How would you rate episode 410?

[Corvinus85]

I like the series but am often disappointed in it. This episdoe only rated a 5 in my opinion.

As I said previously I hated to see the Hound be killed off. He could be a terrible person like when he murdered the family that helped them. But he could also do surprisingly good things. To me he always reminded me of a big bear with a thorn in a paw, always grumpy.

Shae's death was deserved but I was disappointed that they had her turn bad and testify at the trial without showing any good reason for her to do it. (Did I miss something?/ Did the book explain why?)

Sansa was another one that changed from a sweet meek thing into a brazen lying female. I'd rather see what caused her to change so much. Give me a little character development at least so the changes make sense....

The young boy with the fireballs seemed totally out of place for this series.

I know this will get a lot of hate from the board but I am not a fan of Arya. The character just leaves me empty and I could care less if she lived or died.

I think finding Shae in Tywin's bed explains the reason for her betrayal + the whole woman scorned thing.

The "young boy" is played by a girl, and has the voice of a woman. She is a Child of the Forest, and she has just as much place in the series as the rest of the fantasy stuff. This is a prime example of how D&D have failed to fully bring the entirety of the world of ASoIaF on screen.

[Drogon's Personal Trainer]

Dude, that part to me felt like a subtle piece of awesomeness by D&D. The way I interpreted it was that Jaime felt liberated from the clutches of Tywin due to Cersei telling him that now they have the upper hand. This gave him motivation to come free Tyrion.

Me too. I think that as book readers we try to follow the story line from the books, therefore when certain things are missing or changed, it seems like a plot hole, or whatever. But if you follow the story in the show/episode itself, it can make sense. The only slight problem I had in the final Tyrion scenes was WHY he decided to take a detour to his father's room. Of course that DID make better sense in the book due to the Tysha reveal, so they slipped up there somewhat.

But I just knew there would be no Tysha. The show had so obviously invested in the Tyrion/Shae relationship, it was obvious her betrayal would be the trigger. I wasn't too bothered by it - not just for 'Where do whores go?' (Gods save us!) but because that door has now closed on Tyrion's story, and he's off to Pentos. Streamlining - but I do admit it was a wee bit clumsy.

[kevinbgwrites]

Me too. I think that as book readers we try to follow the story line from the books, therefore when certain things are missing or changed, it seems like a plot hole, or whatever. But if you follow the story in the show/episode itself, it can make sense. The only slight problem I had in the final Tyrion scenes was WHY he decided to take a detour to his father's room. Of course that DID make better sense in the book due to the Tysha reveal, so they slipped up there somewhat.

But I just knew there would be no Tysha. The show had so obviously invested in the Tyrion/Shae relationship, it was obvious her betrayal would be the trigger. I wasn't too bothered by it - not just for 'Where do whores go?' (Gods save us!) but because that door has now closed on Tyrion's story, and he's off to Pentos. Streamlining - but I do admit it was a wee bit clumsy.

Um... Trigger? He had no trigger because the moment he decides to go and most likely die is when he is standing at the base of the steps. When he had no reason to suspect Shae being in the chamber.

Edited June 19, 2014 by kevinbgwrites

[Frey Pentos]

Um... Trigger? He had no trigger because the moment he decides to go and most likely die is when he is standing at the base of the steps. When he had no reason to suspect Shae being in the chamber.

The trigger was to confront his father but I agree his motivation was better drawn in the books.

[kevinbgwrites]

Thats not a trigger though. No new information was presented. Sure you could argue he was brooding with anger at his father during his time in holding before execution, but you could more realistically argue that he was meditating on his imminent death, which is what his reaction to Jamie's arrival indicated. One second he's besides himself with relief at the prospect of being freed and the next he is marching to his death(which it would be 99% of the time if not for perfect circumstances in both the book and show- but at least in the books its inspired by temporary insanity.

I don't care about the Tysha subplot, I don't care about the brothers being on good terms, but I do care about one of the most pivotal scenes feeling incredibly contrived. There had to be something, and there just wasn't. Add to it the fact that it was rushed and Tyrions knowledge of the hidden tunnels not explained and it is just such a wasted opportunity.

I don't hate this episode like many seem to, but this is one thing that really took me out of the episode.

[HexMachina]

Yes, the show should always be critiqued on its own merits. Not on what it did or didn't have from the books.

