Craster's: The Definition of Filler

[Duckface]

Yes, yes, I totally see how making new scenes at Craster's with all Hollywood stereotypes is a good thing that developes characters. Seriously, a villain, who doesn't rape&murder but just talks until Night's Watch arrives. Then another villain instead of killing Bran takes him somewhere and gets killed. Such a strong character Jon has become by killing some scum and Bran by warging Hodor. Now we know that he can warg into Hodor, totally haven't seen it in S3.

[Bael's Bastard]

I actually thought that Bran having to choose while looking at his brother for the first time in years made it all the more powerful. I felt bad for both Hodor and Bran after killing Locke. Not that it didn't have to be done, but it was pretty heavy. I would expect Craster's wives to end up with the Free Folk Mance is gathering, and I imagine the one in the scene with Jon at the end will be showing back up again.

[SoManyVows]

Can someone tell me why Lcke wouldn't just slit their throats when they were all tied up? Seemed a bit cartoon villainish... "I'm here to kill you, but first I must delay and take you over here by which you may devise a way to thwart me."

Two very simple explanations:

1) Roose Bolton ordered Locke to hunt down both Stark boys. That means Bran AND Rickon. Locke was successfully able to track down Bran, but once he saw that Rickon wasn't with him, he had two options - blindly traverse the entire goddamn expanse of the North looking for one kid, or torture that information out of Bran. Forcing Bran to give up his brother was going to take time - time that Locke didn't have during the attack. Much easier for him to carry Bran a safe distance away from the Keep so that he could interrogate him without risking discovery.

2) In order to grant Locke his reward of "a thousand acres and a holdfast", a practical man like Roose Bolton would probably require proof of death. That could mean Bran's body, his head, or some other token. The entire reason that Locke was sent to find Bran and Rickon in the first place is that Theon let them slip through his fingers, then let Dagmer kill two random orphans, burn their bodies, and pass them off as the Stark boys. Roose isn't going to fall for the same trick twice. Had Locke failed to track down Bran and Rickon, it would be all too easy for him to show up at the Dreadfort and say "Yeah, of course I killed them! Give me my reward now!" Then the Stark boys turn up alive later, and the Boltons have a new crisis to deal with.

I grant you that they could have done a better job explaining Locke's motivations onscreen. But I think that his logic was sound based on what he knew at the time. Obviously, he wasn't counting on Bran being able to warg into Hodor and snap his neck. ;)

I hate the term "filler". The notion that every single moment and scene has to drive the plot forward is nonsense. We need to devote time to character development, to put things in perspective, to ponder into the current situation, ... A good story is based on having the right balance between "plot advacement" and "plot sandstill", and if you don't have the later, it suffers.

:agree: Thank you for this. "Filler" is such a freaking obnoxious term. It just reeks of entitlement. More than perhaps any other series in the history of television, Game of Thrones has spoiled its viewers when it comes to what we should expect in terms of plot twists and general exhilaration on a week-to-week basis. Every television series in the history of the medium has devoted a significant portion of the episodes comprising the middle section of its season towards setting up future developments and developing its characters. This is to be expected, and yet when it comes to Game of Thrones, people are all too eager to label that natural development with that dreaded, entirely-too-lazy label, “filler”. In tonight’s episode, we got numerous significant developments and entertaining scenes ... including Craster's keep, for the reasons that many others have already stated. Yet the consensus people are leaping to Oh, it was all filler! Nothing really happened! Why did they change it from the book ... where even less happens?

That’s some utter nonsense. I watched Mad Men immediately following Game of Thrones and was treated to a rich hour wherein, plot-wise, “nothing happened”. Except, you know, character development. Tonight’s episode of Game of Thrones featured that in spades, plus a significant amount of kick-ass action sequences. And people still aren’t happy. That speaks to what a high bar that this show has set.

[Starksmustwin]

You're asking why? The answer is simple. If they wouldn't have done it then Jon, Bran and the rest would have absolutely no screen time for almost the entire season, they didn't want to rush the story too much so they invented those scenes, simple.

And they weren't bad scenes.

Agreed. They gave Jon and Bran something to do that didn't alter anything else that's going to happen down the line. very well done and very enjoyable as well.

[Haus of Targaryen]

In regards to Locke I feel like there was no way they could have let him go free after his attempt to kidnap Bran however, I think I would have liked to see him escape and somehow make it back to Roose unsuccessful. Locke then explains that because of unforseen and uncontrollable circumstances (maybe white walkers, dire wolves, too many men to fight) that he was unable to capture Bran but knows where he's headed. Roose seems understanding but now Locke is officially a deserter of the Night's Watch and uses this pretense to get rid of him either executing him or giving him to Ramsey to play with. It'll just show another side to Roose's coldness that he would kill his own men but w/e.

