So what is HBO's strategy on the Jon Snow question?

[Cas Stark]

So if they are lying, they failed in their purpose, since basically no one believes them :lol:

About GRRM, it's only been a couple days. He might comment on it in the future if he feels the need. I don't think he commented on LSH until just this season, but I could be wrong about that.

Lots of people believe them, more people believe them than if they said 'no comment' or 'you think he's dead, do you?' or 'you never know' or 'he looks dead' or some other obvious dodge.

Hey, maybe he is off the show for good. I can't imagine how they work the Northern plot without him, or that he dies in the books after not accomplishing anything meaningful, but GRRM can go off the rails as well the show.

But, it seems much more likely this is a little game they're playing. These are the same people who trolled the viewers with putting benjen stark in the previously on segment afterall.

[R4W13Y]

Lots of people believe them, more people believe them than if they said 'no comment' or 'you think he's dead, do you?' or 'you never know' or 'he looks dead' or some other obvious dodge.

Hey, maybe he is off the show for good. I can't imagine how they work the Northern plot without him, or that he dies in the books after not accomplishing anything meaningful, but GRRM can go off the rails as well the show.

But, it seems much more likely this is a little game they're playing. These are the same people who trolled the viewers with putting benjen stark in the previously on segment afterall.

Well I was responding specifically to you saying that many bloggers/publications/etc. don't believe he's dead. Thus, their purpose failed if that is indeed true, as you asserted.

What I think is it was a bad idea to say anything at all. Now people are confused. Book readers will not believe them (as we see here) and show only watchers will most likely get spoiled online or in real life by someone so they won't believe them either. I don't think their intended purpose (either tell the truth to shut people up about it because they knew there wold be debate or lie and hope people are surprised even more next season) has happened regardless of what it originally was.

[Cas Stark]

They can't say nothing either. Saying nothing is the same as admitting he's not dead.

[R4W13Y]

They can't say nothing either. Saying nothing is the same as admitting he's not dead.

I don't think so. But I think if they had to say something, they could have simply stated the facts and reiterated what we've seen. If D&D said "He's stabbed multiple times, lying in the snow, bleeding out. We don't think the scene is ambiguous at all" that isn't technically a lie, nor is it admitting he's dead or alive. It's a way around the question, sure, but it's also not as definitive as "yes he's dead dead and not coming back" or as vague/winky as "well I don't know!! we will see!!!!".

Plus, I don't see the harm in letting people speculate he might come back. They are doing that anyway, so again, by definitively stating he is dead dead they didn't really accomplish anything that wouldn't have happened anyway.

[Le Cygne]

They can't say nothing either. Saying nothing is the same as admitting he's not dead.

That's what they did with Sandor, said nothing. We know he's not dead in the books. And I think he's returning next season. Compare and contrast:

When asked point-blank of Snow is firmly gone—as in, is actor Kit Harington released from his Thrones contract?—showrunner Dan Weiss told EW, “Dead is dead.”

“We would hope that after seeing the scene and the way it’s shot that the answer to that will be unambiguous in the minds of the people watching it,” Weiss explained. “It should be pretty clear what happens in by the time you’re done seeing that scene. It’s not an, ‘Oh what just happened scene?’” ...

“In a book, you can present that kind of ambiguity,” Weiss said. “In a show, everybody sees it for what it is. It’s that rule: ‘If don’t see the body then they’re not really dead.’ Like when we cut Ned’s head off, we didn’t want a gory Monty Python geyser of blood, but we needed to see the blade enter his neck and cut out on the frame where the blade was mid-neck—it was longest discussion ever of where to cut a frame; two hours of talking about whether to cut at frame six or frame seven or frame eight. And that’s all by way of saying we needed Ned’s death to be totally unambiguous. I remember reading the book and going back and forth, like, ‘Did I miss something? Was [Ned] swapped out for somebody else?’ There’s a level of ambiguity because you’re not seeing something starkly represented. In the book, you can write around things to preserve a certain level of mystery that you have to commit to on screen.”

http://www.ew.com/article/2015/06/14/game-thrones-jon-snow-really-dead

I know better than to ask if The Hound is dead, but: Can you tease anything about what to expect from Brienne’s storyline in 5 now that she’s been through this unexpected event?

You can expect that she’ll remain irritated with Pod for some time to come.

http://www.ew.com/article/2014/06/15/game-of-thrones-showrunners-on-season-4-finale-twists

[Cas Stark]

I don't think so. But I think if they had to say something, they could have simply stated the facts and reiterated what we've seen. If D&D said "He's stabbed multiple times, lying in the snow, bleeding out. We don't think the scene is ambiguous at all" that isn't technically a lie, nor is it admitting he's dead or alive. It's a way around the question, sure, but it's also not as definitive as "yes he's dead dead and not coming back" or as vague/winky as "well I don't know!! we will see!!!!".

