WhatAnArtist!

No one denies that because of Varys's "little birds" he could have had Jaime killed any time he wanted, like Pycelle and Kevan; the issue is with your claim that Varys could easily overpower Jaime physically, of which there is absolutely no textual evidence for this, purely your own conjecture and assumption. I think you need to distance yourself from your adoration of the character and look at things more objectively (i.e. based purely on what the text tells us about this character). Calling a debate you can't win "a joke" is immature.

This would be the most mind-blowing twist in the history of fiction. I don't know whether to be amazed or horrified. Some people on this forum certainly seem to think so, based on these comments.

I understand the thematic reasons of why there "needs" to be a confrontation between Jaime and Cersei, from a traditional storytelling perspective, but at the same time I feel that if Martin were to end every storyline with the most obvious conclusion because it's what fits thematically, there'd be no surprises left in the story. Catelyn and Robb's storylines ended very abruptly and without any closure; they never even encountered any of the people that wanted to defeat - Cersei, Tywin, Joffrey - and were unceremoniously murdered by a minor character who had only showed up once before. I don't expect the storyline to actually end the way I said - I was merely outlining what the most purely realistic and logical way it would end based on the events as they currently are, not what fans predict. But I'm sure that if Jaime was going to be killed by Stoneheart it would have been included at the end of Dance, so.... yeah, I wouldn't worry about that happening, I'm sure he'll go to King's Landing and confront Cersei and it'll either end with him killing her, as every fan predicts, or them dying together, as the show had things happen. I can't say either conclusion particularly interests me, but I'm not the writer so it's not up to me.

If Martin was intent on having a realistic and logical conclusion to Jaime's arc, based on what we've seen on Stoneheart and the aDwD chapter, he'll be brought before Stoneheart, found guilty of his crimes, and hanged from a tree. An extremely bleak and nihilistic ending, to be sure, but it would have a certain poetic feel to it - hanged just as he was starting to truly turn his life around and be a better man, and hanged not for any of the crimes he really did commit, but for the one he actually did not. As much as I truly love Jaime as a character, I wouldn't necessarily have a problem with this ending. It would certainly be more unexpected and impactful than him going back to King's Landing and killing Cersei. Everyone and their cat is predicting this will happen, and it's never seemed particularly interesting or original to me.

I would have thought that Martin would have an instinctive aversion to collaborating on projects with HBO after GoT, but apparently not. Very disappointing.

There isn't any actual evidence to support this, just vague conjecture. Okay now this is just ridiculous. I know you're a fan of the character, but come on. This is a bit much. Unless he takes them completely by surprise and lands a single knock-out blow, there's no way he could take down a "professional warrior".

It should be released in whatever format is necessary for the book to actually be released. I don't care how it's released, I just want it to be released. But all of this is pointless theorising, because we don't even know when it will be released. For all we know it could be another five years.

That's a theoretical theme, yes, because it sounds very clever, but since Martin decided to massively expand the scope and length of the series, almost solely for the sake of the "irrelevant" political maneuvering, it suggests that he himself does not consider the politics to be irrelevant. If it truly was, he wouldn't have spent decades writing about it and going into extreme and mind-boggling depth with it. If all that really mattered was the Others threat, he would have kept the series as a simple trilogy that focused more on that.

I agree that Dany's season 2 storyline is pretty abysmally bad, and sticks out like a sore thumb on rewatches, although I'm willing to give D&D a little bit of slack here. Her storyline was fairly uninteresting in the book, and it was also very short - only five chapters, compared to her ten in AGoT, and the conventions of TV usually necessitate giving main characters a consistent amount of screen-time between seasons. The stolen dragons subplot, while terribly executed and pointless from a narrative perspective, at least added some small semblance of "drama" to her storyline. At least the type of conventional drama that TV viewers expected. Her book storyline - such as it is - consists of a measly two chapters in Qarth before the House of the Undying, and they're pretty redundant - just her endlessly complaining to Jorah and Xaro about how no one is helping her. I would honestly have had no problem with her having far less screentime compared to other seasons, but D&D have shown that they're not the type of writers to want to do that with characters (except Bran). They'd rather invent dumb and redundant storylines than have a character just not show up much in a season (also see: Theon in season 3). And as well all know, D&D are abysmally awful writers when they have to create something from scratch. The same thing also happened with Tywin and Arya that season - rather than properly introducing a character that would go on to be extremely important quite soon - Roose Bolton - the writers instead decided to have completely made-up conversations between two characters we already know well, and in the process completely neuter one of the most cold and ruthless characters in the series because they thought it would be cute and funny if he acted like a cool grandpa for some reason. Reducing Roose's relevance to a short and disposable scene where he tells Robb about Ramsay offhand was ridiculous, and showed that even as early as season 2, D&D were prioritising nonsense fanservice over establishing important new characters and storylines.

It was very interesting skimming through this (enormous) thread, as someone that stopped watching the series at the end of season 5 and have had no interest in watching any more of the show since then. I knew it ended badly, but I didn't realise just how atrociously bad it really was. But people that think the show only became bad in the last two seasons are wrong - the problems started long before then, arguably in season 4, and became deeply ingrained by season 5. The disasters of the last few seasons didn't happen in a vacuum, they were the inevitable result of D&D's many writing faults that stretch back for years. A character killed off too early here, a character excessively whitewashed there. It all added up. I mean, being frank, as a "book purist", the only seasons I can still fully enjoy are 1 and 2, and even 2 has some silliness in it (Arya and Tywin scenes, Talisa scenes, Jon and Ygritte cringe).

What evidence is there in the books that it's acceptable for a knight of the Kingsguard - and the Lord Commander at that - to let himself go and not keep up his fitness and training? I can't recall anything like that.

I think her story will conclude with whatever happens with Stoneheart and the Brotherhood in tWoW. If I had to guess, and I was being optimistic, she'll kill Stoneheart in an attempt to save Jaime at the last minute, and possibly die while doing so. It would be a sad but satisfying end to her character-arc and relationship with Jaime. Worst case scenario, she was really hanged by Stoneheart at the end of Feast and is another resurrected... thing, doing the vengeful bidding of Stoneheart. I really hope that isn't the case, since I love Brienne and don't want her to have such a horrible fate. It would be a final gut punch after her already depressing storyline of Feast. I don't want Brienne to kill Stannis like the show. That wasn't satisfying in the slightest from either a character or thematic perspective. No one cares about Brienne's desire for """"justice"""" for her murdered husbandfu Renly, a traitor and fool. Brienne's character arc will be completed with Jaime and Catelyn/Stoneheart, not Stannis. Plus, I feel like Brienne's worldview and attitude changed a lot from ACoK to AFfC - in the former, she's entirely obsessed with serving and worshipping Renly, a spoiled, arrogant brat with a huge ego, but by the end of Feast she seems to have realised that the true path of honour wasn't serving a (false) king, but defending the common folk, a far more respectable goal.

I haven't read all of these replies, but here's my thoughts on the idea of Bran becoming king: I simply can't see it happening. It wouldn't feel right, or feel in-line with everything Martin has written about him for 25 years. From the very first book, and increasingly so with each passing one, the books have hinted that Bran's destiny is something far more unusual and other-wordly than sitting on a throne and running a kingdom. Like, I'd go so far as to say that it would feel more fitting for Bran to "transcend" into some kind of god or spirit. Any fool can be a king - the series has shown that repeatedly. But only Bran can do what he's doing. It would be one of the biggest cop-outs in fantasy history if Bran just ends up being a mere king. It just wouldn't feel right. He's meant to do something far greater and more distinctive. I just know it.