Jump to content

Archived

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

lannistergold

What do people think of Locke? [book spoilers]

Recommended Posts

He creeped me out far more than Vargo did, so I enjoyed watching him. I was surprised that I liked it, given as how annoyed I was that Vargo was replaced with a new character.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, he's good, and will get even better. They chose a very good actor, Roose is not sacrificing his best man. We may see him for a long time in the show

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Noah Taylor is a wonderful actor and really engaging on screen. I was seriously creeped out during the scene between him and Jaime. For the tone of the show I am really glad they cut Vargo - Locke is far more menacing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like him as a character. He's fucked himself now though.

I like his character as well, but I worry they've introduced another weird plot hole because Roose's man would know whether its okay to cut off the kingslayer's hand or not, the Bolton men are not going to be the freelance types who go all ad hoc on the most important captive in the country.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like his character as well, but I worry they've introduced another weird plot hole because Roose's man would know whether its okay to cut off the kingslayer's hand or not, the Bolton men are not going to be the freelance types who go all ad hoc on the most important captive in the country.

Perhaps he has no idea about Roose's intentions and was just told to capture Jaime under the impression that he would stay loyal to Robb Stark. I mean its still a bad idea but not quite as bad if he knew Roose was communicating with Tywin.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like his character as well, but I worry they've introduced another weird plot hole because Roose's man would know whether its okay to cut off the kingslayer's hand or not, the Bolton men are not going to be the freelance types who go all ad hoc on the most important captive in the country.

See, I don't think he's aware of Roose's intentions at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hate the name change but love the actor's portrayal. He looked like a pallid slightly sinister Coronel Saunders.

Jaime talking down to him really riled him... Or did it? I got the feeling Jaime's mutilation was pre-ordained. Why?

  • Jaime escaped and killed several men while captured, the north wants blood.
  • The war is turning nasty now, desperate men do desperate things.
  • Mutilating him makes it much less likely he'll escape in future, not only physically but it will have a depressing effect on him. When Jaime starts with the sapphires prattling I think Locke realises just how persuasive and charismatic he can be and he decides that he literally needs to be taken down a peg and kept docile.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is no evidence that the RW is being planned at this point in the story. Why would Roose, who peels people like bananas, care about the Kingslayer loosing a hand if he hasn't dealt with Tywin yet? Even if he has dealt with Tywin, he forgot to tell Locke about it (or just said bring him back alive). It'll be more interesting if they show Roose make the RW deal with Tywin, not knowing Jamie is unhanded, then show the aftermath of the mixup when Roose/Tywin finds out. I like Locke, too bad he is a dead man walking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

See, I don't think he's aware of Roose's intentions at all.

I'm sure the show will hand-wave this as his explanation, but IMO it doesn't really hold water. This was my primary gripe when the Bloody Mummers were cut from the show and I think it still applies. Locke has no motive, other than basic sadism, to take Jaime's hand. The same was not true of Hoat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sure the show will hand-wave this as his explanation, but IMO it doesn't really hold water. This was my primary gripe when the Bloody Mummers were cut from the show and I think it still applies. Locke has no motive, other than basic sadism, to take Jaime's hand. The same was not true of Hoat.

He has: To keep him docile and contained and return him to Roose as per his remit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He has: To keep him docile and contained and return him to Roose as per his remit.

Jaime wasn't particularly misbehaving, just running his mouth a bit, and he was in chains, not that much of a threat. More to the point it still requires that Locke be completely ignorant of Roose's intent to turn his cloak, which is a weaksauce hand-wave. Taking Jaime's hand severely damages Roose's ability to turn his cloak (which of course was precisely Hoat's intent), which means that Roose sent out a guy that clearly doesn't have to be pushed pretty hard to start hacking off limbs but that was ignorant of his intentions. Poor planning on Roose's part, and weakens the character. Not a major thing but definitely a downgrade.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't care for him.. don't like or dislike him. He will be a foregettable character to me. I understand some people did not like Vargo Hoat's lipsing, but I thought it was hilarious. Especially since there isn't that much comedy in the series. I was so looking forward to "Kingthlayer! You are my captith!" I just don't understand DD's reasoning behind changing such a distinct character.

