PDA

View Full Version : Game of Thrones Official Trailer out



Brewdude
2010-11-28, 10:27 PM
Finally, a Game of Thrones trailer worth posting.

http://www.hbo.com/video/video.html/...ones&view=null

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=atFX6keD95o

Xondoure
2010-11-28, 10:44 PM
Sniff, so beautiful.

Dienekes
2010-11-28, 10:57 PM
I want.

Please let it be good to curb my desire for the next book in the series.

I also really hope that it was Joffrey who got punched in the face, though it probably wasn't.

Anyone else interested in how they're going to pull of Sandor's face?

Nomrom
2010-11-28, 11:08 PM
Well, this looks pretty good so far. I really want it to come out soon.


Anyone else interested in how they're going to pull of Sandor's face?

I just assumed they would actually hold the actor's face in a fire until it looked about right.

Sneak
2010-11-28, 11:19 PM
I want.

Please let it be good to curb my desire for the next book in the series.

I also really hope that it was Joffrey who got punched in the face, though it probably wasn't.

Anyone else interested in how they're going to pull of Sandor's face?

According to the Winter Is Coming (http://winter-is-coming.net/) blog, which is pretty damn reliable, that was Tyrion punching Joff.

...

:smallbiggrin:

Dienekes
2010-11-28, 11:26 PM
According to the Winter Is Coming (http://winter-is-coming.net/) blog, which is pretty damn reliable, that was Tyrion punching Joff.

...

:smallbiggrin:

I'm so happy right now. Jeez... I'm cheering for an adult punching a child in the face... and I am totally ok with that!

Knaight
2010-11-29, 12:05 AM
I just assumed they would actually hold the actor's face in a fire until it looked about right.

They had better do a better job than Shalaymanadingdong did with Zuko. On another note, there are so many good political jokes that can be done with this if one targets the right countries. Oh well, its a reasonable forum rule in any case.

thorgrim29
2010-11-29, 12:09 AM
Good trailer, I'm glad they included the line about how the man who passes judgment show should swing the sword, as I always felt it defines Ned so perfectly. And I know I'm hopelessly behind on news, but is that Boromir as Ned?

Xondoure
2010-11-29, 02:27 AM
Good trailer, I'm glad they included the line about how the man who passes judgment show should swing the sword, as I always felt it defines Ned so perfectly. And I know I'm hopelessly behind on news, but is that Boromir as Ned?

Sean Bean Yes. :smallsmile: I'm trying not to let this get my hopes too high. After all if they mess with the plot at all I'll be heart stricken. I need to vent my excitement for the inevitable...

Cheesegear
2010-11-29, 04:20 AM
but is that Boromir as Ned?

And Mark Addy as King Bob.

Morph Bark
2010-11-29, 04:37 AM
Sean Bean Yes. :smallsmile: I'm trying not to let this get my hopes too high. After all if they mess with the plot at all I'll be heart stricken. I need to vent my excitement for the inevitable...

Awesome. Sean Bean is one of my favourite actors, though usually moreso for villainous types. Glad to see him back on the hero block, no matter how timely it may turn out. :smallwink:

Eldan
2010-11-29, 04:55 AM
Huh. Had no idea Sean Bean was in this. Lookin' good, though.

Also, too bad we don't see much of Tyrion. He's currently probably my favourite character. If they screw him up, I'll be miffed.

Lord Raziere
2010-11-29, 10:23 AM
I'm so happy right now. Jeez... I'm cheering for an adult punching a child in the face... and I am totally ok with that!

said child is a stupid evil king and said adult is probably the smartest good guy in Westeros, if anything Tyrion would probably make the best king there: look how well he did as Hand.

Closet_Skeleton
2010-11-29, 10:36 AM
said child is a stupid evil king and said adult is probably the smartest good guy in Westeros, if anything Tyrion would probably make the best king there: look how well he did as Hand.

Yeah, he managed to fight off a seige with huge losses and cause everyone to hate him. If Samwell hadn't done anything he would also have caused that useless chief of the city guard guy to be head of the blackwatch. He also freed prisoners to enter the blackwatch that ended up escaping and becoming bandits. He did all this while acting smug in his POV convincing the reader that he was the only guy with a brain in the city.

