will presumably happen in either the first or second episode of season three. After all, the sole reason that Robb decides to name Jon as his heir (at least until he has a son) is because he believes both of his brothers to have been killed by Theon Greyjoy. Prior to that he didn't need to name an heir because it would have been Bran. After Bran and Rickon "die" the Stark line would die with Robb unless he legitimized Jon or had a son.I just can't imagine any other scenario for Cat to go on a monologue about her hate for Jon Snow unless Robb discusses the possibility of legitimizing him with her. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shadow on the Wall Posted March 25, 2013 Share Posted March 25, 2013 Yeah it happened later but that's a scene that could essentially happen at any point after Robb finds out that Bran and Rickon are "dead," which will presumably happen in either the first or second episode of season three. After all, the sole reason that Robb decides to name Jon as his heir (at least until he has a son) is because he believes both of his brothers to have been killed by Theon Greyjoy. Prior to that he didn't need to name an heir because it would have been Bran. After Bran and Rickon "die" the Stark line would die with Robb unless he legitimized Jon or had a son.I just can't imagine any other scenario for Cat to go on a monologue about her hate for Jon Snow unless Robb discusses the possibility of legitimizing him with her.Yep, I think you're right. E2 is called "Dark Wings, Dark Words" so it will make sense for Robb, upon hearing the news, to name his new heir to be Jon Snow. And then we'll hear Cat's monologue.But don't forget, D&D have stated that they want the Battle at the Wall at the end of Season 4 and that it will be bigger than the Blackwater. I think that is a more likely candidate for the S4E9 Climax. I expect Tyrion's story will form the climax of episode 10.I reckon S4E8 will be the battle at the wall, E9 will be Tywin's death and E10 will be Tyrion on his way to Dany. Pure speculation of course.@ebeva91: Haha, yeah. Tbh, I was confused by the term 'Season' when I first heard it, as I was so used to 'Series'. Nowadays I use 'Season' as default because most people are American. It also sounds kind of cool, I guess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YouSnowNothing Posted March 25, 2013 Share Posted March 25, 2013 Wasn't Robb's naming of Jon not only because of Bran/Rickon, but also because of Sansa's marriage to Tyrion? The line would not be dead with Robb, it would pass to Sansa, but since they don't want Winterfell passing to Lannister hands, Robb names Jon. It seems slightly callous of Robb to cut out his sister before the forced marriage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Fixit Posted March 25, 2013 Share Posted March 25, 2013 well, married or not, she is a prisoner in a situation where Robb could die at any moment. Seems prudent to name an heir that isn't rotting in some Lannister cage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Abaddon Posted March 25, 2013 Share Posted March 25, 2013 Wasn't Robb's naming of Jon not only because of Bran/Rickon, but also because of Sansa's marriage to Tyrion? The line would not be dead with Robb, it would pass to Sansa, but since they don't want Winterfell passing to Lannister hands, Robb names Jon. It seems slightly callous of Robb to cut out his sister before the forced marriage.That was a big part of the logic in the book, but pushing back the wedding in the show nixes that.well, married or not, she is a prisoner in a situation where Robb could die at any moment. Seems prudent to name an heir that isn't rotting in some Lannister cage.I don't think it makes as much sense, but it's plausible enough I guess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bardgal Posted March 25, 2013 Share Posted March 25, 2013 Bardgal looks mighty foolish.You're absolutely right. I know nothing. AT. ALL. Oh well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
briantw Posted March 25, 2013 Share Posted March 25, 2013 Wasn't Robb's naming of Jon not only because of Bran/Rickon, but also because of Sansa's marriage to Tyrion? The line would not be dead with Robb, it would pass to Sansa, but since they don't want Winterfell passing to Lannister hands, Robb names Jon. It seems slightly callous of Robb to cut out his sister before the forced marriage.That was part of it, but it's easily explained away. As someone above said, they could simply mention that Sansa is a captive and the Lannisters may force her to marry someone against her will. And honestly, the line typically continues through the male anyway. If anyone, even a Northman, marries Sansa, she's no longer a Stark and, if Robb dies, the Stark line technically ends with him anyway. Legitimizing Jon and releasing him from his duty to the Night's Watch ensures that there can still be a (male) Stark in Winterfell and that the line can continue if Robb is killed before he can father an heir.The most important part, really, is that Bran and Rickon are "dead." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eir Posted March 25, 2013 Share Posted March 25, 2013 Sure, do as you like. Don't think I have to give you permission for that. :PThanks! I wasn't sure. Am still learning the ropes around here--I'd lurked for ages, but there is a maddening number of things you just don't notice until you're actually posting! ^_^ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Born Yesterday Posted March 25, 2013 Share Posted March 25, 2013 Legitimizing Jon and releasing him from his duty to the Night's Watch ensures that there can still be a (male) Stark in Winterfell and that the line can continue if Robb is killed before he can father an heir.Actually, I never got that part. I would think that no one has the authority to release people from their duty to the Night's Watch, not even the King. (Just like no one has the authority to punish a man of the Night's Watch for previous crimes.) How can Robb circumvent that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
