Ramsay in S6

[Barbossa]

I hope Tormund is going to to squish his head with his bear hands, after jon flays him alive.

[Rhollo]

2 minutes ago, Lautrec said:

Shireen being burned on the show was obviously about Stannis as a character, and not her.

It was meant to be about Stannis' character. But it just seemed like a comletely random, unprompted act of madness.

[Lautrec]

20 minutes ago, Rhollo said:

It was meant to be about Stannis' character. But it just seemed like a comletely random, unprompted act of madness.

They could have achieved greater clarity if they spent more time on it, but all of the necessary setup was there. Shireen's death was foreshadowed in S4 in the scene between Melisandre and Selyse and at the beginning of S5 in Castle Black. In the tent scene between Melisandre and Stannis he makes it clear that Shireen is off limits, but you can feel the conflict in him, and when he later talks to his daughter in that scene with the book, it seems that he made up his mind to sacrifice her, but is greatly struggling with it. TV, like film, is a visual medium and the visual language is as important, if not more so, than the dialogues. In the sacrifice scene the camera lingers on Stannis's face and we hear the screams and the fire in the background as a constant reminder of what is happening and as context as to what he is conflicted about, but all of the visual focus is on Stannis and Dillane's performance, with some shots of Selyse. This was not just about avoiding gratuitous violence; remember, this is a show that showed in a clear shot a pregnant woman getting repeatedly stabbed in the belly. The camera was on Stannis because the scene is about him, and not Shireen. 

[Channel4s-JonSnow]

39 minutes ago, Rhollo said:

It was meant to be about Stannis' character. But it just seemed like a comletely random, unprompted act of madness.

It was rushed agreed. But it wasn't random, its been building up to it for a long time and was clearly about Stannis.

[Ser Quork]

Nonsense.  They got rid of Stannis early so they can give his Winterfell arc to fan favourite Jon Snow just as they got rid of Barristan to give his Hand of the Queen arc to Tyrion.  Pure fan-service - little logic in-world.

[Channel4s-JonSnow]

2 minutes ago, Ser Quork said:

Nonsense.  They got rid of Stannis early so they can give his Winterfell arc to fan favourite Jon Snow just as they got rid of Barristan to give his Hand of the Queen arc to Tyrion.  Pure fan-service - little logic in-world.

Sigh. 

[Rhollo]

29 minutes ago, Lautrec said:

They could have achieved greater clarity if they spent more time on it, but all of the necessary setup was there. Shireen's death was foreshadowed in S4 in the scene between Melisandre and Selyse and at the beginning of S5 in Castle Black. In the tent scene between Melisandre and Stannis he makes it clear that Shireen is off limits, but you can feel the conflict in him, and when he later talks to his daughter in that scene with the book, it seems that he made up his mind to sacrifice her, but is greatly struggling with it. TV, like film, is a visual medium and the visual language is as important, if not more so, than the dialogues. In the sacrifice scene the camera lingers on Stannis's face and we hear the screams and the fire in the background as a constant reminder of what is happening and as context as to what he is conflicted about, but all of the visual focus is on Stannis and Dillane's performance, with some shots of Selyse. This was not just about avoiding gratuitous violence; remember, this is a show that showed in a clear shot a pregnant woman getting repeatedly stabbed in the belly. The camera was on Stannis because the scene is about him, and not Shireen. 

I agree that this is what they were trying to show us.

But to me, they just didn't succeed, I could not feel shocked or disappointed or angry at Stannis that he was willing to make this horrible decision, instead I remember just frowning in front of my screen, going, "Wait, what ? Why now ?", being confused about his motivation to do so. And I still, to this day, have not found a satisfying answer. What exactly did he wish/think to gain from the sacrifice ? Better weather ? Certain victory ?

So, we might have to disagree on the necessary setup being there. Foreshadowing is not setup. Characters can't just do something, because it was foreshadowed. Their actions still have to be motivated.

[kissdbyfire]

2 minutes ago, Ser Quork said:

Nonsense.  They got rid of Stannis early so they can give his Winterfell arc to fan favourite Jon Snow just as they got rid of Barristan to give his Hand of the Queen arc to Tyrion.  Pure fan-service - little logic in-world.

Indeed. It's so obvious it's almost painful to keep reading explanations that make no sense whatsoever. 

[Channel4s-JonSnow]

3 minutes ago, Rhollo said:

I agree that this is what they were trying to show us.

But to me, they just didn't succeed, I could not feel shocked or disappointed or angry at Stannis that he was willing to make this horrible decision, instead I remember just frowning in front of my screen, going, "Wait, what ? Why now ?", being confused about his motivation to do so. And I still, to this day, have not found a satisfying answer. What exactly did he wish/think to gain from the sacrifice ? Better weather ? Certain victory ?

