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

I don't think Locke becoming Bolton's bannerman makes a difference. In the books, Bolton voices concern that Vargo could have been seen as acting under Bolton's authority. As for Jamie, he has the allegiance of house Bolton at stake. The RW cannot happen without a guarantee of impunity from Tywin. Overlooking the act to guarantee an end to the war? Tywin is a pragmatic man. Why punish a house that want to ally at a pivotal moment? someone with authority in the North has to rule the North, and who better than the second strongest house who wants to ally with you? The rest don't.

Furthermore, cutting off Jamie's hand was not a political act of defiance from House Bolton- the house is considering allying with the Lannisters. True- Roose needs to be seen to punish Locke, and sending Tywin some flayed skin would certainly smooth things over, but the situation is nothing like the Reynes or Catelyn Tully who were directly opposed to him and continuing to defy him. Tywin wouldn't cut his nose off to spite his face.

I agree, Locke is screwed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like him. I loved how he led Jaime on until he chopped his hand off. Great acting by both of them in that scene. I was re-watching last night and they hubby was asleep, but he made sure to wake up just to watch that scene again. He loved it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think Locke becoming Bolton's bannerman makes a difference. In the books, Bolton voices concern that Vargo could have been seen as acting under Bolton's authority. As for Jamie, he has the allegiance of house Bolton at stake. The RW cannot happen without a guarantee of impunity from Tywin. Overlooking the act to guarantee an end to the war? Tywin is a pragmatic man. Why punish a house that want to ally at a pivotal moment? someone with authority in the North has to rule the North, and who better than the second strongest house who wants to ally with you? The rest don't.

Furthermore, cutting off Jamie's hand was not a political act of defiance from House Bolton- the house is considering allying with the Lannisters. True- Roose needs to be seen to punish Locke, and sending Tywin some flayed skin would certainly smooth things over, but the situation is nothing like the Reynes or Catelyn Tully who were directly opposed to him and continuing to defy him. Tywin wouldn't cut his nose off to spite his face.

Tywin should at least demand Lockes head. Again, Tywin has stated over and over how important it is to strike down and punish any form of slight against their House, to make sure their name is still feared and respected. Why should this go unpunished? All Roose has to do is to deprecate, swear that he had no part in it (wich is probably true) and send Tywin his head (or skin). The Roose from the books would never refrain from killing one little servant who has proved to be a loose cannon anyways to gain such favors with the mightiest house in westeros. Its up to Roose now to show that he wants to continue to plot in good faith, But If he doesnt i doubt Tywin would ever enter an alliance with a house who refuses to show him the minimal amount of respect for House Lannister.

Again, Tywin has 2-4 times as many men (depending on if the tyrells would aid him) so its not like he will face certain defeat if he doesnt go along with Boltons plan.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

why do people think locke is so boring and vargo is so ''interesting?''

what's so ''interesting'' about vargo?

i just found him an abhorrent but hilarious caricature of a character. i enjoyed him. but im not at all mad with the replacing him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

why do people think locke is so boring and vargo is so ''interesting?''

what's so ''interesting'' about vargo?

i just found him an abhorrent but hilarious caricature of a character. i enjoyed him. but im not at all mad with the replacing him.

i agree, he was very cartoony (all of the mummers were) wich was kind of unique considering the serious and "realistic" tone of the books (disregard dragons, shadow babies and zombie armies) and when you read it, you automaticly picture his voice and character in a way that fits in with the tone of the books. when casting for TV it would just/sound look ridiculous and the "comic relief" type of character would clash very hard with the tone in the morbid scenes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

not to mention that GRRM pretty much invented a new unique lisp when he wrote the character, and translating it from letters to speech to get the right sound should be pretty hard, and it would be even harder for any actor to learn and "master" the lisp to make it sound authentic without being too comical.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with both of your posts :) It would have been unnecessarily silly, Locke seems like an OK character to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Book readers are overestimating the non-book readers appetite for complexity. How many times has Roose been referred to as "Lord Bolton"? And Bolton's Bastard being sent to Winterfell? Jaime sees Locke's banners approaching and says "The Flayed Man of House Bolton" And yet my non-book reading wife is still like "Bolton. Who's that?"

They're building up House Bolton as the next Big Bad in Westeros as Tywin will bite it in S4: Ice cold Roose, cruel, reckless Locke, and bat-shit pscho Ramsay.

And yet book readers are not giving the show-runners credit for establishing these characters while still withholding that they are going to betray Robb.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like all the little Bolton hints. :)

My friend said ''The Roose is Loose'' to me once and now that's all I can think when he enters a scene LOL.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Book readers are overestimating the non-book readers appetite for complexity. How many times has Roose been referred to as "Lord Bolton"? And Bolton's Bastard being sent to Winterfell? Jaime sees Locke's banners approaching and says "The Flayed Man of House Bolton" And yet my non-book reading wife is still like "Bolton. Who's that?"

They're building up House Bolton as the next Big Bad in Westeros as Tywin will bite it in S4: Ice cold Roose, cruel, reckless Locke, and bat-shit pscho Ramsay.

And yet book readers are not giving the show-runners credit for establishing these characters while still withholding that they are going to betray Robb.

