King Tommen Posted June 4, 2012 Share Posted June 4, 2012 I loved the Theon story this season but the writing was on the wall about the ending falling flat when they decided not to cast Ramsay this season but still wanted to complete the sack of Winterfell storyline with Ramsay being behind it.They wrote themselves into a corner as it would have looked ridiculously cheesy to have Ramsay appear as a glorified extra so they essentially had to skip that entire scene of the Ironborn giving up Theon and then getting slaughtered anyways.While I can certainly live with them delaying the introduction of Ramsay until he's actually cast, the execution in the finale was sloppy and as a end to the television Theon arc, created a lot of confusion for the audience (which I don't believe was the intention). As a book reader, I know what happened and where Theon is going but I've read a number of reviews of the show from non-readers and they either (1) grossly misinterpreted what happened with Winterfell and Theon or (2) were disappointed with the execution as they suspect what probably happened but have no idea why it was shown the way it was. The answer of course is that they haven't cast the guy who orchestrated the betrayal so they couldn't show him in action but only hardcore fans know this fact.I've read many interpretations from non-readers that involve them assuming Theon was dragged back to the Iron Islands by his crew, or that the Ironborn torched the city on the way out (because they don't show any of them dead on the ground as Bran and crew survey the damage). The audience doesn't understand what happened to the Northmen who were laying siege to Winterfell and why Bran and Rickon had to take off and not try and find them. It's extremely strange that Luwin didn't bother to mention that the Northmen laying siege to Winterfell ending up being the ones to burn it down as he clearly would have been able to witness this even while wounded. He managed to drag himself all the way over to the Wiertree, I'm sure he would have noticed the result of the siege.In any case, it was obviously left as a "we'll explain this next season" deal but I thought they would have come up with something a little better to write around the fact that Ramsay wasn't there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Vader's Bastard Posted June 4, 2012 Share Posted June 4, 2012 This must be confusing to non book readers left wondering, who burned down the castle and where are they? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clueless Northman Posted June 4, 2012 Share Posted June 4, 2012 Wasn't the general belief in Westeros that it was the ironborn who burned Winterfell? Wasn't that the false story spread by the Bastard? If that's the case, then they've basically put viewers in the same position as most of the people of Westeros. It's a change, but one of perspective more than of substance.Indeed. So, that could work, but they have to show next season the whole Dreadfort men taking over, capturing Theon, then killing a few Ironmen, then burning down the castle.And by "next season", I mean in the first episode. Then it would make a bit of sense and would clear things up a bit for the non-readers. Or it might utterly confuse them since Roose looks to be Robb's second-in-command ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frumpus Posted June 4, 2012 Share Posted June 4, 2012 Did anyone else get a resurge of the suspicion that Dagmer = Ramsey in the show from this scene? When Dagmer says "Let's go home", I got the impression he may have meant the Dreadfort. I'm still not sure how this would play with Ramsey being in disguise all the way from Pyke, but even with Roose previously talking about his bastard at the Dreadfort, I don't really think that Roose would have told the whole truth to Rob anyway.Ugh enough with that. Taking some of Character A's parts and giving them to Character B does not mean Character A = Character B! this is just common novel->other media stuff! Ramsay is not Dagmer.is must be confusing to non book readers left wondering, who burned down the castle and where are they?I'd like to know how they reacted to that scene. I mean, it's really implausible to believe that the 20 ironborn men managed to not only burn Winterfell but also kill all of the troops outside. They will have to start thinking really hard about what possibly happened. Though my guess is many probably didn't think about it at all. I've yet to see any mention of this in any of the articles or outside forum posts I've read. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jameson Snow Posted June 4, 2012 Share Posted June 4, 2012 If I hadn't read the books, I would be so utterly lost and confused about this entire story line. It starts with the Ironborn being disrespectful to Theon and treating him like crap when they set sail. Dagmer is the only one who is essentially friendly to Theon and suggests they go take Winterfell, right? So then we get there, take it, kill some children, have Dagmer egging Theon on the entire time. And then at the climax, Dagmer just knocks him out and says let's go home? What the hell? I just am completely missing the point of the entire plot of the season. What was the point of going to Winterfell? Why was Dagmer nice to Theon to begin with at all? What was gained? I don't get it, man!