Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Ran

[Spoilers] Rant and Rave Without Reprecussions - Season 6, Tally-Ho

Recommended Posts

Forget about Jon, let's talk about Ramsay.

In short order, Ramsay has married Sansa Stark (alienating him from the Crown and the very source of legitimization which made him a Bolton), abused her (alienating him from those who would look to protect "The Ned's girl") and lost her (alienating those few who would side with him for no better reason than because he is married to a Stark. ) Sansa running away from him is also a huge blow to his personal prestige - in a society as misogynistic as Westeros, not being able to control your wife, who is your property by law, is an absolute humiliation. Accusations of cuckoldry are sure to fly, and it serves as proof that he has no control over his own household, so why would he presume to control the North? Obviously I don't think like this... but the Northern lords absolutely should. When word gets out, Ramsay is about to become the laughing stock of every tavern in the north.

But not content with that litany of mistakes, Ramsay has now murdered Walda, wrecking any possible alliance with the Freys, and worse, has murdered his father and brother, becoming usurper and kinslayer both. 

My question is this - what sort of person, be they steadfast Stark loyalist or cruel and treacherous social climber (like Arnolf Karstark in the books) would think that Ramsay is the "safe bet"? He has no support from the crown, no allies, no wife and murders his own family - one of the few social taboos that can rival violating guest rights. 

We know that there will be a big battle at the end of the season, but with Jon revived and no doubt soon on the war path, who in their right mind would pick Ramsay in that match up? What does he bring to the table? He has found himself in a far worse position than Robb Stark was and yet will at least live until the end of the season. If you really want to create a thematic bridge with the red wedding (Roose stabbing Robb/Ramsay stabbing Roose) then finish Ramsay in exactly the same way. No one has any reason to follow him and if they do they are doing so because they are "the villains" and this has unambiguously become a comic book.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, TheCasualObserver said:

Forget about Jon, let's talk about Ramsay.

In short order, Ramsay has married Sansa Stark (alienating him from the Crown and the very source of legitimization which made him a Bolton), abused her (alienating him from those who would look to protect "The Ned's girl") and lost her (alienating those few who would side with him for no better reason than because he is married to a Stark. ) Sansa running away from him is also a huge blow to his personal prestige - in a society as misogynistic as Westeros, not being able to control your wife, who is your property by law, is an absolute humiliation. Accusations of cuckoldry are sure to fly, and it serves as proof that he has no control over his own household, so why would he presume to control the North? Obviously I don't think like this... but the Northern lords absolutely should. When word gets out, Ramsay is about to become the laughing stock of every tavern in the north.

But not content with that litany of mistakes, Ramsay has now murdered Walda, wrecking any possible alliance with the Freys, and worse, has murdered his father and brother, becoming usurper and kinslayer both. 

My question is this - what sort of person, be they steadfast Stark loyalist or cruel and treacherous social climber (like Arnolf Karstark in the books) would think that Ramsay is the "safe bet"? He has no support from the crown, no allies, no wife and murders his own family - one of the few social taboos that can rival violating guest rights. 

We know that there will be a big battle at the end of the season, but with Jon revived and no doubt soon on the war path, who in their right mind would pick Ramsay in that match up? What does he bring to the table? He has found himself in a far worse position than Robb Stark was and yet will at least live until the end of the season. If you really want to create a thematic bridge with the red wedding (Roose stabbing Robb/Ramsay stabbing Roose) then finish Ramsay in exactly the same way. No one has any reason to follow him and if they do they are doing so because they are "the villains" and this has unambiguously become a comic book.

All of what you say makes sense but I really doubt Ramsay suffers any consequences by his Northern supporters because D and D never have this character actually have real setbacks. It's the same issue with Tyrion. He never has any real challenges or experiences consequences for any of his actions. He actually repeatedly gets rewarded for his actions. Both characters are insufferable at this point. The plot is made to cater to them instead of them being affected by the plot and having to deal with outcomes of their own decisions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

23 minutes ago, TheCasualObserver said:

Forget about Jon, let's talk about Ramsay.

