Darkstream

We've already had The Wit and Wisdom of Tyrion Lannister, maybe d$d can give us The Prominent Dicks and the Cock less of Weisserof. And maybe, if we're lucky, they can throw in some extended bonus footage of A Thousand and One Ways to Devour a Chicken.

WHAT??? He said chicken? You see, with my waning interest, and the shows inability to hold my attention I must have missed that. Now I feel stupid, I really wish there was a way I could go back and change my vote to reflect such profound and ingenious writing. My bad.

I had the same issue. Someone earlier suggested the word "santorum" to me.

My guess is sensationalism, d$d's trademark.

It has never in six seasons been established anywhere that Arya is a super human with the healing capabilities of marvels wolverine. The existence of dragons and WW's has been thoroughly established as a part of this fantasy world. Your point is irrelevant.

Sure, they could have shown the fights, but then we would not have had time for Tyrion and Missworms comedy night routine. I'm sure d$d know what they are doing concerning the time constraints and streamlining issues. Aww Seven Hells, I couldn't say it with a strait face. If that was intended to be a "lure" scene then they did a worse job than I initially thought, and that's saying a lot.

Thank you soooo much, I feel so enlightened now! And you know something, a five year old could also write a better show than got.

A custom doesn't mean it is required, it just means it is the normal thing to do. Lord Martell would still be, according to custom, the rightful heir of an item as this. That doesn't mean he has to use it, but it would still be his sword, which would be as much a symbol of house Doran, as it would be used as a weapon. It would also be his choice to either pass it down to his son earlier than is normal custom, or give it to someone such as his brother the Red Viper, if he so chose. Just as Lord Tarly has the right to do. It's ridiculous that you think that the owner of a sword (essentially a piece of equipment, an object that a member of that house just happened to acquire at some point) doesn't have the right to do with it as he pleases. The first line specifically states that this is non binding, that means Randyll is not required to leave anything to Sam. This point alone renders your argument that Heartsbane is Sam's property to be false. You are correct, he did not have to send Sam to the wall. You agree he has the power to name Dickon heir of his lands and his title, so don't you think he can do the same for a sword? It is preposterous that he has the power to do the former, but not the latter. The bolded is pure speculation on your part, there is nothing to suggest that this is true. I would surmise that the reason Randyll sent Sam to the wall was because one, he did not want Sam to be around in case he tried to challenge his decision, and two, it is very clear that he despised Sam, saw him as an embarrassment, and was ashamed for anyone to see or meet him. Sending him to the wall was a means of getting rid of this stain on his house. Again, just for arguments sake, as it is not Sam's undeniable birthright. Randyll's intentions have absolutely no bearing on who the owner is at this time. Birthright or not, the undeniable fact is that when Sam takes Heartsbane, it is the property of Randyll Tarly, or if you prefer, House Tarly. This means he stole it. Fact. ETA: This however is off topic, If you wish to continue arguing against a fact, you can tag me in another thread.

But this is d$d's season of empowered women, so all character progression is thrown out the window, turning Sam into the sniffling little wimp that he was before he came to the wall, all so that his big, bad, strong woman could come to his rescue.

OK fine, here is the problem with your argument. You are actually right on one point. The Watch vows do not mentions giving up swords and personal belongings, as you have so stated. The Watch vows say: [6] Now hopefully you will agree that the bolded infers that that once taking these vows it means that you give up your rights to all inheritance as the first born son of a house. You can not inherit your fathers lands and castle, meaning you give up your right to become the lord of said house. This is the specific reason that Randyll sent Sam to the wall, so that he had no rights to the Tarly lands and the title of Lord Tarly. With Sam's joining of the Watch these rights now belong to Dickon. First Longclaw: When Jeor went to the wall, Long claw was already his property, As he was joining the Watch, he decided that he wanted to pass Longclaw to his son before he was dead, as apposed to the normal custom of it being passed upon his death. Note I said custom, there is no law in which it states that a house sword must be passed down to anyone. If you dispute this, please provide a quote from the show or a passage from the book, instead of the irrelevant retort that you had used earlier. Jorah left the sword, so Jeor's daughter decided to send it back to him. He didn't inherit it, It wasn't his right to have it returned, she wanted him to have it. This is why he has Long Claw, it was a personal belonging that was returned to him, not inherited. Also, he decided to leave it to Jon since his son was exiled and disgraced. This would contradict your assertion that Long Claw would belong to the family and that it is the law to pass it down to your first born son. It was his personal property to give to whomever he pleased, family or not. Now Heartsbane: I've already established that by Joining the Watch, Sam has forfeit his rights to Horn Hill, and the title of Lord Tarly. Longclaw is passed down to the first born son not only because he's the first born son, but because being the first born son also means that you will become the Head of the house. Now custom, and I reiterate custom, not law, would dictate that Heartsbane would belong to the head of the house. This means that Sam, by giving up his claim as head of the Tarly house, has also given his rights to Heartsbane. This doesn't mean that Randyll could not give it to him if he still wanted to, just that Sam has given up his entitlement to it. Also, with Sam being in the Watch, he is no longer considered a part of the Tarly house, he is a brother of the Nights Watch. If you assert that Heartsbane is the property of house Tarly and not Randyll's, then it would be contradictory of you to assert that Heartsbane should also be the property of Sam. ... This is why Sam is a thief, not only has Sam given up his rights to Heartsbane, but it is Randyll's choice whether he gets it or not. Yes, he is breaking the custom of Heartsbane going to the first born son, but he is not breaking any law as you would claim. And if you still want to be obstinate to all of the above, there is the simple fact that Randyll is still alive. Just for arguments sake, let's say your are right and Sam is still entitled to Heartsbane, it is still Randyll's property until he either gives it to Sam or until he is dead. Sam stole Heartsbane, this is a fact, not an opinion.

