Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Ran

[Book Spoilers] EP404 Discussion

Recommended Posts

I'm really annoyed with this constant response to the valid criticism that the show seems to use rape scenes for sensation. No one here has said " those NW men woldn't rape" They just are annoyed with having to see it on the screen. We saw a guy drinking from Mormont's school while a bruised and battered woman sat next to him. Was anyone at all confused by what these guys were doing? What that ten seconds of "rape them til they're dead" and boobs flapping necessary to the plot? Also, apparently men being raped is something that occurs in this world but for some reason we only see it threatened...wonder why?

People can legitimately be annoyed by the fact that with other things that are cut there always seems to be enough time for the rape scenes so maybe for once one of you guys can stop acting like these people are too stupid to understand the world and give a cognizant argument why that scene added something we didn't already know and understand about the show for once?

I hate to bring this up again, but I couldn't agree more with your statement.

I know the show has addressed rape before in the context of war, Dothraki vs the Lhazareen for example. It didn't feel the need to declare they were going to rape them until they died and have naked and battered women actively being raped as part of the scenery.

This isn't rape for story purposes, character development, or even establishing the type of setting the characters exist in. It seems like a way to get the right number of boobs on the screen per episode. Additionally the stuff at Craster's came in the wake of an episode where the show decided to once again turn consensual sex into non in an incredibly offensive and stupid way. Now they claim, apparently, that they didn't realize it was a rape scene? I don't think people would be near so upset this week if last week's episode hadn't been so bad.

And if the writers are adding this nonsense in, and sacrificing actual story with Coldhands or Strong Belwas, it is not only distasteful but bad storytelling.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can someone remind me if Thorne was so hatefull of Jon Snow in the books?

In the show it seems like he hates Snow so much he'd rather do things that are not in the best interest of the Wall, just to get at Jon. He doesn't want him (arguably the best swordsman at the Wall, alongside himself and now Locke) to train recruits because he's a steward. And he'd rather see Jon get killed than keeping one of the best fighters alive. Even going to far as to trying to get Jon's raid at Crasters to fail, risking the lives of Snow and anyone who might join him (considering he'd hoped nobody, or only 1 or 2 or so would) and also risking the lives of everyone at the Wall and in the North.

Hell, it seems like he would rather kill Snow than see him succeed, even if Jon's succes is for the best of the Wall. In 4x2 it seemed like genuine mistrust, now it's just blatant hate.

However, one thing that I did notice was that he did allow him to take Locke. He could have just said: "no, he's not ready to take his vows" to screw with Jon Snow.

He is more hateful and far more cunning in the books. He is the mastermind behind Slynt and Bowen. Slynt was dumb as a stump and I don't like it how the TV show changed his character into an intelligent man, seemingly counselling Thorne.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, I have no doubt Slynt bragged about his role in capturing the "traitor" Ned Stark. Just like he brags about his time as Commander of the Gold Cloaks and the fact he was Lord of Harrenhall, though he never stepped foot in it.

In Storm, when Jon is judged, he says that Ned died as a traitor. Before Jon attacks Thorne. I think Jon figured out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is nothing interesting about Coldhands. He is just a meatsuit Bloodraven uses.

Well, a golem. I think so too. His arc is over.

And here is why I think CH is only a golem:

The problem with Coldhands is that he does not seem to have a unique sentence of his own. Read all his words as Bloodraven's words and things will not change a bit. In fact, it is much more sensible that way for me.

“Who sent you? Who is this three-eyed crow?”

A friend. Dreamer, wizard, call him what you will. The last green-seer.”

"Who are you?"

"A friend," said Maynard Plumm.

I think Coldhands is just a meat suit Bloodraven uses by sorcery, just like Maynard Plumm was a glamour he used back then.

ETA:

By the way, TV show Jon showed no sign of being a warg yet. Same goes for Arya. I think if Jon meets Bran, he might open his third eye like he did in the books.

Edited by Paper Waver

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Locke was at the Dreadfort with Ramsay and Roose in episode two, where Roose promised him lands if he is able to find and dispose of the two remaining Stark children. Ramsay puts it out there that he might want to take care of Jon Snow as well just in case.