Sneak
2010-11-29, 10:41 AM
A lot of the casting (http://winter-is-coming.net/features/cast/) for this is pretty much perfect.

Sean Bean as Ned.

Lena Headey as Cersei.

Peter Dinklage as Tyrion.

Aidan Gillen (aka Tommy Carcetti from the Wire) as Littlefinger.

SmartAlec
2010-11-29, 10:51 AM
He did all this while acting smug in his POV convincing the reader that he was the only guy with a brain in the city.

Considering how badly the deck was stacked against him, I think he did alright. The job he was given really was a poisoned chalice, which is kind of ironic, considering.

Dienekes
2010-11-29, 11:26 AM
said child is a stupid evil king and said adult is probably the smartest good guy in Westeros, if anything Tyrion would probably make the best king there: look how well he did as Hand.

Tyrion is awesome, and hilarious, but don't let that fool you. He makes a lot of mistakes that we as the reader can see. His desire to be recognized annoys people immensely, he also seems to act like Tywin to outsiders (sending the family allies to the Wall with little justification, even if we the reader see it as a just act ordering people around he has little authority to) however he is not Tywin. He is not a feared and respected administrator of the most powerful family in Westeros, he's is a little midget with a smart mouth. He makes a lot of enemies and only 2 person in the entire kingdom cares when he is put on trial and flees.

Also read any interaction between Tyrion and Littlefinger, he gets played. Not as bad as Ned, but still pretty bad.

That said, I don't see any character besides Tywin himself who would have been more successful.

The J Pizzel
2010-11-29, 11:35 AM
That said, I don't see any character besides Tywin himself who would have been more successful.

That's because Tywin ****ts gold.

I'd tell you all how exicited I am about the series, but you all understand already. It's the same. Honestly, words can't express it.

Flickerdart
2010-11-29, 11:36 AM
Who wants to bet that they'll film all the books before the next one is out?

Cynan Machae
2010-11-29, 02:15 PM
God I can't wait for this, it's gonna be so good ><

“My sweet summer child, what do you know about fear? Fear is for the long night. When the snows fall a hundred feet deep. Fear is for the winter.”

Old Nan ftw

CarpeGuitarrem
2010-11-29, 02:20 PM
Good trailer, I'm glad they included the line about how the man who passes judgment show should swing the sword, as I always felt it defines Ned so perfectly. And I know I'm hopelessly behind on news, but is that Boromir as Ned?
YES. Really dang awesome. I love that they picked such an iconic Ned moment.

Eldan
2010-11-29, 03:06 PM
A lot of the casting (http://winter-is-coming.net/features/cast/) for this is pretty much perfect.


Huh. They really did cast almost every last commoner mentioned in the book, it seems.

Though I think Drogo could maybe look just a little more, you know, Asian.

Morph Bark
2010-11-29, 03:54 PM
Who wants to bet that they'll film all the books before the next one is out?

I'll bet they'll have the first book done by that time, but...

...okay, the first two. No more. The books got way too much stuff and they'll prolly want to add in a few extra little scenes here and there.

thorgrim29
2010-11-29, 04:09 PM
Dang, that casting looks good... and now I feel bad for the kids, seriously, the girls playing Arya and Sansa look so sweet... Minor nitpick, Jaime and Cersei don't look all that alike.

While I have a lot of hope for the show, I wouldn't bet on it surviving more then two seasons, much less the whole series... I mean HBO cancelled Rome, IMO the best show ever, because it cost too much to make and had lowish ratings, and I can't imagine Game of Thrones costing much less, especially as the actor's wages tend to go up a lot when shows become long running and popular and there's enough material there for the show to last 10+ seasons.

Eldan
2010-11-29, 04:44 PM
Dang, that casting looks good... and now I feel bad for the kids, seriously, the girls playing Arya and Sansa look so sweet... Minor nitpick, Jaime and Cersei don't look all that alike.

Gregor and Sandor do, though. At least on those pictures. Could just be the hairstyles and angles.

Sneak
2010-11-29, 05:13 PM
I dunno, I'd say they look similar enough.

The only bit of casting that I don't like is Theon. But hey, we'll see how things turn out. I'm optimistic.

Eldan
2010-11-29, 05:18 PM
Hmm. I always thought Ned looked quite a bit older. But Bean is good, so that will work.


