Jump to content

A Game of Screentime - Season 4


StannisEndGame

Recommended Posts

Again, you're misunderstanding what heart means in this context. It's supposed to refer to a small but dedicated part of a group of people here, and I don't see how you can deny the forum is anything other than that. Nor do I think D+D have an obligation to include certain lines. I just think it would be nice where they included, and I find it confusing that D+D would go out of their way to avoid those lines.

I get what you're saying. But if we're going by that definition, I'd say WiC.net is also a candidate for the heart of show fandom. Perhaps even more so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I get what you're saying. But if we're going by that definition, I'd say WiC.net is also a candidate for the heart of show fandom. Perhaps even more so.

I wouldn't agree with that myself, but I can see that argument. But anyway this is all rather off topic, so let's just agree to disagree.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fortunately for me, I have watched every HP movie more than once and I still have no clue what that means.

Then again, I am no True Fan. I and I do mean it this time. :cool4:

Isn't it when Dumbledore sees Snape's true patronus is still a doe i.e. the same as Lily's, which means 'after all this time' he still loves her? And 'always' means he never stopped loving her. Was pretty iconic to be fair.

“There is only one god and his name is Death. And there is only one thing we say to Death: “Not today.”

George R.R. Martin, A Game of Thrones

I'm pretty sure this line was not in ther books

You're right, appears it was such a good original show line that people wrongly assumed it was from the books.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Isn't it when Dumbledore sees Snape's true patronus is still a doe i.e. the same as Lily's, which means 'after all this time' he still loves her? And 'always' means he never stopped loving her. Was pretty iconic to be fair.

"- After all this time ?"

"- Always."

For me, one of the most beautiful moments I ever read.

Asoiaf is full of iconic lines as well and D&D know it, it isnt fan service to feature them in the show, it's a necessity for many of them, cause iconic lines oft become iconic for the insight they give into characters. And what best to establish a character than with lines that truly define him.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't people on internet forums mostly use phrases like "Only Cat", "Edd, fetch me a block", and "Tywin didn't shit gold" in order to discuss spoilery things without getting yelled at for posting spoilers? And then, having labeled the scene with that phrase, the phrase takes on too much importance in their minds. There are plenty of great lines from the book that aren't used in that way and which people seem to be more rational about.



The show did include the "Reek reek rhymes with freak" stuff in a way that worked really well - and most of that was internal rather than spoken in the books. Catelyn's name wasn't even used much in the show - mostly she was called "Lady Stark". Referring to her by a nickname that probably hadn't even been established in the show would have been absurd.



The problem with "Edd, fetch me a block" is that it feels triumphant. In the book, at that moment you feel happy that Jon is cutting Slynt's head off. We probably shouldn't feel happy about that. Jon sentencing Slynt to death is a dark thing. And Jon feeling that he has to resort to sentencing Slynt to death speaks to Jon's failings as a leader that end up costing him. Theon and Robb were both in positions where they felt they had to cut of somebody's head, both scenes were dark, and they both paid for it. That line may feel out of place within the show scene, and if so, it should be cut/changed.



I am partial to "don't make me rue the day I raped your mother", but it might seem over the top if it were actually used.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem with "Edd, fetch me a block" is that it feels triumphant. In the book, at that moment you feel happy that Jon is cutting Slynt's head off. We probably shouldn't feel happy about that. Jon sentencing Slynt to death is a dark thing. And Jon feeling that he has to resort to sentencing Slynt to death speaks to Jon's failings as a leader that end up costing him. Theon and Robb were both in positions where they felt they had to cut of somebody's head, both scenes were dark, and they both paid for it. That line may feel out of place within the show scene, and if so, it should be cut/changed.

