Jump to content

Silverstar

Members
  • Content Count

    1,583
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Silverstar

  • Rank
    Spells Psychedelically
  • Birthday 10/16/1980

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    Array
  • ICQ
    Array

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Array
  • Location
    Array

Recent Profile Visitors

6,927 profile views
  1. I have no problem with people -1ing my posts, so long as I know why they've done it. Waiving anonymity would help, as I feel that in most cases, on seeing who had given me a negative rating, I could probably figure out why, as I feel I know enough about the opinions of most boarders to be able to do that. At the moment I generally seem to use positive ratings on posts where I strongly agree with what has been written, and particularly on posts where someone has written exactly what I would have written myself, except they've done it far more eloquently. I've been using negs mostly for posts which I find offensive (like that lovely Margaery/Renly one linked earlier).
  2. My feeling is that the rep system would be a lot more useful if there was more indication of what positive or negative rep actually meant. As I said in another thread, if the +/- signs could be changed to Agree/Disagree or Helpful/Unhelpful or Like/Dislike, or something along those lines, there would be more value in looking at someone's rep or at the post rep. If that's not possible, maybe even a sticky post with some indication what what we're assuming it means? The way it is at the moment, positive rep could mean "Great, informative post" or it could mean "Made me laugh" or it could mean "This person is my best friend and I'm giving them positive rep on every post they make" or it could mean "I agree with everything written". I like the public voting history idea. If people are giving me rep one way or another, it'd be useful to know who did it so I might have more of an idea why. Might also stop some of the silly rep giving.
  3. David and Dan! :) The cast is awesome. Cannot wait to see them on screen. I'm still slightly in shock at just what an amazing cast you've assembled. I didn't expect that we'd get so many fabulous actors. I'll hopefully catch up with you in Belfast and get to say thanks in person. Buy you both a pint!
  4. Yeah, considering GRRM said that his original perfect casting for the Hound years ago was Ron Perlman, I'm not sure that Sandor is supposed to be handsome. And not all women squee over tormented souls. Just sayin' ;)
  5. He's not mentioned. I could be remembering incorrectly, but don't we meet Barristan for the first time as the royal party and Starks are travelling down to King's Landing? He shows up with Renly and Ilyn Payne, and Sansa tries to guess who they all are. If he was at Winterfell during the feast and all, surely she'd already know?
  6. Jorah, Rodrik and Waymar Royce are the three knights in the pilot episode, other than Jaime.
  7. *grumbles* I'm starting to dislike you two ... :P
  8. I'm pretty sure GRRM once said that he envisioned Rowan Atkinson as Varys. I may have just made that up, though.
  9. I'd assume Sean Bean for Ned, on the off-chance we were right about GRRM's hints. He just doesn't have the right look for Jaime, IMO, and I think he comes across as too old. I'm not sure that there is much of an age gap between Ned and Jaime, but in my mind's eye, I see Ned as plainer, and careworn, and solemn, whereas Jaime is younger-looking for his age, drop dead gorgeous and flashy. Sean Bean fits far more into the Ned mould than the Jaime one, I'd say, although I do think he's good looking.
  10. Oh god, you mean GRRM is starting to using foreshadowing in his announcements now? That's going to send my brain into spasms. (Not that this would not be awesome should it be true. Sean Bean for Ned would be utterly fantastic. Just need Gillian Anderson for Catelyn, and I'll explode with happiness)
  11. Let's hope we did as well with all our other choices ;)
  12. :cheers: This has got to be a promising sign ... that the very first cast member to be announced and confirmed is almost everyone's dream casting for the role. Fingers crossed that the rest of the casting is of similar quality. I don't really know any of Tom McCarthy's work, but if it's right that he's a strong dramatic director, then that's perfect for the series, really. The last thing I would want is for them to pick someone with a strong action background, and turn AGOT into more of a cheesy sword'n'sorcery piece. Drama and character interaction is what the series is all about, and that's what makes it different from most fantasy that has been shown on tv previously.
  13. *keeps fingers, toes and eyes crossed*
×
×
  • Create New...