Ah yes, that's right. Thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hate to bring this up again, but I couldn't agree more with your statement.

I know the show has addressed rape before in the context of war, Dothraki vs the Lhazareen for example. It didn't feel the need to declare they were going to rape them until they died and have naked and battered women actively being raped as part of the scenery.

This isn't rape for story purposes, character development, or even establishing the type of setting the characters exist in. It seems like a way to get the right number of boobs on the screen per episode. Additionally the stuff at Craster's came in the wake of an episode where the show decided to once again turn consensual sex into non in an incredibly offensive and stupid way. Now they claim, apparently, that they didn't realize it was a rape scene? I don't think people would be near so upset this week if last week's episode hadn't been so bad.

And if the writers are adding this nonsense in, and sacrificing actual story with Coldhands or Strong Belwas, it is not only distasteful but bad storytelling.

:agree: exactly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As distasteful as the mutineer's rape scene was, it does get them over as antagonists in a major way. I want to see Jon and his crew kill them all SO bad right now. I imagine every show fan on the planet suddenly has those guys at the top of their GOT hit list.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So watching this last night, everything north of the wall was WTF!?



But then I thought what if they are just showing that to bring more magic/fantasy into the show, as atm it's pretty low fantasy and I'm guessing they're going to introduce Un-Cat soon.



In the current season it would be a pretty big contrast bringing an un-dead character without reminding people of the others.



I'm hoping that scene at the very end is based in the future and that it's just a glimpse/flash forward as it wouldn't make much sense that "Coldhands" could trek that far in a few hours and the baby at the end looked a few months older than the new born left in the snow.






The rape scene didn't bother me, I would of thought it more odd if they were all just sat round having a chat.


Edited by The Singer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, just finished watching the episode. As a book reader, this was the first time I've ever scratched my head, thinking WTF?!



The Land of Always Winter... leaving aside that the Others look wrong (too skeletal, and not elf-like enough for my tastes), I wonder if there's sort of a magical cloning going on with the baby, followed by speed growth. A Wight Baby is no use to anyone, and an Other Baby is no use unless it reaches full size in a hurry. Or perhaps the Others are sacrificing the baby again to some Higher Entity of their own? The latter is less likely, since it'd be too convoluted (the Others become mere proxies), and I think the blue eyed ending indicates that the baby has become one of Them.



The Other fortress had battlements... so the Others do archery as well as sword-fighting.



Also, Bran's balls have dropped.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What's weird to me is that by asking him to get volunteers they put him into a leadership position. If they had just ordered it, and sent some other people, the men looking to Jon as a leader wouldn't have happened. I actually thought it was a big mistake for their side.

Yeah he could die but if he comes back triumphant and the men already follow him? Very bad.

it puts him in a leadership position, but for what Thorne thinks will either be a suicide mission or a miserable failure. If it's the former, he wins all around, if it's the latter he wins from the leadership perspective.

I want to see how they play it out, but the fact that they are bringing up Jon as a potential for LC when there are other leaders far in front of him still feels hamfisted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pushing Jon as LC at this point is a significant improvement on the book. Book!Jon sits in his cell and mopes (not even bothering to vote), while others engineer his rise to power. TV!Jon actually has motivations and goals.



However, what we have now at the Wall is:



- Raiders to the South, who are coming North.


- Mance's army proper, which is coming South.


- The mutineers at Crasters (with Bran, et al).



Jon needs to be the one to deal with the Southern threat. Thus he cannot go North to Crasters. On the other hand, if Thorne and Slynt are around to see the Southern attack, they can't very well run with the Jon's a Wilding stitch-up. I think we're looking at more divergences down the road...


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not nitpicking here. Even if the changes don't break the story (and I'm not sayin they absolutley will) it is a dangerous precedent to set. It has never been this blatant in the show before. The Martin quote I posted way back on page 37 or around there is absolutely relevant. Once you open that door, it will be hard to close . . . how can it not be hard to close, you've spun the chain of events down different paths.

The idea that this is a dangerous precedent is laughable. HBO owns the rights to the television adaptation of A Song of Ice & Fire. Therefore, they (and by extension, the showrunners) are free to make any changes that they deem necessary or acceptable. There is no precedent to speak of. There is simply the TV version of the story and the book version. There is no legal reason they have to be the same.