In short order, Ramsay has married Sansa Stark (alienating him from the Crown and the very source of legitimization which made him a Bolton), abused her (alienating him from those who would look to protect "The Ned's girl") and lost her (alienating those few who would side with him for no better reason than because he is married to a Stark. ) Sansa running away from him is also a huge blow to his personal prestige - in a society as misogynistic as Westeros, not being able to control your wife, who is your property by law, is an absolute humiliation. Accusations of cuckoldry are sure to fly, and it serves as proof that he has no control over his own household, so why would he presume to control the North? Obviously I don't think like this... but the Northern lords absolutely should. When word gets out, Ramsay is about to become the laughing stock of every tavern in the north.

But not content with that litany of mistakes, Ramsay has now murdered Walda, wrecking any possible alliance with the Freys, and worse, has murdered his father and brother, becoming usurper and kinslayer both. 

My question is this - what sort of person, be they steadfast Stark loyalist or cruel and treacherous social climber (like Arnolf Karstark in the books) would think that Ramsay is the "safe bet"? He has no support from the crown, no allies, no wife and murders his own family - one of the few social taboos that can rival violating guest rights. 

We know that there will be a big battle at the end of the season, but with Jon revived and no doubt soon on the war path, who in their right mind would pick Ramsay in that match up? What does he bring to the table? He has found himself in a far worse position than Robb Stark was and yet will at least live until the end of the season. If you really want to create a thematic bridge with the red wedding (Roose stabbing Robb/Ramsay stabbing Roose) then finish Ramsay in exactly the same way. No one has any reason to follow him and if they do they are doing so because they are "the villains" and this has unambiguously become a comic book.

Ramsay is a Villain Sue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Suzanna Stormborn said:

After all this time Bloodraven doesnt even have a birthmark?!? ugh  And why has he very obviously had a hair cut in the past week or so? his hair should have looked more like Aeron's.

And Why was Jon's resurrection so lackluster.  I mean the fire could have raged crazy for a second or something. The book will do a better job, this I know.

My only defense of that is that it is entirely possible that Mel was not responsible for Jon's Resurrection. If say Bloodraven had that ability, the perfect time it makes sense is after Mel has tried and failed, but will be believed to be the one who did it. It allows the characters not to have the "Kill Jon with Fire Attitude" since at least Davos thinks she is capable of it, and set that possibility in the minds of the others.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Sir Loin Steak said:

He's long past Mary Sue, at this point he's crossed the event horizon into Black Hole Sue territory http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/BlackHoleSue

That's exactly what we see when Tyrion shows up. A lot of people have theorized that Tyrion might end up being a dragonrider. But if he is, he'll have to do more than just tell his childhood story about dragons to that dragon. And Varys groveling is just mind boggling. Why don't we just send Tyrion to the Wall and let him make a cock-joke and tell a childhood story to the Wight Walkers. The Wights I'm sure will lay down and die for him again and the White Walkers will evaporate to higher spiritual spheres just by listening to him. The only who is immune to it is Carole, but that's because she's a Madonna.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Suzanna Stormborn said:

because AJT 

And if it was because Varys is Blackfyre and was nearby?

Seriously, I must admit I can't imagine Tyrion riding a dragon. Could be fun, but not really serious. And too much fanboy fantasy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, TheCasualObserver said:

Forget about Jon, let's talk about Ramsay.

In short order, Ramsay has married Sansa Stark (alienating him from the Crown and the very source of legitimization which made him a Bolton), abused her (alienating him from those who would look to protect "The Ned's girl") and lost her (alienating those few who would side with him for no better reason than because he is married to a Stark. ) Sansa running away from him is also a huge blow to his personal prestige - in a society as misogynistic as Westeros, not being able to control your wife, who is your property by law, is an absolute humiliation. Accusations of cuckoldry are sure to fly, and it serves as proof that he has no control over his own household, so why would he presume to control the North? Obviously I don't think like this... but the Northern lords absolutely should. When word gets out, Ramsay is about to become the laughing stock of every tavern in the north.

But not content with that litany of mistakes, Ramsay has now murdered Walda, wrecking any possible alliance with the Freys, and worse, has murdered his father and brother, becoming usurper and kinslayer both. 

