Jump to content

[Spoilers] Ruining "The north remembers" & "Vengeance, Justice, Fire and Blood"


GCabot

Recommended Posts

36 minutes ago, tormond said:

Can you tell me a fantasy tv show that has stood the test of time?. I'll even grant you to tell any fantasy movie that has stood the test of time. If you say lord of the ring, be advised that lord of the ring movies changed a lot of things from the book., also it didnt stand the test of time.

In terms of TV shows, we are in an era where shows are not given enough time to evolve. If you dont get high ratings right away and consistently, you are canceled. So you should understand that shows dont have all the time to evolve conspiracies and complicated storylines

How about we discuss Star Trek that decades after the original series are being incredibly culturally relevant. The lord of the rings is an example, but even with Jackson having quite different idea of what Middle-Earth should look like, it did stand the test of time. LOTR is still relevant as a game-changer for entire genre and Hollywood.

But, the issue here, and many miss it, is not the differentiation between the books and TV show. It is in fact in the poor writing, turning an ideas and substance of ASOIAF into something truly mediocre. Jackson may have changed the make-up, but DnD are playing with the essence of the story. And that is why this season, as emotionally fulfilling as it was due to numerous fist-pumping moments will fade. Because after a while, those moments prove to be not enough.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Regardless of the sentiments of those phrases in the books, in the show those phrases are utterly worthless. The North Remembers? Does it balls remember. None of them remember a thing. In fact, most of them forget that Roose is the one responsible for their current situation in the first place. Why put in such a phrase when it is utterly meaningless in the show? Want the Northerners to be cowards, traitors and general scum? Fine. But don't give them a phrase that is meant to show how badass and loyal they are.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, WSmith84 said:

Regardless of the sentiments of those phrases in the books, in the show those phrases are utterly worthless. The North Remembers? Does it balls remember. None of them remember a thing. In fact, most of them forget that Roose is the one responsible for their current situation in the first place. Why put in such a phrase when it is utterly meaningless in the show? Want the Northerners to be cowards, traitors and general scum? Fine. But don't give them a phrase that is meant to show how badass and loyal they are.

Lol what? 

You keep going on this except that not true at all.

Karstarks and Umbers in the book remember perfectly well just like in the show. Lyanna remembers.

the other houses clearly remember but did not act. The show actually showed a human side to "the north remembers" something that the book clearly did not do. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yup. Even after the disgraceful fifth season, I started to have some hope when I saw casting calls for Northern Lords, Euron and Meribald. We would have some version of some of the best book events and speeches, I thought. A sweet summer child through and through.

Show!Meribald: "I killed a kid once. 0/10, would not do it again", instead of 

 

And Show!Euron: "We're going to build a fleet! A big, beautiful fleet, and Westeros is going to pay for it! Also, my cock is huge", instead of 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, xjlxking said:

Lol what? 

You keep going on this except that not true at all.

Karstarks and Umbers in the book remember perfectly well just like in the show. Lyanna remembers.

the other houses clearly remember but did not act. The show actually showed a human side to "the north remembers" something that the book clearly did not do. 

I'm sorry, but I've no idea what you're talking about. Who in the show actually remember? Who helped Sansa and Jon? The Mormonts. That's it. Not the Manderlys, Karstarks, Umbers, Cerwyns or any other House that got a mention.

The Umbers in the books are fighting for both Stannis and the Boltons. But they're only fighting for the Boltons because the Greatjon is a hostage. The Karstarks are divided, with the main branch being hostages or siding with Stannis. The ones who seek to steal Karhold side with the Boltons. The Boltons also have allies in House Dustin and House Ryswell. So, there is your human side to The North Remembers.

The North Remembers is meant to be a phrase that shows that the North is loyal and that they do not forget those who wronged them. But if no one is going to act on that then it becomes worthless.

I've said it before and I'll say it again: if you can't make something work in an adaption, cut it. I don't mind stuff being cut, even stuff as good as The North Remembers, if the end result is a well-told, logical story.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The North Remembered in Robert´s Rebellion. The North Remembered in the War of the Five Kings. The North Remembered when Sansa was prisioner in Winterfell, and got flayed for it.