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I'm_Tim Posted June 4, 2012 Share Posted June 4, 2012 If I hadn't read the books, I would be so utterly lost and confused about this entire story line. It starts with the Ironborn being disrespectful to Theon and treating him like crap when they set sail. Dagmer is the only one who is essentially friendly to Theon and suggests they go take Winterfell, right? So then we get there, take it, kill some children, have Dagmer egging Theon on the entire time. And then at the climax, Dagmer just knocks him out and says let's go home? What the hell? I just am completely missing the point of the entire plot of the season. What was the point of going to Winterfell? Why was Dagmer nice to Theon to begin with at all? What was gained? I don't get it, man!!Robb tells Roose to send his bastard to Winterfell. He tells Roose all Ironborn are not to be harmed, except Theon Greyjoy. Ironborn don't like, respect or trust Theon. That's made clear throughout the season. Dagmer acts like he does because he's playing the Reek role. Ironborn are heartless assholes who give no fuck. Asha begs Theon to leave with her or he'll be killed. Ironborn let Theon give big speech because they think it's funny and give no fuck about Theon. Dagmer knocks Theon out. They turn Theon in, in exchange for their lives. Who burns Winterfell is the only confusing part, which will be addressed next season. It's pretty simple. Maybe not well done, but that's opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Tommen Posted June 4, 2012 Share Posted June 4, 2012 If I hadn't read the books, I would be so utterly lost and confused about this entire story line. It starts with the Ironborn being disrespectful to Theon and treating him like crap when they set sail. Dagmer is the only one who is essentially friendly to Theon and suggests they go take Winterfell, right? So then we get there, take it, kill some children, have Dagmer egging Theon on the entire time. And then at the climax, Dagmer just knocks him out and says let's go home? What the hell? I just am completely missing the point of the entire plot of the season. What was the point of going to Winterfell? Why was Dagmer nice to Theon to begin with at all? What was gained? I don't get it, man!!Well I think at least when it comes to Dagmer and the crew's motivation, I don't think there is any confusion as to why they did what they did. They were fine allowing Theon to lead them and go raise some hell in Winterfell because that fit in with the Ironborn philosophy of reaving and taking what what they wanted, when they wanted. But when push came to shove, they had no real loyalty to Theon as a leader and when offered the option of giving him up in order to save their own lives and return home, it was an easy choice.There were issues with the end of Theon's storyline but that IMO was not one of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turdle Posted June 4, 2012 Share Posted June 4, 2012 It starts with the Ironborn being disrespectful to Theon and treating him like crap when they set sail. Dagmer is the only one who is essentially friendly to Theon and suggests they go take Winterfell, right?i understand why people think dagmer suggested theon take winterfell, but he doesn't. dagmer merely tells theon bluntly that theon is not going to be respected by his men for raiding fishing villages, the rest is theon.edited to make words make sense* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Qwop22 Posted June 4, 2012 Share Posted June 4, 2012 Isn't Ramsay slotted to be casted in Season 3? It appears to me that they are going to play it out like this:Dagmer and Co. surrendered Winterfell to the Bastard of the Dreadfort and offered Theon in exchange for their lives. Then Ramsay ransacked Winterfell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turdle Posted June 4, 2012 Share Posted June 4, 2012 It appears to me that they are going to play it out like this:Dagmer and Co. surrendered Winterfell to the Bastard of the Dreadfort and offered Theon in exchange for their lives. Then Ramsay ransacked Winterfell.i assume you are correct, but it doesn't make sense that bran/osha/rickon/hodor flee if they don't know what happened there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Second Hand Posted June 4, 2012 Author Share Posted June 4, 2012 If that's true, Q, then they will obviously include Alfie in the next couple of seasons. Which is really awful, too, and a complete betrayal of the eventual surprise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jayaris Posted June 4, 2012 Share Posted June 4, 2012 I feel like Luwin was preoccupied bleeding out crawling to the Godswood to take notice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dtones520 