The Boltons are the most discussed family in the Unsullied TWOP thread. They are pretty observant and they do not trust the Boltons. I bet that most non-readers haven't noticed them, but after Roose does his deed I am sure everyone will remember him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Morrigan: You probably heard this audition tape ... The password is ned, IIRC. I also thought it was straight from the books because of it. :D Now I'm not so sure.

That might have been it, yes! Thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I must say i preferred Locke over Hoat. In the books Hoat worked... I think that the lisp would make him a bit more...''jar jar binks'' so to speak... Most people that never read the books would simply relate him as the lisping guy.

So in a Tv series Locke is perfect.

I think Vargo is more of a book only character.

Ofcourse it is only my opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

why do people think locke is so boring and vargo is so ''interesting?''

what's so ''interesting'' about vargo?

i just found him an abhorrent but hilarious caricature of a character. i enjoyed him. but im not at all mad with the replacing him.

Agree with you and Maester Ruin. Vargo Hoat always seemed something of a cartoonish caricature in the books, regardless of the fun reading about his lithp, and things like 'thaffireth'. I don't think he would have translated well to the screen at all, and the showrunners made a wise decision to streamline the story, get rid of the BMs, and give us a far more menacing person with Locke, who is as cruel as Hoat, perhaps mad in his own way. And he's just the sort of person who would really, malevolently enjoy seeing Brienne thrown into the bearpit once Jaime leaves Harrenhal, especially as he now knows she is a 'noble' lady.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

why do people think locke is so boring and vargo is so ''interesting?''

what's so ''interesting'' about vargo?

i just found him an abhorrent but hilarious caricature of a character. i enjoyed him. but im not at all mad with the replacing him.

Agree totally. I always saw him as a pantomime villian - a farcical comic villain character rather than menacing. I'm not disappointed with the change.

I do agree with those who have pointed out a potential plot issue with the relationship between the Boltons and Lannisters.

----

As for the 'My lord' line - I just took it to be an expression of deference to rank - a lower case 'lord' rather than 'Lord'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agree totally. I always saw him as a pantomime villian - a farcical comic villain character rather than menacing. I'm not disappointed with the change.

Haha i had never thought about this before but if you take away his sadistic and violent side but keep the lisp and appearance, and just make him a mugger/bank robber or something else that fits the setting, Hoat would be a perfect stereotypical "comedic villain" in Lucky Luke, Asterix & Obelix or some other old-school childrens cartoon magazine from the time when violent, menacing villains was considered too scary for a childrens cartoon, so villains usualy got to be the comic relief characters instead who were generally completley incompetent, at best managing to set up at trap that backfires on themselves instantly so the hero wont have to do anything to stop/catch them. I remember that these "villains" always had their own trademark comedic trait, (like a really wierd beard, a strange body shape or a large gang of a bunch of "criminals" who all have the same name and wear the same type of hat or mustache but have very different heights, voices and body types WHO will always appear in a comedic introduction scene at a bar or something where they all introduce themselves with the same name)

and i actually recall a few of those so called badguys with substantial speech impediments. wich is an effective tool to make them look comedic and stupid since the kids who read the magazines probably learned to talk properly fairly recently, so having a villain who is portrayed as an adult but still cant speak properly gives the young readers a sense of superiority over them and make them less menacing.

plus it is fun and "educating" for the children to read what the speech impaired villain is saying and try to deduce/translate the words, wich ultimately translates to a moronic sentance that makes little sense and with extremley obvious grammar mistakes and a slightly incorrect word order that the kids will notice and get tons of extra laughs at the Villains stupidity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Locke doesnt seem to have much personality and animation that Vargo had in the books.

This. He's acceptable but otherwise? Not much to him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Locke is important to establish the Boltons as players in the story, you have Locke with Jaime, Roose with Robb, and "Boy" with Theon.

TV viewers wouldn't undertand the whole Vargo Hoat thing, he was a minor and unimportant disposable book character with a complex loyalty switch, so this works better with what they are trying to do, establish House Bolton for later and more terrible things to come.

TV Viewers are thinking the "northmen" are taking some payback on a Lannister, just like "boy" and theon, they are not sure about these guys and are guessing, its misdirection to create a suprise when the horrible truth about the Boltons comes out, lol.

I agree and think he's a more than adequate replacement for Vargo Hoat.

I don't think Locke becoming Bolton's bannerman makes a difference. In the books, Bolton voices concern that Vargo could have been seen as acting under Bolton's authority. As for Jamie, he has the allegiance of house Bolton at stake. The RW cannot happen without a guarantee of impunity from Tywin. Overlooking the act to guarantee an end to the war? Tywin is a pragmatic man. Why punish a house that want to ally at a pivotal moment? someone with authority in the North has to rule the North, and who better than the second strongest house who wants to ally with you? The rest don't.

Furthermore, cutting off Jamie's hand was not a political act of defiance from House Bolton- the house is considering allying with the Lannisters. True- Roose needs to be seen to punish Locke, and sending Tywin some flayed skin would certainly smooth things over, but the situation is nothing like the Reynes or Catelyn Tully who were directly opposed to him and continuing to defy him. Tywin wouldn't cut his nose off to spite his face.

Quite.

Tywin should at least demand Lockes head. Again, Tywin has stated over and over how important it is to strike down and punish any form of slight against their House, to make sure their name is still feared and respected. Why should this go unpunished?

Why are you assuming Tywin isn't going to do anything?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×