The North also died by the thousands in both those wars, all good, loyal men, in case part of the audience here doesn´t Remember that.

The North was never very densely populated in the first place. How is it not clear that most of what´s left behind has questionable loyalty, either from the beginning or due to accumulated years of disgrace? As much as they might want to Rememeber the good old times, their present was pretty freaking sad, and the people they most certainly want to take revenge on are way too powerful.

 

But what does all that matter, right? They looked after their own interests once so they obviously don´t Rememeber anything, ever, they´re just a bunch of traitorous badly written assholes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, WSmith84 said:

I'm sorry, but I've no idea what you're talking about. Who in the show actually remember? Who helped Sansa and Jon? The Mormonts. That's it. Not the Manderlys, Karstarks, Umbers, Cerwyns or any other House that got a mention.

The Umbers in the books are fighting for both Stannis and the Boltons. But they're only fighting for the Boltons because the Greatjon is a hostage. The Karstarks are divided, with the main branch being hostages or siding with Stannis. The ones who seek to steal Karhold side with the Boltons. The Boltons also have allies in House Dustin and House Ryswell. So, there is your human side to The North Remembers.

The North Remembers is meant to be a phrase that shows that the North is loyal and that they do not forget those who wronged them. But if no one is going to act on that then it becomes worthless.

I've said it before and I'll say it again: if you can't make something work in an adaption, cut it. I don't mind stuff being cut, even stuff as good as The North Remembers, if the end result is a well-told, logical story.

The north is loyal. Why do you think they are calling Jon kitn?

Karstark? They aren't loyal! They betrayed rob. Let's not forget the boltons, who also betrayed rob. 

Not to mention, the North had a very large army/support for the Starks and the Starks themselves failed the north. Even through all that, the North remembered, they acknowledged that they remember but questioned going to war her again considering the population was nearly all killed.

the boltons took power when the power vacuum came and they made sure to hold it. Hell, the show made it clear that the Umbers/Karstarks and boltons have the largest army. So is it crazy that despite that most of the north remembering, they don't think they can win? Just because they are loyal does not mean they have no    Survival instinct. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, NutBurz said:

The North Remembered in Robert´s Rebellion. The North Remembered in the War of the Five Kings. The North Remembered when Sansa was prisioner in Winterfell, and got flayed for it.

The North also died by the thousands in both those wars, all good, loyal men, in case part of the audience here doesn´t Remember that.

The North was never very densely populated in the first place. How is it not clear that most of what´s left behind has questionable loyalty, either from the beginning or due to accumulated years of disgrace? As much as they might want to Rememeber the good old times, their present was pretty freaking sad, and the people they most certainly want to take revenge on are way too powerful.

 

But what does all that matter, right? They looked after their own interests once so they obviously don´t Rememeber anything, ever, they´re just a bunch of traitorous badly written assholes.

Except most of them aren't even looking after their own interests, not by following Ramsey. Roose? OK, Roose is a fairly reasonable man. I can see Northerners putting aside their loyalty and need for revenge (at least for a while) when someone like Roose is your enemy and there is no one to rally around. But Ramsey? He's a monstruous tyrant, and worse, he's unpredictable. He flayed a family for refusing to pay taxes. Even if you don't care about the morality of the situation, that makes for a leader that you can't trust to be reasonable. And thus he would have to go. Just for your own safety.

The whole thing is made worse by the fact that the North in the show had two viable alternatives and suporting either would be a more sensible, safer choice than Ramsey. The Umbers sided with Ramsey for no actual reason that I can understand. Neither the Karstarks nor the Umbers made a play to control the North themselves (the Karstark with their claim to Winterfell or the Umbers with Rickon). And there's the fact that the North would be forced to fight another war anyway, due to the Boltons marrying Sansa. So there's a guaranteed war on the horizon (caused by the Boltons) and they now get to pick their leaders. And yet they choose Ramsey.

