J_Crews

A good article.

Game of Thrones: Season 2 Review from IGN

It's a review of the season as a whole, but this seemed the only thread it made sense to post it it.

No you wouldn't unless you went through Catechism first...

LOL! You know what I meant! :lol: :tantrum: :thumbsup:

... the books clearly say that Rhakaro is a youth that is still growing. By the fifth book we see him as a man, bigger and brawnier, completely changed from the boy in the first book. The same thing happened with the character of Gregor Clegane. The actor that played him in the first season, Conan Stevens, went to make The Hobbit. They replaced the actor and did not kill the character. They could have done the same thing with Rhakaro.

I hate, hate, hate recasting actors. That's some bush-league daytime soap opera shit. Cue the voice-over: "The part of blah blah is now being played by blah blah." Screw that noise. I not only prefer dead to recast, I would prefer they never have been written into the show in the first place. Screw recastings. Screw them hard.

No, they're not. They did not abbandon Theon, not even once. And Dagmer was a pretty loyal dude. He gave Theon good advice and did what was asked of him.

Remember the scene in the fifth book where Reek goes to Moat Cailin to ask the ironborn holding the ruins to surrender. They are reluctant to do so, they want to stay and fight and die. Only after they hear about Crow's Eye winnin the kingsmoot do they accept to give up. And also, the one that came and told them to give up was balon's son, not a nobody.

I misunderstood what you were referring to initially. :)

Salladhor Saan is a Lysene pirate. The Lysene have white-blond hair, blue eyes and smooth fair skin.

That's a Lysene description from the books. We don't know what they look like in the show. I doubt GRRM's Lorathis are all pseudo-germans, but they are in the show.

I know. But it still makes no sense.

The talk almost always comes to the financial part. People keep telling me that the actors need to be paid. But it's not like the show is not making any money. I would guess it makes a whole lot of money. A buttload of money. A Scrooge McDuck load of money. And we're still talking about paying actors?! Come on!

Hollywood. Everybody is getting paid whatever their talent agent and/or manager negotiates for them, and nobody is taking a pay-cut so somebody else can get cast. Things like that are exceedingly rare and usually only happen when a Director/Producer wants a big, big Bruce Willis-esque star in their flick, and so they agree to the cut. GoT has a pretty big budget for a TV show, but it is not some giant inexhaustible gob of $$$.

That would just be wrong.

Then they should also scrap the sand snakes, the damphair, Stannis' knights, the rest of the tyrells, etc.

What does Belwas do that's so important? He's mostly comic relief. And, for the record, some of those you named being cut wouldn't surprise me, unless they can pussy-foot around the budget issue by holding their parts of the story back until later seasons when more established (and, likely, higher-paid) actors get iced, thereby freeing-up their salaries.

double post. board had a brain fart.

Or a godswood when a weirwood is unavailable in the south. There are plenty of those.

Godswoods are in castles. There was no castle ergo... no godswood?

Even if you couldn't find a godswood, do you convert religions? Ok... maybe converting religions is acceptable if you are doing so for your spouse even though your bannermen would like as not quit following you for this. The problem with this, is that Rob's bride is from Esos, and she wouldn't be a worshiper of the seven either.

I hear ya, dude. They wanted to get married, though. I'm not a Catholic, but, if I wanted to get married in a hurry and a Catholic Priest was game, I'd straight-up be gettin' married by a Catholic Priest. That was my take on it.

Good point. However, Robb's religion is not that of the Seven and neither is Tallisa's(if she is from Volantis). I doubt that two people with two different religions would marry into a third different religion. Come on!

And there are weirwoods in the south.

The Blackwoods still serve the Old Gods and a lot of castles have their own Godswood!

Southern godswoods, almost uniformly, have no weirwoods, using other tress like oaks, etc. as their heart trees. Off the top of my head, I can only remember one weirwood is the south, that being at Raventree Hall. Riverrun and King's Landing are specifically mentioned as having no weirwoods So, how do we know they aren't hundreds of miles from the nearest (and maybe the only) one? The Riverlands is a big region.

I did think about this, but there could have been some accommodation made. Just even mentioning the old gods would have sufficed for me. Also, as someone pointed out, having Karstark swear by the seven indicated it was probably sloppy rather than taking practical matters into consideration (no tree available).

I had tried to make a separate thread on this earlier, but wasn't able to because of the forums acting up. Thanks for pointing that out about the weirwood. But in the absence of their own gods, they swear to someone else's?

I took to be more like a "We need to get married now. Let's go find a septon."

Good point. However, Robb's religion is not that of the Seven and neither is Tallisa's(if she is from Volantis). I doubt that two people with two different religions would marry into a third different religion. Come on!

And there are weirwoods in the south.