Something bugs me about Littlefinger, though. Can't quite say what.

Xondoure
2010-11-29, 06:57 PM
Hmm. I always thought Ned looked quite a bit older. But Bean is good, so that will work.


Something bugs me about Littlefinger, though. Can't quite say what.

That should be a good thing yes?
Catelyn's casting scares me the most. I'm sure she'll be great but she just seems too old.

Terraoblivion
2010-11-29, 07:01 PM
Ned is in his mid-thirties or so. He comes off a lot older to me as well, but he really isn't that old when you get down to it.

I did, however, think that Sean Bean was too heavyset to really be Ned. I mean where is the long horse face that he is supposed to have?

Sneak
2010-11-29, 07:22 PM
That should be a good thing yes?
Catelyn's casting scares me the most. I'm sure she'll be great but she just seems too old.

Oh, yeah, I forgot, that's the other bit of casting that bugs me. Jennifer Ehle (http://www.google.com/images?client=safari&rls=en&q=jennifer+ehle&oe=UTF-8&um=1&ie=UTF-8&source=og&sa=N&hl=en&tab=wi&biw=1280&bih=686) was originally supposed to play Cat but was replaced after the pilot. I think she looks much better for the part. Oh well.


I did, however, think that Sean Bean was too heavyset to really be Ned. I mean where is the long horse face that he is supposed to have?

That's true, but he's Sean Bean, so I can get behind it.

As for Littlefinger, I'm a huge fan of The Wire so I know Aidan Gillen from that, and IMO he's perfect for Littlefinger, both in his looks and in his acting. And Littlefinger is my favorite character from the books. So I'm excited.

Morph Bark
2010-11-29, 07:24 PM
Who was Littlefinger again? I've only read a translation of the books that kept most of the names intact, but a nickname like that obviously didn't care over as such.

WalkingTarget
2010-11-29, 07:31 PM
Who was Littlefinger again? I've only read a translation of the books that kept most of the names intact, but a nickname like that obviously didn't care over as such.

Petyr Baelish. Started out the books as the Master of Coin. He's the one who was infatuated with Cat since childhood and is quite the schemer as far as the plot of the books go.

Dienekes
2010-11-29, 08:16 PM
Ned is in his mid-thirties or so. He comes off a lot older to me as well, but he really isn't that old when you get down to it.

I did, however, think that Sean Bean was too heavyset to really be Ned. I mean where is the long horse face that he is supposed to have?

He is mid-thirties but he was described as prematurely gray, and he comes off in the books as older.

In the original leaked script of the pilot they place a larger emphasis that Ned is a warrior which would explain why Ned is more heavyset, although this is rather contrary to the books and GRRM's own discussions on the matter of Ned as a fighter. This seems to be carried over into later scripts since in this trailer we have Ned exclaim he was "trained to kill." Originally I was more or less against the notion of Ned as a warrior but I've warmed up to it a bit (I mean come on, it's SEAN BEAN!) so long as they don't do something stupid with it like have him ride in the tourney or fight in the brawl. The worst that would happen is him holding his own against Jaime some when Jaime attacks him and his men. Which would be rather cinematic really.

Da'Shain
2010-11-29, 09:45 PM
Ned in the books isn't going to be winning any tourneys and is explicitly stated to be the weaker of the Starks next to Brandon, but he's no slouch. He's supposed to be a competent swordsman, and showing that onscreen would be perfectly alright by me. I'm just not sure when they'll show his prowess except for in flashbacks and while training with his sons, though. As I recall, Ned doesn't actually fight any battles in the first book, only gets his leg broken when Jaime and his men scare his horse into rearing
I kind of agree on Lena Headey not being ideal for Cersei, but she's a great actress and so I'm not too worried. Jennifer Ehle definitely looks the part better and seems closer to the actor playing Jaime's age, but I have no idea how she is as an actress.

warty goblin
2010-11-29, 10:00 PM
Ned in the books isn't going to be winning any tourneys and is explicitly stated to be the weaker of the Starks next to Brandon, but he's no slouch. He's supposed to be a competent swordsman, and showing that onscreen would be perfectly alright by me. I'm just not sure when they'll show his prowess except for in flashbacks and while training with his sons, though. As I recall, Ned doesn't actually fight any battles in the first book, only gets his leg broken when Jaime and his men scare his horse into rearing


He also survived the fight with the Kingsguard at the Tower of Tears, and took part in the storming of Pyke at the end of Balon Greyjoy's rebellion. He's pretty clearly a relatively skilled swordsman, I always figured he was simply not particularly interested in pursuing that path beyond what was necessary.

