Jump to content

Archived

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

Lothar

Director Mark Mylod on this week's episode

Recommended Posts

 

16 hours ago, Cas Stark said:

If he is truly dead, the whole segment, whether it was well written or not, was a complete waste of GOT's precious time.  The Blackfish and Edmure scenes add nothing to the main story, because BF is dead, Edmure is off to be a prisoner at Casterly Rock.  Unless there is a twist coming, that was all pretty pointless.

We can agree to disagree on whether his actions are very logical, but his reappearance in the show was underwhelming to say the least.

The Jaime in the Riverlands scenes were one of my favourite parts of AFfC. It helped further Jaime's redemptive arc by maintaining his vow to not to take up arms against Tullys/Starks, to cement his estrangement from Cersei (burning the letter), reinforced the Blackfish's honour and badassery with him escaping, showed more of the Frey's fumbling ways, introduced us to Gatehouse Ami, and enabled the upcoming encounter with LSH.

The show version happened because ummm because ahhhh - they needed Brienne away from Sansa for a while? Or Brienne/Jaime fanservice? I'm not sure exactly. And for context, you won't find many, if any, other posts with me bitching about the book being better than the show.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At the end of the day, not showing his death came down to a matter of respect in Mylod's eyes.

"I didn't want to see the moment of the sword going into him or whatever it may be," Mylod explained. "I didn't want to see that, I didn't gain anything from it. I wanted him to have that warrior's death and I was happy to leave that offscreen. So it was really just a question of choice. I expect that one could make an equally compelling argument either way. That was the writer's choice and I fully agreed with it."

 

Apparently the poor sparrow whose head was ripped by the Mountain and the random dudes gutted and hung by the Hound are not deserving of the same respect. At the end of the day they are just religious zealots and finger rapists, not cool badass warriors.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, WSmith84 said:

The BF could have gone with them. There was nothing stopping him, except his own stupid desire to stay.

 

What if they don't escape unless he stays back and buys them time? 

That's what the actor who plays the character said to explain why he didn't just hop in and escape. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, No One of Importance said:

Except that without Jon's wildling arc, would he be trying to save them now?  Would he ever have gone to Hardhome?  Would Tormund et al be following Jon now?  It did have material consequences on the story.  Jaime's Riverrun arc still could have such consequences, potentially, but we certainly haven't seen any yet, and everything he's said indicates that he just wants to get back to KL.

You´re precisely right. All the things that were influenced by Jon´s arc came into play way after the arc itself. I don´t think it was useless at all, like I don´t think anyone can really assess whether Riverrun´s arc is useless yet.

The manner of Jaime´s return is important, the things he said and done during the siege are important - it´s not because it´s not the same character as the book that it´s a bad character, Jaime can still break away from Cersei for far more important reasons than unfaithfulness and in a much better position (heir to Casterly Rock, "conqueror" of Riverun without a bloodshed) than he did in the books. He could not break away from her at all, who knows.

Edmure should most certainly be facing treason. And then Jaime´s sleight of hand could suddenly be rendered moot. Would everything that happened not matter then? Just like it doesn´t matter that Tyrion negotiated with the slavers? Of course it does, and of course it would - that´s them trying and failing. That´s something that also has to be shown, so we can analyze why would it be that such failure happened. That´s character building.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, NutBurz said:

You´re precisely right. All the things that were influenced by Jon´s arc came into play way after the arc itself. I don´t think it was useless at all, like I don´t think anyone can really assess whether Riverrun´s arc is useless yet.

The manner of Jaime´s return is important, the things he said and done during the siege are important - it´s not because it´s not the same character as the book that it´s a bad character, Jaime can still break away from Cersei for far more important reasons than unfaithfulness and in a much better position (heir to Casterly Rock, "conqueror" of Riverun without a bloodshed) than he did in the books. He could not break away from her at all, who knows.

Edmure should most certainly be facing treason. And then Jaime´s sleight of hand could suddenly be rendered moot. Would everything that happened not matter then? Just like it doesn´t matter that Tyrion negotiated with the slavers? Of course it does, and of course it would - that´s them trying and failing. That´s something that also has to be shown, so we can analyze why would it be that such failure happened. That´s character building.