Because that would come across rather poorly on screen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jaime wasn't particularly misbehaving, just running his mouth a bit, and he was in chains, not that much of a threat. More to the point it still requires that Locke be completely ignorant of Roose's intent to turn his cloak, which is a weaksauce hand-wave. Taking Jaime's hand severely damages Roose's ability to turn his cloak (which of course was precisely Hoat's intent), which means that Roose sent out a guy that clearly doesn't have to be pushed pretty hard to start hacking off limbs but that was ignorant of his intentions. Poor planning on Roose's part, and weakens the character. Not a major thing but definitely a downgrade.

I didn't say that he was misbehaving but he was clearly offering rewards and riches in return for Brienne's virtue and his own release. There is a perception among all northerners now that they are losing the war. Jaime makes direct reference to that in his pitch to Locke. Locke doesn't fall for it but he cannot be sure one of his men wouldn't and, insofar as he knows, should Jaime slip away again, that's his head on a pike. So he mutilates Jaime to make escaping that much more difficult.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sure the show will hand-wave this as his explanation, but IMO it doesn't really hold water. This was my primary gripe when the Bloody Mummers were cut from the show and I think it still applies. Locke has no motive, other than basic sadism, to take Jaime's hand. The same was not true of Hoat.

He has no motivation to treat him well though. He still believes him to be the enemy. Chopping off his hand won't make Tywin pay or offer less and it's not like they're kidnappers trying to extort Tywin for every penny possible. Hoat initially looks to have made a mistake in the book since he was once Tywin's goat but then Roose explains it to Jaime. Locke was never Tywin's creature and is unaware of Roose's dealings with him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i like him

i really do not understand how some people are saying he had no good motive to cut off jaimes hand. who said he needs a good motive?

he doesn't like jaime. jaime tries to con him into freeing him and feeding him, gives him all that lannister lip service which he doesn't appreciate so he decides to teach him a lesson. it also guarantees that he won't be attempting any escapes. its pretty simple

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hate the name change but love the actor's portrayal. He looked like a pallid slightly sinister Coronel Saunders.

Jaime talking down to him really riled him... Or did it? I got the feeling Jaime's mutilation was pre-ordained. Why?

  • Jaime escaped and killed several men while captured, the north wants blood.
  • The war is turning nasty now, desperate men do desperate things.
  • Mutilating him makes it much less likely he'll escape in future, not only physically but it will have a depressing effect on him. When Jaime starts with the sapphires prattling I think Locke realises just how persuasive and charismatic he can be and he decides that he literally needs to be taken down a peg and kept docile.

Those are some fair points. But whatever gains he made would pale in comparison to his loss: he'll have brought Tywin Lannister's wrath down on him.

Vargo's act at least made some sense.

He knew that Tywin would never forgive him for stealing Harrenhal (and indeed, by the time Tywin learns about Jaime's hand, Vargo's already being carved up by Gregor). Currying favour with Lord Karstark by delivering "justice" on Jaime was rational at that point. Vargo's plan only went awry when Karstark lost his head, unforeseeably.

By contrast, Locke's closed his options rather than opening them - after all, why not try to make a good first impression with Tywin by delivering Jaime in one piece?

On the other hand, Locke does have a subtle sort of menace to him that I dig. I'll be interested to see how he tries to get himself out of this bind, but my gut tells me he'll fail miserably.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think they should do the whole "Vargo suspects Roose of conspiring with Tywin". That might be too much of a giveaway of things to come. They can just attribute him as being reckless. He doesn't seem like the brightest person, so cutting off Jaime's hand wouldn't be totally out of character. After all, in show canon, Locke probably thinks he's returning Jaime to Robb. I doubt he believes that Robb would punish him for the hand thing. If he does, he can claim Brienne did it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really don't see the problem with Locke cutting off Jaime's hand. He is most likely, like others have said, operating under the assumption that Jaime will remain in the hands of the Starks as a valuable hostage. The episode last week established that Littlefinger's and Varys' spies are doing a good job tracking Jaime, so they most likely wouldn't find out about his hand, and he'd still serve the same purpose he did before.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×