So, we might have to disagree on the necessary setup being there. Foreshadowing is not setup. Characters can't just do something, because it was foreshadowed. Their actions still have to be motivated.

Maybe but that is your personal interpretation. I understood it just fine. There were a number of episodes where it was set up, it was established that he didn't really want to do it but was forced into the situation and made that choice and was pretty much devastated by it. 

What he hoped to gain from it is unclear, but its pretty apparent that he put his trust in the red god, that he needed to make a huge sacrifice if he was to fulfil his destiny. Its not like he was asking for something specific like 'get rid of the snow', but that he was going to die there in the snow unless the choice was made. 

Like I said, it was a little rushed, but to say there was no motivation there at all is just untrue. 

[Ser Quork]

5 minutes ago, Rhollo said:

I agree that this is what they were trying to show us.

But to me, they just didn't succeed, I could not feel shocked or disappointed or angry at Stannis that he was willing to make this horrible decision, I remember that I was just frowning in front of my screen, going, "Wait, what ? Why now ?", being confused about his motivation to do so. And I still, to this day, have not found a satisfying answer. What exactly did he wish/think to gain from the sacrifice ? Better weather ? Certain victory ?

So, we might have to disagree on the necessary setup being there. Foreshadowing is not setup. Characters can't just do something, because it was foreshadowed. Their actions still have to be motivated.

Absolutely right.  They needed to show how dire circumstances had become and they fudged it for the sake of speed.  When I think of all the rubbish that could have been cut throughout that season to set this up properly, it's a real shame. 

[Rhollo]

2 minutes ago, Channel4s-JonSnow said:

What he hoped to gain from it is unclear, but its pretty apparent that he put his trust in the red god, that he needed to make a huge sacrifice if he was to fulfil his destiny. Its not like he was asking for something specific like 'get rid of the snow', but that he was going to die there in the snow unless the choice was made. 

The "unclear/nothing specific" part is the one I just can't agree on. 

When Stannis produced the shadow baby with Mel it was for the specific purpose to asassinate Renly, when he threw Gendrys leeches into the fire, he was extremely specific that each one was supposed bring an usurper down. And now, with the biggest sacrifice yet, he is like: "Just help me somehow, R'hollor" ?

[Channel4s-JonSnow]

4 minutes ago, Rhollo said:

The "unclear/nothing specific" part is the one I just can't agree on. 

When Stannis produced the shadow baby with Mel it was for the specific purpose to asassinate Renly, when he threw Gendrys leeches into the fire, he was extremely specific that each one was supposed bring an usurper down. And now, with the biggest sacrifice yet, he is like: "Just help me somehow, R'hollor" ?

Not really, by that point he already has his faith in R'hollor and he knew what his purpose was. Why would he need to know the specific outcome of the sacrifice? Its not like there is a written contract somewhere. The shadow baby was a specific spell that created a shadow baby.

The leeches were pretty loose as to how they did their job, in fact you could even suggest they had no effect whatsoever, seeing as all those deaths were the result of external events unrelated to the leeches. In the same way it could be said that the sacrifice had zero effect as well, and that Mel has been conning him, and possibly herself all along.

[Rhollo]

40 minutes ago, Channel4s-JonSnow said:

Not really, by that point he already has his faith in R'hollor and he knew what his purpose was. Why would he need to know the specific outcome of the sacrifice? Its not like there is a written contract somewhere. The shadow baby was a specific spell that created a shadow baby.

The leeches were pretty loose as to how they did their job, in fact you could even suggest they had no effect whatsoever, seeing as all those deaths were the result of external events unrelated to the leeches. In the same way it could be said that the sacrifice had zero effect as well, and that Mel has been conning him, and possibly herself all along.

From an outside POV one could say that, yes, from an Stannis POV, if he had faith in Rhollor he should have been pretty convinced, that sacrifices can yield very specific outcomes, because that was his expierience.

And why would he (want to) know the specific outcome of his biggest sacrifice ? Well, because he is a tactician.

Playing the "Game of Thrones" Stannis in the end just seemed to me like a player who has lost half of his chips the last few rounds, was a bit fed up and then said "Ah, fuck it" and went all-in before the flop with a 3-5 in hand.

[Channel4s-JonSnow]

20 minutes ago, Rhollo said:

From an outside POV one could say that, yes, from an Stannis POV, if he had faith in Rhollor he should have been pretty convinced, that sacrifices can yield very specific outcomes, because that was his expierience.

And why would he (want to) know the specific outcome of his biggest sacrifice ? Well, because he is a tactician.

Playing the "Game of Thrones" Stannis in the end just seemed to me like a player who has lost half of his chips the last few rounds, was a bit fed up and then said "Ah, fuck it" and went all-in before the flop with a 3-5 in hand.