Posted June 4, 2012 Share Posted June 4, 2012 I'm worried that Ramsay isn't going to be cast, even though that seems ridiculous when they are casting people like Edmure Tully, the Blackfish, Olenna....all very important characters IMO, but Ramsay is up there with them, if not higher. I thought Theon's story was one of the greatest of the season, until.....the final episode. Talk about anticlimactic.Why would they mention him in multiple episodes and then never cast him? Plus I highly doubt that they are going to have Alfie Allen disappear for two seasons and then bring him back for season 5, especially after the great job he did this season. We will see Ramsay torturing Theon throughout the next two seasons. We will get a picture of how evil Ramsay Bolton is, bank it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I'm_Tim Posted June 4, 2012 Share Posted June 4, 2012 i assume you are correct, but it doesn't make sense that bran/osha/rickon/hodor flee if they don't know what happened there.So they should stay in ruins instead of seeking help at the wall? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turdle Posted June 4, 2012 Share Posted June 4, 2012 So they should stay in ruins instead of seeking help at the wall?they don't have to stay in the ruins, but they don't have to flee, either. they aren't on the lam, so to speak. no one is trying to kill them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I'm_Tim Posted June 4, 2012 Share Posted June 4, 2012 they don't have to stay in the ruins, but they don't have to flee, either. they aren't on the lam, so to speak. no one is trying to kill them.There's nothing to stay for. Winterfell's in ruins. It's a sacked city. Why would they stay? There's nothing there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turdle Posted June 4, 2012 Share Posted June 4, 2012 There's nothing to stay for. Winterfell's in ruins. It's a sacked city. Why would they stay? There's nothing there.i think you're misunderstanding, i'm not saying they needed to stay, i'm saying in the show, they're not in any danger. in the book they have an explicit reason to run. on the show they do not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I'm_Tim Posted June 4, 2012 Share Posted June 4, 2012 i think you're misunderstanding, i'm not saying they needed to stay, i'm saying in the show, they're not in any danger. in the book they have an explicit reason to run. on the show they do not.Considering that Winterfell's been sacked, there are no guards, and it's only inhabited by a kid, a crippled boy, a wildling and a halfwit, there's no reason to stay. It's dangerous. So far, the motivation is different, but the result is the same. Patience... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turdle Posted June 4, 2012 Share Posted June 4, 2012 Considering that Winterfell's been sacked, there are no guards, and it's only inhabited by a kid, a crippled boy, a wildling and a halfwit, there's no reason to stay. It's dangerous. So far, the motivation is different, but the result is the same. Patience...it's not a matter of patience, it's a matter of not having an explanation to my non-reader friends when they point out to me that they don't understand why they're running away. i didn't even think about the issue until they brought it up to me, and i had to resort to, "well they have a reason in the book." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Tommen Posted June 4, 2012 Share Posted June 4, 2012 i think you're misunderstanding, i'm not saying they needed to stay, i'm saying in the show, they're not in any danger. in the book they have an explicit reason to run. on the show they do not.Before dying, Luwin does say that "they may come back" which is why Bran and co need to leave. Who "they" are is supposed to be ambiguous but it doesn't make much sense that Ironborn would come back again after sacking a city so he is most likely referring to Ramsay's men. Which is why it doesn't make sense for him to keep this information from Bran and Osha. Like a little heads up that the guys who were supposed to save them ended up being the ones who burnt their home down which means they can't trust anyone and should head to the Wall.But he couldn't impart that crucial bit of info because it would inform the audience of what actually happened and the writers want that reveal to remain frustratingly ambiguous until next season.Basically, it's as if they cut the crucial climax of the arc out of this season entirely because of external issues (no casting of the villain) and then had to write around the fact that they couldn't show that scene. There is a domino effect of making some of the character actions confusing and unclear (Luwin not spilling the beans, did the Ironborn leave?, where the hell did all the Northmen go?, why exactly did the city get sacked? etc).I think it was very much a case of, "we'll have to deal with this next season, there's no good way of explaining this coherently now." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.