My question is this - what sort of person, be they steadfast Stark loyalist or cruel and treacherous social climber (like Arnolf Karstark in the books) would think that Ramsay is the "safe bet"? He has no support from the crown, no allies, no wife and murders his own family - one of the few social taboos that can rival violating guest rights. 

We know that there will be a big battle at the end of the season, but with Jon revived and no doubt soon on the war path, who in their right mind would pick Ramsay in that match up? What does he bring to the table? He has found himself in a far worse position than Robb Stark was and yet will at least live until the end of the season. If you really want to create a thematic bridge with the red wedding (Roose stabbing Robb/Ramsay stabbing Roose) then finish Ramsay in exactly the same way. No one has any reason to follow him and if they do they are doing so because they are "the villains" and this has unambiguously become a comic book.

^THIS. Ever since last year D&D have had the Boltons (Ramsay in particular) face no consequences for their actions. When Stannis goes on his campaign no Northern Lords join him so the Boltons faced no RW backlash in that department. They win because Ramsay an "20 good men" rape logic and burn all of Stannis' stuff during a snow storm. Now Ramsay has lost control of the North in Sansa, logically has destroyed his alliance with the Freys, and is a bastard who's claim is based on being legitimatized by the North's enemies. The Karstarks one could argue due to Robb might be ok with him but why in 7 hells are the Umbers riding to WF to hand Rickon over on a silver platter with smiles on their faces?! This is the prefect time to let Rickon's presence known and call for a revolt. Hell Rickon might have given the Umber's the Dreadford for helping him what the hell do they get out of helping Ramsay?!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, SuperMario said:

So, not sure if it was mentioned, but basically in order to dispel a few flurries you need to sacrifice a child in front of her parents. But to raise a being from the dead, all you need to do is give him a shave and a hair cut?

By making Melisandre apparently fail, I feel they wanted to keep the ambiguity about the origin of Jon's resurrection. Was it R'hllor? Was it someone else?

But yes the absence of sacrifice is illogical. But it was also the case for Beric. Except I don't think it was R'hllor. He should not have any interest in the Riverlands.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, TheCasualObserver said:

Forget about Jon, let's talk about Ramsay.

In short order, Ramsay has married Sansa Stark (alienating him from the Crown and the very source of legitimization which made him a Bolton), abused her (alienating him from those who would look to protect "The Ned's girl") and lost her (alienating those few who would side with him for no better reason than because he is married to a Stark. ) Sansa running away from him is also a huge blow to his personal prestige - in a society as misogynistic as Westeros, not being able to control your wife, who is your property by law, is an absolute humiliation. Accusations of cuckoldry are sure to fly, and it serves as proof that he has no control over his own household, so why would he presume to control the North? Obviously I don't think like this... but the Northern lords absolutely should. When word gets out, Ramsay is about to become the laughing stock of every tavern in the north.

But not content with that litany of mistakes, Ramsay has now murdered Walda, wrecking any possible alliance with the Freys, and worse, has murdered his father and brother, becoming usurper and kinslayer both. 

My question is this - what sort of person, be they steadfast Stark loyalist or cruel and treacherous social climber (like Arnolf Karstark in the books) would think that Ramsay is the "safe bet"? He has no support from the crown, no allies, no wife and murders his own family - one of the few social taboos that can rival violating guest rights. 

We know that there will be a big battle at the end of the season, but with Jon revived and no doubt soon on the war path, who in their right mind would pick Ramsay in that match up? What does he bring to the table? He has found himself in a far worse position than Robb Stark was and yet will at least live until the end of the season. If you really want to create a thematic bridge with the red wedding (Roose stabbing Robb/Ramsay stabbing Roose) then finish Ramsay in exactly the same way. No one has any reason to follow him and if they do they are doing so because they are "the villains" and this has unambiguously become a comic book.

#Bless

If you're looking for logic, you've come to the wrong place. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, The Fattest Leech said:

So the show can't even get their own consistency right when it comes to Bloodraven and Leaf. Was that Leaf? 