The potential's still there for Jaime growth, no doubt.  But Jon's arc with the wildlings showed a fundamental change in his perspective (and subsequently in his actions).  He went north of the Wall looking to fight and kill wildlings.  Through his interactions with the wildlings (Ygritte and Tormund, mainly), his view changed.  Jaime went to Riverrun to settle the situation and get back to Cersei.  He's now presumably leaving Riverrun to get back to Cersei.  His interactions with the Freys, Tullys, etc. - and the Blackfish and Edmure - do not appear to have had any impact on his perspective, goals, or actions.  Again, that could be coming, I guess, but the groundwork hasn't been laid for it so far.  Basically, the two situations as shown on the screen to this point, are not particularly comparable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, No One of Importance said:

Again, that could be coming, I guess

Considering that it happened last episode, this would make the most sense.

And the fact that he´s still loyal to Cersei is still telling. And the parallel between him so far succeeding in diplomacy where Tyrion failed is also telling.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, NutBurz said:

Considering that it happened last episode, this would make the most sense.

And the fact that he´s still loyal to Cersei is still telling. And the parallel between him so far succeeding in diplomacy where Tyrion failed is also telling.

But what's the trigger for it?  

 

Comparing Tyrion to Jaime is definitely interesting; I was just commenting on the Jon/Jaime comparison.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, TickTak7 said:

 

What if they don't escape unless he stays back and buys them time? 

That's what the actor who plays the character said to explain why he didn't just hop in and escape. 

Brienne and Pod walked into the besieged castle in the sight of the entire Lannister/Frey army with Jaimes express permission. Them not walking right back out is stupid enough but saying that they could t escape without BF buying them time is just silly. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, No One of Importance said:

But what's the trigger for it?  

 

Comparing Tyrion to Jaime is definitely interesting; I was just commenting on the Jon/Jaime comparison.

Sorry, I didn´t understand, the trigger for what?

If it´s Jaime remaining loyal to Cersei, it´s the lack of a trigger that´s important. He has no real reason to break away from her so far, and he´s burying himself deeper and deeper into that relationship. This could set him up for a larger fall if he eventually comes to face the truth about her, just like it could be the assertion that he is that, that even if inside he has the feelings that he clearly shows towards Brienne, he chooses to be that, the Lannister, the heir to Casterly Rock, the "cold, calculating" leader that he watched his father be.

Hell, that could tell us about Tywin himself.

 

If I´m talking about something else entirely, please correct me. ^^

 

ps- In relation to the parallel with Jon´s arc, I will not claim it´s a perfect comparison. I only question if people wouldn´t complain about the same thing imediatelly after Jon returns to be a Night´s Watch if they didn´t have the source material to show why the whole thing was important in the first place. When we didn´t know that him caring about wildlings would even matter.

Share this post


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

Sorry, I didn´t understand, the trigger for what?

If it´s Jaime remaining loyal to Cersei, it´s the lack of a trigger that´s important. He has no real reason to break away from her so far, and he´s burying himself deeper and deeper into that relationship. This could set him up for a larger fall if he eventually comes to face the truth about her, just like it could be the assertion that he is that, that even if inside he has the feelings that he clearly shows towards Brienne, he chooses to be that, the Lannister, the heir to Casterly Rock, the "cold, calculating" leader that he watched his father be.

Hell, that could tell us about Tywin himself.

 

If I´m talking about something else entirely, please correct me. ^^

What about her sleeping with Lancel?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Lothar said:

What about her sleeping with Lancel?

You mean the thing he doesn´t really know that happened in the series? Tyrion never tells him like in the books.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, NutBurz said:

You mean the thing he doesn´t really know that happened in the series? Tyrion never tells him like in the books.

This is a personal pet peeve/nitpick if you like.

She did the walk of shame over her affair w/Lancel, how could Jamie possibly not know?  Are we supposed to think that the Faith has people do public walks of shame but don't disclose their crime against the faith?  Seems impossible, that wouldn't be much of a deterrent for sin, would it?  So, I have to assume this is a huge plot hole.  Everyone in King's Landing would know why she did the walk, it would be common knowledge....which would mean, either her brother already forgave her...which gives zero future reasons for their inevitable break...unless he ends up not getting redeemed after all...or plot hole.

