why was Ladystoneheart cut out

[Meera of Tarth]

36 minutes ago, lancerman said:

Doing essentially nothing. 

Like I said, we could literally start next season with the Epilogue to ASOS. Then an episode later Brienne runs into her on her way back to Winterfell. And it would change nothing regarding her plot and how it effects literally everything else. And it probably gets her plot going in faster. 

Meanwhile starting it at the end of season 4, essentially means you are writing filler for her and putting her in a holding pattern for two year. Which most fans, would start wondering why this major character that just returned is dicking around for two season without any major plot development. That's how little of her story has developed thus far. 

Yes, she could still be next season as you mention (although it won't happen).

writing her at the end of s4 would have also made sense, but the story of Brienne should have changed from the show version of s5 (and it would have been better).if she appeared in s6 I doubt fans would have thought that, they didn't seem surprised to see the brotherhood again, the Blackfish again, or Edmure again...or Benjen again.

She could have been with the Bwb planning her revenge. And in the middle of s6 we see Lem and Beric and LSH could have started their plan hanging him before the Freys. Another possibility would have been LSH being with Lem, as part of a darker brotherhood.

The possibilities are endless.

[Meera of Tarth]

Two seasons are not two years..just for the record. It's probably one year. But we don't know exactly. The wikia says two but it can not guess the ages of some characters correctly, like Sam jr or Tommen. maybe someone here has a timeline of the show. i just recall s6 happens just after Jon Snowss death so time just happens to be important in the middle of the season (when LSH could have appeared) and then a lot of time passes in the last episode when Dany goes away, judgind by Varys going to Dorne and returning to leave again, and also Olenna in Dorne. But that doesn't count. That is in the last episode. lSH would have appeared before those visits to Dorne.

in s5 time passes but not as much as a year, I don't remember but they mentioned someing when Stannis had to be in the battle (a month maybe) and in Sansa's storyline, and we have Jaime's trip and Cersei's trial...definitely not a year........although Walda has a child, but that is in s6, so maximum nine months between half s5 and half s6? tyrion's trial doesn't last 15 months, so no two years.......... We could also guess By Edmure's speech. does he say two years have passed? Then we have Tyenne's hair, seems less than a year growth, probably six months. Overall I would say a year between 4,1 and 6.6  but I don't know if some storylines follow that pattern or they follow more than a year and others less. It's very complicated.

[Adam_Up_Bxtch]

I think we can give up on LSH being introduced in the show. With 2 seasons left and around 13 episodes left I doubt they are gonna be bringing back anymore dead characters.

[lancerman]

I doubt they are too. I'm just saying, based off the material we have, there is nothing that she did that can't be accomplished in the first two episodes of next season if they wanted to use her. So the idea that they needed to introduce her before or should have introduced her 2 seasons ago and then made up filler plots to keep her active just isn't a compelling argument to me. 

The question is less why wasn't she introduced yet, and more "why wasn't she introduced at all". Assuming they don't use her. And truthfully if they were going to introduce her they would try to keep it a secret anyways. 

For that final question, it depends on how important she is in the novel going forward. If Brienne has a change of heart and slays her to save Jamie in the very next scene, then it's like okay probably a poignant character moment, but not the most effective use of plot time. If she plays heavily into the endgame, then we might question it more and argue that it was a mistake to not include her. But either way at this point there simply is a lack of information and source material to have that discussion. With other additions or subtractions to the series there is generally enough information to see what the thought process was for doing one thing over another. Whether you agree with it or not, you can see the "why". There isn't enough to create a "why" for LSH. 

[lancerman]

5 hours ago, Meera of Tarth said:

Two seasons are not two years..just for the record. It's probably one year. But we don't know exactly. The wikia says two but it can not guess the ages of some characters correctly, like Sam jr or Tommen. maybe someone here has a timeline of the show. i just recall s6 happens just after Jon Snowss death so time just happens to be important in the middle of the season (when LSH could have appeared) and then a lot of time passes in the last episode when Dany goes away, judgind by Varys going to Dorne and returning to leave again, and also Olenna in Dorne. But that doesn't count. That is in the last episode. lSH would have appeared before those visits to Dorne.

in s5 time passes but not as much as a year, I don't remember but they mentioned someing when Stannis had to be in the battle (a month maybe) and in Sansa's storyline, and we have Jaime's trip and Cersei's trial...definitely not a year........although Walda has a child, but that is in s6, so maximum nine months between half s5 and half s6? tyrion's trial doesn't last 15 months, so no two years.......... We could also guess By Edmure's speech. does he say two years have passed? Then we have Tyenne's hair, seems less than a year growth, probably six months. Overall I would say a year between 4,1 and 6.6  but I don't know if some storylines follow that pattern or they follow more than a year and others less. It's very complicated.