If something seems illogical in the show, then it should be based on what happened in the show, not on what happened in the books.

Why though? If by straying from the source material the show becomes illogical, that is a valid criticism.

[sj4iy]

Would you also say that about M. Night's The Last Airbender?

I mean as I said somewhere, if they completely would throw overboard all plot points and create an alternate universe from now, I would be okay with it. But as adaptation it has failed this season. And we book readers review it as adaptation. And thus we should give it the low score. If we were Unsullied, it would be a decent season. Still a lame and underwhelming Finale for a season, but overall a decent season. But as an adaptation it has failed this season.

As a movie, TLA was terrible. I don't even need to compare it to the original cartoon to say, flat out, that it was terrible. The writing was awful, the directing and sfx were deplorable and the acting was downright terrible.

None of that is true of GoT. At all. The writing, acting, sfx and cinematography (with maybe one or two exceptions) have overall been top-notch. And sorry, but I thought this season of GoT was great. It did a great job of adapting the source material onscreen, and was full of great moments. More great moments than any other season so far, really. Every other season has maybe had one or two stand-out moments...while this season had more than all of the other seasons combined in just a few episodes.

"Changes" don't equate to "bad". But again...if you want to criticize, that's fine and good. But it should be based on the show itself, and not on what has been changed, moved or omitted from the books, because none of us actually know where the story is going, so we can't say for certain that something they did will have a huge impact on the story down the road.

[sj4iy]

Me too. I think that as book readers we try to follow the story line from the books, therefore when certain things are missing or changed, it seems like a plot hole, or whatever. But if you follow the story in the show/episode itself, it can make sense. The only slight problem I had in the final Tyrion scenes was WHY he decided to take a detour to his father's room. Of course that DID make better sense in the book due to the Tysha reveal, so they slipped up there somewhat.

But I just knew there would be no Tysha. The show had so obviously invested in the Tyrion/Shae relationship, it was obvious her betrayal would be the trigger. I wasn't too bothered by it - not just for 'Where do whores go?' (Gods save us!) but because that door has now closed on Tyrion's story, and he's off to Pentos. Streamlining - but I do admit it was a wee bit clumsy.

To me, I think Tyrion's decision to go to his father's room was understandable, even without the Tysha development. Tyrion's impulsive, he does things without thinking the consequences through (we've seen him do it a lot), and the one thing he's wanted more than anything else in this world was his father's acceptance. Now that father has sentenced him to die, and he wants to know why. I don't think he really had a plan on what he would do when he confronted his father, but that's the type of person he is.

[Modesty Lannister]

Yes, the show should always be critiqued on its own merits. Not on what it did or didn't have from the books.

If something seems illogical in the show, then it should be based on what happened in the show, not on what happened in the books.

That's absolutely false line of thought. The show in not an original invention. It is an adaptation of existing books. Therefore it can be and should be criticized for what it is or should be - an adaptation, not an original work. Since the show has turned into a fan fiction rather than an adaptation in season 4, one can criticize it on that basis. Many of us on this forum have never been purists before and never begrudged deviations from the original source material since it never before affected the overall plot. Now, many of us fear that line has been crossed and we are looking at something that has a vague resemblance to GRRM's work. GRRM gave D&D right to ADAPT his books for television, not to alter plots or characters' arcs at will thus jeopardizing the plot itself. Furthermore, I do not see that any of these changes improved anything. For example, a beetle Jaime/Tyrion dialogue was invented, badly written and pointless. It took a lot of screen time. It could have been used much better. In episode 10 the whole KL final sequence is an invention. And a dangerous one at that. Jaime and Cersei's arcs have been totally altered. That is not an adaptation. That is fan fiction and it merits harsh criticism.

[Metopheles]

As a movie, TLA was terrible. I don't even need to compare it to the original cartoon to say, flat out, that it was terrible. The writing was awful, the directing and sfx were deplorable and the acting was downright terrible.

None of that is true of GoT. At all. The writing, acting, sfx and cinematography (with maybe one or two exceptions) have overall been top-notch. And sorry, but I thought this season of GoT was great. It did a great job of adapting the source material onscreen, and was full of great moments. More great moments than any other season so far, really. Every other season has maybe had one or two stand-out moments...while this season had more than all of the other seasons combined in just a few episodes.