Dienekes
2010-11-29, 10:06 PM
He also survived the fight with the Kingsguard at the Tower of Tears, and took part in the storming of Pyke at the end of Balon Greyjoy's rebellion. He's pretty clearly a relatively skilled swordsman, I always figured he was simply not particularly interested in pursuing that path beyond what was necessary.

He took on 3 warrior's with 7 guys, and was one of many storming Pyke. By GRRM's FAQ (ok I spent too much time on westeros.org) Ned was an average swordsman but militarily he was the brains behind Robert's rebellion and an incredibly skilled strategist.

Kallisti
2010-11-29, 10:14 PM
It does look incredible, but I've got to say I'm kind of skeptical about TV adaptations in general. Too much possibility of Adaptation Decay. (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/AdaptationDecay) Still, if it's handled well it could be very good indeed.

Da'Shain
2010-11-29, 10:17 PM
He also survived the fight with the Kingsguard at the Tower of Tears, and took part in the storming of Pyke at the end of Balon Greyjoy's rebellion. He's pretty clearly a relatively skilled swordsman, I always figured he was simply not particularly interested in pursuing that path beyond what was necessary.Right, I was talking about onscreen in the first book. Those do show that he's a competent warrior (or at least was, and there's no indication his skills went to pot), but as Dienekes pointed out they don't show more than that. I do agree with you though, that Ned never saw the point of dedicating himself to becoming a badass swordsman when he's more concerned with governance and strategy than glory. And, of course, teh honorz. :smallamused:

Sneak
2010-11-29, 10:21 PM
I kind of agree on Lena Headey not being ideal for Cersei, but she's a great actress and so I'm not too worried. Jennifer Ehle definitely looks the part better and seems closer to the actor playing Jaime's age, but I have no idea how she is as an actress.

Jennifer Ehle was supposed to play Catelyn, not Cersei. But personally, I'm fine with all the Lannisters. And super excited for the Dinklage.

I don't think Ned's prowess as a warrior will figure into the show much anyways, given that he doesn't fight much in the novels, and so far the show seems to be staying fairly faithful (i.e. only changing minor details).

Nomrom
2010-11-29, 11:30 PM
Varys looks absolutely nothing like I expected him to. I always pictured him as a really skinny guy. Hopefully I just read that wrong somewhere. everyone else looks pretty good though.

Sneak
2010-11-29, 11:34 PM
Nope, he was described as plump and bald in the books as well.

Nomrom
2010-11-30, 01:49 AM
Huh, I must have completely missed that somehow.

warty goblin
2010-11-30, 01:58 AM
Huh, I must have completely missed that somehow.

Well, he does have a lot of disguises, although all of them are still fairly plump.

Morph Bark
2010-11-30, 07:29 AM
I probably will HAVE to watch this series to even remotely manage to remember who all the characters are by the time the next book comes out.

Martin takes too long and uses too many perspectives, even though he does an awesome job. @_@

Shyftir
2010-11-30, 09:38 PM
Whoot! Sean Bean huh? comment inside spoiler! (cuz it's a spoiler duh)

Awesome! a new great character to join the Sean Bean Death Squad. (http://www.digitalpimponline.com/strips.php?title=movie&id=229)
It's funny how he gets so many of these roles as awesome people who end up dead.

Eldan
2010-12-01, 06:56 AM
Maybe there will be a great twist about that!:smalltongue:

MammonAzrael
2010-12-02, 02:06 AM
Sweet Jesus yes! This is looking fantastic. I've been following news of the show for a while, and pray that HBO gets the viewers for support this awesomeness...and that GRRM manages to get the books out in time for the show to move forward. :smallsmile:

He needs to take a page out of Brandon Sanderson's book, and freakin' write.