How did Jon fail as a leader there? Because he couldn't reason with an unreasonably awful man who didn't respect him and never would respect him? That makes no sense at all. Jon was correct in his assessments that leaving Slynt alive would do far more damage to the NW than killing him would- letting Slynt live would have undermined Jon's every command. Slynt was in the wrong and he deserved the punishment that Jon gave him. He pushed too far and took it for granted that Jon was too much of a boy to do a man's job. Jon made mistakes later on, but I don't see how Slynt's execution had anything to do with Jon's betrayal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, I doubt it very much. Fans on the internet aren't better than the fans who don't go on the internet, nor do their opinions count for more.

I think they do.

There is such a thing as "opinion leaders," and it's typically the people who are the most informed, the most engaged, and care the most.

You can certainly easily go overboard by attributing too much weight to the opinions of message board hangers-on, but to say their opinions aren't more influential than others gives them too little weight. Message board types tend to be opinion leaders on their fixations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think they do.

There is such a thing as "opinion leaders," and it's typically the people who are the most informed, the most engaged, and care the most.

You can certainly easily go overboard by attributing too much weight to the opinions of message board hangers-on, but to say their opinions aren't more influential than others gives them too little weight. Message board types tend to be opinion leaders on their fixations.

I don't see it. How does spouting your opinions online make one a better fan? I mean, I'm on this forum, but I don't consider myself a 'better fan' than my husband, who has loved the books longer and read them more than I have. He simply hates message boards. The only thing I really see happening in these forums is that conspiracy theories get thrown around more and people fight over whether the books or show is better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't see it. How does spouting your opinions online make one a better fan? I mean, I'm on this forum, but I don't consider myself a 'better fan' than my husband, who has loved the books longer and read them more than I have. He simply hates message boards. The only thing I really see happening in these forums is that conspiracy theories get thrown around more and people fight over whether the books or show is better.

It doesn't but it helps to make sure that your pet ideas and theories become fact. You see that a lot on this board -- those who shout the loudest and the longest generally become the "defacto opinion." Case in point the 5 or so posters who kept the LS thread going for dozens of pages which resulted in the assumption that "LS has to be in the show."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't see it. How does spouting your opinions online make one a better fan? I mean, I'm on this forum, but I don't consider myself a 'better fan' than my husband, who has loved the books longer and read them more than I have. He simply hates message boards. The only thing I really see happening in these forums is that conspiracy theories get thrown around more and people fight over whether the books or show is better.

People who are more engaged tend to be more knowledgeable, and people who are more knowledgeable are more influential. It's as true in TV-watching as it is in politics. There are a million different ways that people socialize around issues and form opinions, but it's undeniable - at least in the sales business, or in the politics business - that certain people are influential.

Engaged = knowledgeable = influential. Not in every case without exception, but on the average. I actually agree with you to the extent you are only arguing that the original poster's line about the "heart" of the fanbase was overstating the case, but you go too far when you say message board poster opinions aren't more important than non-message-board-poster opinions. That's untenable. This is one of the important places where mass opinions are generated, or at least influenced.

That it may be different as between you and your husband is irrelevant; that's just one case.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

People who are more engaged tend to be more knowledgeable, and people who are more knowledgeable are more influential. It's as true in TV-watching as it is in politics. There are a million different ways that people socialize around issues and form opinions, but it's undeniable - at least in the sales business, or in the politics business - that certain people are influential.

Engaged = knowledgeable = influential. Not in every case without exception, but on the average. I actually agree with you to the extent you are only arguing that the original poster's line about the "heart" of the fanbase was overstating the case, but you go too far when you say message board poster opinions aren't more important than non-message-board-poster opinions. That's untenable. This is one of the important places where mass opinions are generated, or at least influenced.

That it may be different as between you and your husband is irrelevant; that's just one case.

How am I more influential on the show or the books than my husband is? I may know the details a bit better than he does about certain things, but I have absolutely no influence whatsoever on the books or the show.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How am I more influential on the show or the books than my husband is? I may know the details a bit better than he does about certain things, but I have absolutely no influence whatsoever on the books or the show.

