GtrGbln Posted May 19, 2015 Share Posted May 19, 2015 I know its poor form to use the show as evidence but am I the only one who noticed that Mel is leaving the wall with Stannis? Normally I would be like whatevs show deviation but it seems like many people are counting on her to resurrect Jon. The problem is in the books she never met Thoros or heard about how he was able to save first Beric and then Catelyn. So Mel in show leaves + Mel in book doesn't know about resurrection = holes in a lot of theories. Like I said its just show stuff so who knows if its important. But what if Jon Snow and the R+L=J thing while still true is the biggest red herring in this series? Despite what people think it is and has always been a real possibility. If Aegon turns out to be genuine I'll forced to conclude that this is bad news... for Jon Snow. Yeah and before someone links to the MTV interview with Carice I am aware of it and its from before Mel and Jon had their little near miss in Jon's chambers so it doesn't really prove anything. /Flame on Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Makk Posted May 19, 2015 Share Posted May 19, 2015 Even if it is a slight little hint that Melisandre isn't the one who resurrects Jon Snow (maybe, its just a hint, I always hoped she doesn't) I don't understand what that has to do with R + L = J or whether Aegon is genuine? There are other ways Jon can survive. Melisandre can also still return to the wall in the show. If anything the show makes out that Aegon is not genuine because he isn't in it and is unlikely to be added next season after events in his storyline have already happened. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GtrGbln Posted May 19, 2015 Author Share Posted May 19, 2015 Even if it is a slight little hint that Melisandre isn't the one who resurrects Jon Snow (maybe, its just a hint, I always hoped she doesn't) I don't understand what that has to do with R + L = J or whether Aegon is genuine? There are other ways Jon can survive. Melisandre can also still return to the wall in the show. If anything the show makes out that Aegon is not genuine because he isn't in it and is unlikely to be added next season after events in his storyline have already happened. Well if I'm right R+L=J becomes completely irrelevant now doesn't it? By the same token if he is a red herring, to disguise what? A true born Targaryen heir assumed dead waiting in the wings until the end of the second act would definitely qualify. Sometimes I wonder how many people actually know what a red herring is. Its more than just a false trail, it has to be a distraction from something else as well to be considered a true red herring. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Wun Wun Posted May 19, 2015 Share Posted May 19, 2015 Not sure why you are dismissing that interview. In it she breaks down what went into that seduction scene, then says there is an even bigger one coming up that she wants to see the Twitter reaction to. Since nothing big happened between them in E5 or E6, logically that must mean she is going back to the Wall for future scenes with him. It seems pretty conclusive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Knight Of Winter Posted May 19, 2015 Share Posted May 19, 2015 Using show as an evidence, Arianne and Victarion never existed. Using show as an evidence, there's no Aegon to lay his claim to the throne. Using show as an evidence, prophecies of the HOTU are non-existant or meaningless. Using show as an evidence Sansa is married to Ramsay. In short, using show as an evidence for anything that could/will happen in the books doesn't work at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GtrGbln Posted May 19, 2015 Author Share Posted May 19, 2015 Not sure why you are dismissing that interview. In it she breaks down what went into that seduction scene, then says there is an even bigger one coming up that she wants to see the Twitter reaction to. Since nothing big happened between them in E5 or E6, logically that must mean she is going back to the Wall for future scenes with him. It seems pretty conclusive. I'm discounting it because that interview was conducted and aired before the scene in Jon's chambers did not after. Don't get me wrong I think its definitely a veeeeery long shot but to deny the possibility completely smacks of being too much in love with your own head cannon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Wun Wun Posted May 19, 2015 Share Posted May 19, 2015 I'm discounting it because that interview was conducted and aired before the scene in Jon's chambers did not after. Don't get me wrong I think its definitely a veeeeery long shot but to deny the possibility completely smacks of being too much in love with your own head cannon. It definitely aired after the seduction scene in Episode 4. It was released on May 4, the episode aired May 3. Not sure about when it was conducted, but I don't think it matters since Clarice specifically says that there is an 'even bigger scene after episode 4'. She actually says "Season 4", but she clearly meant "episode 4" given the context. She makes it pretty clear that there are at least 2 big scenes between her and Jon Snow this season, and we've only gotten one of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GtrGbln Posted May 19, 2015 Author Share Posted May 19, 2015 It definitely aired after the seduction scene in Episode 4. It was released on May 4, the episode aired May 3. Not sure about when it was conducted, but I don't think it matters since Clarice specifically says that there is an 'even bigger scene after episode 4'. She actually says "Season 4", but she clearly meant "episode 4" given the context. She makes it pretty clear that there are at least 2 big scenes between her and Jon Snow this season, and we've only gotten one of them. The byline of the article the youtube video comes from says April 16. http://www.mtv.com/news/2135170/game-of-thrones-melisandre-carice-van-houten-interview/ I'm new and don't get the hyperlinking system here but if you copy and paste the addy into the googles it should come right up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GtrGbln Posted May 19, 2015 Author Share Posted May 19, 2015 The byline of the article the youtube video comes from says April 16. http://www.mtv.com/news/2135170/game-of-thrones-melisandre-carice-van-houten-interview/ I'm new and don't get the hyperlinking system here but if you copy and paste the addy into the googles it should come right up. Oh it does it automatically cool! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GtrGbln Posted May 19, 2015 Author Share Posted May 19, 2015 Anyway just asking the question it will probably end up amounting to nothing, but I've seen plenty of nuttier ideas built on far less pass muster around here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GtrGbln Posted May 19, 2015 Author Share Posted May 19, 2015 Using show as an evidence, Arianne and Victarion never existed. Using show as an evidence, there's no Aegon to lay his claim to the throne. Using show as an evidence, prophecies of the HOTU are non-existant or meaningless. Using show as an evidence Sansa is married to Ramsay. In short, using show as an evidence for anything that could/will happen in the books doesn't work at all. That has yet to stop anybody now has it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bael's Bastard Posted May 19, 2015 Share Posted May 19, 2015 Nah, the show is shit, and isn't even internally consistent, let alone consistent with the books. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poppa Bolton Posted May 19, 2015 Share Posted May 19, 2015 Using show as an evidence, Arianne and Victarion never existed. Using show as an evidence, there's no Aegon to lay his claim to the throne. Using show as an evidence, prophecies of the HOTU are non-existant or meaningless. Using show as an evidence Sansa is married to Ramsay. In short, using show as an evidence for anything that could/will happen in the books doesn't work at all. Well, it just makes it seem like those plot points won't matter in the end. Not having Aegon in the show leads a lot of people to believe (even though some might argue it's obvious) that he's definitely going to fail in the end. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Wun Wun Posted May 19, 2015 Share Posted May 19, 2015 The byline of the article the youtube video comes from says April 16. http://www.mtv.com/news/2135170/game-of-thrones-melisandre-carice-van-houten-interview/ I'm new and don't get the hyperlinking system here but if you copy and paste the addy into the googles it should come right up. Wrong interview. This is the one I am referring to: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fefNSdfvfss Released May 4. Both interviews were clearly conducted at the same time, but they waited until after episode 4 to release this one because it refers to a specific event in that episode. Keep in mind that reviewers got access to the first 4 episodes as screeners, that is how this interviewer was asking her about the seduction scene before it aired. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GtrGbln Posted May 19, 2015 Author Share Posted May 19, 2015 Nah, the show is shit, and isn't even internally consistent, let alone consistent with the books. Legitimate point but as I said in the books as far as we know she's unaware of the resurrections that have occurred. Whichever one you choose to look at there is a problem. Not that there aren't a number of ways it can be overcome but its there. I'm just saying its a way he could go. It could be that Jon has a two-fold purpose in the story, first as red herring for Aegon if genuine which I admit is by no means a given and also to make sure the watch were too weak and fragmented to stand against the Others if the wall falls. Which I'm pretty sure it will otherwise we have a finale comprised of several hundred pages of people sitting on top of a wall looking down at some other people looking up at them from the ground with mean looks on their faces. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GtrGbln Posted May 19, 2015 Author Share Posted May 19, 2015 dbl post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GtrGbln Posted May 19, 2015 Author Share Posted May 19, 2015 Wrong interview. This is the one I am referring to: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fefNSdfvfss Released May 4. Both interviews were clearly conducted at the same time, but they waited until after episode 4 to release this one because it refers to a specific event in that episode. Keep in mind that reviewers got access to the first 4 episodes as screeners, that is how this interviewer was asking her about the seduction scene before it aired. Now that I think about it you're right I had forgotten the four leaked episodes. The general public had seen episode four already so that accounts for the twitterage she's referring to. But then why was she talking about season four? Not debating, just don't get it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Wun Wun Posted May 19, 2015 Share Posted May 19, 2015 Now that I think about it you're right I had forgotten the four leaked episodes. The general public had seen episode four already so that accounts for the twitterage she's referring to. But then why was she talking about season four? Not debating, just don't get it. She simply misspoke. Given the context, an interviewer specifically asking her about an an event in episode 4, it's reasonable to infer that she meant to say 'episode 4' instead of 'season 4. English is not her first language, let's cut her a break :p Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Modesty Lannister Posted May 20, 2015 Share Posted May 20, 2015 I never believed Melisandre would resurrect Jon Snow, so I am not surprised. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GtrGbln Posted May 20, 2015 Author Share Posted May 20, 2015 She simply misspoke. Given the context, an interviewer specifically asking her about an an event in episode 4, it's reasonable to infer that she meant to say 'episode 4' instead of 'season 4. English is not her first language, let's cut her a break :P Thats probably it I used to work for a Columbian immigrant who couldn't speak english very well. People, even some of my co-workers thought she was stupid because of it. I would always think to myself if you're so fucking smart dude why is she your boss? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.