It was a very typical turn out I mean I knew Bran would escape and continue north, I knew Jon & Co. would save the day and the direwolves would be freed (please explain to me how you shove a direwolf into a cage anyway?) and I was almost certain there would be no Stark Bros. reunion but I thought D&D would've found more a of clever way to do it. Suffice to say I was very unsatisfied. It was actually more satisfying seeing them get into this predicament then out of it. Jojen totally saved this sequence w/all his foreshadowing.

When is the little back door raid going to happen where Jon finds Ygritte sprawled out across the snow and she says to him "We should've stayed in that cave" and her final "You know nothing" I figure they're going to hang on to Rose Leslie for as long as possible but she has to die.

I assume that Jon won't be imprisoned? And I also assume, considering the big battle is Ep.9, that they're going to treat the vote like it's NBD and Jon will pretty much win by default based on his courage, bravery, and leadership skills he showed during the battle and the moments leading up to it. I bet it'll be over in 123 w/o any doubts that Jon could lose.

[The Prince of Newcastle]

Whole scene has ruined my entire life.

This isn't enough ALL CAPS on the whole internet to express my outrage at this enjoyable bit of vengeance.

I hate D&D/am never watching again/white washing/character assassination

[Starksmustwin]

Two very simple explanations:

1) Roose Bolton ordered Locke to hunt down both Stark boys. That means Bran AND Rickon. Locke was successfully able to track down Bran, but once he saw that Rickon wasn't with him, he had two options - blindly traverse the entire goddamn expanse of the North looking for one kid, or torture that information out of Bran. Forcing Bran to give up his brother was going to take time - time that Locke didn't have during the attack. Much easier for him to carry Bran a safe distance away from the Keep so that he could interrogate him without risking discovery.

2) In order to grant Locke his reward of "a thousand acres and a holdfast", a practical man like Roose Bolton would probably require proof of death. That could mean Bran's body, his head, or some other token. The entire reason that Locke was sent to find Bran and Rickon in the first place is that Theon let them slip through his fingers, then let Dagmer kill two random orphans, burn their bodies, and pass them off as the Stark boys. Roose isn't going to fall for the same trick twice. Had Locke failed to track down Bran and Rickon, it would be all too easy for him to show up at the Dreadfort and say "Yeah, of course I killed them! Give me my reward now!" Then the Stark boys turn up alive later, and the Boltons have a new crisis to deal with.

I grant you that they could have done a better job explaining Locke's motivations onscreen. But I think that his logic was sound based on what he knew at the time. Obviously, he wasn't counting on Bran being able to warg into Hodor and snap his neck. ;)

:agree: Thank you for this. "Filler" is such a freaking obnoxious term. It just reeks of entitlement. More than perhaps any other series in the history of television, Game of Thrones has spoiled its viewers when it comes to what we should expect in terms of plot twists and general exhilaration on a week-to-week basis. Every television series in the history of the medium has devoted a significant portion of the episodes comprising the middle section of its season towards setting up future developments and developing its characters. This is to be expected, and yet when it comes to Game of Thrones, people are all too eager to label that natural development with that dreaded, entirely-too-lazy label, “filler”. In tonight’s episode, we got numerous significant developments and entertaining scenes ... including Craster's keep, for the reasons that many others have already stated. Yet the consensus people are leaping to Oh, it was all filler! Nothing really happened! Why did they change it from the book ... where even less happens?

That’s some utter nonsense. I watched Mad Men immediately following Game of Thrones and was treated to a rich hour wherein, plot-wise, “nothing happened”. Except, you know, character development. Tonight’s episode of Game of Thrones featured that in spades, plus a significant amount of kick-ass action sequences. And people still aren’t happy. That speaks to what a high bar that this show has set.

You're awesome man. Very well said. The people on this board seem to bitch first, think later. Kudos to you!

[Ingelheim]

Two very simple explanations:

1) Roose Bolton ordered Locke to hunt down both Stark boys. That means Bran AND Rickon. Locke was successfully able to track down Bran, but once he saw that Rickon wasn't with him, he had two options - blindly traverse the entire goddamn expanse of the North looking for one kid, or torture that information out of Bran. Forcing Bran to give up his brother was going to take time - time that Locke didn't have during the attack. Much easier for him to carry Bran a safe distance away from the Keep so that he could interrogate him without risking discovery.

