Jump to content

Archived

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

teemo

[Spoilers] Rant and Rave without Repercussion

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, Lady Lovisa said:

Characters don't need to spell out and justify every single action. It will kill the thrill and kill the suspense. ASOIAF is well known for plot twists and shock value. Though I would agree GOT writers are pretty incompetent when it comes to logic and consistency of plots.

Sansa's plans may unravel towards the end of the season.

The author not, but the characters do. They move the story. The audience is standing between the author and the characters in terms of knowledge. F.e. The RW was a shocker but it didn't come out of the blue. Robb made a few mistakes and lost many supporters, walder Frey showed himself as manipulative and unsympathic and his past actions described him as not trust-worthy, Catelyn freed Jaime thus enabling Tywin to act. The betrayal of Boltons was rather suprising, b/c the show didn't mention centruies of hostility between Starks and Boltons, but the book did. So we saw it coming.

Don't get me wrong, I don't dismiss your theory completely. I just say, that nothing in the story hints it. And if it confirms to be true, it would be an example of just a lazy writing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, teej6 said:

Yes they do. Like the poster above said, the audience needs to know. In terms of the books, even if GRRM surprises us, it's done in a manner that is organic and when the twist finally happens it doesn't come out of nowhere. As for your argument that Sansa is undermining Jon's authority in front of all the Northern Lords and Ladies to fool LF that's just plain stupid and bad writing. There's a zillion other ways for her to fool LF.    And besides what does she get by doing this act when she still privately snubs LF and tells him to f..k off? If she wants to get rid of LF all she needs to do is get Yohn Royce on board and that shouldn't be hard if she's actually the player everyone keeps saying she is. Your argument of Sansa undermining Jon in public and appearing to the audience as a complete idiot in the process only so that the writers can in the end surprise and shock the viewers is simply put very bad writing. But since D&D are bad writers who think shock and awe (no matter how illogical) is great storytelling, I wouldn't be surprised if they do what you suggest. 

Well yeah obviously at this point, logic is non-existent. The books are GRRM's and the show is D&D's. I'm aware of D'D's incompetencies when it comes to plot logic and consistency, and am short of praises for how the show is written. 

I formed my theory based on what I've seen from season 5 and 6, i.e. basically a plethora of shit and gags with little logic but A+ for shock factor (cue scene where Vale army rushes in to save the day? Is this LOTR? :rolleyes:). 

The facade theory may seem ridiculous but considering how Sansa was written to marry Ramsay, Tyrion is Mister Perfect, Sandor and Thoros could easily dig frozen dirt, Dragonstone was left deserted, Euron's fleet passing by Dragonstone (assuming already occupied by Dany&gang), do you really think this theory is not plausible? There have been two scenes of LF smirking whenever Sansa was 'threatened' by Jon's authority (or so he thought). LF suddenly became stupid in seasons 5 and 6 so there's a chance he is even dumber in season 7.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do we know what happend to Tarly's sword Heartsbane? Does Sam just having it with him? I mean the montage clearly showed us that SOME time has passed while he was there. Shouldn't his father (first of all stopped em 1 day from his castle) at least try to get it back by now. I mean it's pretty obvious were Sam went and the badass his Father is supposed to be would just storm in there and kick Sam's a** or am I wrong?

Share this post


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

Do we know what happend to Tarly's sword Heartsbane? Does Sam just having it with him? I mean the montage clearly showed us that SOME time has passed while he was there. Shouldn't his father (first of all stopped em 1 day from his castle) at least try to get it back by now. I mean it's pretty obvious were Sam went and the badass his Father is supposed to be would just storm in there and kick Sam's a** or am I wrong?

I'll be amazed if anyone among the writers even remembers that such a sword exists.

Share this post


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

I'll be amazed if anyone among the writers even remembers that such a sword exists.

Well, supposedly, Randyll should play a role this season, so we´ll see.

Share this post


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

Well yeah obviously at this point, logic is non-existent. The books are GRRM's and the show is D&D's. I'm aware of D'D's incompetencies when it comes to plot logic and consistency, and am short of praises for how the show is written. 

I formed my theory based on what I've seen from season 5 and 6, i.e. basically a plethora of shit and gags with little logic but A+ for shock factor (cue scene where Vale army rushes in to save the day? Is this LOTR? :rolleyes:). 

The facade theory may seem ridiculous but considering how Sansa was written to marry Ramsay, Tyrion is Mister Perfect, Sandor and Thoros could easily dig frozen dirt, Dragonstone was left deserted, Euron's fleet passing by Dragonstone (assuming already occupied by Dany&gang), do you really think this theory is not plausible? There have been two scenes of LF smirking whenever Sansa was 'threatened' by Jon's authority (or so he thought). LF suddenly became stupid in seasons 5 and 6 so there's a chance he is even dumber in season 7.

As I said in my earlier response to you I think D&D is capable of taking this route on Sansa especially considering their penchant for shock and awe while ignoring all logic, consistency and rationally behaving characters in the process. I'm not disputing that they are capable of doing this, I'm disagreeing with you when you state that it's okay that the audience does not know or recognize Sansa's true motives until bam D&D decides to pull it out of their hats. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 17 July 2017 at 7:42 AM, of man and wolf said:

I have nothing to complain about, the show was good, really enjoyed it. A mild annoyance at Sansa talking about how stupid Ned and Robb were when she's kinda the one that got Ned into the mess he was in.

