Craster's: The Definition of Filler

[Jairion Lannister]

I thought it was fairly good. People are judging it as filler from what they know of the books, but that shouldn't be the case. It should be judged from the perspective of the show and what this meant.

Jon had already made it clear that failure to eliminate the rogue NW men would mean the Wildlings would soon realise that they could easily attack the Wall and take it as they didn't have as many men as Jon had told them. From a show watchers perspective, that's the point here; they want to see whether Jon can eliminate these men and maintain the silence that the NW isn't equipped to hold the Wall. The scenes at Crasters are intended to remind us of what they're up against; of who they're facing and so we can get some satisfaction from these guys being killed.

The part with Bran is filler until he reaches the three eyed crow, but it was good filler. For a show viewer, who doesn't know whether Bran will be successful, it creates more tension. What will happen? Will Bran's group survive? Will Bran and Jon be reunited? I wish we'd have seen Coldhands, but even then this creates a lot of tension and puts our protagonists in tight stops, where we wonder if they'll survive or not.

The most disappointing part was after all of the build up, Locke was simply killed in the end when he could've served a really good purpose to the NW storyline, although apart from that most of those storyline was done quite well.

[Ankou]

I don't see why Locke taking Bran alive is so odd. He still needs to find Rickon, so he can interrogate him himself or let Roose do it. It's not like he knew how dangerous Bran was. To him he was a crippled child who had three chained up friends.

[Cas Stark]

I don't see why Locke taking Bran alive is so odd. He still needs to find Rickon, so he can interrogate him himself or let Roose do it. It's not like he knew how dangerous Bran was. To him he was a crippled child who had three chained up friends.

Wouldn't the smart thing to do be to kill the 3 friends first, so he leaves no witnesses?

[Uldra I]

Responding to the argument that the scenes last night served some-sort of purpose:

BUt before I begin I just want to ask people if they like Clam Chowder? What do you like about it. For me- call me silly- but I like the actual clams, and not the filler of the potatoes.

Keep that in mind.

You can do all of this without including Bran. Jon’s attack on Craster’s – while certainly having the odor of contrivance – can be explained by saying that if those men get captured they may reveal the NW true strength and they are deserters. So, using it as a “character builder” for Jon works, but no need to include the time-sync that is Bran.

We already knew all that- if being tethered to Ygritte etc for an entire season didn't convince you that he respects wildings and women, nothing will. We don’t need it to be reinforced because we don’t have the time. Further, you could have accomplished all this by having a scene between Jon and Gilly at the Wall; 5 minutes- done. No need to waste two episodes.

Don’t care. The fact that they are laying back-story to a 4^th-level character does not interest me. Here’s an idea – why not lay the back-story of the PRIMARY characters instead?! You know like Ned and Jaime and Tyrion- characters we actually NEED to know something about and not a character who… is actually not a character. The show does not have the luxury of that kind of time.

Which is why I have a problem with it and why the OP is correct- it was filler. Like eating clam chowder- you can tell if its good or not after the first bite; if you taste mostly potatoes – the filler- you know you are eating cheap stuff. But get mostly clams? That's what you paid for!

I paid for Tyrion; for Brienne; Dany, Jaime, Tywin, Stannis, Arya, Sansa, Jon (they made me do it) and not the "woman-who-we-sort-of-heard-about-for-like-4-total-paragraphs-in-book-five." I can do without that; THAT is the potatoes. The fact that there is a REASON for potatoes or the fact that some people may like potatoes does not change the fact that its filler. I paid for the clams, thanks.

Again, you could have done that in an independent scene, with Bran making Hodor do something and Hodor not liking it; it could even have been killing somebody. You don’t need to send Bran on a magical collision-course with Jon Snow in the “Magnetic-Zone” that is CRaster’s Keep that just attracts every major character in the books. Fuck, I’m surprised we didn't find Stannis and Khal Drogo up there.

.

I got bad news for you: Bran’s story IS an endlessly boring travel up North. That’s what that is. You send somebody up North don’t expect that to be a “page-turner.” And even if its boring, its better than Gerrymandering a system where two characters can kinda-sorta-but-not-really connect. Another bait-and-switch. We don’t need that.

What we need is well developed story-arcs tethered to the foundation of the underlying narrative; not silly sidetracks and … potatoes.

Again, have Ghost show up at the Wall like it was in the books. I don’t know anyone who was sitting on the edge of their seats trying to figure out the complexities of …. Of … having a wolf… go… South. Wow. You don’t need an ultra-silly and convoluted set-up just to get Ghost back with Jon. And… why was Ghost there to begin with? Oh, that’s right- potatoes.