Plus, I don't see the harm in letting people speculate he might come back. They are doing that anyway, so again, by definitively stating he is dead dead they didn't really accomplish anything that wouldn't have happened anyway.

When have the D's ever given you a reason to think they could actually finesse a non answer answer without crossing the line? LOLZ. These are the same guys who can't remember what they write on their own show. The idea they can conduct a flawless PR highwire act hitting the exact mark between obfusication and lying is about as crazy as them now writing a cogent plot for the show. They're not up to it.

Like I said, I admit I certainly could be wrong, but all things considered, it seems much more likely Kit comes back.

[Le Cygne]

Like I said, I admit I certainly could be wrong, but all things considered, it seems much more likely Kit comes back.

I think so, too. I think they are playing a game, like you said. Nothing else makes any sense. All the R+L=J stuff. One episode, I think three characters said "promise me"...

[R4W13Y]

That's what they did with Sandor, said nothing. We know he's not dead in the books. And I think he's returning next season. Compare and contrast:

http://www.ew.com/article/2015/06/14/game-thrones-jon-snow-really-dead

http://www.ew.com/article/2014/06/15/game-of-thrones-showrunners-on-season-4-finale-twists

Thanks for those quotes. I agree, they really went out of their way to drive the point home. They also didn't mention anything about Lady Stoneheart/Catelyn in interviews that would keep people wondering if she was really dead dead (at least, I don't remember them doing that). I remember them being silent on that issue as well, even at CC. And they are still silent about it.

So silence is indeed an option, I think.

When have the D's ever given you a reason to think they could actually finesse a non answer answer without crossing the line? LOLZ. These are the same guys who can't remember what they write on their own show. The idea they can conduct a flawless PR highwire act hitting the exact mark between obfusication and lying is about as crazy as them now writing a cogent plot for the show. They're not up to it.

Like I said, I admit I certainly could be wrong, but all things considered, it seems much more likely Kit comes back.

Haha you got me there :P

I also admit I could be wrong. I hope I am wrong. I think it's a ridiculously, incredibly stupid idea if they do indeed leave him for dead (assuming he comes back in the books).

[SerJeremiahLouistark]

Yes, yes, YES. This!

Besides, this is FILM (well, digital HD video...), if they can make WWs, they can change Kit enough to keep him in the role, should that be required.

Also when George met D&D for the first time to see if he would allow them to make this show George asked them 1 question.

The question was, "who is Jon Snow's mother?" Their answer won them the bid.

[Cas Stark]

Thanks for those quotes. I agree, they really went out of their way to drive the point home. They also didn't mention anything about Lady Stoneheart/Catelyn in interviews that would keep people wondering if she was really dead dead (at least, I don't remember them doing that). I remember them being silent on that issue as well, even at CC. And they are still silent about it.

So silence is indeed an option, I think.

Haha you got me there :P

I also admit I could be wrong. I hope I am wrong. I think it's a ridiculously, incredibly stupid idea if they do indeed leave him for dead (assuming he comes back in the books).

Listen, him being dead and resurrected by blood magic, if this what happens in the books is stupid as far as I am concerned. There is not a shortage of stupid here.

Honestly, it would be funny if, like so many times, they ARE doing exactly what they seem to be doing, keeping Stannis alive and throwing Jon Snow off the show. That would be hiliarious in a bad way, but it would also be consistent with their inability to finesse anything, what you see is what you get, somebody start talking about killing someone, burning someone, diseases, giving the side eye....it happens. Which also means Carol will eventually let loose and attempt to burn down KL, letting out her inner Cersei.

So, we'll see.

[kissdbyfire]

Fro. The article that @Le Cygne linked:

But as for HBO’s hit series, the show’s team is taking the public stance that Jon is dead. Harington was pretty firm about it in our interview. Weiss noted that when filming a show or movie, the ambiguity of Martin’s final Dance with Dragons chapter is tougher to pull off—a producer typically has to clearly commit to a character’s fate, one way or the other. “In a book, you can present that kind of ambiguity,” Weiss said. “In a show, everybody sees it for what it is. It’s that rule: ‘If don’t see the body then they’re not really dead.’ Like when we cut Ned’s head off, we didn’t want a gory Monty Python geyser of blood, but we needed to see the blade enter his neck and cut out on the frame where the blade was mid-neck—it was longest discussion ever of where to cut a frame; two hours of talking about whether to cut at frame six or frame seven or frame eight. And that’s all by way of saying we needed Ned’s death to be totally unambiguous. I remember reading the book and going back and forth, like, ‘Did I miss something? Was [Ned] swapped out for somebody else?’ There’s a level of ambiguity because you’re not seeing something starkly represented. In the book, you can write around things to preserve a certain level of mystery that you have to commit to on screen.”

