King Tommen Posted April 8, 2014 Share Posted April 8, 2014 Some people have such specific complaints, it honestly baffles me. Was there really that strong of a push from the ASOIAF fanbase to have the Thenn's depicted as 100% accurate on the show? Where did this come from? I feel like sometimes people just make up things to get upset about because they see something that's different than the novels and then have to retroactively go back to find a reason to be offended by it. Based on the sheer number of cuts to the overall story that have to be made, we're pretty damn lucky that the Thenns even appear at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hippocras Posted April 8, 2014 Share Posted April 8, 2014 The Thenn's role right now is to be the scariest wildling yet. Then later, when they come past the wall, they will be the biggest pain in Jon's ass aside from Thorne and Marsh.Then he will manage to civilize them somewhat, and their reward for good behaviour will be Alys Karstark, whose story may be merged with Jeyne Poole. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WTFSalami Posted April 8, 2014 Share Posted April 8, 2014 Some people have such specific complaints, it honestly baffles me. Was there really that strong of a push from the ASOIAF fanbase to have the Thenn's depicted as 100% accurate on the show? Where did this come from? I feel like sometimes people just make up things to get upset about because they see something that's different than the novels and then have to retroactively go back to find a reason to be offended by it. Based on the sheer number of cuts to the overall story that have to be made, we're pretty damn lucky that the Thenns even appear at all. The book purists at this point have just begun complaining for the sake of complaining. None of them actually gives a shit that the Thenn's aren't really cannibals, just that it's not exactly the same as the book so it's just one more thing for everyone to moan about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sam with Hooters Posted April 8, 2014 Share Posted April 8, 2014 Anderly wrote about the flaying Boltons, frog-eating Reeds, and rapist Umbers.You're putting these on the same moral plane? Seriously? You're definitely not from Cajun country, are you? Frog legs and lizard-lion on quite a few menus there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chebyshov Posted April 8, 2014 Share Posted April 8, 2014 Anderly wrote about the flaying Boltons, frog-eating Reeds, and rapist Umbers.You're putting these on the same moral plane? Seriously? You're definitely not from Cajun country, are you? Frog legs and lizard-lion on quite a few menus there. The Reeds was a silly point, but there's something to be said for the Boltons and Umbers. Not to mention I think the Skags are technically of the North, even if disconnected from the mainland. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kasporio Posted April 8, 2014 Share Posted April 8, 2014 IMO i dont really give a fu.. about the thenns are true to the books. But cannibalism is supposed to be practiced in a ritual way. You eat the heart, or liver, it depends, of a slain ennemy. It's supposed to give the consumer the strength of his lsain foe, and, in a way, to honour the fallen. In the tv, we see the Magnar bragging about how people taste better south of the wall, o my gawd, like it's a freaking all you can eat buffet. If thenns are supposed to be the most civilised wildlings, its because they had enough agricultural means and cultivable lands to allow a large population to thrive, which would eventually allow them to unite into one tribe, instead of warring at each others. The fact tv thenns are all cannibals show they're brutish savages, they should carry some bear pelt and wooden clubs.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WTFSalami Posted April 8, 2014 Share Posted April 8, 2014 These aren't ALL the Thenns that we see in this episode though, it's just a small group of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kasporio Posted April 8, 2014 Share Posted April 8, 2014 Ok, just saying the tv show depicts the free folk as barely able to cross the wall and invade Westeros. In the books, its made clear wildling raiders often cross the wall, Jarl, while not twenty, crossed the wall with the weeper in the past.They know how many NW garrisons are still active, and roughly, how many black brothers will defend it. In season 3, they was very unsure of it, while in the books, they were able to tell Jon was lying by overestimated the watch manpower.So, the scenarists just dont bother, or its to make clear to the viewer who never read the book... hey, wildlings are douchebags, you're expecting an homeric battle with 300 hundred mamoth, 50000 raiders against hundreds of cooks and stewards?May not happen. The watch will win anyway cuz...WL are creepy.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Old Tongue Posted April 8, 2014 Share Posted April 8, 2014 Agreed. There's still plenty of time to further the dynamic of the wildlings throughout the season, especially if Jon does go over to "negotiate" with Mance.And then we'll see if the show will feature Val. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cold Crashing Waves Posted April 8, 2014 Share Posted April 8, 2014 The book purists at this point have just begun complaining for the sake of complaining. None of them actually gives a shit that the Thenn's aren't really cannibals, just that it's not exactly the same as the book so it's just one more thing for everyone to moan about. This exactly. No one cares about the Thenns. They barely have a presence in the books to begin with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
