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

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

are you serious lol? what do you think the cunning Roose prefers, keeping his old hunter or winnings tywins favor and being granted paramount lordship over the north?

i still smell plot hole/character assasination. Locke was riding under Bolton Banners. Remember when Tywin invaded the riverlands just because Cat took Tyrion (a son he didnt even care about and probably hoped for him to die in secret).

Now that tywin has twice the army of the north plus his tyrell allies to call in, he could simply tell bolton "Your men cut off my oldest sons hand. i have three times as many men as the northern host, i dont need your and Walder Freys help to deal with the young pup. I will gather my forces and personally hunt down every single one of you, and when i get my hands on you Lord Bolton, i will show you what happens to those who cross the lion of casterly rock. I havent decided what to do with you yet, but you can be sure that there will be no more Boltons and no Dreadfort when im done"

Its pretty well established that the most important thing to tywin is the family reputation, that house lannister is either respected or feared. what kind of message would it send if a relativley minor house from the north can get a way with mutilating his favourite son and in return he is given paramount lordship over the north.

there are only 2 possible solutions AFAIK:

1. Roose sends tywin lockes skin

2. Roose sends Locke as a prisoner, accompanying Jamie and Qyburn to kings landing, and upon arrival locke is given to Qyburn for his experiments.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i still smell plot hole/character assasination. Locke was riding under Bolton Banners. Remember when Tywin invaded the riverlands just because Cat took Tyrion (a son he didnt even care about and probably hoped for him to die in secret).

Now that tywin has twice the army of the north plus his tyrell allies to call in, he could simply tell bolton "Your men cut off my oldest sons hand. i have three times as many men as the northern host, i dont need your and Walder Freys help to deal with the young pup. I will gather my forces and personally hunt down every single one of you, and when i get my hands on you Lord Bolton, i will show you what happens to those who cross the lion of casterly rock. I havent decided what to do with you yet, but you can be sure that there will be no more Boltons and no Dreadfort when im done"

What character assassination? Tywin didn't lash out at the Bolton's when Hoat cut off Jaime's hand in the books - and Hoat was very much one of Bolton's men, just as a sell-sword instead of a Bannerman. As long as Locke dies, there'll be no reason for Tywin to think any different to how he did in the books.

I'm surprised nobody has mentioned that Locke is actually a Lord. When Jaime convinces him to not rape Brienne, Locke calls out, "Bring her back here," and his men respond, "Yes, my Lord." Maybe Tywin will want to take out his frustrations on House Locke* over House Bolton.

*They're a very different House in the books.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What character assassination? Tywin didn't lash out at the Bolton's when Hoat cut off Jaime's hand in the books - and Hoat was very much one of Bolton's men, just as a sell-sword instead of a Bannerman. As long as Locke dies, there'll be no reason for Tywin to think any different to how he did in the books.

That was a different situation. the fact that jamie lost his hand to a sellsword that was originally unleashed by Tywin made the entire issue more embarrasing for Tywin. But Locke actually carries Boltons Banners, so Roose better do something to make up for the facts that his men mutilated Tywins Son.

to quote tywin from S1:

"if another house can seize one of our own and hold him capitive with impunity, then we are no longer a house to be feared"

but cutting of a lannister of casterly rocks hand will reward you with paramount lordship over the north? does not add up. it would most certainly affect how other houses percieve house Lannister, and it would affect how i percieve Tywins personality... in the first book he went to war to protect the family reputation because a son that he hates was captured by Catelyn Tully. Now hes just gonna let the men who chopped of his favourite sons hand get away with being lifted to wardens of the north?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It would save bought time and make things easier if Roose simply sent Locke and his men to Tywin along with Qyburn, brienne and jamie and allow them to execute their revenge themselves in the dungeons under the red keep. again, this could be an excellent opportunity to introduce Qyburns "experiments on one of the prisoners.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Except that in this situation, Tywin deals with the Bolton's to win the war. Getting them on his side is necessary to win the war and he knows Roose didn't personally cut off Jaime's hand, rather it was this Locke character. I agree that revenge must be taken, I'm just trying to find the "character assassination" in it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like Locke. Being a lover of the books, I had mixed feelings about losing the telltale lithp of Vargo. On the one hand, it's in the books, but on the other, would it come across as overly goofy on camera? We'll never know, but Locke is great.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think he's cool (much more so than Vargo Hoat, who I didn't particularly care for), and the scene of him humiliating Jaime before cutting his hand off was more effective to me than how it plays out in the book. Also it keeps the story focused.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It would save bought time and make things easier if Roose simply sent Locke and his men to Tywin along with Qyburn, brienne and jamie and allow them to execute their revenge themselves in the dungeons under the red keep. again, this could be an excellent opportunity to introduce Qyburns "experiments on one of the prisoners.