"Changes" don't equate to "bad". But again...if you want to criticize, that's fine and good. But it should be based on the show itself, and not on what has been changed, moved or omitted from the books, because none of us actually know where the story is going, so we can't say for certain that something they did will have a huge impact on the story down the road.

changes are nice, but small ones only. The ones that make the story richer or don't hurt the story.

Having Brienne and Pod take another route is .. okay. It was not that far yet and the Hound ended up the same way. But huge changes are terrible. Or tiny changes that take away iconic stuff. Like Daario's appearance. What is wrong with including blue hair dye? It doesn't have to be baby blue, but some nice matte indigo or black blue would be perfect and all be happy.

But they really castrated him (the first one) more than all the Unsullied.

Introducing Jojen and Meera later was great.

Adding more povs is absolutely the best change they did. I love the books pov system, but I like that they added new ones.

But then it goes straight back to cutting iconic stuff. Only Cat was digestible. Changing Jon's turncloak reason in S3 was better than in the books. But cutting out motives for killing certain characters like Tywin..no. just no.

And changing the moment of Jaime and Tyrion parting. Lost me there. This is just unacceptable.

Changes are good or alright, but only reasonable ones and good ones. What they did recently was rubbish.

Common, a thousands eyes and one. forget it if he has two eyes.

"But I heard the Mountain, Ser Gregor Clegane raped her and split her in half with his greatsword"

Later

"And then I smashed her head in...like this"

I understand it was a rumor Obe heard, but why add it if they don't use it?

Same with Tysha. Add it, introduce it, annoy people for 3 seasons with it....and cut it?

Introduce Orell and his Eagle, good we had him longer, great actor and performance, then introduce that he lives on in his Eagle...stay...introduce another warg...kill him and have his owl remain...have Stannis and Mel arrive and cut the best part when Mel kills the eagle? We have two angry birds (sorry) and use none of them?

They have great moments and I appreciate them, but this was just horrible last week. The easiest moments, the easiest episode one could film, because of so many iconic stuff. Just add a root in his eye and use the same dialogue as in the book and people would love it, but noooo, we have to do it our way.

[sj4iy]

That's absolutely false line of thought. The show in not an original invention. It is an adaptation of existing books. Therefore it can be and should be criticized for what it is or should be - an adaptation, not an original work. Since the show has turned into a fan fiction rather than an adaptation in season 4, one can criticize it on that basis. Many of us on this forum have never been purists before and never begrudged deviations from the original source material since it never before affected the overall plot. Now, many of us fear that line has been crossed and we are looking at something that has a vague resemblance to GRRM's work. GRRM gave D&D right to ADAPT his books for television, not to alter plots or characters' arcs at will thus jeopardizing the plot itself. Furthermore, I do not see that any of these changes improved anything. For example, a beetle Jaime/Tyrion dialogue was invented, badly written and pointless. It took a lot of screen time. It could have been used much better. In episode 10 the whole KL final sequence is an invention. And a dangerous one at that. Jaime and Cersei's arcs have been totally altered. That is not an adaptation. That is fan fiction and it merits harsh criticism.

No, it's not.

It's absolutely fair to say "I liked how this was done better in the books than in the show."

It's NOT fair to say "I wanted this from the book in the show and they didn't do it, so it's a bad show."

See the difference?

Things like LF saying "Your sister" instead of "Only Cat" or Lady Stoneheart not being where you think she should be based on the books aren't actual criticisms of the show. They are nitpicks because someone expected something to be exactly like the books and when it wasn't, they got upset.

Now, does "Your sister" ruin that scene? Uh, no, it doesn't. But people had created a false assumption of what SHOULD have been there, and then flew off the handle when it wasn't.

Does LS not being in this episode ruin the show? No- actually, it will probably work better in the next season where she has more to do. But that doesn't stop people from being upset because they EXPECTED her now.

That's what bothers me. You can't criticize the show based on how closely it follows the book. It's not a fair criticism. It would be like criticizing the books based on the fact that it doesn't have music. They are NOT the same medium. The show and the books both have different limitations. That's why the show should be criticized on its own merits. It can be a great show without being a great adaptation.