Eldan
2010-12-02, 03:57 AM
Sweet Jesus yes! This is looking fantastic. I've been following news of the show for a while, and pray that HBO gets the viewers for support this awesomeness...and that GRRM manages to get the books out in time for the show to move forward. :smallsmile:

He needs to take a page out of Brandon Sanderson's book, and freakin' write.

I don't know... I love Sanderson's characters and world-building, but that man just can't write a surprising twist. At least GRRM (awesome abbreviation) writes good plots as well.

MammonAzrael
2010-12-02, 04:33 AM
I don't know... I love Sanderson's characters and world-building, but that man just can't write a surprising twist. At least GRRM (awesome abbreviation) writes good plots as well.

Fair enough, I wasn't referring to Sanderson's style at all though. But rather the fact that he can sit down and write his books at an impressive rate. Even with everything he had from Robert Jordan, he is still putting out 3 books of ~400,000 words in 3 years. I get that GRRM has changed what he's been writing, changing the story, but still. That is quite a difference in speed.

J.Gellert
2010-12-02, 08:21 AM
I am completely uneducated on everything Game of Thrones (save some Blind Guardian songs), but this appears to be made of win. Can't wait!

Dienekes
2010-12-02, 11:01 AM
I am completely uneducated on everything Game of Thrones (save some Blind Guardian songs), but this appears to be made of win. Can't wait!

If you have time, you should definitely pick up the books. There are so many intricacies that probably won't carry over into the show that flesh out the story and the characters. It really is the best piece of fiction I've read in a long time. Though admittedly I am a huge fanboy.

Shyftir
2010-12-02, 03:44 PM
I don't know... I love Sanderson's characters and world-building, but that man just can't write a surprising twist. At least GRRM (awesome abbreviation) writes good plots as well.

Huh? I don't know, I found Verin Sedai's twist to be pretty well done. I mean everybody knew "something" was up, but when we found out exactly what, well it answered a lot of questions. Of course I guess that was Jordan's doing really but still.

Eldan
2010-12-02, 04:39 PM
Huh? I don't know, I found Verin Sedai's twist to be pretty well done. I mean everybody knew "something" was up, but when we found out exactly what, well it answered a lot of questions. Of course I guess that was Jordan's doing really but still.

Well, can't help you there, I haven't read Wheel of Time. Or rather, gave up after the first book, it didn't seem interesting. But at least in Mistborn, Elantris and Warbreaker, I didn't find any surprises.

Of course, I still read five of his books. Shows that he can make up for it.

Knaight
2010-12-02, 06:53 PM
He took on 3 warrior's with 7 guys, and was one of many storming Pyke. By GRRM's FAQ (ok I spent too much time on westeros.org) Ned was an average swordsman but militarily he was the brains behind Robert's rebellion and an incredibly skilled strategist.
Yes, he took on 3 warriors with 7 guys. Said three warriors killed four of the seven before they were brought down. Said three warriors included one Ser Arthur Dayne, and one Ser Barristan the Bold. Ser Arthur Dayne was the best warrior of his time, and one of several who can be argued to be the best ever. Ser Barristan was good enough to survive fighting seven guys, go through several other reigns in his position, then manage to get noticed as one of the best warriors in an army while both elderly and using a weapon that was far from his preferred one. The other guy is largely an unknown, but extreme competence can be assumed. Ned was primarily a strategist and primarily the brains, and for a son of a major noble house who would be receiving sword training from early childhood, he may well have been average. Jon Snow is a similar case, there is no reason to expect him to be anything better than average for the son of a noble, yet every time he had to fight a peasant that wasn't Qhorin Half-hand, he won easily.

Da'Shain
2010-12-02, 06:59 PM
Yes, he took on 3 warriors with 7 guys. Said three warriors killed four of the seven before they were brought down. Said three warriors included one Ser Arthur Dayne, and one Ser Barristan the Bold. Ser Arthur Dayne was the best warrior of his time, and one of several who can be argued to be the best ever. Ser Barristan was good enough to survive fighting seven guys, go through several other reigns in his position, then manage to get noticed as one of the best warriors in an army while both elderly and using a weapon that was far from his preferred one.Minor correction, here: none of the three Kingsguard at the Tower survived. Barristan was not there, having been defeated and severely wounded in the Battle of the Trident, and subsequently switching sides (although I'm not sure whether that was before or after Aerys' death).