That is a HUGE change from the books. Would you really prefer such a massive change to a non-change? Tywin's character is not "assassinated" (by the way it's pretty clear that people here don't know what "character assassination" means) just because he won't kill Roose Bolton over one of his men chopping Jaime's hand off without Boton's knowledge.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That is a HUGE change from the books. Would you really prefer such a massive change to a non-change? Tywin's character is not "assassinated" (by the way it's pretty clear that people here don't know what "character assassination" means) just because he won't kill Roose Bolton over one of his men chopping Jaime's hand off without Boton's knowledge.

But killing innocent farmers in the riverlands because catelyn stark captured Tyrion, the son he doesnt care about makes more sense to you? why would he go to war for tyrions honour but ally himself with the man who is responsible for jamies loss of arm, when he really can just crush the northern army at this point?

Except that in this situation, Tywin deals with the Bolton's to win the war. Getting them on his side is necessary to win the war and he knows Roose didn't personally cut off Jaime's hand, rather it was this Locke character. I agree that revenge must be taken, I'm just trying to find the "character assassination" in it.

it is not at all necessary. Tywin has twice the men on his own and probably 3,5-4 times more men than the north if he calls for a portion of the tyrell vassals. Since the Northerners are cut off from retreating to their northern keeps by the ironborn occupying Moat Cailin, they are kinda stuck in the riverlands for now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But killing innocent farmers in the riverlands because catelyn stark captured Tyrion, the son he doesnt care about makes more sense to you? why would he go to war for tyrions honour but ally himself with the man who is responsible for jamies loss of arm, when he really can just crush the northern army at this point?

Uh correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't Jaime promise Bolton he won't tell Tywin that he was responsible for cutting his hand off if he lets him leave Harrenhal?

EDIT - from the Ice & Fire wiki:

Later, at dinner, Lord Bolton hints that he will free Jaime as long as Jaime absolves him of the blame for the loss of his hand. Jaime agrees, and Lord Bolton orders Steelshanks Walton to escort him to King's Landing.

So looks like there isn't the conflict you think there is. *Whew* no characters "assassinated" today!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think he's cool (much more so than Vargo Hoat, who I didn't particularly care for), and the scene of him humiliating Jaime before cutting his hand off was more effective to me than how it plays out in the book. Also it keeps the story focused.

Exactly. And there is no reason why Tywin Lannister should be the only person with renegade bannermen who are loyal, but also brutal and sadistic (The Mountain). Why can't Roose Bolton have someone like that, with Locke? It makes perfect sense - Roose knows Locke's ability as a hunter of men, just as Tywin knows the impact that a rampaging Gregor Clegane can have, and so Roose sends out Locke to find Jaime and bring Jaime to him (Roose). There is no reason for Roose to tell Locke anything of his own plotting with Tywin: he just expects Locke to return with Jaime, expecting to use Jaime's return as a further bargaining chip withTywin. But if Locke returns with handless Jaime, Roose is in an awkward situation and is likely to have one or two 'problems' with Daddy Tywin, just as in the books. That's the whole point of the Roose/Jaime dinner table conversation at Harrenhal - Roose wants Jaime to 'sing the right song' back to Tywin about how it wasn't Roose who removed Jaime's hand. So I don't see too many problems with the plot being simplified in this way, and certainly Hoat's cartoonish lisp would not have come across nearly as effectively on TV as it does in the books. Some things work well on the page but not on screen, and vice versa.