It's less about how much in story time passed and that you in a television format you are telling it season by season at a very defined pace for the original airing. Even if we say one second has passed for the characters, one year has passed for the audience, the actors, the crew, etc. So when you introduce a character like LSH it's a major development for the audience, and when you have to sit on that devopment for two years, it impacts how the audience digests it. And that impacts how the audience perceives the plot point. 

Example, to most fans they had to wait a year with Jon Snow dead to see what happened to him. In series, he was probably only dead a few hours at most and two episodes apart. If you switched the episodes around so that season 5 had him killed off in episode 8, Davos finds him in  9, and he's ressurected in 10, all of a sudden he was brought back right away and it lessens the impact. But that's not how it happened. We waited a full off season to see him come back and it impacts how we perceive what happened. 

And that's the problem you run into LSH. You bring her in, and then have nothing do with her sans maybe 1 scene in season 5 and 6. 

[Tolsimir]

The inclusion of LSH has nothing to do with her importance in the novel. They could have made LSH as important as they wanted on the show without resorting to book plotlines.

Best example: Euron.

In the books Euron is shaping up to be the greatest villain of the series, maybe only surpassed by the white walkers. If the leaks are true he will only amount to Cersei's sidekick in the show. There was no need to specifically introduce Euron just for this, yet they did it.

Mind you, I am not advocating for a LSH inclusion. To me it's just one less character the showrunners have gotten their hands onto. I just think that the argument that the showrunners always perfectly know which book characters are important is absurd.

Speaking of which, when the Greyjoy brothers weren't introduced in season 5 a lot of people were saying that they obviously won't be important to the plot. But then Euron got into season 6, and people were like ''Oh, Euron will be important in the books I guess''. Even though it's turning out that they will play completely different roles in show and book.

The showrunners don't always know best.

 

 

[Meera of Tarth]

8 hours ago, lancerman said:

It's less about how much in story time passed and that you in a television format you are telling it season by season at a very defined pace for the original airing. Even if we say one second has passed for the characters, one year has passed for the audience, the actors, the crew, etc. So when you introduce a character like LSH it's a major development for the audience, and when you have to sit on that devopment for two years, it impacts how the audience digests it. And that impacts how the audience perceives the plot point. 

Example, to most fans they had to wait a year with Jon Snow dead to see what happened to him. In series, he was probably only dead a few hours at most and two episodes apart. If you switched the episodes around so that season 5 had him killed off in episode 8, Davos finds him in  9, and he's ressurected in 10, all of a sudden he was brought back right away and it lessens the impact. But that's not how it happened. We waited a full off season to see him come back and it impacts how we perceive what happened. 

And that's the problem you run into LSH. You bring her in, and then have nothing do with her sans maybe 1 scene in season 5 and 6. 

but the point is that they could use her for more than one scene if she was introduced, lrt's say in s5. End with the cliffhanger and next season, six, contibue or end her story.

in s6 it's not two years. If the bwb is introduced (and that is what happened) I don't understand why you say people would think that happened so long ago, considering the last time we saw them was also in s3 when they sold Gendry to Mel.

and they could also invent another storyline for her like they did with Dorne. And end her storyline when they want or feel it is needed. There is no reason to believe she was not introduced bc she was not having a plot, there is a plot and, ifnot, they can invent it or use it with other storylines.

[Ser Matt Dayne]

Had they introduced her in season 4 and accurately portrayed her appearances in the books thus far (of course with a bit of embellisment), I wouldn't have seen having one scene per season up until 7 as unthinkable.

I'd liken it to the Night's King appearances thus far in the show: they've been minimal, but all major and huge in repercussion for the entire story. The fans would have liked to have seen more of course but still accept it for what it is: a great mystery that is slowly unravelling. I think the fan base would have accepted a similar approach with LSH. 

[Meera of Tarth]

9 minutes ago, Ser Matt Dayne said:

Had they introduced her in season 4 and accurately portrayed her appearances in the books thus far (of course with a bid of embellisment), I wouldn't have seen having one scene per season up until 7 as unthinkable.

I'd liken it to the Night's King appearances thus far in the show: they've been minimal, but all major and huge in repercussion for the entire story. The fans would have liked to have seen more of course but still accept it for what it is: a great mystery that is slowly unravelling. I think the fan base would have accepted a similar approach with LSH. 