That’s all that was; an excuse to have the show serve us potatoes and hope we forget about the clams.

Filler. Convoluted, empty, unfulfilling and contrived.

:agree:

to clue you into my personal POV: I read the books before watching GoT, pondered them, became almost obsessed with them, then watched the HBO series. I've loved the tv version until the last 3 episodes. I'm not a book purist, but I at least was looking for a show that tells the story in the books more accurately, like the LoTR movies did for Tolkeins story. GRRM's story deserves no less. The divergences from the books are growing more disturbing, to the point of rendering the plot almost unrecognizable as ASOIAF. While I realize a LOT of what happens in both the Bran and Jon storylines is mostly internal character development in the books, which it seems a lot of people find "boring". (I don't.) D&D should pick the interesting parts of the books and use those for their script inventions. They could've used a Coldhands scene and embellish it for example. Why didn't they just drop Locke at about the same time Vargo leaves the storyline in the books... why bring him to the wall? What exactly did they accomplish with that? There are so many interesting things to happen at the Wall w/Jon. They could've just moved the Mance story up instead of inventing whole an entirely new storyline. I just don't get it, and I really don't like it. If what they care about is capturing the attention of the unsullied, then they should have written their own story to begin with.

ps. No one is mentioning the fact the Karl gave Jon a nasty stab wound to the gut. Kit hardly even gave a nod to such a nasty wound in his performance afterward, as though it were merely a scratch. Could Karl have been fulfilling the function of Bowen Marsh in the books? Will that wound eventually bring Jon down the way Bowen did?

Just wondering what you guys think.

[The Prince of Newcastle]

http://asoiaf.westeros.org/index.php?/topic/109208-Craster%27s%3A-The-Definition-of-Filler/page__view__findpost__p__5742783

But it is EXACTLY what Gendry does to Biter in the book. Exactly.

[Ankou]

Gee I like both the clams and the potatoes!

Yeah exactly. It's not clam chowder if it's just clams.

[The Prince of Newcastle]

We should cry more about this.

I was gobsmacked that I wasn't reading the txt from the novels scroll up the screen.

[The Prince of Newcastle]

The clam chowder thing was painful to read and didn't make sense.

I love clam chowder now read why I just want clams and no chowder.

[Ankou]

Wouldn't the smart thing to do be to kill the 3 friends first, so he leaves no witnesses?

That takes time he may not have, and in addition he'd probably have to do it in front of Bran and that would make interrogating him harder.

[Cas Stark]

That takes time he may not have, and in addition he'd probably have to do it in front of Bran and that would make interrogating him harder.

Why? Sorry. It's illogical. If he doesn't kill the 3 and they survive they will tell Jon that he took Bran and not only will "everyone" know Bran is alive but Jon will set out in pursuit of him. Also, not sure how killing his companions is going to make a child less able to withstand the coming torture....

I don't have a problem w/the Craster/Bran storyline per se, but it wasn't executed that well...because it has lots of logic gaps. The deserters are going to kill everyone or try and get ransom money for them? Seems like both and neither, LOL.

Also, how long is it going to take to slit the throats of 3 chained up people? A minute?

[sj4iy]

Don't care if it was filler or not...it's the best kind of filler. The kind that is exciting and gratifying. Martin himself uses a LOT of filler that's nowhere near as fun or interesting.

Best villian death by far, one of the best fight scenes by far. Count me happy.

[I'm_Tim]

Why do people have to be so judgemental about everything? Especially with this show- it really confuses me.

Sure, while it did not serve too much of a bigger purpose, the Craster scene was, in my opinion, one of the best sequences the show has ever done... Especially the scene with Jojen's vision and then his talk with Bran (Thomas Brodie Sangster for episode MVP). That scene is now probably my favourite sequence in the entire show. What happened to Bran in this episode was definitely more interesting than anything that has happened to him in the books It made me care a lot more for him, Jojen, Meera as well as Jon and Grenn. I, for one thought it was a great sequence.

Why can't people be happy with awesomeness without thinking too deeply about its bigger purpose?

Unfortunately the forum has created a culture of haters. It's a message board, so it's to be expected.

A lot of Martin's story doesn't translate well to TV. These deviations are necessary. These episodes have been fantastic at character development.

The viewing audience is now engaged and interested in the North. Unfortunately, I could almost hear their collective sigh when Dany announced she's staying in Slaver's Bay.

These next 2 seasons are really important. Not much happens in the books and they're somewhat poorly written. The show runners are going to have their work cut out to keep the viewers interested.