~DarkHorse~ Posted April 8, 2014 Share Posted April 8, 2014 I'm not bothered, as long as too much cannibalism prior to certain pies...doesn't take away from the impact of said pies! :devil: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ilúvatar Posted April 9, 2014 Share Posted April 9, 2014 I don't like the change. It seems like the show producers are trying too hard to have clearly identifiable (bald) evil baddies in the upcoming battle. What makes the wildlings interesting is the fact that they're not just a bunch of evil savages trying to get beyond the Wall so they can eat people. The audience is supposed to be a bit unsure who to root for. I feel like sometimes people just make up things to get upset about because they see something that's different than the novels and then have to retroactively go back to find a reason to be offended by it.I disagree. If book fans get upset about any kind of change, then why is Tywin Lannister widely regarded as one of the best portayals in the TV adaptation? Charles Dance doesn't really look like book Tywin at all, and he sure as hell doesn't spend time with Arya in Harrenhal. Book fans can accept and even appreciate significant changes when they make sense and actually improve upon the books. Turning the Thenns into evil cannibals doesn't improve anything. It just seems like some network executive in a suit has presented a bunch of pie charts and said that ratings will be higher if there are some obvious baddies involved in the Battle of Castle Black, because audiences are so stupid that they get all flustered and angry when they don't know who to root for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dtones520 Posted April 9, 2014 Share Posted April 9, 2014 I think it's mostly that they wanted to show how different Wildling clans are. Most of the Wildlings we have seen so far are relatively normal people who are just more hardened from living in shitty conditions for their whole lives. We know there are tons of different Wildlings out there from the Hornfoots to the Thenns and certain clans are much more savage than the others. The Thenns are tv viewers avenue to the savagery of some of the Wildling clans. And just because they are portrayed as cannibals doesn't mean they can't have a structured society with laws and a Lord/god. It just means you eat your enemy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dtones520 Posted April 9, 2014 Share Posted April 9, 2014 I don't like the change. It seems like the show producers are trying too hard to have clearly identifiable (bald) evil baddies in the upcoming battle. What makes the wildlings interesting is the fact that they're not just a bunch of evil savages trying to get beyond the Wall so they can eat people. The audience is supposed to be a bit unsure who to root for. I disagree. If book fans get upset about any kind of change, then why is Tywin Lannister widely regarded as one of the best portayals in the TV adaptation? Charles Dance doesn't really look like book Tywin at all, and he sure as hell doesn't spend time with Arya in Harrenhal. Book fans can accept and even appreciate significant changes when they make sense and actually improve upon the books. Turning the Thenns into evil cannibals doesn't improve anything. It just seems like some network executive in a suit has presented a bunch of pie charts and said that ratings will be higher if there are some obvious baddies involved in the Battle of Castle Black, because audiences are so stupid that they get all flustered and angry when they don't know who to root for.There are Wildlings they can root for in Tormund and Ygritte and Mance. There are some pretty awful Wildlings in the books too that no one would root for, the Weeper and Lord of Bones for example. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
averde Posted April 9, 2014 Author Share Posted April 9, 2014 Some people have such specific complaints, it honestly baffles me. Was there really that strong of a push from the ASOIAF fanbase to have the Thenn's depicted as 100% accurate on the show? Where did this come from? I feel like sometimes people just make up things to get upset about because they see something that's different than the novels and then have to retroactively go back to find a reason to be offended by it. Based on the sheer number of cuts to the overall story that have to be made, we're pretty damn lucky that the Thenns even appear at all.I don't often have problems with changes at all I just felt the Thenns, especially later on in the story, are one the most important Wildling groups. They are the first house "accepted" into the north and made a noble house, and this is mainly because of their advanced culture over the other Wildlings (historically similar to the Gaul of Roman times). By making the Thenn mindless cannibals (there's no way to make cannibals seem okay in anyway) either the whole Wildlings joining the North and House Thenn thing gets dropped (which I see as really sad) or they replace them with another Wildling clan that is more modern, but if they did that why not just make the guys we just met a different tribe and keep the Thenn for that later intro. It just seemed like an unnecessary change that didn't really add much besides some kind of tribal islander looking guys. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lady Winter Rose Posted April 9, 2014 Share Posted April 9, 2014 I don't often have problems with changes at all I just felt the Thenns, especially later on in the story, are one the most important Wildling groups. They are the first house "accepted" into the north and made a noble house, and this is mainly because of their advanced culture over the other Wildlings (historically similar to the Gaul of Roman times).By making the Thenn mindless cannibals (there's no way to make cannibals seem okay in anyway) either the whole Wildlings joining the North and House Thenn thing gets dropped (which I see as really sad) or they replace them with another Wildling clan that is more modern, but if they did that why not just make the guys we just met a different tribe and keep the Thenn for that later intro. It just seemed like an unnecessary change that didn't really add much besides some kind of tribal islander looking guys. I don't see any reason why they would they make Alys marry Thenn. I also don't see why would they cast Alys, but they are obviously including Thenns, then why not Alys. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Tommen Posted April 9, 2014 Share Posted April 9, 2014 I don't often have problems with changes at all I just felt the Thenns, especially later on in the story, are one the most important Wildling groups. They are the first house "accepted" into the north and made a noble house, and this is mainly because of their advanced culture over the other Wildlings (historically similar to the Gaul of Roman times).By making the Thenn mindless cannibals (there's no way to make cannibals seem okay in anyway) either the whole Wildlings joining the North and House Thenn thing gets dropped (which I see as really sad) or they replace them with another Wildling clan that is more modern, but if they did that why not just make the guys we just met a different tribe and keep the Thenn for that later intro. It just seemed like an unnecessary change that didn't really add much besides some kind of tribal islander looking guys. They wanted the attack on the Wall to include Wildlings who were formidable, scary warriors and who had a bit of savagery to them. All this garbage about how the Thenns were "accepted" by Jon because of their advanced culture is some serious extrapolation and it sure as hell isn't going to be something that the show deals with.They included the Thenns so they could provide an element of danger to the battle in E9. Based on the decisions they've made in the past around consolidating characters and storylines, I will be absolutely shocked if they bother with anything after that. Your first hint is that they didn't bother casting Sigorn, only Styr (who's going to be killed). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
averde Posted April 9, 2014 Author Share Posted April 9, 2014 They wanted the attack on the Wall to include Wildlings who were formidable, scary warriors and who had a bit of savagery to them. All this garbage about how the Thenns were "accepted" by Jon because of their advanced culture is some serious extrapolation and it sure as hell isn't going to be something that the show deals with.They included the Thenns so they could provide an element of danger to the battle in E9. Based on the decisions they've made in the past around consolidating characters and storylines, I will be absolutely shocked if they bother with anything after that. Your first hint is that they didn't bother casting Sigorn, only Styr (who's going to be killed). The Thenns have lords and laws ... They mine tin and copper for bronze, forge their own arms and armor instead of stealing it. A proud folk, and brave.[4] - Jon Snow Because they have laws and lords in their valley, some consider the Thenns more sophisticated than other free folk and closer to the people south of the Wall. - ASOIAF Wiki Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Le Cygne Posted April 9, 2014 Share Posted April 9, 2014 They could have showed divide between the wildlings better and the whole 'you should eat crow' and close up of the arm was so naff, i'm sorry. It really was. Why did they go there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Khal Porno Posted April 9, 2014 Share Posted April 9, 2014 The Thenns have lords and laws ... They mine tin and copper for bronze, forge their own arms and armor instead of stealing it. A proud folk, and brave.[4] - Jon SnowBecause they have laws and lords in their valley, some consider the Thenns more sophisticated than other free folk and closer to the people south of the Wall. - ASOIAF WikiGood thing we have the books to go back and read for all that stuff, and it will always be there no matter what happens on the show. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.