To me, a fair criticism, and one that I've pointed out, would be the burning of Molestown. It's unnecessary, because we see that NW men are there in the brothel, so they obviously could have been warned about the raiders south of the Wall, but they weren't. That's something that didn't make sense...in the show.

That's the difference.

Edited June 19, 2014 by sj4iy

[Metopheles]

Besides: George R. R. Martin abhors fan fiction.

DD are brave, no one can deny that.

[Mr Fixit]

For example, a beetle Jaime/Tyrion dialogue was invented, badly written and pointless.

I can only imagine the fawning of book fans over Martin's supreme and sublime existentialist tour de force regarding beetles and the unforgivable sin of omission of said scene from the show if the situation was reversed. :devil:

Edited June 19, 2014 by Mr Fixit

[sj4iy]

Besides: George R. R. Martin abhors fan fiction.

DD are brave, no one can deny that.

..and yet he sold the rights to write the show to someone who wasn't him. So his acceptance of 'fanfiction' has a price.

[Metopheles]

Just to add fuel to it:

"They have a choice. They can live in [our] new world, or they can die in their old one" -DD

We can't say there was no foreshadowing.

[Metopheles]

..and yet he sold the rights to write the show to someone who wasn't him. So his acceptance of 'fanfiction' has a price.

He did not know then that they would go that route.

The first season and second are pretty good. The third also, just too stretched out and long and some parts badly done, but good as an adaptation.

Now the fanfic starts.

[Mr Fixit]

Just to add fuel to it:

"They have a choice. They can live in [our] new world, or they can die in their old one" -DD

We can't say there was no foreshadowing.

:cheers:

[Modesty Lannister]

No, it's not.

It's absolutely fair to say "I liked how this was done better in the books than in the show."

It's NOT fair to say "I wanted this from the book in the show and they didn't do it, so it's a bad show."

See the difference?

Things like LF saying "Your sister" instead of "Only Cat" or Lady Stoneheart not being where you think she should be based on the books aren't actual criticisms of the show. They are nitpicks because someone expected something to be exactly like the books and when it wasn't, they got upset.

Now, does "Your sister" ruin that scene? Uh, no, it doesn't. But people had created a false assumption of what SHOULD have been there, and then flew off the handle when it wasn't.

Does LS not being in this episode ruin the show? No- actually, it will probably work better in the next season where she has more to do. But that doesn't stop people from being upset because they EXPECTED her now.

That's what bothers me. You can't criticize the show based on how closely it follows the book. It's not a fair criticism. It would be like criticizing the books based on the fact that it doesn't have music. They are NOT the same medium. The show and the books both have different limitations. That's why the show should be criticized on its own merits. It can be a great show without being a great adaptation.

To me, a fair criticism, and one that I've pointed out, would be the burning of Molestown. It's unnecessary, because we see that NW men are there in the brothel, so they obviously could have been warned about the raiders south of the Wall, but they weren't. That's something that didn't make sense...in the show.

That's the difference.

You haven't read my critique then, because all the things that you mention were not a part of it. You deliberately ignore that the snow is an adaptation of a series of books. That's your thing. But, you have no right to criticize people who expect the show to be an adaptation of the books, because it IS HOW IT HAS BEEN ADVERTISED. Nitpicking is one thing. Altering or endangering the overall plot and outcome of the series is quite another. And GRRM has been warning this may happen if they continued down their own path. Now it is happening and many people, myself included, are not happy about it.

[Modesty Lannister]

I can only imagine the fawning of book fans over Martin's supreme and sublime existentialist tour de force regarding beetles and the unforgivable sin of omission of said scene from the show if the situation was reversed. :devil:

That rubbish piece of writing is not to be found in GRRM books. Does that tell you anything? No?

Edited June 19, 2014 by Modesty Lannister

[sj4iy]

He did not know then that they would go that route.

The first season and second are pretty good. The third also, just too stretched out and long and some parts badly done, but good as an adaptation.

Now the fanfic starts.

So? Some fanfiction is great. Better than the original, in some cases.

Some fanfiction authors go on to become famous and award winning writers (Mark Gatiss and Steven Moffat come to mind).

Any adaptation can be termed as "fanficiton" simply because it's not written by the original creator. But that doesn't mean it's bad.

"Blade Runner" and "The Princess Bride" are iconic movies, yet they are not good adaptations of the source material.