Ah, that rule! Am I to expect Stannis to be alive then? :rolleyes:

Yeah, have to take everything these guys say with a ton of salt.

[Hajk]

I also don't agree there hasn't been an emphasis on AAR in the show, it has just been focused solely on Stannis even if not by name, and that got blown out of the water in the last episode when he lost. There was never the doubt in Mel's visions that we got in the book but the focus has been there. I'd wager the reason there wasn't the doubt was precisely because they didn't want the audience thinking there was even the possibility of it being anyone else in Westeros (I imagine many think Dany might be a possibility).

The book evidence for Dany is quite strong. Especially if Azor Ahai is the champion of fire, not ice and fire. In fact it is so strong that one of the most common arguments against it is that it would be too obvious.

But in the show there has been little focus on it apart from the statements of one priestess of an obscure (at least in the show) religion. Characters from other traditions that we normally interpret as either being related to or identical with AA are not mentioned (e.g. the Targaryen PTwP obsession, the Last Hero, etc.) as far as I can remember. There is a whole lot of stuff about Rhaegar's obsession with this prophecy that comes from Dany's visions in the HoTU, Barristan's statements about Rhaegar and something that he read to Dany, and Maester Aemon's discussions with Sam and Melisandre. None of this is even mentioned even though there has been ample opportunity to present it. Sallador's description of the Azor Ahai myth is also missing. This was Melisandre's satement in the first episode of season 2

"After the long summer, darkness will fall heavy on the world. The stars will bleed. The cold breath of winter will freeze the seas... and the dead shall rise in the North...In the ancient books its written that a warrior will draw a burning sword from the fire; and that sword shall be Lightbringer. Stannis Baratheon, Warrior of Light, your sword awaits you."

That is probably the longest passage the show has ever had on the topic (40 episodes ago). Other than that she made some mention of Salt and Smoke etc. There has been very little emphasis after the second season (when they might still have been planning to make it a major thing). nothing about the special properties of Lightbringer, so far as I can remember, appears either. All in all it is quite understated.

Most significantly, the whole Targaryen connection with the prophecy has been ignored completely by the show (the HoTu visions, Rhaegar's obsession etc.), and this connection is exactly what is needed if Jon is AA.

[R4W13Y]

Listen, him being dead and resurrected by blood magic, if this what happens in the books is stupid as far as I am concerned. There is not a shortage of stupid here.

Honestly, it would be funny if, like so many times, they ARE doing exactly what they seem to be doing, keeping Stannis alive and throwing Jon Snow off the show. That would be hiliarious in a bad way, but it would also be consistent with their inability to finesse anything, what you see is what you get, somebody start talking about killing someone, burning someone, diseases, giving the side eye....it happens. Which also means Carol will eventually let loose and attempt to burn down KL, letting out her inner Cersei.

So, we'll see.

Yeah, I've already come to peace that Jon Snow as we know him is dead and gone. He will come back (through whatever means GRRM decides to do it) slightly changed or completely changed, or not even human.

[Astromech]

Imagine how many times they will be asked if Jon Snow is dead before season 6. Now imagine how many more times they would be asked that same question were they to be ambiguous as to his fate.

But he will warg into Wun Wun. It is known.

[Le Cygne]

Yeah, have to take everything these guys say with a ton of salt.

An ocean of salt.

[Hajk]

They can't say nothing either. Saying nothing is the same as admitting he's not dead.

No, saying nothing is saying nothing. There would be greater ambiguity and many people may have come to an agnostic conclusion if they said nothing. But that would be it. The "perhaps yes, perhaps no" would still be in the air. The fact is that they are trying to eliminate this question by clearly supporting the "yes" side. This is easier to explain if they have actually decided for the Yes side (i.e. they have committed to that fate for the character).

[Hajk]

Imagine how many times they will be asked if Jon Snow is dead before season 6. Now imagine how many more times they would be asked that same question were they to be ambiguous as to his fate.

But he will warg into Wun Wun. It is known.

Probably the same number of times. This question will be asked repeatedly and they must have known that already.

[Hajk]

An ocean of salt.

And smoke.

[Astromech]

Probably the same number of times. This question will be asked repeatedly and they must have known that already.

Maybe they felt taking a stance either way would quash some of those questions.

[R4W13Y]

Probably the same number of times. This question will be asked repeatedly and they must have known that already.

Yeah, they are still going to get asked it a lot even though they said "definitely not". People are still going to speculate even though they said "definitely not". So if their point was to lie and make everyone think he's dead when he's not and to have no one ask them about it again, I have to conclude that they failed.