As for Locke not having much depth as someone suggested earlier - hello? Apart from the two seconds of his arrival in ep 2, he's only appeared in two scenes in Ep 3, and you are already assessing him as not having 'depth'?!! I thought he was excellent, and had a real sense of cold menace from the very first.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Uh correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't Jaime promise Bolton he won't tell Tywin that he was responsible for cutting his hand off if he lets him leave Harrenhal?

EDIT - from the Ice & Fire wiki:

So looks like there isn't the conflict you think there is. *Whew* no characters "assassinated" today!

Wich i wont buy for a second if they try to pull off in the series. after the loss of his hand, if i remember correctly, jamie was in a furious state of lust for revenge. Just because he makes a promise to bolton to be able to escape doesnt mean he has to keep it. First of all it would be far from the first time jamie lied about something, so there is absolutley no reason for him to keep this stupid promise to Roose Bolton, who is a totally insignificant house compared to Lannister of casterly rock. There is no reason for Jamie to NOT tell Tywin exactly what happened when he get back to kings landing. and in the case of the series the man who cut off his hand actually carried the bolton banners, so regardless if it happened on Rooses order or not, he should face a similiar fate as house Reyne unless Tywin has went through a complete personality change.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wich i wont buy for a second if they try to pull off in the series. after the loss of his hand, if i remember correctly, jamie was in a furious state of lust for revenge. Just because he makes a promise to bolton to be able to escape doesnt mean he has to keep it. First of all it would be far from the first time jamie lied about something, so there is absolutley no reason for him to keep this stupid promise to Roose Bolton, who is a totally insignificant house compared to Lannister of casterly rock. There is no reason for Jamie to NOT tell Tywin exactly what happened when he get back to kings landing. and in the case of the series the man who cut off his hand actually carried the bolton banners, so regardless if it happened on Rooses order or not, he should face a similiar fate as house Reyne unless Tywin has went through a complete personality change.

But Jaime could just as easily easily have dumped the blame on Roose in the books, and he didn't. After all, Vargo Hoat took Jaime back to Roose at Harrenhal - just because Hoat was a renegade turned loose by Tywin didn't mean that he hadn't conspired with Roose against Jaime, or that Jaime wouldn't be able to tell Tywin a tale of how Roose was not to be trusted and had paid Vargo Hoat to hunt down Jaime.

And I don't think Daddy Tywin would be taking immediate revenge against the Boltons just because Jaime arrives back minus a hand. Tywin has much bigger things on his mind: he has a war to win against the Starks, and he has the RW planned - and for those much plans, he needs Roose Bolton. Yes, we saw him being concerned about getting Jaime back, but I don't think Tywin's version of fatherly affection would ever lead him to forget the realities of the much bigger picture and prize to be won. This is Tywin Lannister we are talking about!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wich i wont buy for a second if they try to pull off in the series. after the loss of his hand, if i remember correctly, jamie was in a furious state of lust for revenge. Just because he makes a promise to bolton to be able to escape doesnt mean he has to keep it. First of all it would be far from the first time jamie lied about something, so there is absolutley no reason for him to keep this stupid promise to Roose Bolton, who is a totally insignificant house compared to Lannister of casterly rock. There is no reason for Jamie to NOT tell Tywin exactly what happened when he get back to kings landing. and in the case of the series the man who cut off his hand actually carried the bolton banners, so regardless if it happened on Rooses order or not, he should face a similiar fate as house Reyne unless Tywin has went through a complete personality change.

So now the problem is with the book rather than the show?

Regardless of that, I think your "shoulds" are unreasonable. It would be quite foolish for Tywin to do the things you are suggesting. As we know, he isn't a hotheaded all-or-nothing character. He's cold and calculating, and he NEEDS Roose Bolton's treachery with the Freys in order to defeat Robb.