The Northerners can look out for their own interests. Siding with Ramsey is the exact opposite of that. Siding with Ramsey was neither smart, nor loyal. It was against the Northerners' own interests.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, NutBurz said:

The North Remembered in Robert´s Rebellion. The North Remembered in the War of the Five Kings. The North Remembered when Sansa was prisioner in Winterfell, and got flayed for it.

The North also died by the thousands in both those wars, all good, loyal men, in case part of the audience here doesn´t Remember that.

The North was never very densely populated in the first place. How is it not clear that most of what´s left behind has questionable loyalty, either from the beginning or due to accumulated years of disgrace? As much as they might want to Rememeber the good old times, their present was pretty freaking sad, and the people they most certainly want to take revenge on are way too powerful.

 

But what does all that matter, right? They looked after their own interests once so they obviously don´t Rememeber anything, ever, they´re just a bunch of traitorous badly written assholes.

The North Remembers is used specifically in relation to the aftermath of the RW. It's nothing to do with the previous wars in which there wasn't anything to remember - they simply answered the call to banners of their liege Lord like every single other Lord banner man in 7K with the possible exception of Late Lord Frey. So yes, on the one relevant occasion when it mattered they indeed didn't remember.

Now, I don't expect to see any version of the GNC on screen as that would be too complicated to do justice probably. And I would have been fine with some of the lords saying they wish the Starks the best of luck but they're very sorry but they don't have the men to spare with the winter coming. This is not what happened. Most of them ignored the call to arms completely and some outright rejected Jon and Sandra on grounds that had little to do with their fear of Ramsay or not having enough men. Even Lyanna Mormont, who famously wrote that she knee no King but the KITN whose name is Stark had to be persuaded to help. If the North remembered they should have been waiting on the earliest opportunity to fuck the Boltons over for their role in the RW and there was never going to be a better chance to do so than when Jon and Sansa started an open rebellion with an army (or two) in tow. Even if they couldn't support them militarily they should have been ready to provide other forms of support - provisions, local expertise, spies in the Boltonn camp, you name it. The North Remembers is not even about the Stark restoration, necessarily, it's about the fact that everybody hates the Boltons and the Freys. Rickon and fArya are just the rallying points.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, WSmith84 said:

Except most of them aren't even looking after their own interests, not by following Ramsey. Roose? OK, Roose is a fairly reasonable man. I can see Northerners putting aside their loyalty and need for revenge (at least for a while) when someone like Roose is your enemy and there is no one to rally around. But Ramsey? He's a monstruous tyrant, and worse, he's unpredictable. He flayed a family for refusing to pay taxes. Even if you don't care about that morality of the situation, that makes for a leader that you can't trust to be reasonable. And thus he would have to go.

I don´t think you understand how very few men are left in the North.

 

Not rebelling against the Boltons is looking out for their own interest because if they don´t, they´d be killed, simple as that.

Robb lost virtually all of his army except for Karstarks and Boltons. Everyone had already sent their fighting men, and they died.

As soon as the Boltons came back, they already had the simpathy of the Karstarks. That already made them, if allied, the largest force in the North - and the Boltons had the Lannisters and Tyrell armies at their back.

Ramsey flayed a family and is obeyed out of fear by the North, Tywin exterminated the second richest House in the Westerlands and is obeyed out of fear by half the kingdom, I´d only say Ramsey is not ambitious enough given the standards.

29 minutes ago, WSmith84 said:

The whole thing is made worse by the fact that the North in the show had two viable alternatives and suporting either would be a more sensible, safer choice than Ramsey. The Umbers sided with Ramsey for no actual reason that I can understand. Neither the Karstarks nor the Umbers made a play to control the North themselves (the Karstark with their claim to Winterfell or the Umbers with Rickon)

They have no men.

Why exactly it is that people think the series made a point to show that the Bear Islands have 62 fighting men? Just a funny little joke. Not the depleted state that the entire North must be. Nah, funny joke.

