season 5 deviations... don't make sense.

[normalice]

Like, marrying sansa off to the boltons. That doesn't happen in the books because it's a really dumb idea. The explanation littlefinger basically gave was that Sansa was to marry into the boltons to assassinate them. What the hell? She tells one convincing lie and he thinks she's ready to disregard all hopes of a decent marriage for the minuscule chance to murder a whole family of grown battle-tested warriors? Or was he lying with all that 'caring about her' stuff he said? He kind of gave her a choice in the matter, but that's still a dumb idea. Why would she go with it?

Also, why did littlefinger's men chase after brennidine (sp?) when she introduced herself to Sansa? They were going to kill her? capture her? why? Why was sansa okay with that? "Hi. I promised your mother I would protect you." "Oh. Okay then. Start running."

 

And Jamie sneaking into dorne to get back his niece/daughter. It makes sense, sort of, but the idea that the sand snakes would attack the moment he happened upon his daughter is a little too convenient of a plot development.

[Mrs. Levi Ackerman]

the show aka Dumby and Dimwit's fanfiction.

[TheCasualObserver]

Like, marrying sansa off to the boltons. That doesn't happen in the books because it's a really dumb idea. The explanation littlefinger basically gave was that Sansa was to marry into the boltons to assassinate them. What the hell? She tells one convincing lie and he thinks she's ready to disregard all hopes of a decent marriage for the minuscule chance to murder a whole family of grown battle-tested warriors? Or was he lying with all that 'caring about her' stuff he said? He kind of gave her a choice in the matter, but that's still a dumb idea. Why would she go with it?

Also, why did littlefinger's men chase after brennidine (sp?) when she introduced herself to Sansa? They were going to kill her? capture her? why? Why was sansa okay with that? "Hi. I promised your mother I would protect you." "Oh. Okay then. Start running."

 

And Jamie sneaking into dorne to get back his niece/daughter. It makes sense, sort of, but the idea that the sand snakes would attack the moment he happened upon his daughter is a little too convenient of a plot development.

Not to piss on your post but we already have an R and R thread for when the show starts getting to you. 

However, these decisions are best viewed as a result of this being an adaption of a complex book series, rather than examine the internal inconsistencies of season 5. You will go mad if you spend your time trying to work out what LF hoped to gain from the match, why Sansa agreed to it, or why Jaime bothered going to Dorne at all.

Outside the context of the show things start to make a little more sense, because Sophie Turner is a big draw now and burgeoning movie star, and without her in Winterfell she would have had to spend more time in the Vale. Not enough screentime for her maybe? And the use of Dorne this season was an attempt to capitalize on the success of Padro Pascal as Oberyn last season. The next time you find yourself confused over why a character is behaving in a certain way, save yourself some pain and instead ask "why do the writers want this character behaving this way?" 

[Maid So Fair]

Not to piss on your post but we already have an R and R thread for when the show starts getting to you. 

However, these decisions are best viewed as a result of this being an adaption of a complex book series, rather than examine the internal inconsistencies of season 5. You will go mad if you spend your time trying to work out what LF hoped to gain from the match, why Sansa agreed to it, or why Jaime bothered going to Dorne at all.

Outside the context of the show things start to make a little more sense, because Sophie Turner is a big draw now and burgeoning movie star, and without her in Winterfell she would have had to spend more time in the Vale. Not enough screentime for her maybe? And the use of Dorne this season was an attempt to capitalize on the success of Padro Pascal as Oberyn last season. The next time you find yourself confused over why a character is behaving in a certain way, save yourself some pain and instead ask "why do the writers want this character behaving this way?" 

Giving a popular character more screen time is perfectly understandable. But it doesn't excuse bad writing teeming with plot holes. Why not give a popular actor more screentime by involving them in a storyline that actually makes sense?

[Le Cygne]

Yeah, the screentime thing is an excuse, not an answer. They rushed past her own story to make her a minor character in a plot that made no sense.

[Stannis is the man....nis]

It has nothing to do with screentime it has to do with raping her for "OMG" reactions

[TheCasualObserver]

Yeah, the screentime thing is an excuse, not an answer. They rushed past her own story to make her a minor character in a plot that made no sense.

I agree with you. My point was that there is no reason to look at the internal logic of the show because it simply doesn't stand up in many cases in season 5. Winterfell, Dorne and King's Landing were riddled with problems and you can't hand wave them all away.

[Le Cygne]

I agree with you. My point was that there is no reason to look at the internal logic of the show because it simply doesn't stand up in many cases in season 5. Winterfell, Dorne and King's Landing were riddled with problems and you can't hand wave them all away.

Agreed, I am just saying the external logic often doesn't make sense, either.

