Jump to content

Margaery incrimination too easy?


Recommended Posts

Why does everyone assume that Margery is sentenced to death? She has been only taken into custody to await a real trial. Even if she is found guilty in the trial [which she might well be since it will be a stacked trial anyways] it won't be a death sentence...

This is obviously in the hypothetical scenario where the Queen of Thorns doesn't get her out via political maneuvering...

You're right, we don't know that. But going by the preview, she looks to be imprisoned for a while (she looks mad, dirty, hair is all scraggly, fear and hate in her eyes). Just seems like overkill for her "crime" :dunno:

It's just poor writing. They could have at least made it less obvious without reminding everyone that he was Loras squire. Aging up Tommen is really backfiring too.

The plus for aging Tommen:

1) Sex scene with Margaery

The minuses:

1) He should have regency at his age and Cersei should be nothing.

2) He shouldn't act like a six year old who can't speak or comprehend what is happening when his queen is threatened or he is challenged.

3) He isn't sweet, young and naïve, he is indecisive and a door mat that anyone can walk over.

4) He signed the order arming the faith, how about signing another one disarming them? For all Margaery's alluded scheming she hasn't accomplished convincing him of even that yet?

It seems like characters are required to stand around and let all of this happen, just because. Seriously, so much seems to rely on luck rather than common sense and logic.

I will never understand the aging up of Tommen :worried:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While Olyvar's testimony about Loras at least had the birthmark to give support (still hardly definitive), his claim about Margaery seeing them didn't have any proof whatsoever. He just said that she saw them once, and didn't give any more details. I didn't see why Margaery couldn't just plead ignorance. Was it just supposed to illustrate the kangaroo court nature of the trial?

Well, first off, it wasn't a trial, it was a pre-trial or a hearing of sorts. At the end of it, after Oly's testimony, the HS declared that he had heard enough to proceed with a trial. It's just that no bail was offered. Both Loras and Marg pleaded ignorance the whole time.

Plus, you have to take into consideration that the HS does a good job of playing the chuckling, wise-old grandfather type that takes you fishing and reads bedtime stories until you fall asleep.

NO...he is not. He is the leader of a fanatical organization that is quite frankly taking advantage of people in a desperate situation. He serves soup in bare feet and simple robes not because he is a kindly sage, but because it's the exact opposite visual of what people hate and see wrong with the world. The HS is just like them, destitute and poor...a regular joe schmoe of Westeros. Meanwhile, the king and the lords sup on fine food and breed bastards born of incest.

Regular KL commoner from Flea Bottom: "Didn't the gods say such things are cursed? Aren't we living like shit? We need to do something to lift this wretched curse off of our people and live like it was the good ol' days, just like back when we worshiped the...the...the Seven."

*Enter High Sparrow, all humble and shit*

HS: "Please brothers....join us for a meal...we don't have much...but we care..."

RKLCFFB: "Well a meal sounds good...but I don't know...you guys WERE just beating up my favorite whore a few scenes ago."

HS: "Did I mention that we randomly hand out loaves of bread while you eat, seemingly out of nowhere?"

RKLCFFB: "KILL THE BASTARD!!! ABOMINATION!! *munch munch* ALL HAIL THE SEVEN!!!!

Add to that, HS had both Cersei and Tommen in his clutches when they came to visit him. He could have grabbed them at anytime outnumbering their soldiers 6-1 (including common folk) easy, but he didn't, why? Because he needed to use Cersei so he could get his Faith Militant armed. Tommon got a pass because HS still needs his mom to help them with that secret infiltration shit.

But yet we believe he is an extremist with gay-bashing views.

Well, maybe he does have those views, who knows? But publicly, his behavior is more than simple bigotry.