The Karstarks didn´t have an agreement with the Lannisters+Tyrell+Freys.

It´s not that hard.

29 minutes ago, WSmith84 said:

And there's the fact that the North would be forced to fight another war anyway, due to the Boltons marrying Sansa. So there's a guaranteed war on the horizon (caused by the Boltons) and they now get to pick their leaders.

Or not. Or they can swear to watch their back and when the crown comes for their head, they do nothing. Maybe they try to save Sansa and let Bolton and Lannister kill each other.

They would certainly not have that option if they decided to send their civilians to die in the spot.

29 minutes ago, WSmith84 said:

The Northerners can look out for their own interests. Siding with Ramsey is the exact opposite of that. Siding with Ramsey was neither smart, nor loyal. It was against the Northerners' own interests.

Please explain why.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Maid So Fair

They could have raised banners against the rebels. They could have stayed home waiting. They could betray the rebellion or the King in the North in a feast. Men can go so many ways, but when they do exactly what you want them to do, you barely notice.

 

No one has men to rebel against Bolton+Crown.

No one tells a band of Wildlings they have ~62 fighting men.

No one sees the slightest opportunity in Jon´s endeavor, except the little child.

No one wants to be suspected of aiding Wildling rebels while their Liege flays people for way less.

 

The North Remembers have all sorts of connotation. They remember loyalty, they remember betrayal, but remembering implies the past and they have to live in the present.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, NutBurz said:

I don´t think you understand how very few men are left in the North.

 

Not rebelling against the Boltons is looking out for their own interest because if they don´t, they´d be killed, simple as that.

Robb lost virtually all of his army except for Karstarks and Boltons. Everyone had already sent their fighting men, and they died.

This very season it was stated that the Karstarks, Umbers and Manderlys could raise as many men as the Boltons. So no, their men aren't dead. And we know this, since both Karstark and Umber men fought with the Boltons.

As soon as the Boltons came back, they already had the simpathy of the Karstarks. That already made them, if allied, the largest force in the North - and the Boltons had the Lannisters and Tyrell armies at their back.

Ramsey flayed a family and is obeyed out of fear by the North, Tywin exterminated the second richest House in the Westerlands and is obeyed out of fear by half the kingdom, I´d only say Ramsey is not ambitious enough given the standards.

Tywin exterminated a family that openly rebelled against him.

They have no men.

False.

Why exactly it is that people think the series made a point to show that the Bear Islands have 62 fighting men? Just a funny little joke. Not the depleted state that the entire North must be. Nah, funny joke.

The Mormonts are in charge of a tiny island with a small population.

The Karstarks didn´t have an agreement with the Lannisters+Tyrell+Freys.

It´s not that hard.

Neither did the Boltons after they married Sansa. They rebelled against the Crown, once again putting the North at war with the Iron Throne. The Karstarks should have jumped on this opportunity to seize Winterfell. They have a family claim to it, they weren't responsible for the Red Wedding, they can make peace with the Iron Throne by removing the treacherous Boltons and they seem a damn sight more reasonable than Ramsey as a leader.

Or not. Or they can swear to watch their back and when the crown comes for their head, they do nothing. Maybe they try to save Sansa and let Bolton and Lannister kill each other.

They would certainly not have that option if they decided to send their civilians to die in the spot.

Then why fight for Ramsey? Fighting for Ramsey guarantees that you'll be fighting a war with the Lannisters again. As does fighting for the Starks. So why not pick a leader who wont flay you just cos he's in the mood? Or stay out of it.

Please explain why.

Because Ramsey is a leader that you can't trust to be reasonable. Tywin and Roose might be monsters, but they're reasonable monsters. They probably won't murder you just because the mood takes them. The Karstarks and the Umbers both had better options than siding with Ramsey (better for themselves, that is) and yet they still sided with him.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, sure, if you think they have men because they say that three houses together could have as many men as one (and you´re conveniently forgetting the entire crown behind this one), then I have no problem interpreting things differently than you

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, NutBurz said:

@Maid So Fair

They could have raised banners against the rebels. They could have stayed home waiting. They could betray the rebellion or the King in the North in a feast. Men can go so many ways, but when they do exactly what you want them to do, you barely notice.