warty goblin
2010-12-02, 11:28 PM
Yes, he took on 3 warriors with 7 guys. Said three warriors killed four of the seven before they were brought down. Said three warriors included one Ser Arthur Dayne, and one Ser Barristan the Bold. Ser Arthur Dayne was the best warrior of his time, and one of several who can be argued to be the best ever. Ser Barristan was good enough to survive fighting seven guys, go through several other reigns in his position, then manage to get noticed as one of the best warriors in an army while both elderly and using a weapon that was far from his preferred one. The other guy is largely an unknown, but extreme competence can be assumed. Ned was primarily a strategist and primarily the brains, and for a son of a major noble house who would be receiving sword training from early childhood, he may well have been average. Jon Snow is a similar case, there is no reason to expect him to be anything better than average for the son of a noble, yet every time he had to fight a peasant that wasn't Qhorin Half-hand, he won easily.

Second nitpick, the Three killed five, only Ned and Howland Reed survived.

Also remember Ned was the second son, who never was supposed to inherit anything particularly major. His education may well have focused more on direct combat, since until his brother got BBQed he needed a career outside of managing half the kingdom. Military service isn't a bad choice.

Cynan Machae
2010-12-05, 11:46 PM
A 15 minute clip called "Inside Game of Thrones" was release tonight, and it's quite interesting (and awesome to see).

http://www.hbo.com/video/video.html?view=grid&vid=1149091&autoplay=true
Or youtube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JJR3eBfcusM

Can't wait, stop putting this stuff forward HBO ><

thorgrim29
2010-12-06, 12:02 AM
First thought: Awesometaculariffic, it looks so cool I, had to invent a word.
2: Boy, Jason Momoa buffed up A LOT since SGA
3: With that kind of initial investment, they'll be wanting to do more then one season I think
4: Finish the book George!

Brewdude
2010-12-06, 01:25 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-EVKp5nYxyI

the slightly extended version of the 10 minute inside trailer. Has a few extra scenes, like one with Jon asking Tyrion why he reads.

Mr._Blinky
2010-12-06, 04:41 AM
Minor correction, here: none of the three Kingsguard at the Tower survived. Barristan was not there, having been defeated and severely wounded in the Battle of the Trident, and subsequently switching sides (although I'm not sure whether that was before or after Aerys' death).

Correct. There's even the scene where Ned dreams about the three Kingsguard that he fought, and they mention Ser Barristan. They're fairly derisive, as they see it as wrong to break one's oath and switch sides even in the service of a mad, losing king.

shadowxknight
2010-12-06, 06:06 AM
Just watched the newest trailer, looks awesome!

Another thing to look forward to, along with maybe the fifth book being released next year. :smalltongue:

Closet_Skeleton
2010-12-06, 08:01 AM
It was kind of funny watching that, because I was like "Targarens in plural?"

Oh yeah, Viserys. Forgot about him.

TheBibliophile
2010-12-06, 09:28 AM
I like GRRM's statement in the behind the scenes trailer that Ned is the main character of the whole series.

I'd never really thought about it like that, but at least the Westeros storyline can be entirely attributed to

his execution.

DomaDoma
2010-12-06, 09:40 AM
said child is a stupid evil king and said adult is probably the smartest good guy in Westeros, if anything Tyrion would probably make the best king there: look how well he did as Hand.

Yeah, smartest good guy in Westeros out of the three marginally effective ones. And Dany isn't even in Westeros, technically speaking. And none of the three had more than a bit part in the last book.

God, I have no good reason for loving this series.

Mathis
2010-12-06, 04:03 PM
I like GRRM's statement in the behind the scenes trailer that Ned is the main character of the whole series.

I'd never really thought about it like that, but at least the Westeros storyline can be entirely attributed to

his execution.

I always read the first book with an understanding of Ned being the main character, then the rest of the books sort of focused on the Stark children. But definately not as him being the main character of the entire series, interesting indeed but I envoke my power of interpretation as I prefer to read the books with the Stark children as the main characters (by Stark children I mean all of them, Robb, Jon, Sansa, Bran, Arya and Rickon). Im not sure how others read it.

Eldan
2010-12-06, 04:16 PM
Okay. After seeing that:

I now like the casting of Littlefinger. He looks right for the role.