[DemiNymph]

I'm not opposed to this filler part. I'm just disappointed at Locke's character arc. What a waste. He could have done more to the story and they killed him off. And this isn't even a "ohh my fave character got killed" type of thing. The writers ain't GRRM. Only GRRM knows how to kill someone and make the audience really shocked and/or miss that character. When the writers killed Locke, I was like, "Eh? So they created a useless character?"

So Locke is basically another Ros, ableit, without tits. Just like Ros was a substitute for Alayaya, Locke was a substitute for Vargo Hoat. They did a terrible job with the Ros character but for a moment there I thought they did good with Locke and that he was a improvement to the story. But they created this character and used him to accomplish nothing other than to plump up Bran's part of the story. They can't even kill him off with finesse. Bah.

[King Nothing]

So basically "filler" in the books is called "character development". And in the shows it is just called "filler".

You have to keep in mind the unsullied did not know Bran & Jon would not meet. My friends were visibily excited for them to finally re-connect, and it was a big deal when Bran made the decision to continue North

[Mr Fixit]

Unfortunately the forum has created a culture of haters. It's a message board, so it's to be expected.

It's common human behaviour, unfortunately. It's always easier to be against something. Just look at politics. Anyone can wail and hate, but precious few can actually articulate their position in a constructive manner.

[sj4iy]

:agree:

to clue you into my personal POV: I read the books before watching GoT, pondered them, became almost obsessed with them, then watched the HBO series. I've loved the tv version until the last 3 episodes. I'm not a book purist, but I at least was looking for a show that tells the story in the books more accurately, like the LoTR movies did for Tolkeins story. GRRM's story deserves no less. The divergences from the books are growing more disturbing, to the point of rendering the plot almost unrecognizable as ASOIAF. While I realize a LOT of what happens in both the Bran and Jon storylines is mostly internal character development in the books, which it seems a lot of people find "boring". (I don't.) D&D should pick the interesting parts of the books and use those for their script inventions. They could've used a Coldhands scene and embellish it for example. Why didn't they just drop Locke at about the same time Vargo leaves the storyline in the books... why bring him to the wall? What exactly did they accomplish with that? There are so many interesting things to happen at the Wall w/Jon. They could've just moved the Mance story up instead of inventing whole an entirely new storyline. I just don't get it, and I really don't like it. If what they care about is capturing the attention of the unsullied, then they should have written their own story to begin with.

ps. No one is mentioning the fact the Karl gave Jon a nasty stab wound to the gut. Kit hardly even gave a nod to such a nasty wound in his performance afterward, as though it were merely a scratch. Could Karl have been fulfilling the function of Bowen Marsh in the books? Will that wound eventually bring Jon down the way Bowen did?

Just wondering what you guys think.

You can't be serious. The LotR movies diverged from the books in many, many ways and far more than GoT has done. And the definition of a 'book purist' is someone who doesn't want the story to diverge from the books at all, which you are saying you want. And he wasn't stabbed in the gut, he was stabbed in the hip (or thigh). Hence Jon limping afterwards.

[Winterfell is Burning]

It makes perfect sense to spend time at Craster's: in the books, it's kind of a stretch to see Jon elected Lord Commander. Here, they are building it better, showing he's already popular, and killing the men that murdered Jeor will make him even more.

Plus, it gives Bran something to do and shows him going further into the dark side.

[Lady of Dragonstone]

I'm not opposed to this filler part. I'm just disappointed at Locke's character arc. What a waste. He could have done more to the story and they killed him off. And this isn't even a "ohh my fave character got killed" type of thing. The writers ain't GRRM. Only GRRM knows how to kill someone and make the audience really shocked and/or miss that character. When the writers killed Locke, I was like, "Eh? So they created a useless character?"

So Locke is basically another Ros, ableit, without tits. Just like Ros was a substitute for Alayaya, Locke was a substitute for Vargo Hoat. They did a terrible job with the Ros character but for a moment there I thought they did good with Locke and that he was a improvement to the story. But they created this character and used him to accomplish nothing other than to plump up Bran's part of the story. They can't even kill him off with finesse. Bah.

What gets my goat is that they had to spend money to hire these actors to play, when they could have spent the money & time on Coldhands and probably gotten less grief and better reviews from critics and fans alike.

[protar]

Disappointed that Locke's story was cut short so quickly when he could have acted as a composite character for a bit longer. The only real consequence of this piece of filler is Jon being reunited with Ghost, although maybe one of the Craster's Wives (the one who stabbed Karl) will end up going to the Wall and taking the role of Val or something? Who knows?

[sj4iy]

What gets my goat is that they had to spend money to hire these actors to play, when they could have spent the money & time on Coldhands and probably gotten less grief and better reviews from critics and fans alike.

I don't get the love for Coldhands. I think he's more confusing than helpful to the story.