[TheCasualObserver]

Agreed, I am just saying the external logic often doesn't make sense, either.

That depends entirely on what they were going for. If it was purely to create shock then everything that happened in Winterfell makes perfect sense. I find it reprehensible, but there you go. 

[Le Cygne]

That's an excuse, not sense.

[Channel4s-JonSnow]

That depends entirely on what they were going for. If it was purely to create shock then everything that happened in Winterfell makes perfect sense. I find it reprehensible, but there you go. 

there's no suggestion it was for shock value.

[Alayne's Shadow.]

there's no suggestion it was for shock value.

No suggestion? "We wanted to include a story that we loved from the books." "Who do we use?" It's pretty much established by themselves that Sansa was put in Jeyne's story for maximum effectiveness. 

[Channel4s-JonSnow]

No suggestion? "We wanted to include a story that we loved from the books." "Who do we use?" It's pretty much established by themselves that Sansa was put in Jeyne's story for maximum effectiveness. 

how does that quote manage to be so continuously misunderstood and taken out of context.

[Alayne's Shadow.]

how does that quote manage to be so continuously misunderstood and taken out of context.

Then let's put in context, shall we?

 “We really wanted Sansa to play a major part this season,” Benioff said. “If we were going to stay absolutely faithful to the book, it was going to be very hard to do that. There was as subplot we loved from the books, but it used a character that’s not in the show.” 

Subplot: Jeyne's rape.

Besides, Cogman pointed out: “You have this storyline with Ramsay. Do you have one of your leading ladies—who is an incredibly talented actor who we’ve followed for five years and viewers love and adore—do it? Or do you bring in a new character to do it? To me, the question answers itself: You use the character the audience is invested in.” 

The character THE AUDIENCE IS INVESTED IN. We know what the storyline is about. We know why Sansa was used. She was the buy-in in the rape of Winterfell. Since Sansa was an established character, for them it was better to put her in that storyline, because it gave the audience emotional value. therefore, emotionally manipulating the audience by raping Sansa. Shock for the sake of Shock.

 

Edit: There's no mention whatsoever of this being Theon's subplot, only Ramsay's. Make no mistake. Sansa wasn't raped for Theon's sake, even though they say that it's "powerful" to reunite a Stark with Theon under these circumstances. She was raped for Ramsay's story, because unlike the books, the focus of this storyline is placed at Ramsay's feet. 

[Stag_legion]

Not to piss on your post but we already have an R and R thread for when the show starts getting to you. 

However, these decisions are best viewed as a result of this being an adaption of a complex book series, rather than examine the internal inconsistencies of season 5. You will go mad if you spend your time trying to work out what LF hoped to gain from the match, why Sansa agreed to it, or why Jaime bothered going to Dorne at all.

Outside the context of the show things start to make a little more sense, because Sophie Turner is a big draw now and burgeoning movie star, and without her in Winterfell she would have had to spend more time in the Vale. Not enough screentime for her maybe? And the use of Dorne this season was an attempt to capitalize on the success of Padro Pascal as Oberyn last season. The next time you find yourself confused over why a character is behaving in a certain way, save yourself some pain and instead ask "why do the writers want this character behaving this way?" 

This right here is the problem with with the show, It has become a show about the most popular characters, rather than a show where the chief concern should be a good plot. I don't buy that the medium necessitated this regression in quality. Sansa could have had little screen time or been out of the season entirely and It would have been ok. they did that with Bran. For the winterfell plot they should have gone with jeyne poole, either bring back the season 1 actress or bring in a new actress. Its a BS argument that no one would care for the character being abused if it wasn't a known character. And Poole's character could have been laid to rest after escaping winterfell simply by theon recounting next season that she went off to live in some northern village or was taking in by some stark loyalist. Then the character wouldn't need to come up again and yet the plot would make sense.

 

The show should first and foremost be about a good story, characters should come secondary to the plot. This is not supposed to be fan fiction.

[Channel4s-JonSnow]

Then let's put in context, shall we?

 “We really wanted Sansa to play a major part this season,” Benioff said. “If we were going to stay absolutely faithful to the book, it was going to be very hard to do that. There was as subplot we loved from the books, but it used a character that’s not in the show.” 

Subplot: Jeyne's rape.

Besides, Cogman pointed out: “You have this storyline with Ramsay. Do you have one of your leading ladies—who is an incredibly talented actor who we’ve followed for five years and viewers love and adore—do it? Or do you bring in a new character to do it? To me, the question answers itself: You use the character the audience is invested in.” 

The character THE AUDIENCE IS INVESTED IN. We know what the storyline is about. We know why Sansa was used. She was the buy-in in the rape of Winterfell. Since Sansa was an established character, for them it was better to put her in that storyline, because it gave the audience emotional value. therefore, emotionally manipulating the audience by raping Sansa. Shock for the sake of Shock.