briantw Posted March 25, 2013 Share Posted March 25, 2013 Actually, I never got that part. I would think that no one has the authority to release people from their duty to the Night's Watch, not even the King. (Just like no one has the authority to punish a man of the Night's Watch for previous crimes.) How can Robb circumvent that?I think kings have the power to sever oaths that a person has given. I mean, clearly they must, or Robb wouldn't even have mentioned that as an option. As an example, Joffrey released Barristan Selmy from the Kingsguard, albeit against Barristan's will. That's another brotherhood that takes lifetime vows. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Born Yesterday Posted March 25, 2013 Share Posted March 25, 2013 I think kings have the power to sever oaths that a person has given. I mean, clearly they must, or Robb wouldn't even have mentioned that as an option. Did he mention it, though? That he would name Jon, specifically, as his heir? Or is it just a theory? (A theory which makes a lot of sense otherwise, I'm not denying that, I'm just not sure if it still counts as conjecture, or if it was confirmed somewhere and I missed it.)As an example, Joffrey released Barristan Selmy from the Kingsguard, albeit against Barristan's will. That's another brotherhood that takes lifetime vows.Good point. On the other hand, the Kingsguard is a completely different animal from the Night's Watch (and Joffrey from Robb, for that matter). If it were so easy, why didn't they just undo Janos Slynt's appointment to the Wall, too? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
briantw Posted March 25, 2013 Share Posted March 25, 2013 Did he mention it, though? That he would name Jon, specifically, as his heir? Or is it just a theory? (A theory which makes a lot of sense otherwise, I'm not denying that, I'm just not sure if it still counts as conjecture, or if it was confirmed somewhere and I missed it.)He mentioned it, at least according to Tower of the Hand's chapter summaries for ASoS. Here's the excerpt:"Robb silences his mother and states he wants to legitimize Jon, release him from the Watch, and designate him heir. Catelyn thinks this is a bad idea, fearing that he would harm Robb's own issue to secure his position. She points out that Aegon IV legitimized his bastards on his deathbed leading to five generations of Blackfyre pretenders before Ser Barristan Selmy slew the last in the Stepstones. Robb is angry at his mother's lack of support and stalks off."Source: http://towerofthehand.com/books/103/046/index.htmlNow, no one knows (yet) if Robb actually went through with it, as he doesn't invite Cat into the room when he creates his will. But he clearly discussed it with her and it is likely that he did indeed do it.Good point. On the other hand, the Kingsguard is a completely different animal from the Night's Watch (and Joffrey from Robb, for that matter). If it were so easy, why didn't they just undo Janos Slynt's appointment to the Wall, too?Probably because, in actuality, no one really gave a shit about Janos Slynt. He was low-born and, while he did help the Lannisters assume absolute power in King's Landing, he had served his purpose. Why bother releasing him from the Night's Watch? Plus, by the time Tyrion was no longer the Hand, chances are everyone had already forgotten about Slynt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crown Posted March 25, 2013 Share Posted March 25, 2013 Now, no one knows (yet) if Robb actually went through with it, as he doesn't invite Cat into the room when he creates his will. But he clearly discussed it with her and it is likely that he did indeed do it.I think it was confirmed by the official ASOIAF wiki (I forgot its name) app. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
briantw Posted March 25, 2013 Share Posted March 25, 2013 I think it was confirmed by the official ASOIAF wiki (I forgot its name) app.Ah. Well, there you have it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Born Yesterday Posted March 25, 2013 Share Posted March 25, 2013 He mentioned it, at least according to Tower of the Hand's chapter summaries for ASoS. [...]Source: http://towerofthehan.../046/index.htmlAh, yes. That confirms it rather explicitly. Thanks. :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shit_for_Honour Posted March 25, 2013 Share Posted March 25, 2013 That Wildling video was great, I'm really excited about Ciaran Hinds as Mance. I have a feeling he'll nail it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Conchobar Posted March 25, 2013 Share Posted March 25, 2013 That Wildling video was great, I'm really excited about Ciaran Hinds as Mance. I have a feeling he'll nail it.What video? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.