 

No one has men to rebel against Bolton+Crown.

No one tells a band of Wildlings they have ~62 fighting men.

No one sees the slightest opportunity in Jon´s endeavor, except the little child.

No one wants to be suspected of aiding Wildling rebels while their Liege flays people for way less.

 

The North Remembers have all sorts of connotation. They remember loyalty, they remember betrayal, but remembering implies the past and they have to live in the present.

They did  stay home waiting. I'm not sure what your point is? And some of ten did join the Boltons. Just because they didn't go out of their way to betray the Starks (well, some of them anyway) doesn't make them particularly loyal or worthy of going on about remembering when they clearly do not. 

Theres mo such thing as Boltons + the Crown. The Bolton's lost the Crown support he moment Ramsay married Sansa and the Crown is in any case preoccupied already with the Faith/Dorne/Blackfish/each other. And they declare Jon KITN pretty much straight after so they're obviously not Too concerned about the Crowns response.

Im really not see what you're trying to say with the rest. He fact that Ramsay is an unpredictable psycho who flays people at a whim is exactly the reason why anybody with a little bit of foresight should be desperate to be rid of him. And there's never going to be a better opportunity than when you have an actual leader to rally's behind with an army (or two as Sandra should have told them) of his own to contribute to the cause. 

As for the North Remembers it does have a very specific connotation - that the North remembers the RW. That's very evident from Manderlys speech. If they want to play it safe, fine, but then don't use the phrase out of context as if it means something.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I´ll leave aside the fact we have absolutely completely different understandings of "The North Remembers".

This here:

45 minutes ago, Maid So Fair said:

And there's never going to be a better opportunity than when you have an actual leader to rally's behind with an army (or two as Sandra should have told them) of his own to contribute to the cause. 

is absolutely only true for someone who is watching a series.

For the people inside the universe, there´s the entire rest of time of possibilities, much of which will not be winter like it is right now, and pretty much at any other point their strenght will be larger than right now. I´m sure they can wait for a much better leader than a deserter of the night´s watch.

And "Sandra""´s" army...You mean the army of the Vale, which (as far as they know) rebelled against the crown as much as the Boltons did in order to get Sansa married in the first place? Which she "has" because she claims that they met in some village, but which is not here for whatever reason (assuming she hides that she refused said army)?

And even if you want to make the sentence all about getting vengeance over the red wedding, does the verb "remember" sound more like "patient" or "rash"? It´s not "The North takes swift, reckless action".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, NutBurz said:

I´ll leave aside the fact we have absolutely completely different understandings of "The North Remembers".

This here:

is absolutely only true for someone who is watching a series.

For the people inside the universe, there´s the entire rest of time of possibilities, much of which will not be winter like it is right now, and pretty much at any other point their strenght will be larger than right now. I´m sure they can wait for a much better leader than a deserter of the night´s watch.

And "Sandra""´s" army...You mean the army of the Vale, which (as far as they know) rebelled against the crown as much as the Boltons did in order to get Sansa married in the first place? Which she "has" because she claims that they met in some village, but which is not here for whatever reason (assuming she hides that she refused said army)?

And even if you want to make the sentence all about getting vengeance over the red wedding, does the verb "remember" sound more like "patient" or "rash"? It´s not "The North takes swift, reckless action".

Considering the fact that the meaning of the North Remembers is pretty explicitly approved out in the books, that is a bit concerning. I don't want to make it about anything - I'm pointing out what it means, which again is in no way ambiguous. 

