Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Ran

[Book Spoilers] Ep 202 Discussion

Recommended Posts

I really would have preferred some more ambiguity about the whole thing on screen though. They could have gone through that whole scene and still left it up to interpretation whether Stannis gets his freak on...it might have made the eventual shadow baby more chilling in that respect, much in the way it is in the books. Down the line, the Davos/Mel scene where she offers herself to him, that could confirm it then, but some ambiguity would have served the tension of the story better, as well as given the non-book viewers something more to debate at the water cooler...

Ambiguity is bad in this medium. You can't skip backwards a few pages to remind yourself what happened in the previous chapter, you can't re-read the page because you're on to the next scene. A large audience that has not read the books is going to have to grasp where this shadowbaby is coming from and I guarantee you, we will find non-book readers who will be very confused about what just happened at the end of Episode 4.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They are changing alot. I like the changing with the indivdual scenes while keeping the esscense of the story still there. However they seem to be cutting corners and taking out alot of characters. Shireen, Bywater, and they killed Rakharo!! I also believe the way the show is going that they are going to cut Edric Storm aswell. Not cool. They seem to be just cutting down the story alot in a attempt to pop off new seasons. I would have wished they spent more time getting stronger acotrs for ahsa/yara, and gilly, and spending more time on the story. THEY ARE CUTTING TO MUCH OUT WTF!!!! PATCHFACE!!!! NO!!!

1. Shireen isn't taken out, the line referred to stillborn sons.

2. Rakharo's death was due to the actor leaving to do another movie.

3. Bywater is not essential; he's a minor character who dies in the book he was introduced in. Having Bronn in his place to betray Tyrion after the battle will be so much more resonant than having one minor character replaced by another.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The way they are focusing on Ros, I think that Ros will be the one who will be forced to marry Ramsay in the show as fake Arya.

That thought crossed my mind, too. As for the other suggestion, as a fake Sansa, I think that Sansa has another part to play in the Eerie.

I do not like that Ros survived the crying situation. It would have been totally in Littlefinger's character to offer teh customer the alternative whore, as he did, then find someone to escort Ros away, permanently. I kind of find the idea that Petyr would stoop to threats with Cersei and Ros as incongruant with his nature. He has a golden rule, to always keep his hands clean.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tywin's bastard

He had a completely neutral look when he was watching so it was obviously just him keeping a close eye on his business (information is power).

Huh. He had a neutral expression? Didn't notice. I was too busy rolling my eyes.

If you don't think that's anything new I suppose we don't need have to have Joffrey do anything sadistic anymore since he already did that in the first season and we couldn't possibly gain anything from continuing to follow his character on that path, right?

I thought I was pretty clear initally but obviously not. Let me restate it: this was 1) a new scene which 2) did not progress the plot and 3) provided no new character insights. Joffrey does plenty of awful things in the books. In the show, these will 1) not be new scenes - I'll be annoyed if they do create any since there are many from which to choose already, 2) progress the plot (e.g. inciting the riot) and/or 3) provide new character insights - with respect to Sansa, Tyrion, the Hound, Margaery, and the Queen of Thorns amongst others. I honestly don't see how you can draw that comparison.

Edited by night light

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To be blunt, if we're going to whine about characters like Bywater, we might as well just not watch the series, and writers might as well stop producing the show.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Episode 3 is Catelyn discussing peace terms with Renly when he gets the news about the siege of Storms End, then Stannis meets Renly in episode 4, and episode 5 suggests that the shadowbaby will be the capper to episode 4. I think they're going to blend the second shadowbaby in with the first and have Davos row Melisandre over as she gives birth to the one that kills Renly.

Thanks. That makes sense. The killing of Renly and the capture of Storms End can be blended into one sequence to move the plot along, with little to no draw backs. I wonder if Edric Storm is gonna be brought into the story. Much like Stannis' daughter, I don't think it would be an important omission in the grand scheme of the show. Really all he did was create a mild conflict between Stannis' duty and Melisandre's desires and magic. So after they meet in the field, Renly retires to Storms End. Simple enough...just move his army closer to Storms End. Why would a fancy boy like Renly sleep in a tent when he was a nice comfy castle near by. Davos takes Melisandre into Storms End to kill Renly, instead of the castellan (sp?). I buy it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does anyone else think that although the Stannis actor is doing a good job, when he says

"I cannot defeat my brother in the field"

its one of the worst delivered lines in the series.

I think too many are taking the image we have of Stannis from the books as the real Stannis. Remember, the book is all through the eyes of other characters. The Stannis we know from the books is mostly derived from the POV of Davos, who owes everything he has (and even things he doesn't have, like some fingers) to Stannis.

I took Stannis' comment in the show to mean more along the line of:

"I [and my 5000 troops] cannot defeat my brother [and 100,000 troops that should be mine] in the field."

I think it shows that while Stannis is a very capable commander, he is not stupid. He is a realist. In the book, doesn't Stannis want to defeat Renly in single combat? This goes along the same lines. He knows his army is no match for Renly's.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1. Shireen isn't taken out, the line referred to stillborn sons. 2. Rakharo's death was due to the actor leaving to do another movie. 3. Bywater is not essential; he's a minor character who dies in the book he was introduced in. Having Bronn in his place to betray Tyrion after the battle will be so much more resonant than having one minor character replaced by another.

So far, the only omission of characters so far that I am truly disappointed in is the Reed kids. The rest, I am totally OK with.

