Jump to content

TheCasualObserver

Members
  • Content count

    1,200
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About TheCasualObserver

  • Rank
    Council Member

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I would argue that Sansa is no better. For all that people claim she is a "player" now, she's terrible at diplomacy. Being cold and standoffish to Dany as soon as they meet is a bad move, even if Sansa does have a bad feeling about her. If Jon doesn't assassinate dany (and how could sansa possibly predict that?) she is putting herself and the north on a collision course with the next targ monarch for no real reason.
  2. TheCasualObserver

    Who got the most screwed over

    Except of course that Loras is clearly not just "the gay sword fighter" in the books. He is a character with depth and sincerity, and to deliberately remove that to save some time and effort in the writing room is a pretty unpleasant thing to do. Now you can argue (I'm sure you will and your devotion to D&D is noted) that this was necessary for the process of adaption and we can discuss that elsewhere, but the title of this thread is "Who got most screwed over", and I think Loras absolutely did. Loras is a character in the book who genuinely loved Renly, rashly killed good men in anger when he found out about his death, joined the kingsguard out of respect to his dead lover and ultimately gets hideously burned trying to take dragonstone simply so that the Redwyne's fleet can help protect his homeland. He has flaws, but the fact that he is gay is immaterial to the strength of his character and convictions. In the show he screws around with Olyvar (because he's gay), is creeped out by Sansa (because he's gay) and is ultimately tortured by the faith militant (because he's gay) and blown up by Cersei, with no heroics at all. I think that's a pretty strong argument that he got screwed over by the writers.
  3. TheCasualObserver

    Why do some people have a problem with Sansa?

    Sansa in the books is one of my favourite characters, because she's really one of the most realistic characters. People assume that Sansa is being childish when she dreams that Joffrey will be her shining prince in a story. But those stories are written in support of the patriarchal system, designed to control the thoughts and feelings of young girls so that they buy into the way this society works. Sansa dreams of a wonderful wedding to a noble prince because this is the best possible outcome for her in this system - her complicity in marrying someone she doesn't know for political gain is mandatory. It wasn't her fault she reacted like this to Joffrey at first - it was the way it she was taught. Look at Gawain and the green knight as an real life example - on the surface a story about chilvalric romance, but underneath it's a dark lesson in the necessity of wives to satay faithful to their husbands no matter what they might think and feel. This is what noble women of the 13th and 14th centuries were taught almost from birth. And ultimately we know that beneath Sansa's love of stories lies a genuinely good person, a person who will risk her life to help strangers, weep for margery even though she is freed from Joffrey's torment, try to find the goodness in a soul as black as Sandor Clegane's, and promise to herself that the people will love her rather than fear her, as Cersei tries and fails to instruct her. I have great faith in GRRM to finish Sansa's arc in the books properly, and I do not think it will have anything to do with having people ripped apart by dogs. Sansa in the show sucks because D&D never understood her, and simply wanted her to be more like Arya. They had the character raped to accomplish that, and it hasn't even worked. Sansa never does anything particularly intelligent; instead other people compliment her intelligence and behave stupidly so she can look less so by comparison. The battle of the bastards is a great example. Sansa doesn't tell Jon about the knights of the vale (because mentioning it in the episode would give away the surprise... for the audience) and that in itself is only an issue because she initially turned LF's offer down. She failed to gain any support from the Northern lords (a complete failure in diplomatic ability), she didn't spot LF's scheming in season 7 and had to get Bran to bail her out of trouble. Now in season 8 she hides in the crypts and doesn't comfort anyone (a regression of her character from season 2 since whilst comforting people in need is common courtesy, it's also excellent politics) and is mean and snarky to Danerys because she doesn't like her. Obviously she should have tried to befriend her and only then stab her in the back, but one liners and sarcasm is all that passes for smart these days on GOT. The character has been battered and inverted by the show and I cannot stand it.
  4. I see this as a tactic they've used in the past which is now backfiring. Previously they've used these behind the episodes to explain the motivations of a character or the mechanics of a plot to excuse the absence of proper characterisation. But now that the plot is so shallow the explanations aren't fooling anyone anymore and make D&D look a bit ridiculous. >You have to ask 'what is this plot?' >Dany kind of forgot about the Iron Fleet >Euron didn't really listen to Tyrion
  5. TheCasualObserver

    What was your personal GoT breaking point?