And I enormously dislike John Snow. For one thing, he looks older than I imagined, but I don't think I can blame them for that. However, he also looks... soft, I guess? Can't really say it.

Also, Daenerys' brother looks just about perfect.

0Megabyte
2010-12-06, 05:08 PM
For Viserys: It's the hair. Totally the hair. They got the Targaryen hair right in this series, and for that I'm eternally grateful.

Anyway, I bet George was talking about Game of Thrones itself, not the larger Song of Ice and Fire.

Also, let's see. Game of Thrones next year, the sequel to The Name of the Wind... and hopefully... maybe... I HOPE... to dance with dragons. That would be perfect, man... perfect.

warty goblin
2010-12-06, 06:03 PM
Okay. After seeing that:

I now like the casting of Littlefinger. He looks right for the role.

And I enormously dislike John Snow. For one thing, he looks older than I imagined, but I don't think I can blame them for that. However, he also looks... soft, I guess? Can't really say it.

Also, Daenerys' brother looks just about perfect.

They aged everybody up for the show, presumably to make Drogo more likable, and reduce the creep factor of Arya stabbing people.

thorgrim29
2010-12-06, 06:29 PM
Also, Ghost story is due in april, plus another DW season. Spring will be awesome.

Closet_Skeleton
2010-12-06, 06:30 PM
I like GRRM's statement in the behind the scenes trailer that Ned is the main character of the whole series.

I'd never really thought about it like that, but at least the Westeros storyline can be entirely attributed to

his execution.

I have to disagree.

His execution only really caused Rob to become King in the North and Arya to start being thrown about the country. The actual effect of Rob's rebellion has been pretty minimal. The Lannisters were all defeated by someone else apart from Jaime, who was the least politically potent anyway. Greyjoy would have rebelled anyway and could have destroyed Winterfel anyway. Jon and Bran were miles from Rob. Sansa basically didn't rebel and stayed on the Lannister side. The non-Stark POVs don't seem to have any interest in Rob's Rebellion and half the Stark ones could easily be in their respected messes without it.

Then Rob ended up being killed without having accomplished anything but 2 military victories that seem to have had a minimal effect on Lannister power. The most Rob seems to have done is taken Jaime's ironically stabalising presence away from Cersei.



Anyway, I bet George was talking about Game of Thrones itself, not the larger Song of Ice and Fire.

Yeah, he said "series" and could easily have been refering to the TV series not the book series. I'm guessing that any plans to make a series of the other books are no more than the hope that this one will be successful enough to warrant them.


They aged everybody up for the show, presumably to make Drogo more likable, and reduce the creep factor of Arya stabbing people.

Hasn't Martin also stated that he wishes he'd made everyone older from the start now that he's found himself unable to do a decent time skip?


But definately not as him being the main character of the entire series, interesting indeed but I envoke my power of interpretation as I prefer to read the books with the Stark children as the main characters (by Stark children I mean all of them, Robb, Jon, Sansa, Bran, Arya and Rickon). Im not sure how others read it.

I couldn't do that because the only ones I liked were Jon and Bran. Robb is a cypher who is only seen through the eyes of his mother. Rickon is a little kid of no current relevance except for being a (now discarded) prop for Bran. I didn't find Sansa that annoying but she's still only there to give a differant interpretation of the things Tyrion is seeing and I didn't really like Arya since for all her hatred she isn't very proactive and just goes where-ever the wind blows her.

A Feast for Crows does suffer from basically being about new characters who are introduced a bit late but it does have Sansa. Or does it? I can't remember because I got them all out of the library after they were all released so they kind of ran together in my head.

Dany and Tyrion are just as important as the Starks and my favourite character was Davos anyway.

warty goblin
2010-12-06, 06:36 PM
I have to disagree.

His execution only really caused Rob to become King in the North and Arya to start being thrown about the country. The actual effect of Rob's rebellion has been pretty minimal. The Lannisters were all defeated by someone else apart from Jaime, who was the least politically potent anyway. Greyjoy would have rebelled anyway and could have destroyed Winterfel anyway. Jon and Bran were miles from Rob. Sansa basically didn't rebel and stayed on the Lannister side. The non-Stark POVs don't seem to have any interest in Rob's Rebellion and half the Stark ones could easily be in their respected messes without it.