If he could just go destroy everyone purely because he's such a badass, why doesn't he just do that in the first place?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That was a different situation. the fact that jamie lost his hand to a sellsword that was originally unleashed by Tywin made the entire issue more embarrasing for Tywin. But Locke actually carries Boltons Banners, so Roose better do something to make up for the facts that his men mutilated Tywins Son.

to quote tywin from S1:

"if another house can seize one of our own and hold him capitive with impunity, then we are no longer a house to be feared"

but cutting of a lannister of casterly rocks hand will reward you with paramount lordship over the north? does not add up. it would most certainly affect how other houses percieve house Lannister, and it would affect how i percieve Tywins personality... in the first book he went to war to protect the family reputation because a son that he hates was captured by Catelyn Tully. Now hes just gonna let the men who chopped of his favourite sons hand get away with being lifted to wardens of the north?

^^^This

As someone who watched the show before reading the books I'm usually fine with changes. However with this season, there are many deviations in adaptation that create plot holes instead of tighten, add to, or simplify the story. Jorah filling in for many Arstan's lines of disapproval against the madness of Unsullied training doesn't make sense since he's the one who knows all about and talks Dany into buying them. Littlefinger directly plotting with Sansa doesn't make sense because as a traitor she's being watched, and as Varys's rival he knows he's being watched. Then there's this, which creates problems for the Bolton-Lannister conspiracy.

So I dislike the change especially when I was looking forward to hearing "thaffireth" and seeing the satisfying just desserts with Hoat flopping around with no hands and feet, although I enjoy the actor who played Locke. At the very least we didn't get some wildly changed compromise* with Vargo Hoat as a non-mercenary Stark Bannerman and a non-international Brave Companions. Therefore we can save them for later seasons much like we got with Thoros, Roose Bolton, Blackfish Tully, Edmure Tully, the Reeds and others who are introduced past the timeline in their book appearances.

The thing I really hated though was how the episode CUT to credits with that out of place rendition of The Bear and the Maiden Fair, which SEVERED all tension from that shocking moment. The out of nowhere placement of BAMF was made even worse by how disappointed I was that it wasn't played during the lunch with Sansa and the Tyrells which really demonstrated the Queen of Thorn's improvisational ingenuity and Sansa's discretion. This would have been one of my favorite episodes if not for the ending.

*(Benioff having worked on the movie versions of The Kite Runner and Wolverine made some terrible cuts and concessions before.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Locke is one of the good changes they've made.

As people have pointed out already : Explainen the Harrenhal/Brave Companions storyline simply would have been too much.

Also it focuses the viewer's attention on the existence of House Bolton and it being a major player in the game.

Furthermore i think that the performance is spot-on and enjoyable.

"The thing I really hated though was how the episode CUT to credits with that out of place rendition of The Bear and the Maiden Fair, which SEVERED all tension from that shocking moment. The out of nowhere placement of BAMF was made even worse by how disappointed I was that it wasn't played during the lunch with Sansa and the Tyrells which really demonstrated the Queen of Thorn's improvisational ingenuity and Sansa's discretion."

You do know that this was done by the uploader and not included in the official airing?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You do know that this was done by the uploader and not included in the official airing?

This is actually not true. The music was included in the original broadcast. Apparently the original pirated version had the music starting early for some reason, which is what I assume you're referring to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You do know that this was done by the uploader and not included in the official airing?

Reread my quote.

The thing I really hated though was how the episode CUT to credits

I'll agree with you, on giving the Boltons more emphasis instead of having to introduce and give screentime and exposition for the Bloody Mummers. But since we're losing two of our principal villains in the next two seasons, I hope in the future we get a ragtag assortment of international scumbags led by an Old Goat with a speech impediment to fill that void.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Something's been nagging at me. Locke's line about Jaime using his father's name to make his troubles magically go away was familiar to me, but I couldn't find it (from Vargo or anyone else) in the Jaime chapters. I might have skimmed and missed it, but it was very familiar dialogue, anyone remember if/when it's said in the books?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like him but think the lisp would have been too much for TV, so it was the right decision not to run with the full Vargo version IMO. (But....I wish we had heard "thapphireth" even just once from anyone in Locke's group really, just as a nod to a very popular and humorous part of the books).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×