A_Cornered_Wolf Posted June 11, 2015 Share Posted June 11, 2015 Right. I know if I was a member of the military and my general returned from enemy territory with the enemy, relating to everyone that we have to put our differences aside because magical ice creatures have amassed an army of the dead and are heading south, I know my first inclination would be to assassinate my general because 'guy code'. Nonsense. This is particularly valid since there will be other NW members, including Edd who opposed the mission, who will back up Jon's account. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Khal Boner Posted June 11, 2015 Share Posted June 11, 2015 Right. I know if I was a member of the military and my general returned from enemy territory with the enemy, relating to everyone that we have to put our differences aside because magical ice creatures have amassed an army of the dead and are heading south, I know my first inclination would be to assassinate my general because 'guy code'. Nonsense. Again though it's from the books. The WW's are coming and FTW still happens. Even Stannis knows the WW's are coming but still marches south. Restricting your criticism of this to D & D alone is just simplistic and ignorant of the source material. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Borodin Posted June 11, 2015 Share Posted June 11, 2015 This is particularly valid since there will be other NW members, including Edd who opposed the mission, who will back up Jon's account. Exactly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loralei Pyke Posted June 11, 2015 Share Posted June 11, 2015 http://www.westeros.org/Citadel/SSM/Entry/12392 So sayeth the Shepherd, so sayeth the flock. "As for the Night's King (the form I prefer), in the books he is a legendary figure, akin to Lann the Clever and Brandon the Builder, and no more likely to have survived to the present day than they have." GRRM does not say he did not survive - he equates the Night's King's survival to other legendary figures - perhaps we will also see Brandon the Builder and other "heroes" again. There is a theory (sorry, not sure where to find it) that Coldhands' reply, "Your monster, Brandon Stark." means not that he belongs to our Bran, but that he is in fact Brandon Stark - aka Brandon the Builder (Bran chapter in A Dance with Dragons). I don't buy the idea that D&D are so sloppy as to add the name to this character so carelessly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Borodin Posted June 11, 2015 Share Posted June 11, 2015 Again though it's from the books. The WW's are coming and FTW still happens. Even Stannis knows the WW's are coming but still marches south. Restricting your criticism of this to D & D alone is just simplistic and ignorant of the source material. No, I think GRRM screws up, too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dndmn422 Posted June 11, 2015 Share Posted June 11, 2015 I don't know, if I were him I would want to make Benioff stop using me as a shield for the poor plot and character development he's writing in his show. I guess if I read that correctly, GRRM found Linda's twitter rant endearing and he won't be cutting ties. LOL. Do people really still want to try and claim that he and D&D are totally sympatico on the show and he's not at all dissastified and there are no issues there? Do you have links to GRRM's statements or quotes that suggest this in any way? Not saying this isn't the case, but I honestly only see dissatisfied fans projecting this on him. Nothing in the OP here even hints at this intent when I read it. Plus George has said from the beginning the show should be considered separate from the books and he's known the show would catch up and do things differently. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dndmn422 Posted June 11, 2015 Share Posted June 11, 2015 FTW makes no sense because no one is going to give a crap about wildlings when it has just been confirmed that WW are leading a massive army of zombies south. "Fellow men of the Night's Watch. We have seen the horrors that filled our childhood fairytales. They are real and they are marching on the wall! No one will survive. Not a wildling, not you, not your families. No one. We must band together..." *stab* *stab* *stab* For the Watch!!! "Wha...why did you just stab me. This makes no sense." Wildling lover! "Umm, you realize your going to have your head eaten by zombies in a couple days, right?" For the Watch! "It's like you're following through with a plotline that no longer makes any sense given what has just happened to us all." For the Watch!! I understand your criticism here but only ask that you wait until everything is sorted out both on screen and in book. Remember that we are still not even entirely sure the circumstances of FTW in-book. Jon's POV was intentional grey in describing the details. Plus throughout history many assassinations have taken place for selfish, shortsighted reasons. Not sure why that is such a big deal here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShadowKitteh Posted June 11, 2015 Share Posted June 11, 2015 But there definitely seem like their are problems in the GRRM, D&D, HBO relationship, brewing just out of sight ATM. I think that's just wishful thinking by book purists. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShadowKitteh Posted June 11, 2015 Share Posted June 11, 2015 Maybe they don't all agree but FTW is going to be such a eye-roller now that Jon himself has slayed a white walker and convinced wildlings to come south of the wall. The motivation will be absent. Which is why they have Olly all cocked and loaded, perhaps. Because it's not going to be most of the watch. It will me mostly Olly, "For my mum & dad!" At least that's what I think is going to happen, but I'm wrong constantly. I do agree with you, after Hardhome, FTW seems insanely silly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cas Stark Posted June 11, 2015 Share Posted June 11, 2015 I think that's just wishful thinking by book purists. I honestly don't see how you can read GRRM comments this year and not come away with the feeling he's disappointed in the show changes and the sloppiness like the stuff with the Nights King and things like that. So, right back atcha, it's denialism by show fans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Borodin Posted June 11, 2015 Share Posted June 11, 2015 Calling someone a "book purist" is like calling them a "water purist". All it communicates is that you tolerate drinking sewage while they do not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Facebookless Man Posted June 11, 2015 Share Posted June 11, 2015 Again though it's from the books. The WW's are coming and FTW still happens. Even Stannis knows the WW's are coming but still marches south. Restricting your criticism of this to D & D alone is just simplistic and ignorant of the source material.No.Show Jon has slain the boogeyman in single combat in front of hundreds of witnesses. That's an instant hero, of the songs-will-be-sung-about-you-in-a-thousand-fucking-years variety. That's immediate and inconditional allegiance and devotion from anyone who saw it. That's saviour-of-humanity, quasi-religious territory. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daphne of House Vakarian Posted June 11, 2015 Share Posted June 11, 2015 Not really that bothered about the Maegor III or Night King issue.What I take issue with is other more recent and story related inconsistencies like how many daughters Ellaria has by Oberyn or Cersei's first child which seems to have been retconned.Or stuff like the muddled timeline e.g. Myrcella saying she has been in Dorne for "years" while Gilly's baby is ...still a baby not a toddler. Or why Jon and the wildlings ended up North of the Wall while they took ships from Hardhome.I dunno, I'm confused. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daphne of House Vakarian Posted June 11, 2015 Share Posted June 11, 2015 Calling someone a "book purist" is like calling them a "water purist". All it communicates is that you tolerate drinking sewage while they do not. :bowdown: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonCon's Red Beard Posted June 11, 2015 Share Posted June 11, 2015 No. Show Jon has slain the boogeyman in single combat in front of hundreds of witnesses. That's an instant hero, of the songs-will-be-sung-about-you-in-a-thousand-fucking-years variety. That's immediate and inconditional allegiance and devotion from anyone who saw it. That's saviour-of-humanity, quasi-religious territory. He has also gotten information on how to kill them. :dunno: That's why we don't see Hardhome. Because we, like the watch, have no idea what's happening. The Watch is walking blind on this. Jon could have been right or not. The show has proven he was right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daphne of House Vakarian Posted June 11, 2015 Share Posted June 11, 2015 I meant a scenario in-which we got the exact same show, all the same creative choices with the sole difference being Martin being the guy behind them all. That's not a very valid argument.Sorry to say that. Take this analogy, I make my favourite dish.It doesn't turn out that great.If my mom was overseeing me or worked with me closely to make that said dish, it would turn out way better because my mom is a better cook and she has more experience than me,she came up with the said variation of that dish.Therefore she knows better.It logically will turn out way better that mine. To say that we I would get the exact same mediocre dish while my mom has been helping me and guiding me step by step wouldn't make sense.Because under her guide, I would avoid mistakes. That is how I see it. If Martin was working closely with D&D and overseeing the show we would get a different show.Minor differences, major differences, for the best or for the worst...We'd still get a different show. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roxWolfox Posted June 11, 2015 Share Posted June 11, 2015 Because he's not - otherwise they would have. Remember how nice the White Walker was with that baby in season 4? Gentle, paternal, shelterring the fleshy infant from the cold and then the Nights King imbued it with the power to survive the cold. The Nights King is the hero of this saga - the people are the bad guys. Jeez, how much is it going to take for everyone to work it out? What level of human depravity does a human audience have to be subjected to before they give up on the human characters? This is the question this saga is asking and obviously the answer is a lot - humans have more faith in humans, even when they are shown at their most flawed and better options exist, than what they are logically worth. Our species is biased towards itself, which is really quite immature, when you think about it. There are some readers who have given up on caring for the humans in this story. I've been rooting for the WW since book 3. Out with the old and in with the new is my aSoIaF motto. ;) I honestly don't see how you can read GRRM comments this year and not come away with the feeling he's disappointed in the show changes and the sloppiness like the stuff with the Nights King and things like that. So, right back atcha, it's denialism by show fans. I have lost count of the folks who post after reading NAB and interviews with Mr. Martin who keep telling the rest of us to 'read in between the lines' and Mr. Martin feels this (or that) because 'how can he not!'. I believe it's called projection. From what I have heard of his personality, he is a rather blunt, outspoken person. As a blunt person myself, I tend to be taken literally by anyone who knows me...they don't 'read between the lines' of what I'm saying. And now I'm projecting! Argh! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roxWolfox Posted June 11, 2015 Share Posted June 11, 2015 Calling someone a "book purist" is like calling them a "water purist". All it communicates is that you tolerate drinking sewage while they do not. I believe Linda Antonsson, the co-owner of this site, calls herself a book purist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The hairy bear Posted June 11, 2015 Share Posted June 11, 2015 I believe Linda Antonsson, the co-owner of this site, calls herself a book purist. I think the names "book purist" and "book apologist" made more sense in the first seasons, when the quality was higher and the plots had some correspondence. Then I was happy to call myself book purist. But at least for me, my criticisms have moved from "it's different from the books, and I prefer the book's approach. I don't know why they've changed it" to "what they have done is awful by itself, and the comparison is painful". Next season there'll be no books to compare to, and probably the people who criticize the show will continue doing it. Probably even more. It's not a matter of purity, but of quality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Borodin Posted June 11, 2015 Share Posted June 11, 2015 I believe Linda Antonsson, the co-owner of this site, calls herself a book purist. I meant calling someone a book purist as an insult. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.