Rant over.  Back to your regularly scheduled programming.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, NutBurz said:

You mean the thing he doesn´t really know that happened in the series? Tyrion never tells him like in the books.

She's on trial for it and confessed to it.  That's why she did the Walk of Shame for.  What did Jaime think that was about?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Cas Stark said:

This is a personal pet peeve/nitpick if you like.

She did the walk of shame over her affair w/Lancel, how could Jamie possibly not know?  Are we supposed to think that the Faith has people do public walks of shame but don't disclose their crime against the faith?  Seems impossible, that wouldn't be much of a deterrent for sin, would it?  So, I have to assume this is a huge plot hole.  Everyone in King's Landing would know why she did the walk, it would be common knowledge....which would mean, either her brother already forgave her...which gives zero future reasons for their inevitable break...unless he ends up not getting redeemed after all...or plot hole.

Rant over.  Back to your regularly scheduled programming.

Do we see anyone say it outside the trial? Why is it that you suppose the faith would detail the sins to the general public? They don´t even have public trials. And the word on the street in that she is being punished for incest, which is precisely the reason Jaime thinks they would go after him as well.

 

Wouldn´t some Tyrell tell him? Some Kingsguard? Well, in the books that didn´t happen, it took hatred-shocked Tyrion to tell him. Do you suppose Jaime would receive the news well from anyone else? Do you think people would cherish the idea of delivering such news to the Kingslayer?

1 minute ago, Lothar said:

She's on trial for it and confessed to it.  That's why she did the Walk of Shame for.  What did Jaime think that was about?

 

When did she publicly confess? I was under the impression the show made it clear that every trial happened within closed walls, just like every "confession".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I went look at the script to see what was said. 

"Cersei of House Lannister.  Mother to His Grace King Tommen.  Widow of His Grace King Robert.  She has committed the acts of falsehood and fornication.  She has confessed her sins and begged for forgiveness."

So everyone in the city knows she fucked someone she wasn't supposed to.  Jaime has to know.

Share this post


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

I went look at the script to see what was said. 

"Cersei of House Lannister.  Mother to His Grace King Tommen.  Widow of His Grace King Robert.  She has committed the acts of falsehood and fornication.  She has confessed her sins and begged for forgiveness."

So everyone in the city knows she fucked someone she wasn't supposed to.  Jaime has to know.

LOL.  Thanks.  So:  plot hole, just as I suspected.

Since she is to be put on trial for incest and regicide.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, Lothar said:

I went look at the script to see what was said. 

"Cersei of House Lannister.  Mother to His Grace King Tommen.  Widow of His Grace King Robert.  She has committed the acts of falsehood and fornication.  She has confessed her sins and begged for forgiveness."

So everyone in the city knows she fucked someone she wasn't supposed to.  Jaime has to know.

Yes, Jaime.

Are you saying those people would understand the nuances between fornication and incest when gossiping, especially when one implies the other anyway? Even the most informed peasant could argue that they couldn´t charge them with incest because the Targaryens did it, "so they call it fornication".

I have no idea how you conclude everyone must know that Cersei was screwing someone else, and I have no idea how you conclude that the gossips of the uninformed rabble would be enough evidence for Jaime. At least he would think they were exaggerating based on how serious the real accusation was.

And most important than anything, if Jaime had this information, it had to be shown, in any way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, NutBurz said:

Yes, Jaime.

Nonononono, not Jamie. If she had confessed to incest with Jamie, it's game over. Cersei would be awaiting her death penalty for treason and Tommen would be illigitimate. That is the one thing she can NEVER admit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, NutBurz said:

Yes, Jaime.

Are you saying those people would understand the nuances between fornication and incest when gossiping, especially when one implies the other anyway? Even the most informed peasant could argue that they couldn´t charge them with incest because the Targaryens did it, "so they call it fornication".

lol.  Jaime knows it's not him they're talking about because he's not currently under arrest for incest.

Quote

I have no idea how you conclude everyone must know that Cersei was screwing someone else

Fornication means sex with someone else

Quote

And most important than anything, if Jaime had this information, it had to be shown, in any way.

The writers of this show are bad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×