Like I said, I'm talking averages. I have no idea about you and your husband. Your husband could be vastly influential for all I know. There's more than one way to become influential.

Plus . . . we're not talking about actually influencing the book or show. We're talking about influencing the fanbase. This conversation came from the quote "the beating heart of the ASOIAF/GoT fandom."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How did Jon fail as a leader there? Because he couldn't reason with an unreasonably awful man who didn't respect him and never would respect him? That makes no sense at all. Jon was correct in his assessments that leaving Slynt alive would do far more damage to the NW than killing him would- letting Slynt live would have undermined Jon's every command. Slynt was in the wrong and he deserved the punishment that Jon gave him. He pushed too far and took it for granted that Jon was too much of a boy to do a man's job. Jon made mistakes later on, but I don't see how Slynt's execution had anything to do with Jon's betrayal.

Jon broadly failed to get the Night's Watch on board with the changes he was making. Some of his decisions were bad - marching on Winterfell is not the job of the Night's Watch, particularly when they face an existential threat from the north, and it doesn't sound like anything good will come from sending people to Hardholme. Some of Jon's decisions were good but he didn't manage to convince the watchmen that he was right. By executing Slynt, Jon established himself as more authoritarian and less approachable to the watchmen.

Jon has been somebody that kills in self defense or battle, not for other reasons, particularly in the show where it seemed like he killed Halfhand almost accidentally. Slynt is the first helpless person he kills. Even if Slynt needs to die, that is a sobering moment.

Jon executed Slynt because he had refused to follow an order and because Jon thought he would stir up trouble in the future. Jon himself could have been executed on those grounds. Show Slynt isn't even likely to stir up future trouble because he has no credibility among the night's watchmen after failing so publicly in the battle. I suspect the show will change Slynt's crime, probably to doing something bad to a wildling, to tie it into the broader arc of wildling / night's watch relations and to make chopping his head off into a more reasonable act.

I'm not saying that executing Slynt is a moronic thing to do, nor that it makes Jon evil. Jon is young and he has a really hard job - it is understandable that not all of his decisions are great ones. But Slynt's crimes at the Wall, in my opinion, did not merit a death sentence, and hacking Slynt's head off pushed reasonable people toward assassinating Jon. Killing Slynt shouldn't be portrayed as a happy badass moment, so the "fetch me a block" quote probably doesn't fit the scene that will happen in the show.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jon broadly failed to get the Night's Watch on board with the changes he was making. Some of his decisions were bad - marching on Winterfell is not the job of the Night's Watch, particularly when they face an existential threat from the north, and it doesn't sound like anything good will come from sending people to Hardholme. Some of Jon's decisions were good but he didn't manage to convince the watchmen that he was right. By executing Slynt, Jon established himself as more authoritarian and less approachable to the watchmen.

Jon has been somebody that kills in self defense or battle, not for other reasons, particularly in the show where it seemed like he killed Halfhand almost accidentally. Slynt is the first helpless person he kills. Even if Slynt needs to die, that is a sobering moment.

Jon executed Slynt because he had refused to follow an order and because Jon thought he would stir up trouble in the future. Jon himself could have been executed on those grounds. Show Slynt isn't even likely to stir up future trouble because he has no credibility among the night's watchmen after failing so publicly in the battle. I suspect the show will change Slynt's crime, probably to doing something bad to a wildling, to tie it into the broader arc of wildling / night's watch relations and to make chopping his head off into a more reasonable act.

I'm not saying that executing Slynt is a moronic thing to do, nor that it makes Jon evil. Jon is young and he has a really hard job - it is understandable that not all of his decisions are great ones. But Slynt's crimes at the Wall, in my opinion, did not merit a death sentence, and hacking Slynt's head off pushed reasonable people toward assassinating Jon. Killing Slynt shouldn't be portrayed as a happy badass moment, so the "fetch me a block" quote probably doesn't fit the scene that will happen in the show.