 

Also I dont really see why the Hound is still alive. I dont see the point. Euron whether in the books or the show is not a replacement for Ramsay, Ramsay makes that guy look like a girl scout.

Sansa played a smallpart in what happened to Ned.  She was a child and he never explained things that were happening in KL to her.  Nex brought on his own downfall by trusting the wrong people and believing in honour. Which Cersei most definitely does not have

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, teej6 said:

As I said in my earlier response to you I think D&D is capable of taking this route on Sansa especially considering their penchant for shock and awe while ignoring all logic, consistency and rationally behaving characters in the process. I'm not disputing that they are capable of doing this, I'm disagreeing with you when you state that it's okay that the audience does not know or recognize Sansa's true motives until bam D&D decides to pull it out of their hats. 

People said this about Good Shae too, in the beginning.  They said that she was faking her love for Tyrion when there was no faking apparent in the acting, and that is because there was no faking going on.  It's the same with Sansa.  You can tell by the comments of the showrunners that they see Sansa now as a strong player, so the idea that she's running a double/triple game on LF pretending to be pissy and unhappy is more audience imagination....just like the imagination of last year over how Mystique Stark was able to sustain massive injuries and still ninja around, LOL.  The Sansa we see is the Sansa they wrote: inconsistent, meanish, mini Cersei....the show doesn't write these double fake outs, what you see is what you get.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Regarding the Vale Army and Moat, I think it's plausible they talked their way past.   LF could have told Roose they were coming to help defend vs the Wildlings and/or Lannesters should they think of invading after news of Ramsey's marriage get out.

They had King's orders to allow them to get north if needed.

Edit: Even now LF has a claim to be Warden of the North from a Southern perspective if he can get Sanaa to King's landing or her head anyway.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only irritation to me was too much time spent on the Starks.  I don't enjoy Arya and Jon.  We should have had Yara and Theon and Lady Olenna.

Share this post


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

People said this about Good Shae too, in the beginning.  They said that she was faking her love for Tyrion when there was no faking apparent in the acting, and that is because there was no faking going on.  It's the same with Sansa.  You can tell by the comments of the showrunners that they see Sansa now as a strong player, so the idea that she's running a double/triple game on LF pretending to be pissy and unhappy is more audience imagination....just like the imagination of last year over how Mystique Stark was able to sustain massive injuries and still ninja around, LOL.  The Sansa we see is the Sansa they wrote: inconsistent, meanish, mini Cersei....the show doesn't write these double fake outs, what you see is what you get.

Yeah I believe it will be another season of Sansa switching between daft and brilliant on a whim. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, teej6 said:

Yeah I believe it will be another season of Sansa switching between daft and brilliant on a whim. 

The worst thing is, that her stupidity, which is apparent in the plot, is supposed to go unnoticed by the audience and she's just to be  brilliant, player, badass, despite consistently doing things that are objectively stupid....like getting in a public squabble with Jon or withholding critical military info. before a battle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I forgot to add... By what right is Jon occupying the keeps of the Nightwatch with Wildlings?  He isn't Lord Commander.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, legba11 said:

I forgot to add... By what right is Jon occupying the keeps of the Nightwatch with Wildlings?  He isn't Lord Commander.

LOL  I thought of that one, too, while watching.  It's like they are working backwards from the books, in how Jon had already started manning the castles while he was LC.  I suspect they MAY just have Edd go along w whatever??  IF they even address it.  Insert eye roll here.  Even something this small, detail wise, the D's can't handle. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Given that the Nights Watch have less than 100 and more like 50 sworn brothers, I suspect that an army that commands thousands can do whatever they please. Edd will just have to suck it up. Given his reluctance to become Lord Commander, he may actually like a southern army bolstering their ranks and taking charge.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, legba11 said:

I forgot to add... By what right is Jon occupying the keeps of the Nightwatch with Wildlings?  He isn't Lord Commander.

Just like the Karstarks and Umbers, I think the writers are trying to put people back where they would have been had they followed the ADwD plots.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, legba11 said:

I forgot to add... By what right is Jon occupying the keeps of the Nightwatch with Wildlings?  He isn't Lord Commander.

By Right of Bad Plotting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some were wondering why Dragonstone seemed deserted when Dany and crew arrived, but, when compared to the Iron Islands, Dragonstone is a wee speck of rock.  Logistically, Iron Islanders' economy consists of piracy, for It is known that they do not sow.  It follows then, that when Stanis went north, he took kit and kabootle.  With no great lord to provide and nothing left to eat, the domestic help gravitated back to the mainland.  As far as I can tell, Dragonstone's only natural resorce is Dragon glass.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, Slingingstones said:

Some were wondering why Dragonstone seemed deserted when Dany and crew arrived, but, when compared to the Iron Islands, Dragonstone is a wee speck of rock.  Logistically, Iron Islanders' economy consists of piracy, for It is known that they do not sow.  It follows then, that when Stanis went north, he took kit and kabootle.  With no great lord to provide and nothing left to eat, the domestic help gravitated back to the mainland.  As far as I can tell, Dragonstone's only natural resorce is Dragon glass.

The issue is why did Jaime, Cersei and Euron leave this strategically vital stronghold that they had identified as Dany's arrival point in Westeros unoccupied so that she could walk straight in? No garrison, no boobytraps, no assassin in case she walks in without guards for some reason.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×