They showed Bloodraevn already in the tree looking way more gnarly, and now he is just kindly old grandpa out and in the tree??? I could almost give a pass if he was grandpa while on walking tours of Westeros... But WE HAVE SEEN HIM IN THE TREE! 

And is that Leaf??? I almost miss the actual little girl. The dirt smudged crouched looked like she was trying to pinch one out behind random rocks. Again, we have already seen Leaf!!!

and now Meera is mopey Jojen 2.0? 

And and is Lyanna the oldest of the Stark kids????

 

Bazinga, I noticed that right away, she seemed maybe the same height, but much older than Ned, RME

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With regards to Brienne and Sansa's conversation last night.  In season 4, Pod told her who the Hound was, he says Gregor Clegane, the Hound. So FFS, she knew who Arya was with.

She had to word the conversation with Sansa just right.  Why would Brienne care who Arya was with?  How that might hold meaning to Sansa?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Lady Fevre Dream said:

Bazinga, I noticed that right away, she seemed maybe the same height, but much older than Ned, RME

Just to be fair, the oldest kid of the three grouped boys was not Brandon, it was Rodrick. My sweet, sweet hubbs told me they were "all" her brothers when I ran in to the kitchen and came right back. He is an unsullied so I gave him a pass.

But then Hodor appeared to be older than all the Stark kids???

However, What the Fuck with making Lyanna older than Ned??? Why??? This is an absolutely arrogant change for the sake of change.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Lady Fevre Dream said:

Bazinga, I noticed that right away, she seemed maybe the same height, but much older than Ned, RME

tom still in his bath robe, though it seems a slightly different version than last years,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, The Fattest Leech said:

Just to be fair, the oldest kid of the three grouped boys was not Brandon, it was Mikken. My sweet, sweet hubbs told me they were "all" her brothers when I ran in to the kitchen and came right back. He is an unsullied so I gave him a pass.

But then Hodor appeared to be older than all the Strak kids???

However, What the Fuck with making Lyanna older than Ned??? Why??? This is an absolutely arrogant change for the sake of change.

Really, Mikken was there?  OMG!!  I don't want to have to watch it again to check that out, YIKES!!

I can almost see making Hodor older than Ned and Co., his age is hard to peg on the show, with the greyish hair and all.   Honestly, if you think about it, Old Nan seemed much too young.

So much of this show is just a big arrogant "Fuck it, and us, too"  I think they wanted a semi teen looking Lyanna and didnt' even give thought to matching the look of the ages correctly.  They're asses.  

I still need to get lots of my ranting in order on the whole episode as well, hopefully by tomorrow,

As much as I hated the Roose death.......I gotta laugh at the fact that Balon even outlived him, a bit, hahahaha

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who is Arya going to kill when they do Mercy Part V?  Who on her list would go to Braavos?  

I got a momentary surge when Ramsay mentioned the Manderlys, but based on precedent, Wyman Manderly will be a thin, tatted up traitor who will be eating an apple pie...because why not? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Lady Fevre Dream said:

...

I can almost see making Hodor older than Ned and Co., his age is hard to peg on the show, with the greyish hair and all.   Honestly, if you think about it, Old Nan seemed much too young.S

o much of this show is just a big arrogant "Fuck it, and us, too"  I think they wanted a semi teen looking Lyanna and didnt' even give thought to matching the look of the ages correctly.  They're asses.  

...

I agree about Nan. She was supposed to really old, even when Ned was a kid.

I am still trying to figure out what the true point of the scene was. It almost felt like it was intended to start unraveling the "mystery" behind Hodor's "hodor". It was mentioned in the flashback scene and then later that Hodor has the capability of becoming/ or was a capable fighter. That felt like foreshadowing to me.

Oh, and Hodor's name is Willis, not Walder... another change for the fucking sake of change.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Cas Stark said:

Who is Arya going to kill when they do Mercy Part V?  Who on her list would go to Braavos?  

I got a momentary surge when Ramsay mentioned the Manderlys, but based on precedent, Wyman Manderly will be a thin, tatted up traitor who will be eating an apple pie...because why not? 

was there a Dareon character who left with Sam and Gilly? I dont remember....If not then maybe it'll just be someone trying to do Sam harm or something.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×