Oh I agree, I wasn't trying to infer that these criticisms mean you have to agree the show is bad. Just pointing out that these types of criticizim are not just an opinion. I have no problem with people giving a rating of a ten, even with the flaws, if they enjoyed it. This poll isn't meant to be strictly based on objective criticism, people have the right to vote based on their own feelings and enjoyment.

The issue with the show, while people's opinion are subjective, is that the objective criticism is a fact based on any literary standards. To say these issues with the show are only opinion is false. There are established rules and standards that can be used to judge a piece of literature objectively, d&d's writing fails miserably when judged by these.

Ok, I see, I didn't even see that post. Anyway, I'm done, you are acting way too childish.

Pretty much what I expected, your not supporting your argument, your just blurting out "your wrong". And I'm not sure what you mean by I'm copying you. And ignoring facts is not defeating.

Seriously? You are just making stuff up out of thin air to support your wishes. I responded to you false assertion with a passage containing quotes strait from the books that proved you wrong and your response was basically, uh, uh, your wrong. Your argument is comparable to a little child throwing a tantrum when they don't get their way. It's clear why you are such a big fan of the show, you have no regard for logic and facts, just as d&d. You ignore valid points against your argument and make up your own fan-fic to fill in the gaping holes in d&d's fan-fic. Like seriously, grow up man, this is not a subjective opinion, this is fact, you are wrong.

Actually, it undeniably renders your entire statement as false. And I would love to see you support your statement that handing down a family heirloom is the law.

... ... Oh wait... Again, are you serious? Kinslaying is a great taboo in Westeros. Any individual who kills a member of their own family is dubbed a kinslayer, and believed to be cursed forever.[1] Many nobles andsmallfolk believe this, and thus those who slay their own blood are usually looked down upon or shunned. Across Westeros, in the religions of the old gods, the Faith of the Seven, and even of the Drowned God, men state that "no man is so accursed as the kinslayer" and that "the kinslayer is accursed in the eyes of gods and men".[1][2][3][4]

No, the sword was Mormont's property before he went to the wall. The example you just brought up supports the argument against you. Or I suppose you are calling Mormont a thief as well.

Are you serious? First off, Randyll is alive, by tradition it's wouldn't be Sam's until he was dead. Secondly, it's not a law that Heartsbane be handed down to the first born son, it's just a tradition, although a prick move, Randyll has every right to deny Sam the sword. Thirdly, when Sam said his vows to the Watch, he renownced any claim to Hornhill, as well as Heartsbane, as traditionally it would go to the lord of Hornhill. Heartsbane is Randylls and Rickon is in line to inherit it once Randyll dies. Show Sam is a deserter, oathbreaker, and a thief.

2/10 My first score above 1 this season. Although still riddled with many problems Imo, I thought the Bran/Meera/Benjin segments were OK. The opening scene was the the only scene in a long time that I actually felt engaged in and enjoyed watching. Some nice imagery and edited well. Would have been the only scene to not completely pull me out of submersion if it wasn't for the Jason and the Argonauts wytes skeletons. I though the rest was a complete mess, but nothing too aggravating or offensive for a change. ETA: Except the scene with the actors from the play. I felt like this was a shot at anyone who would be so audacious to critique d&d. In an interview with Cogman: The theater troupe scenes have been really fun too. It’s like you’re meta commentating on the way the show itself gets depicted. I come from theater and being able to comment on the show and the reactions to the show through the players were so much fun. The show is often accused of being gratuitous in all kinds of way – the violence and the bigness of the characters. It’s a huge operatic story. We’re able to lovingly spoof ourselves but also play with ideas about how audiences view the show, good and bad, and how a perspective of a story changes. Plus there’s the dramatic deliciousness of Arya watching her own life play out on stage. http://www.ew.com/article/2016/05/29/game-thrones-coldhands-benjen-stark Remembering that scene, wish I had voted 1 again.

You would think so, but seeing as nobody at Castle Black is even aware of the White Walkers, I'm not surprised that Rickon doesn't believe they are real.

You do realize that a typo has nothing to do with a person's knowledge. As I am on a crappy mobile 99% of the time, it is very difficult to type, and my auto correct is very viscous. I also cant' can't see the signatures when on my mobile. And yeah, you're really taking the high road by insulting someone behind their back. If you want to call me out, go ahead, but don't try to make it look like your being respectful, it's not difficult to figure out who you're talking about. As for the comments I made, I have already explained that those were made in retaliation to a poster that attacked me unprovoked. (If I told you what he said, my post would be removed just like his was.) He made it personal, so I responded. Was it necessary? No. Was it petty and childish? Yes, I'll own up to that. I apologize if anyone else besides the poster I was quoting was offended. Sure hope I've got no grammatical or spelling errors in this post. I will thank you for bringing that to my attention though, I'll be sure to correct it, just for people like you.

Yes, and those statements were made to point out the hypocrisy of the argument that I am opposing, make of it what you will. I didn't say it was my only stance, try reading a little more attentively, I said it's not one you were accusing me of. And as I just said, the issue's are constantly shifted in order to dodge valid points. A good day to you, as well.

dp