    I'm seeing a lot of people zeroing in on no Tysha reveal in season 4 ep 10 and I'm inclined to agree. It didn't leave Tyrion much to do as a character, as killing Shae was framed as self defense and no one cared he killed his father. This was the really big wobble for me. Season 4 had it's problems for sure - the idiotic Jon plot to kill the night's watch deserters was one, because even when watching I knew it was filler. But Sansa going to the boltons in season 5 converted me to actively disliking the show. I didn't accept that it was necessary to give sansa something to do, (she didn't do anything in winterfell anyway except be abused) she was effectively learning the same lessons she should have learnt in KL, (don't marry someone you don't know in a situation you cant control) and the argument that D&D used her to adapt the plotline of ADWD is bullshit because they adapted so little of it. No murder mystery, no fighting northern lords, no spearwives, no mance, no freys, no manderly, nothing except "Ramsay's wife gets raped and Theon saves her" as if that was the only important thing to take away from what GRRM wrote. I've been against the show ever since and it infuriates me that the faux feminism and pandering of later seasons has tricked people into thinking that D&D have a clue how to write female characters properly.
  6. I know this is off topic, but I have to stand up for Jon a little. The only reason Jon fought the BOB when he did was because Sansa wouldn't tell him about the knights of the vale. She essentially rescued a situation she herself ruined. Not that Jon isn't a massive dumbass. If he hadn't led the wight hunt north of the vale and sent Podrick for help, the NK would be stuck beyond the wall for the rest of history without a dragon. In the end he completely fucked everything up and his little sister had to bail him out.
  7. Wasn't this series supposed to have an anti-war message? Or an environmental message? Or any message?
  8. Oh god, I sound just like the posters convinced LF was coming back.
  9. This is just crazy to me. If Arya is able to do what she did at the end of this episode, couldn't she sneak up on Cersei and cut her throat within ten minutes of the next episode? The conflict should be over completely.
  10. I've mentioned it before, but it is utterly impossible for Cersei to be queen in season 7, if anything we know about this world is true. It reminds me of Varys' riddle about the three men and the swordsman: is he motivated by religon, authority or wealth? At the start of season 7, how does cersei fulfilling any of those motivations? She blew up the sept so she's an affront to anyone religous, she murdered the queen and (it is assumed) murdered her own son so she has no legal authority, and the mines of casterly rock are empty so she has no money. How, HOW can she possibly hold any power at all? Her own Lannister guards would cut her throat whilst she slept.
  11. I couldn't even tell you if that was supposed to be genuine tension or not. The final scene with LF implies they were faking the whole time, but what was with that scene where Arya shows sansa her bag of faces? LF wasn't present for that, so why include it if this was all a ruse?
  12. There is a very good reason why the northern lords aren't present in winterfell in Season 5, it's just not a part of the internal story. Think about it: sansa is taking jeyne's place in the plotline. For that to happen she needs to marry ramsay, be abused by him, then run away with theon's help. That's what is going to happen. But if the northern lords are there then why doesn't Sansa get help from them instead of Theon? And if sansa fails to ask for help from friends of her father, she looks even more politically incompetent than she did when she said yes to the marriage. So even though the narrative logic of the wedding (boltons marrying sansa to control the north) tells us that the northern lords must be present to witness the marriage, the plot itself wouldn't work if they were because it would give sansa someone else to help her other than theon and that old lady. So they fudged it - the northern lords are both there and not there at the same time. Schroedinger's northerners.
  13. Not as telling as the fact that only one episode of season 5 made the list.
  14. I still don't really understand why Jaime broke with her when he did, it seemed arbitrary. I'm not saying I side with Cersei, but choosing not to fight with Danerys and the Starks against the white walkers is hardly crazy. Cersei has no men at the moment and couldn't make a difference even if she wanted to. And there is no way that after the war is won they let Cersei control anything anyway. It's short sighted logic sure, but there is logic to it. I don't see why Jaime would object to that so much, when he was fine with Cersei literally blowing up hundreds of innocent people with wildfyre, the very thing he killed aerys to stop. It makes no sense at all.
×