It's absolutely true for everybody - they know that Sansa is wanted for regicide (and married to a Lannister) so  it's pretty obvious the Boltons didn't have the Crown support to marry her. It's similarly obvious that Jon ha an army because it's standing right there. Their strenght is more likely to fall during  winter but even if it increases its not likely to make up for the loss of 2k men. And it's not just him either - Sandra, a bona fide trueborn Stark and the oldest surviving Stark sibling is also standing right there. They even have news of Bran and Rickon being alive. The Starks have more legitimacy when it comes to ruling the North than any other potential current or future claimant and Jon apparently even has a bit of a reputation as a swordman/leader at this point.

As for the Vale army, if Sandra was smart enough to mention it, I don't see why it needs a long-winded explanation. Sandra sent e raven to her cousin Sweet Robin from CB who promised to lend his military support to help her reclaim her birthright. The army is not there because it's still on the march from the Vale. Case closed.

There's nothing rash about it. As explained when planning the campaign, if all the houses join them the Starks can rival Ramsay's numbers - and that's without the Vale army. Even if that's not he case, the difference in numbers could easily be accounted for by superior tactics and knowledge  the local terrain (and possible treachery as Ramsay isn't exactly popular) - they're marching on their home castle. Sure, it's a risk. But taking revenge against the Boltons was never going to be risk free and it's a calculated one. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, NutBurz said:

Well, sure, if you think they have men because they say that three houses together could have as many men as one (and you´re conveniently forgetting the entire crown behind this one), then I have no problem interpreting things differently than you

I'm pretty sure they said that each house can raise as many men as the Boltons by themselves. And they said that all of the smaller houses combined could match the combined forces of the Manderlys, Umbers, Karstarks and Boltons. So it would make most sense if the Boltons, Karstarks etc. all had a similar amount of men. Especially considering that they were all, more or less, equal in status pre-war. I'll try and find the scene where they discuss it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Maid So Fair said:

They did  stay home waiting. I'm not sure what your point is? And some of ten did join the Boltons. Just because they didn't go out of their way to betray the Starks (well, some of them anyway) doesn't make them particularly loyal or worthy of going on about remembering when they clearly do not. 

Theres mo such thing as Boltons + the Crown. The Bolton's lost the Crown support he moment Ramsay married Sansa and the Crown is in any case preoccupied already with the Faith/Dorne/Blackfish/each other. And they declare Jon KITN pretty much straight after so they're obviously not Too concerned about the Crowns response.

Im really not see what you're trying to say with the rest. He fact that Ramsay is an unpredictable psycho who flays people at a whim is exactly the reason why anybody with a little bit of foresight should be desperate to be rid of him. And there's never going to be a better opportunity than when you have an actual leader to rally's behind with an army (or two as Sandra should have told them) of his own to contribute to the cause. 

As for the North Remembers it does have a very specific connotation - that the North remembers the RW. That's very evident from Manderlys speech. If they want to play it safe, fine, but then don't use the phrase out of context as if it means something.

No, go rewatch the conversation between Ramsay and the other lord. One of them said their alliance would be the biggest army 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, xjlxking said:

No, go rewatch the conversation between Ramsay and the other lord. One of them said their alliance would be the biggest army 

Is this Karstark or Umber? This already assumes that the other lord joins Ramsay. It's also said that if Jon and Sansa can get the Manderlys + all the other minor houses they can rival the Boltons + Karstarks + Umbers. They most definitely outnumber them if you count the Vale troops. But in any case my point is that numerical supremacy is not necessary to make this a worthwhile exercise - as long as Jon and Sansa have a fighting chance then joining them is not a fool's errand and if the North remembered they would/should have at least seriously considered the option.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Maid So Fair said:

Is this Karstark or Umber? This already assumes that the other lord joins Ramsay. It's also said that if Jon and Sansa can get the Manderlys + all the other minor houses they can rival the Boltons + Karstarks + Umbers. They most definitely outnumber them if you count the Vale troops. But in any case my point is that numerical supremacy is not necessary to make this a worthwhile exercise - as long as Jon and Sansa have a fighting chance then joining them is not a fool's errand and if the North remembered they would/should have at least seriously considered the option.

I don't remember. I think umbers

also, if they can rally all the other houses assuming if they call do so which was a big IF

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

×
×
  • Create New...