The Blackwoods still serve the Old Gods and a lot of castles have their own Godswood!

Southern godswoods, almost uniformly, have no weirwoods, using other tress like oaks, etc. as their heart trees. Off the top of my head, I can only remember one weirwood is the south, that being at Raventree Hall. Riverrun and King's Landing are specifically mentioned as having no weirwoods So, how do we know they aren't hundreds of miles from the nearest (and maybe the only) one? The Riverlands is a big region.

I did think about this, but there could have been some accommodation made. Just even mentioning the old gods would have sufficed for me. Also, as someone pointed out, having Karstark swear by the seven indicated it was probably sloppy rather than taking practical matters into consideration (no tree available).

I had tried to make a separate thread on this earlier, but wasn't able to because of the forums acting up. Thanks for pointing that out about the weirwood. But in the absence of their own gods, they swear to someone else's?

I took to be more like a "We need to get married now. Let's go find a septon."

I don't like some of the changes they made. Totally unnecessary.

They killed Rakharo,

That wasn't by choice. The actor got a bigger, better-paying gig. He's doing the World War Z film adaptation with Brad Pitt.

The ironborn are now traitorous bastards.

They always were. They're, essentially, the Westerosi stand-in for Danes going viking. If they can't screw it, eat it, or sell it it's useless to them. Trying to turn such people into something that fits in with the school of warfare Theon grew-up learning was on of his big blunders. The Ironborn do not occupy inland holding, regardless of the strength of the fortress... because they're strength is their fleet.

Osha is a slut.

She always was. She went from humping the wildling (former crow) who was killed last season straight to letting Winterfell's cook "lift her skirts." Having her with Theon didn't change her character in the slightest; it just kept them from needing to cast another actress for Theon to play with.

Xaro is dead.

Who cares? He shows-up one more time in the following 3 books and does nothing that can't be done by another new character. This isn't a book; it's TV -- keeping him alive would've meant either using him on-screen, taking $$$ out of the budget every season to pay him under a holding contract, or re-casting him.

Salladhor Saan is black.

Why is this a problem?

Ser Barristan did not appear. Neither did Strong Belwas or the Reeds.

We know the Reeds are being cast for next season.

Why pay an actual salary to the actor who plays Ser Barristan for him to be in one scene, when they could just as easily pay him under a holding contract (less $$$) and then re-introduce him as a full cast member in Season 3?

Also, I wouldn't be surprised if Belwas gets cut altogether?

To those having issues over Robb marrying Susie SexyNurse in the light of the Seven:

You need to remember that they're marrying somewhere near a war camp in the South. Northern marriage vows are said before a weirwood, of which there are none in the South.

Who burned Winterfell, and why, if there were no defenders?

Because that's what it says to do in the Medieval Warfare 101 textbook, under the heading "How to Sack a City/Castle." You either occupy it or do your best to destroy it to deny it to others. It doesn't matter that there were no defenders -- you round-up the populace, take everything of value that can be carried, then either murder everybody outright or march them off toork your fields, kitchens, etc.. Peasants, sadly, were treated as chattel, one step above outright slaves.

It's pretty obvious to me Ramsey's men did the sacking, either after letting the Ironborn besides Theon go free (as Robb commanded), or, more likely, double-crossing them after they opened the gates to surrender. I guess the Ironborn could have done it as a departing F U, but then where are Ramsey's 500 men who were previously besieging them? I think Ramsey did it with the intent that it be blamed on the Ironborn.

I gave this episode a 9, mostly because I have largely separated book and show in my mind into 2 separate entities; not totally, mind you -- they still have to bring the story to the same place, but if they go a slightly different route to get there, I'm fine with that. The fact is that, as much as we book lovers b!tch about every little change, that criticism simply has no bearing on the average TV viewer. Media buzz, ratings, and critical assessments are all still very positive.

Above, it was supposed to say "Xaro's xhiz-nit," not "Xaro's whiz-nit," but now the board issues won't let me edit it. Dratz!

Also, two articles:

THIS and THIS

Enjoy!

A few thoughts as I rewatch tonight's finale. Apologies if a hundred people have touched on these before me, but the board won't stay up long enough for me to post these in real-time; I'll be copy/pasting later.

- Pycelle was deliciously satisfied with Tyrion's downfall.

- Loved Sansa's reaction to being "set aside."

- Littlefinger being awfully open about helping Sansa; why was Dontos introduced at all, I wonder?

- Loving Brienne! She straight f'd that dude up!

- Dillane is wickedly intense as Stannis.

- Alfie Allen deserves an Emmy! Him being so intense, while simultaneously bitching about the horn-blower was hilarious and a very nice touch, I thought. Allen's portrayal has actually manges to humanize Theon-freaking-Greyjoy for me.

- No knighthood for Ser Bronn of the Blackwater?