Well the point is more that he felt he couldn't go back, that he HAD to move forward and win Winterfell, that the Gods had decreed that he was destined to do it, and he didn't have a lot of choice at that point. He put his trust that it would work, I'm not sure what else you need to know, you don't go asking gods for the exact outcomes of sacrifices, they don't work like that.

[Cas Stark]

7 minutes ago, Channel4s-JonSnow said:

Well the point is more that he felt he couldn't go back, that he HAD to move forward and win Winterfell, that the Gods had decreed that he was destined to do it, and he didn't have a lot of choice at that point. He put his trust that it would work, I'm not sure what else you need to know, you don't go asking gods for the exact outcomes of sacrifices, they don't work like that.

Except it has worked like that on GOT.  The shadow baby did a specific thing, the thing that it was created to do.  Mel wanted to kill Gendry to raise the stone dragon, a specific thing.  The leeches were a specific thing.  Each previous time that Mel's magic was discussed or used it was for a specific outcome in mind.  Except when Stannis has his only child burned alive before his troops...then, it was 'whatever....'

 

 

[The Scabbard Of the Morning]

1 hour ago, Cas Stark said:

Except it has worked like that on GOT.  The shadow baby did a specific thing, the thing that it was created to do.  Mel wanted to kill Gendry to raise the stone dragon, a specific thing.  The leeches were a specific thing.  Each previous time that Mel's magic was discussed or used it was for a specific outcome in mind.  Except when Stannis has his only child burned alive before his troops...then, it was 'whatever....'

 

 

Especially since burning the daughter he loved is asking far more of him than the previous acts.  And I just want to reiterate that foreshadowing is not "set up", just because you have some foreshadowing of an event that a character will do doesn't mean you can now have the character do it without motivation and then point to the foreshadowing. Characters still need to have motivation to act in the the moment that they act.  And GOT completely failed to provide the proper motivation.

[Stannis is the man....nis]

It's painfully obvious from the books and if we are to believe D&D about last season that Stannis will be the one to get rid of the Boltons and will make this Shireen call near the end of TWOW or in ADOS because of the WW attacking so they decided to have him do it now and give his arch to Jon

[Lord_Ravenstone]

12 hours ago, Lautrec said:

They could have achieved greater clarity if they spent more time on it, but all of the necessary setup was there. Shireen's death was foreshadowed in S4 in the scene between Melisandre and Selyse and at the beginning of S5 in Castle Black. In the tent scene between Melisandre and Stannis he makes it clear that Shireen is off limits, but you can feel the conflict in him, and when he later talks to his daughter in that scene with the book, it seems that he made up his mind to sacrifice her, but is greatly struggling with it. TV, like film, is a visual medium and the visual language is as important, if not more so, than the dialogues. In the sacrifice scene the camera lingers on Stannis's face and we hear the screams and the fire in the background as a constant reminder of what is happening and as context as to what he is conflicted about, but all of the visual focus is on Stannis and Dillane's performance, with some shots of Selyse. This was not just about avoiding gratuitous violence; remember, this is a show that showed in a clear shot a pregnant woman getting repeatedly stabbed in the belly. The camera was on Stannis because the scene is about him, and not Shireen. 

The problem was that they rushed in way too fast through his own storyline when they decided to cut Stannis for Jon. There was no one they could've done a good job of it in one season. They should've put it in his head this season and then have saved the sacrifice for season 6.

Instead they should've shown the northern lords and their storyline in all its glory in season 5. 

And then have Shireen's sacrifice the next season so they could continuously build up to it.

Their was no winning for D & D when they decided it had to happen now.

[Stannis is the man....nis]

2 hours ago, Lord_Ravenstone said:

The problem was that they rushed in way too fast through his own storyline when they decided to cut Stannis for Jon. There was no one they could've done a good job of it in one season. They should've put it in his head this season and then have saved the sacrifice for season 6.

Instead they should've shown the northern lords and their storyline in all its glory in season 5. 

And then have Shireen's sacrifice the next season so they could continuously build up to it.

Their was no winning for D & D when they decided it had to happen now.

2

Agreed this event is like the RW and Ned's death it should happen at its proper moment in the story

[Khione]

 

On 1.04.2016 at 1:58 PM, Ser Quork said:

Nonsense.  They got rid of Stannis early so they can give his Winterfell arc to fan favourite Jon Snow just as they got rid of Barristan to give his Hand of the Queen arc to Tyrion.  Pure fan-service - little logic in-world.

 

On 1.04.2016 at 2:00 PM, Channel4s-JonSnow said:

Sigh. 

Hey, that's the logical thing to do. The show's made for the GOT fanbase which trumps all over ASOIAF fanbase. If they have to cater to anyone, D+D would be fools to cater to book purists instead of the general audience.