1) Buggery (as HS called it) is seen as disgraceful in Westeros during the time of the Seven being respected. In Season 1-2 Loras had to keep his stuff private, Marg knew, but back then it was only a rumor that was totally believable. HS holding Loras on those charges isn't "gay-bashing" as some obviously Unsullied posters put on these threads, he is asserting the faith of the Seven that everyone was down with before things got shitty. In fact, notice as the seasons progress Loras is more open about his activities. At that point, religion and morals have gone out of the window. I blame show producers for this oversight. We mostly see the stars of the show who also happen to be mostly lords ladies, kings and queens. Nobody gives a shit about what Hotpie is up to, so we don't see that, and unfortunately the perspective of people actually suffering. We only get darker camera filters to suggest how bleak things are getting (as Winter approaches). I was actually taken by surprise when Cersei mentioned septas being raped and holy men's bodies in the streets. I remembered that clearly from the books, but it was unfair to Unsullied viewers who didn't get a chance to fully see that emotional part of the story develop. Instead we get Olyvar in bed with like six different dudes (Oberyn) over a couple of seasons.

2) HS knows that Marg is probably lying, but there is more to be gained by letting her and Loras go, OR keeping them as hostages. Now the Tyrells will be all but forced to either stand down or turn against the Lannisters. If HS intends to take over KL and Westeros, then he needs a bigger army at his disposal than dudes with clubs. If HS wants autonomy or there own Vatican-style kingdom and allow the Tyrells to take the throne, then again, they need hostages. And they're guilty, so why feel bad?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Way too easy....but..let me put my D&D hat on so as to put a positive spin on this scene! Ding! This will end with Marg doing the walk of shame...it still counts even if it's a different character, right?, right?

Haha!

I know this post is lighthearted, but it's already been reported that Lena did that scene, so we can at least feel safe in the knowledge that they didn't screw up that badly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Apparently that scene is what stands for intrigue anymore on this show.

Sad, it used to be so interesting in the first season (and some of the second, in my opinion). Now they've reduced it to people acting like idiots but still ending up where they need to be because of luck and convenience.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's just poor writing. They could have at least made it less obvious without reminding everyone that he was Loras squire. Aging up Tommen is really backfiring too.

The plus for aging Tommen:

1) Sex scene with Margaery

The minuses:

1) He should have regency at his age and Cersei should be nothing.

2) He shouldn't act like a six year old who can't speak or comprehend what is happening when his queen is threatened or he is challenged.

3) He isn't sweet, young and naïve, he is indecisive and a door mat that anyone can walk over.

4) He signed the order arming the faith, how about signing another one disarming them? For all Margaery's alluded scheming she hasn't accomplished convincing him of even that yet?

If point 4 in the minuses is even possible, it's an outrage no one has suggested it before now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The scene was fine.

King's Landing was my favorite part of the episode. Loved Olenna glaring at Cersei after Marg's arrest. Can't wait for episode 7!

K.

...care to expand on that and add to the discussion?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

First of all, Olyvar was his squire. He would have seen him naked. Next.

Squires wouldn't typically see the knights naked. The closest they came to dressing a knight was to help the knight don armor, hand them weapons. The knights wore clothing under their armor.

A manservant or personal valet might help a gentleman/nobleman knight bathe, or in some cases a serving woman.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In AFFC, they have a plausible storyline which leads to Margaery's arrest. So, why come up with something as implausible as this, in the Show?

Even the Inquisition wouldn't have dared arrest a Queen and her brother.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Squires wouldn't typically see the knights naked. The closest they came to dressing a knight was to help the knight don armor, hand them weapons. The knights wore clothing under their armor.

A manservant or personal valet might help a gentleman/nobleman knight bathe, or in some cases a serving woman.

I see your point, but "wouldn't typically" isn't the same as "wouldn't ever." At the very least, Loras would have some leverage to cast serious doubt on Olyvar's story. Seeing as it's the one piece of evidence that incriminates both Margaery and Loras, it is surprisingly weak. I don't know they didn't go with the Margaery infidelity story line from the book, but they could at least have had Cersei bribe or coerce some other people to testify. Why not make Littlefinger say he saw Loras enter the brothel several times as a condition of making him Warden of the North? Maybe she doesn't bother because she knows that Loras might ask for trial by combat and Cersei is planning to use a certain character against him or Marge's champion? I'm seriously wondering at this point whether Cersei will get a trial at all. I'm thinking that the WoS might be it for her.

Whatever the case might be, I think the scene came off as kind of shoddily written. Just something to move the plot along that makes sense if you don't think about it too much.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

×
×
  • Create New...