- Bran riding in the Westerosi equivalent of a grocery cart... Har! :)

- The HotU was sufficiently weird for my tastes. I loved the sequence of how Dany entered. I imagine many people are freaking about the different visions and no mention of the 3 prophecies, but I wasn't expecting much, so I'm not disappointed. Seeing Drogo and the ruined throne room was cool, tying the wall in was a nice touch, and there will be plenty of time to introduce the prophecies later (by Quaithe, maybe?). Far too early for Rhaegar visions and such explicit foreshadowing of the RW, in my opinion.

- A Man changes his face and sufficiently lays the groundwork for A Girl's future storyline. Good.

- Jon killing QH was a little off. I think it would have benefited from one more snippet of a conversation with QH being clear about his orders. True, there was the previous interaction with QH talking about Jon being able to do what he must when the time comes; I just hope it wasn't lost on casual viewers.

- RIP my beautiful Doreah. Sigh. Closing them up in the vault and pillaging Xaro's whiz-nit was a cool ending for Dany.

- 3 blasts and that Other was awesome. I was a bit surprised we didn't see any Sam the Slayer action, but only because some comments in a recent interview with the actor who plays him made it seem that way.

Javier Bardem as The Red Viper

Oded Fehr as Oberyn.

really? after ruling for 300 years? Well, crackclaw can be counted on and the lannisters are hashing it so badly - and robert was an indifferent king. I can see westerosians going right back to targs.

there was no sitting king bc lannisters killed him and his grandchildren - except the child that Robert killed - the others had to run away. robert was certainly thinking of being re-usurped - suspecting a targ return - and if L+R+J is accurate that explains the incredibly confidential and difficult secret Lyanna wanted him to keep.

Eddard could also have grabbed it - if Jaime had been older and wiser he might have kept it. Pycelle was in on the lannister plot s well - too bad no one told jaime.

Robert's claim was that he reached the throne that Eddard was holding for him - the king was dead and his heir was dead and everyone else had run or been killed.

We have been told the female line targ relationship was an excuse.

You're correct on all points, but it changes nothing. My point was that, after such a long time has passed, it's hardly accurate to think of Robert as a usurper. He's been king for nearly 2 decades; there are children who have been born and are nearing adulthood who only know the Targs from stories. The point also remains that Robert didn't rebel in order to usurp power; that was a by-product. Yes, the fact his grandmother was a Targ was used as an excuse to legitimize his crown, but that doesn't change the fact that the rebellion occurred for other reasons, not with the express goal of putting Robert on the throne. That was decided after. That whole idea was, essentially, a fantasy cooked-up in Viserys' head.

GOT's ratings are excellent, we don't need to worry (yet). It is doing better than Boardwalk Empire, which is is equally expensive. True Blood does much better, and is cheaper, but that show is a weird spike in their ratings. HBO does not carry about initial viewings like normal networks because they do not pay for their shows with ads. Whether you watched the show at Sunday, 9pm or Tuesday 4am (on HBO Go), you are paying for an HBO subscription, which is how they make money.

Exactly. Also, granted it's on Showtime and they have fewer subscribers than HBO (but they are their closest competitor), but The Borgias is considered a hit over there with less than a seventh of GoT's average viewership, and it is not cheap to make either, being a period-drama versus something like Weeds.

... but on the other hand, Robert was usurper. His kingly line is not established and so even though Stannis is Robert's true heir, I don't complitely accept him as rightful king...

After well over a decade of no Targs in Westeros, their claim is practically non-existent. They've effectively lost the right to the kingship.

Richard the Lionheart remained King of England when he disappeared on his Middle East adventures only because he left his irascible mother Eleanor of Acquitaine, and, even more importantly, William Marshall (largely considered the greatest knight in history and so influential that, after he was gone, his name became the official title of his successors -- Lord Marshal of England) in charge of things. Otherwise, some enterprising distant cousin with powerful friends would've taken his throne.

If Dany reclaims Westeros, it'll be as a conqueror. None of that will matter if she wins, though. Just like after Robert's Rebellion, she'll be touted as the "rightful" ruler if she's victorious (but the same people who say that would not be so nice if she was beaten).

We sometimes forget that Robert didn't seize his throne. Not technically. Gaining power wasn't the reason for the rebellion. They rebelled to oust a mad tyrant who had killed both Ned's father and brother and whose son (in their view, at least) had kidnapped Robert's betrothed. Lord Arryn called-up his banners because King Aerys demanded he send him Ned and Robert's heads; they were his wards and surrogate sons, and so he defied his king and rebelled rather than see them dead.

Robert was crowned only after they'd won and there was no sitting king, because his claim was better than anyone else's, his grandmother having been one of the daughters of King Aegon V -- thus he had royal blood through the female line.