 

Edit: There's no mention whatsoever of this being Theon's subplot, only Ramsay's. Make no mistake. Sansa wasn't raped for Theon's sake, even though they say that it's "powerful" to reunite a Stark with Theon under these circumstances. She was raped for Ramsay's story, because unlike the books, the focus of this storyline is placed at Ramsay's feet. 

Funny how everyone here who quotes that article conveniently omits the paragraph in the middle:

 “In the books, Sansa has very few chapters in the Vale once she’s up there. That was not going to be an option for one of our lead characters. While this is a very bold departure, [we liked] the power of bringing a Stark back to Winterfell and having her reunite with Theon under these circumstances.” 

Clearly showing that one of their main motivations was to bring Sansa back to Winterfell and have her interact with Theon. The subplot they are clearly referring to is the ghost of winterfell subplot with theon. 

[Alayne's Shadow.]

Clearly showing that one of their main motivations was to bring Sansa back to Winterfell and have her interact with Theon. The subplot they are clearly referring to is the ghost of winterfell subplot with theon. 

They outright state that it's a Ramsay storyline. The Ghost of Winterfell subplot wasn't adapted. The only thing actually similar to something that happens on the books is the fact that Ramsay's bride gets raped. And conveniently, you omitted the part where they clearly state that they used Sansa because she was a character the audience was invested in. Most importantly, the character that wasn't cast was without a doubt, Jeyne Poole. The storyline she shares with Ramsay is not the Ghost of Winterfell subplot. It's the rape, beating subplot. 

And I do agree one of their motivations was to make Sansa return to Winterfell and interact with Theon. After all, she was put into this storyline for the sole purpose of raising the stakes. More like a plot-device than a character. 

[StepStark]

Funny how everyone here who quotes that article conveniently omits the paragraph in the middle:

 “In the books, Sansa has very few chapters in the Vale once she’s up there. That was not going to be an option for one of our lead characters. While this is a very bold departure, [we liked] the power of bringing a Stark back to Winterfell and having her reunite with Theon under these circumstances.” 

Clearly showing that one of their main motivations was to bring Sansa back to Winterfell and have her interact with Theon. The subplot they are clearly referring to is the ghost of winterfell subplot with theon. 

What "ghost of Winterfell" subplot you are talking about? There weren't even traces of that subplot in the show. They were clearly not even thinking about that subplot at all, because otherwise at least some of Theon's book scenes would happen in the show.

And by the way, what does it mean that "that was not going to be an option for one of our lead characters"? Really, what does that mean even? Is Sansa, as one of their lead characters, really better off if she's thrown in some ridiculous plot that makes zero sense, than if she had her screen-time reduced?

[Le Cygne]

There's so much wrong with their excuses. But just the part where they call her "a" Stark like she's a mascot and not a character in her own right, and say she will "reunite with Theon" when she never had anything to do with him before. This is not a story they have developed for her at all, it's just plugging her into someone else's story, after cutting her own story. And major and secondary characters do not at all serve the same purpose in a narrative, yet they turned her into one. None of this makes any sense at all. And that's just a small fraction of the things wrong with this decision. There's much, much more.

[JonCon's Red Beard]

Funny how everyone here who quotes that article conveniently omits the paragraph in the middle:

 “In the books, Sansa has very few chapters in the Vale once she’s up there. That was not going to be an option for one of our lead characters. While this is a very bold departure, [we liked] the power of bringing a Stark back to Winterfell and having her reunite with Theon under these circumstances.” 

Clearly showing that one of their main motivations was to bring Sansa back to Winterfell and have her interact with Theon. The subplot they are clearly referring to is the ghost of winterfell subplot with theon. 

Bold is nonsense. Bran is also an important character and they had no problem not bringing him back for one season

Also, "the power of bringing a Stark back to Winterfell and having her reunite with Theon under these circumstances" is ridiculous. By power they mean "the shock of bringing back a Stark to Winterfell to make her suffer in her own home", most like. What was powerful about Sansa returning except the fact she was just there? There was nothing of effect of that specially if we consider she has left WF again: no northern lords rallying for her, not people trying to put down the Boltons, not one single relevant person saying "the Starks are back! let's fight for them!". A powerful moment needs to have an impact. The only impact was "she's been raped on her parent's bed!".

A Stark back in Winterfell should be the climax and resolution of the story, whether is Jon, Sansa or Rickon. They used it as a excuse for a shocking move but added little or nothing to the plot. Sansa could have been married to Ramsay in Deepwood Motte and it would have been the same.