1. Shireen: are we sure she will be in the show? The scene on the beach burning the seven, after Stannis gets his sword, he sticks it in the sand and starts to storm off. He doubles back and gets his wife. ONLY his wife. No child was there. Might be insignificant, but could also mean Stannis (HBO type) is childless. In the end, does it matter? What did Shireen ever do to advance the plot of the series?

2. Patchface: Really? Upset about that? Again, what did he ever do to advance the plot, except for put out some jiberish that some take of a prophecy of future events? No real loss here.

3. Bywater: As stated above, no real loss. He is easily replaced with another existing character that will eventually betray Tyrion. Bronn has already said he will do pretty much anything for money.

4. Rakharo (or whoever the bloodrider was): Not a big loss. Not really a big loss in terms of the overall plot. In the end, you get Dany with a hodge podge of a Queens Guard. Barriston Selmy. The fat pit fighter. Joras for a while. It doesn't matter who they really are. She has a band of misfits that are following her.

5. The Blackfish: Still not sure if he is cut or not. I think he is, but who knows. I personally love the Blackfish, and would really have enjoyed seeing him on screen, but as I think about it, he really has done very little for the overall plot (in 5 books). I am not gonna shed a tear if Brynden Rivers is axed from the HBO series, even though I truly love his persona in the books.

6. The Reed kids: This is the one that have both a personal and plot objection. My favorite dialogue in the entire series was when the Reeds came to Winterfell and swore their loyalty to the Starks. Moving! But cutting them creates alot of problems with the plot moving forward. Yes, I get that Osha can serve in a similar manner in terms of Bran's development of his "abilities". In fact, she is probably a better guide for him to get into the north. But who on earth will take Rickon? Will he go with Bran? The omission of the Reeds (who still could be brought into the series later without a ton of problems, if HBO wants to do it) is the only one that I see as truly affecting the overall plot line of the show.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure if it's mentioned in this thread or not, but did anyone notice that Melisandre tells Davos' son Matthos "A death by fire is the purest death". That totally forshadow's his death in the Battle of the Blackwater.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agreed on the Reeds. Bran and the Reeds was one of my Favorite storylines and to not have it makes me sad.

What confuses/interests me about the Reeds is I don't understand how D&D are going to work in anything about the TOJ now...we already didn't get the crucial scene in the first season (ned's dream) but without the Reeds there is literally no more connection to Howland, the last person who knew what happened...which either means that there's going to have to be some creatine jerry-rigging to fit this all in, or the show's going to deviate from the book extremely and not have R+L=J.

And Silverx2, we need to talk about your avatar pic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ambiguity is bad in this medium. You can't skip backwards a few pages to remind yourself what happened in the previous chapter, you can't re-read the page because you're on to the next scene. A large audience that has not read the books is going to have to grasp where this shadowbaby is coming from and I guarantee you, we will find non-book readers who will be very confused about what just happened at the end of Episode 4.

I have to disagree. There's good ambiguity in television. Mysteries can be left out there for the discerning viewer to piece together. The whole idea of "show don't tell". If Mel attempts to seduce Stannis and he says no, but maybe he seems tempted and then there's a shadow baby that looks like Stannis? Real good viewers will catch on to things that are foreshadowed well.

Hell the first time we see Stannis' shadow in the books, there's no indication that it has anything to do with Melisandre's seduction of him. Unless of course, they're going to combine Davos taking Melisandre under Storm's End and the killing of Renly into one scene to save time and skip Edric Storm all together...

Bottom line, the seduction of Stannis was done in a clunky manner and felt out of place with the deliberate nature of it.

Not sure if it's mentioned in this thread or not, but did anyone notice that Melisandre tells Davos' son Matthos "A death by fire is the purest death". That totally forshadow's his death in the Battle of the Blackwater.

This statement is a case in point. Readers will get the reference right away, but viewer who haven't read the books might just look back upon this statement at the end of the season and think that the writers might have just been that clever.

Edited by Jaxom 1974

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To be blunt, if we're going to whine about characters like Bywater, we might as well just not watch the series, and writers might as well stop producing the show.

So long as Bronn doesn't go the way of Bywater, I'm ok with it. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Renly will be in Episode 3, but he's not going to get killed by the end, right? While for book readers it's a dramatic moment, I think killing a character the first episode we see him (this season), would lose a bit of drama. Also, Im looking forward to the actress who plays Margery. I loved her as Anne Boleyn in the Tudors!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, it is quite nice, I've had it on here for a couple of years now...

Damn it. That means I'm the Bizarro in this equation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mr. E and Silerx2, it seems to me that the show may skip the hints to Jon's parentage, at least until Bran comes into power. I think it will be something to watch the battle at the Tower of Joy through Bran's eyes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I always surprised at how much credit people give Littlefinger, this is the same guy who told a story about the knife that was used to attack Bran, a story that could very easily been disproved. He clearly makes mistakes in the book and is not an expert at the game of thrones.

I have no problem with the way he has been shown in the show, be it with Cersei in episode one or with the whores in episode two. If there is one constant in the books it is that no one is perfect.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I always surprised at how much credit people give Littlefinger, this is the same guy who told a story about the knife that was used to attack Bran, a story that could very easily been disproved. He clearly makes mistakes in the book and is not an expert at the game of thrones.

I have no problem with the way he has been shown in the show, be it with Cersei in episode one or with the whores in episode two. If there is one constant in the books it is that no one is perfect.

I see the story about the knife as a gamble, and indicative of his character; unlike Varys, who plays the long game and is incredibly meticulous in his plotting, Littlefinger improvises and plays for short-term advantage, sometimes very impulsively. As we see later from his speech to Sansa, sometimes he does things for the sheer hell of it to muddy the waters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×