Slynt disobeyed a direct order, blatantly and publicly, and would not acknowledge Jon's authority as Lord Commander. In this milieu, there could be only one penalty for that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Like I said, I'm talking averages. I have no idea about you and your husband. Your husband could be vastly influential for all I know. There's more than one way to become influential.

Plus . . . we're not talking about actually influencing the book or show. We're talking about influencing the fanbase. This conversation came from the quote "the beating heart of the ASOIAF/GoT fandom."

Well, this conversation started because some people believe that the those who go on internet forums are the 'real fans' and the ones that the writers should be trying to appease...which is ridiculous. The rule with art is that you make it to please yourself, first and foremost. You can't be worried about other people liking it, because not everyone will like it. The worst mistake anyone could make would be trying to make something ONLY for the 'core fans', because you aren't trying to attract them...you are trying to attract the people who haven't read the books. Most of the people who bitch about how they don't like the show are STILL watching the show, which means they must like something about it. The ones who truly don't care for it don't watch it at all and don't bother with internet forums.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jon broadly failed to get the Night's Watch on board with the changes he was making. Some of his decisions were bad - marching on Winterfell is not the job of the Night's Watch, particularly when they face an existential threat from the north, and it doesn't sound like anything good will come from sending people to Hardholme. Some of Jon's decisions were good but he didn't manage to convince the watchmen that he was right. By executing Slynt, Jon established himself as more authoritarian and less approachable to the watchmen.

Jon has been somebody that kills in self defense or battle, not for other reasons, particularly in the show where it seemed like he killed Halfhand almost accidentally. Slynt is the first helpless person he kills. Even if Slynt needs to die, that is a sobering moment.

Jon executed Slynt because he had refused to follow an order and because Jon thought he would stir up trouble in the future. Jon himself could have been executed on those grounds. Show Slynt isn't even likely to stir up future trouble because he has no credibility among the night's watchmen after failing so publicly in the battle. I suspect the show will change Slynt's crime, probably to doing something bad to a wildling, to tie it into the broader arc of wildling / night's watch relations and to make chopping his head off into a more reasonable act.

I'm not saying that executing Slynt is a moronic thing to do, nor that it makes Jon evil. Jon is young and he has a really hard job - it is understandable that not all of his decisions are great ones. But Slynt's crimes at the Wall, in my opinion, did not merit a death sentence, and hacking Slynt's head off pushed reasonable people toward assassinating Jon. Killing Slynt shouldn't be portrayed as a happy badass moment, so the "fetch me a block" quote probably doesn't fit the scene that will happen in the show.

Jon doesn't have time for a 'happy family' approach, and he was never going to make everyone underneath him like him or the decisions he made. He's the LC and he has to prepare the very understaffed and decrepit Night's Watch to fight an incredibly powerful enemy that they have no hope of defeating. But the first thing he has to do is get the Wildlings south of the Wall so that they aren't killed and reanimated as soldiers who will eventually fight them.

Many of his subordinates and all of the Wildlings understand this. It's really only a vocal few who dislike what he's doing...but what choice does he have?

And I really see no shades of grey when it comes to Slynt. He was repeatedly insubordinate to Jon in front of the rest of the NW. Jon even gave him more than one chance to go, and Slynt refused. Jon had to let everyone know that there would be no tolerance for that sort of behavior, especially given the situation they are in. Slynt would have done everything he could to undermine Jon's command, and Jon is the only one who is trying to do anything at all to save the realm from the WW.

I think Jon was completely right in this situation and Slynt was completely wrong. Jon's decision to go to Winterfell is definitely a grey area that can be debated as such, but I see no shades of grey here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jon doesn't have time for a 'happy family' approach, and he was never going to make everyone underneath him like him or the decisions he made. He's the LC and he has to prepare the very understaffed and decrepit Night's Watch to fight an incredibly powerful enemy that they have no hope of defeating. But the first thing he has to do is get the Wildlings south of the Wall so that they aren't killed and reanimated as soldiers who will eventually fight them.