2) In order to grant Locke his reward of "a thousand acres and a holdfast", a practical man like Roose Bolton would probably require proof of death. That could mean Bran's body, his head, or some other token. The entire reason that Locke was sent to find Bran and Rickon in the first place is that Theon let them slip through his fingers, then let Dagmer kill two random orphans, burn their bodies, and pass them off as the Stark boys. Roose isn't going to fall for the same trick twice. Had Locke failed to track down Bran and Rickon, it would be all too easy for him to show up at the Dreadfort and say "Yeah, of course I killed them! Give me my reward now!" Then the Stark boys turn up alive later, and the Boltons have a new crisis to deal with.

I grant you that they could have done a better job explaining Locke's motivations onscreen. But I think that his logic was sound based on what he knew at the time. Obviously, he wasn't counting on Bran being able to warg into Hodor and snap his neck. ;)

:agree: Thank you for this. "Filler" is such a freaking obnoxious term. It just reeks of entitlement. More than perhaps any other series in the history of television, Game of Thrones has spoiled its viewers when it comes to what we should expect in terms of plot twists and general exhilaration on a week-to-week basis. Every television series in the history of the medium has devoted a significant portion of the episodes comprising the middle section of its season towards setting up future developments and developing its characters. This is to be expected, and yet when it comes to Game of Thrones, people are all too eager to label that natural development with that dreaded, entirely-too-lazy label, “filler”. In tonight’s episode, we got numerous significant developments and entertaining scenes ... including Craster's keep, for the reasons that many others have already stated. Yet the consensus people are leaping to Oh, it was all filler! Nothing really happened! Why did they change it from the book ... where even less happens?

That’s some utter nonsense. I watched Mad Men immediately following Game of Thrones and was treated to a rich hour wherein, plot-wise, “nothing happened”. Except, you know, character development. Tonight’s episode of Game of Thrones featured that in spades, plus a significant amount of kick-ass action sequences. And people still aren’t happy. That speaks to what a high bar that this show has set.

This. End of this thread. Next.

[Veltigar]

Two very simple explanations:

1) Roose Bolton ordered Locke to hunt down both Stark boys. That means Bran AND Rickon. Locke was successfully able to track down Bran, but once he saw that Rickon wasn't with him, he had two options - blindly traverse the entire goddamn expanse of the North looking for one kid, or torture that information out of Bran. Forcing Bran to give up his brother was going to take time - time that Locke didn't have during the attack. Much easier for him to carry Bran a safe distance away from the Keep so that he could interrogate him without risking discovery.

2) In order to grant Locke his reward of "a thousand acres and a holdfast", a practical man like Roose Bolton would probably require proof of death. That could mean Bran's body, his head, or some other token. The entire reason that Locke was sent to find Bran and Rickon in the first place is that Theon let them slip through his fingers, then let Dagmer kill two random orphans, burn their bodies, and pass them off as the Stark boys. Roose isn't going to fall for the same trick twice. Had Locke failed to track down Bran and Rickon, it would be all too easy for him to show up at the Dreadfort and say "Yeah, of course I killed them! Give me my reward now!" Then the Stark boys turn up alive later, and the Boltons have a new crisis to deal with.

I grant you that they could have done a better job explaining Locke's motivations onscreen. But I think that his logic was sound based on what he knew at the time. Obviously, he wasn't counting on Bran being able to warg into Hodor and snap his neck. ;)

The problem here is... Why did Locke let the other hostages live? I mean they could have told Jon everything and he would be fucked. I understand your reasoning and I thought taking Bran made sense, but no attempt whatsoever to cover his tracks? That's just weird.

[aFeastForDragons]

What a waste of Locke and it made the whole Bran plot pointless. They should have just taken this time to introduce Coldhands.

Karl was awesome. Best actor so far in the show. His expressions and tone of voice just put everyone else to shame. Well maybe not the more seasoned actors like Charles Dance but for a newcomer.

[veto]

yeah i felt that way too once all was said and done , id rather the time spent on fleshing out all the mythos and mysteries they feel the need to leave out , dumbing it down for me , which is understandable , however not at the expense of filler drama .

[aFeastForDragons]

How did Locke survived that long without being subject to Tywin's wrath? Tyrion gets captured and Tywin invades the Riverlands because of their ties to Catalyn.

Yet a Bolton bannerman chops of Jaime's hand and Roose becomes Warden of the North without Tywin looking for any retribution.

[acosta]

I assume that Jon won't be imprisoned? And I also assume, considering the big battle is Ep.9, that they're going to treat the vote like it's NBD and Jon will pretty much win by default based on his courage, bravery, and leadership skills he showed during the battle and the moments leading up to it. I bet it'll be over in 123 w/o any doubts that Jon could lose.