And again, the Martin quote you posted is totally irrelevant because Martin himself opened this door by signing the contract for the adaptation in the first place. He gave the showrunners permission to take his work and alter it. In fact, he has had numerous interviews where he talks about the realities of adaptations, and how changes are necessary for various reasons. He himself has worked in the television industry.

This is not fan fiction. This is a legally sanctioned adaptation, and more importantly, it's an adaptation with no obligations to be totally faithful to the source material.

And again, that's not me saying that I agree with all the changes. It's me saying that calling changes that you don't like fan fiction is ignorant of the realities here. HBO owns the television rights to this story. Therefore, the story in the television show is whatever they say it is. You may not always agree with their changes (as I don't), but that doesn't make them fan fiction, and it doesn't set any sort of precedent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Most of my friends and co workers loved the episode and never even opened one of the books. They're quite exited at the possibility of Jon and Bran meeting.



Let's face it, if you post here odds are you read the books. So a lot of people have a double standard on anything that's changed.



Let's be frank, GRRM has done very little with Bran once he reaches the other side of The Wall. He only had 3 chapters in total. I think most people complaining about the changes are pretty much complaining that D & D didn't just ignore Bran and the way George did for most of A Dance with Dragons.



You can't just ignore your main characters on a tv series for an entire season or in Bran's case it would have to be two seasons.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Regarding Bran's arc, people seem to be upset that they aren't taking an opportunity to showcase the histories and lore of Westeros this season. They actually have an entire season for Bran to catch up to everyone else in Season 5 where it would make much more sense for he and Bloodraven to do a little tree investigation. There is honestly zero material for Bran between what will happen to him by S4 end and S5 end, so that seems like a likely time.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, just finished watching the episode. As a book reader, this was the first time I've ever scratched my head, thinking WTF?!

The Land of Always Winter... leaving aside that the Others look wrong (too skeletal, and not elf-like enough for my tastes), I wonder if there's sort of a magical cloning going on with the baby, followed by speed growth. A Wight Baby is no use to anyone, and an Other Baby is no use unless it reaches full size in a hurry. Or perhaps the Others are sacrificing the baby again to some Higher Entity of their own? The latter is less likely, since it'd be too convoluted (the Others become mere proxies), and I think the blue eyed ending indicates that the baby has become one of Them.

The Other fortress had battlements... so the Others do archery as well as sword-fighting.

Also, Bran's balls have dropped.

:lmao:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
R+L=J isn't a crackpot theory, it's the truth. It is known.

I still deny this theory, I just think the story would be ruined if this were true. I'm just keep on believing that Ned impregnated Ashara just to show that Ned has flaws too. :cool4:

I imagine every show fan on the planet suddenly has those guys at the top of their GOT hit list.

Not me, I want Karl-fucking Tanner of Jean Alley to live! Don't know why people are going on with the rape in the background, it showed the atmosphere in Craster's keep, the mutineers don't have any qualms about raping. That's why there weren't any focus on the rape, to show that this is their daily routine and they're not making a big deal out of it since they've probably been doing this for weeks?months?

Raper's raping? Seems too far-fetched.

That ending man. :drool:

My reaction to the ending was, "Oh, the episode is going to end with the WW taking the baby, I guess it's a good way to remind the unsullied that the WW are still a looming threat. Wait what? There's still more? Hmmm ok, more WW travelling with the baby,,..... WAIT WTF? IS THAT THE LAND OF ALWAYS WINTER? DARTH MAUL? WHITE WALKERS COME FROM BABIES?"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I haven't read the entire discussion yet, but I thought it would be a few days until I was able to catch up, so forgive me if someone has already mentioned it... But did Jaime quote Jon? With the "they say the best swords have names"? That's exactly what he says to Arya when he gives her needle, isn't it?


I was just thinking if the writers were intentionally drawing a parallel, and if they were, what could it mean....


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

on one of the HBO sites the other who turns the baby is listed as the "nights king", you can still find this information on reddit as HBO took it down not long after putting it up.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×