Many of his subordinates and all of the Wildlings understand this. It's really only a vocal few who dislike what he's doing...but what choice does he have?

And I really see no shades of grey when it comes to Slynt. He was repeatedly insubordinate to Jon in front of the rest of the NW. Jon even gave him more than one chance to go, and Slynt refused. Jon had to let everyone know that there would be no tolerance for that sort of behavior, especially given the situation they are in. Slynt would have done everything he could to undermine Jon's command, and Jon is the only one who is trying to do anything at all to save the realm from the WW.

I think Jon was completely right in this situation and Slynt was completely wrong. Jon's decision to go to Winterfell is definitely a grey area that can be debated as such, but I see no shades of grey here.

Maybe the ends justify the means and killing somebody for a lesser crime is necessary to cement Jon's authority so he can save the realm. But even if it was necessary, do you see it as a triumphant moment for Jon? Something that Jon should look back on proudly?

And executing Slynt drives home how hopeless Jon's mission as Lord Commander is. So many of the men at the Wall are dregs of society that don't believe in their mission and Jon has to maintain order by chopping off one of the far-too-few heads. The Night's Watch is in a bad state and faces hopeless problems. Jon for all of his efforts, can't change decades of neglect, fix a ravaged North, integrate warring peoples, and deal with an undead army. Beheading Slynt is a symptom of the problems Jon faces, it is not a solution.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe the ends justify the means and killing somebody for a lesser crime is necessary to cement Jon's authority so he can save the realm. But even if it was necessary, do you see it as a triumphant moment for Jon? Something that Jon should look back on proudly?

And executing Slynt drives home how hopeless Jon's mission as Lord Commander is. So many of the men at the Wall are dregs of society that don't believe in their mission and Jon has to maintain order by chopping off one of the far-too-few heads. The Night's Watch is in a bad state and faces hopeless problems. Jon for all of his efforts, can't change decades of neglect, fix a ravaged North, integrate warring peoples, and deal with an undead army. Beheading Slynt is a symptom of the problems Jon faces, it is not a solution.

Triumphant for Jon? No. Nor would he look on what he did with 'pride'...but that doesn't mean he would regret doing it, either. In fact, we know that he doesn't regret what he did to Slynt because we would have seen it in his chapters, as we are privy to his thoughts- the only time he mentions Slynt after beheading him is when he says that Slynt's lies about him live on. Jon did what he needed to do to maintain order. He should neither take pride in that or regret it. He has a job to do, and a big part of his job is making sure that his orders are obeyed- otherwise, he's useless.

Now, is it a triumphant moment for the readers? Hell, yes. I can't imagine there was anyone who didn't want to see that asshole get what was coming to him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

well the characters that we know for a fact are going to get decent screentime because of the actors are: Tyrion, Cersei, Jaime, Jon, Dany and Margaery.

Arya and Sansa have to get decent screentimes too because of their fanbase. Everyone else......its not so obvious

Arya has to get decent screentime because she is one of the main characters, she has the most chapters of any female character. She is the only character to appear in every book so far. Next season the entire Braavos arc has to be set up and she is the only POV there. Bumper screentime. She had no story this year because they cut out most of her material last year so they could rush her to the red wedding. This year her plot was to be sassy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you AryaNymeriaVisenya. So some people don't like Arya's scenes in Braavos. There are plenty who do. Go make a beverage when they are on if you don't want to watch it.



Honestly, I care about 10% about Sansa's storyline, about 20% about Dany's and about 60% about Cersei's. But I don't disregard their importance to the story and their need to be there.



Arya is going to be our eyes into the city first entered by Davos and Stannis. A city that several of the movers and shakers have some connection (or believed connection) to. We don't even know how important Braavos is going to end up being in the conclusion of this storyline.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...