I never felt when reading like Jon could lose. His entire storyline has been pretty well telegraphed from the beginning. The only thing that surprised me was the, you know.

[The King Of Cooked Steak]

They had to filler it up. If they didn't, they'd finish Bran's story in 3 episodes at most. And if they did have something of importance happen to these characters, they would stray too far from the books. It was pretty much a lose-lose situation, so they went with the one they wouldn't lose much with. TBH the "boss-fight" between Jon and Karl was very predictable and I didn't care much for it.

In general, the episode was good. It was a filler episode, but seriously, aren't GRRM's recent books mostly filler too? They're obviously gonna' prepare the battle at Castle Black in a few episodes and the meeting with BR is gonna' happen at episode 7 or 8.

[GHOSTSTARK]

thought it was alright. they needed to spice Brans story up a bit and make it more obvious that Jon is becoming more of a leader in the NW. was pretty cool how Karl almost got Jon but on of the Wives slowed him in time for Jon to get his Mormont justice.

[I'll pay the iron price]

Perhaps Jaime never named Locke?

Maybe he told Tywin that he was captured by a gang of men beaten and then one of them did the deed - citing that he would never recognise the man again?

[Cold Crashing Waves]

How did Locke survived that long without being subject to Tywin's wrath? Tyrion gets captured and Tywin invades the Riverlands because of their ties to Catalyn.

Yet a Bolton bannerman chops of Jaime's hand and Roose becomes Warden of the North without Tywin looking for any retribution.

Jaime most likely never revealed who cut his hand off. He's too proud for it.

[Ravi Seaworth]

I hate the term "filler". The notion that every single moment and scene has to drive the plot forward is nonsense. We need to devote time to character development, to put things in perspective, to ponder into the current situation, ... A good story is based on having the right balance between "plot advacement" and "plot sandstill", and if you don't have the later, it suffers.

Agree. Again, I wonder if some call this filler only because it was not in the books. This is not filler, since it shows many traits of each character, not to mention that it advances Bran's plot in the show. If it were in the books, then people would consider it to be an important scene. Personally, I find it much more interesting to have these larger deviations. Of course, they have to be good deviations, which may not always be the case.

[Korgan]

Those Craster' scenes was good for the show and a way to come back too the book's original plot that DD was messing really bad.

[RhaenysBee]

I won't be popular with this, but the Craster's scenes were well made, had a point and added something to the show (contrary to many other filler scenes).

1. Currently, the show is lacking villains. With Joffrey dead, there aren't really any more Lannisters to hate with Jaime maimed and Cersei so over-humanized and Charles Dance/Tywin being awesome. There's Ramsay, but we haven't seen Ramsay for episodes plus the Theon torture was the villain lead of the previous season, they can't play that card again for an entire episode. There are the Thenns, but one little scene about big bad guys attacking a village won't make you start hate the wildlings with Jon being best pals with them last season and even making out with Ygritte. But the audience needs somebody to hate. It's one thing to follow the Everybody's Gray guide line in a book and an entirely different on a tv show. And so, to be it seems absolutely logical and well based to make the Craster's black brothers the temporary bad guys.

2. Rooting them out is essential to building up Jon's future NW career as well.

3. Much more interesting for Wall scenes than listening to Sam raving about Gilly's safety while they are waiting for Mance Rayder's army.

4. This is Game of Thrones, it needs its regular brutality dose.

Capturing Bran worked out, I think. It finally brought that frustrating desperation and tragedy of "almost there" feeling to the audience the book constantly uses but the show hasn't show too much of yet. It was nicely done. It was very nice that Bran and Jon were so close but there was still no reunion. Harassing Meera... that was pretty much just a filler, but I guess it was enough of harassing random Craster daughters and they tried to go for someone the audience cares more about (and probably failed, because I doubt anybody likes the Reeds as characters).

Locke whole departed secret agent story line was nicely written, added some long missed spice and they actor did pretty well too, I think. His death: Hodor got some action, Bran showed a bit of a badass side. I liked it.

The battle could have been just a little bit better. But no complaints. It was still okay. Karl vs Jon. Kinda lame that Karl basically beat Jon in single combat, but it was expected that the girl would kill him (or have a part in it) since the camera focused on her too many times last time to remain insignificant. Plus, it left me with a sensation of justice. It came across as sort of a Pia story north of the Wall.

And biggest advantage of the whole Craster's story line: something HAPPENED. You could be excited about something, root for the death of Karl and co, not just watch people talking and talking and talking and talking.