Yes, that's also another appoach that they could have used. It would not have been been my favourite, but ccertainly it is another of the dozens of possibilities with the character...

[Dragon in the North]

On March 21, 2017 at 6:19 AM, Tolsimir said:

The inclusion of LSH has nothing to do with her importance in the novel. They could have made LSH as important as they wanted on the show without resorting to book plotlines.

They could have included LSH and given her a more prominent role, but other than appeasing Stoneheart fans, why would they want to?

[Cas Stark]

21 hours ago, Dragon in the North said:

They could have included LSH and given her a more prominent role, but other than appeasing Stoneheart fans, why would they want to?

It would have been a huge shocking moment, if they included Stoneheart, which the show loves.  And she could have been involved in several gruesome death scenes, which the show also loves.  

[Dragon in the North]

28 minutes ago, Cas Stark said:

It would have been a huge shocking moment, if they included Stoneheart, which the show loves.  And she could have been involved in several gruesome death scenes, which the show also loves.  

No, they like big moments as long as there's proper build up and it propels the story forward. Shock for the sake of shock is not something that they do. Otherwise, Stoneheart would have been in.

[Cas Stark]

10 minutes ago, Dragon in the North said:

No, they like big moments as long as there's proper build up and it propels the story forward. Shock for the sake of shock is not something that they do. Otherwise, Stoneheart would have been in.

Stoneheart has long divided the fan base, some love her, some thought it was a bad idea on the author's part.  I think the simple answer is that D/D fall in the second category, they didn't think he should have brought Cat back, so they left it out.   But, it's all a moot point, since Stoneheart is out, I presume there is no one left who still thinks she will show up, LOL.  We don't know what the author will do with her, probably nothing. So, there it is.  The end.

[Dragonsbone]

The death of Cat had a perfect ending in the sense of storytelling. Very different from everything that we have seen on television. There is this big build-up for her character, where she looses everything, her home, most of her children and her husband. The only one she was left, was Robb. As a viewer, you think that she will take revenge with Robb and claim her home back. But then, out of nowhere, the show runners, destroy that dream in about 10 minutes. They made TV history with that scene. It will remain one of the best scenes on television. They had the perfect ending of that character, because it was unexpected and completely different from everything you have seen on television. Bringing her back, would destroy the whole path. It would destroy this beautifully developed piece of art. What would we think, if Shakespeare brought Hamlet back at the end of his drama? It would ruin the story and the message. That is also the reason, why some readers did not like the return of Cat as Lady Stoneheart. And D&D probably thought that too. 

[Zombies That Were Promised]

Haven't seen the show or been to the forum since last summer...just saw a random episode night for kicks and Brienne was in it.  I don't even care about LSH anymore so much as how different it's made Jaime and Brienne.

Specifically, thinking about how Brienne kills Stannis while spouting off "Renly the rightful king" BS.... what a moron.  It'd have been FAR better if she had to choose between revenge and keeping her oath to Cat's daughters but nah she gets to do both.  Because Game of Thrones works like that.

[Dragonsbone]

2 hours ago, Zombies That Were Promised said:

Haven't seen the show or been to the forum since last summer...just saw a random episode night for kicks and Brienne was in it.  I don't even care about LSH anymore so much as how different it's made Jaime and Brienne.

Specifically, thinking about how Brienne kills Stannis while spouting off "Renly the rightful king" BS.... what a moron.  It'd have been FAR better if she had to choose between revenge and keeping her oath to Cat's daughters but nah she gets to do both.  Because Game of Thrones works like that.

And you are in this part of the forum bacause...??? 

[Zombies That Were Promised]

Since last summer.

Did you have anything to add or just going around trolling Mr six posts?

[Dragonsbone]

4 hours ago, Zombies That Were Promised said:

Since last summer.

Did you have anything to add or just going around trolling Mr six posts?

I was not trolling at all. I just thought that the part about "last summer" was dedicated to the forum and I thought that it made no sense to criticize something that you don't watch. I apologize very much. 

Oh and I am new here. Since last week. But now there are seven posts

[Meera of Tarth]

about LSH, news

http://watchersonthewall.com/grrm-time-interview/#more-148147

[LadyNoOne]

I think as in so many books gone movies/TV, there are minor-ish story arches that cannot be fit in.  I thought Stoneheart was important, but realistically not important enough to squeeze into an already hour-long series. Peace!