Good to know I guess my friend didn't know what he was talking about when he told me that then. I did read somewhere that it was doing better than Sopranos which is impressive.

It's averaging more viewers than The Sopranos did in their 1st season when looking at it by averages. Later seasons blew GoT's numbers out of the water, though (first run live-airing ratings, that is), but that's to be expected. A mob show will always draw a more diverse audience than the fantasy genre. When you factor in GoT's numbers from HBOGo, On Demand, and repeat airings our numbers look closer to Sopranos-esque ratings... but there was no such thing as HBOGo back then and On Demand was very new and not at all in widespread use. Therefore, it's difficult to make such a comparison.

My understanding was HBO signed GoT for three seasons based off the pilot episode. So the budget was set in writing before any ratings were accumulated other than test screenings and such. So the deal is the deal if you know what I'm saying but future seasons will depend on the ratings heavily. I think HBO knows they have a show that is tuff to watch only once so there ON Demand is blowing up the replays and they know it. Its probably working wonders for bringing along HBOGo as well.

No. They greenlit season 2 after the pilot aired, then greenlit season 3 after several of this season's episodes aired. HBO has never, to my knowledge greenlit 2 seasons at once of any show, and likely never will. Season 2 also got an increased budget based off of the success of season 1... which has payed off in spades; seasons 2's lowest-rated episode had more viewers than the highest-rate episode from season 1. Taken as an average of each week, season 2 has seen an increase of over 1.2 million viewers over the 1st season, which was already considered a big success.

So take it to the next step. Why wasn't Stannis Lord at Storms End? Answer: see what you quoted

You're hopelessly deluded, and I'm starting to think you're just here as a troll. Stannis wasn't Lord of Storms End because Robert was a prick who repayed his loyalty by insulting him. Robert never loved either of his brothers, but, at the time, Renly was young, and Robert had no idea he would eventually grow into a man who cared more about fancy clothes and throwing masquerade balls than whoring, and drinking, and warring. Otherwise, he would've shunned him too, probably.

Being nice is a pathetic prerequisite to have for a King.

Also, this discussion should probably have it's own thread.

It was Stannis's choice to put himself at the time up against Renlys army of which he can't defeat.

That's another misconception. Stannis chose nothing. He *IS* King. Not fighting to secure that claim over all the usurpers running around would be failing in his duty; that's why he can't just step aside.

Stannis wasn't Lord of Storm's End and all the bannerman don't follow him because he is a miserable S.O.B that can't get along with anyone.

Renly was Lord of Storm's End and so they owed him their fealty... but Renly owed his fealty to Stannis as the head of his house. That's why Stannis followed Robert's lead when he rebelled, even though he agonized over it because he knew the Targs were the rightful kings, and that's why Renly was honor-bound to follow Stannis' lead.

He did choose "to not use that power at his command" Melisandre he left out of the battle at KL. All his bannerman did get slaughtered what did you think happened when all that Wildfire blew. You are being kinda a prick about facts when you are one who is contradicting yourself. The FACTS are he lead everyone to their death. I'm not quite sure how you could see it any other way.

There's quite a big difference between people dying in a pitched battle, trying and very nearly succeeding to take a walled-city versus if Stannis had thrown his pitifully small force against Renly's huge host, trying to beat him conventionally. That dog won't hunt, dude. All of the Stormlords owed their allegiance to Renly who, in turn, owed his to Stannis as the elder brother and thus the leader of House Baratheon. The Tyrells, technically, should've stayed loyal to Joffrey if not Stannis. Loras, being daddy Mace's favorite, however, convinced him to back lover boy Renly instead. People also seem to be missing the fact that, from their standpoint, it was always about the Tyrells gaining power. Renly would have been a puppet-King, at best. The Tyrells are very good at the game.

I love Stannis and always will, even if GRRM kills him or returns him to a dark place. I won't root for him if the latter occurs, obviously, but I'll grieve for what might have been. Stannis, in his heart-of-hearts, is a soldier doing what he believes is his duty under every law of Westeros. He doesn't want to be King; he *IS* King, and, in his eyes, failing to fight for what is his is tantamount to not doing his duty -- an idea so alien to everything he is that he doesn't even consider it. True, he has no real proof that Cersei's children are what they are, but he knows it to be true; and so duty requires he act upon it, proof be damned.

Using Melisandre's magic to kill Renly was a necessity, because Renly commanded the larger force -- a force that Stannis both required in order to take the Iron Throne and should've been his by rights in the first place. They were all rebels and the only reason he forgave any of them was, again, by necessity.

In all honesty, the only thing that I imagine could make Stannis a poor King would be his past ideas of outlawing whoring and gambling. In every other way, he would be an awesome King who would deal justly with every person and issue on their own merits.