Then Rob ended up being killed without having accomplished anything but 2 military victories that seem to have had a minimal effect on Lannister power. The most Rob seems to have done is taken Jaime's ironically stabalising presence away from Cersei.

I disagree with your disagreement.

[SPOILER]
If Ned hadn't died, Robb would never have rebelled. Given that, there's no reason to think the power of the north would ever have gone south of the Neck. GIven that, Greyjoy would have been unable to take Winterfell and have even a prayer of holding it, and thus would not have rebelled, or would have attacked elsewhere.

Even if Winterfell did join in Stannis and/or Renly's rebellions, it would have been as an ally. The Lannisters were seriously worried about the power either of those two lords could bring to bear on their own. With the added might of the North, they would have been up hurt street without an exit. Yes they fought them all and won, but all three were separate and without common cause, which is a very different thing than defeating a coordinated effort on their part.
[/QUOTE]

Closet_Skeleton
2010-12-06, 06:48 PM
I disagree with your disagreement.


If there were only two books out I might agree, but every book introduced more plot elements that were unrelated, so while it certainly shaped events it isn't that important to what appears to be the main 'metaplot'.

Jon goes to the wall regardless. The others and Dany are out there regardless.

It really depends on what subplot you consider to be the most important.

Rob only rebelled because Ned died, but none of the power shifts in this series have been due to battles. All the kings in the war of five kings except for Stannis were assassinated.

Sneak
2010-12-06, 10:19 PM
Oh my God this is going to be so good.

Seriously, Dinklage is the best. As if I needed more reason to love Tyrion.

TheBibliophile
2010-12-07, 03:44 PM
And I enormously dislike John Snow. For one thing, he looks older than I imagined, but I don't think I can blame them for that. However, he also looks... soft, I guess? Can't really say it.

I agree totally. In fact, he looks a bit too much like a certain platinum-album distributing angel (http://www.google.co.uk/imgres?imgurl=http://www.exposay.com/celebrity-photos/josh-groban-2005-vanity-fair-oscar-party-0aKZ4i.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.exposay.com/josh-groban-2005-vanity-fair-oscar-party/p/7138/1/%3Ff%3DJosh%2BGroban&usg=__WoVEvhdhpG6keYnbVoEsxGHMTbg=&h=620&w=424&sz=31&hl=en&start=0&zoom=1&tbnid=DocUjL_2ZcXBOM:&tbnh=158&tbnw=124&prev=/images%3Fq%3Djosh%2Bgroban%26hl%3Den%26client%3Dfi refox-a%26sa%3DX%26rls%3Dorg.mozilla:en-US:official%26biw%3D1280%26bih%3D647%26tbs%3Disch: 1%26prmd%3Divnlo&itbs=1&iact=hc&vpx=275&vpy=95&dur=5774&hovh=272&hovw=186&tx=150&ty=124&ei=lJz-TOulEMqYhQeMudHLCQ&oei=lJz-TOulEMqYhQeMudHLCQ&esq=1&page=1&ndsp=21&ved=1t:429,r:1,s:0) for my liking.

MammonAzrael
2010-12-07, 04:17 PM
And I enormously dislike John Snow. For one thing, he looks older than I imagined, but I don't think I can blame them for that. However, he also looks... soft, I guess? Can't really say it.

He's a bit rounder than I always pictured him. I say him as fairly lean, especially in the face. However, it's the worst in the interview sections, so I'm thinking that I'll be just fine with him once he's in action.

Also, Jamie is freakin' perfect. All the Lannisters are. The entire casting job was superb, but those three...fantastic.

warty goblin
2010-12-07, 10:50 PM
I haven't seen enough of the characters in action to say anything about the casting yet, really.

The production design however appears to be phenomenal. Everything looks so believable, but not lifted straight from history. Absolutely perfect.

The Grue
2010-12-14, 07:40 AM
I still say Brian Blessed would be a perfect King Robert.

http://www.superiorpics.com/wenn_album/Brian_Blessed_-_Mars_Travel/brian_blessed_001_110906.jpg

Eldan
2010-12-14, 08:24 AM
Aye. The guy they hired even looks like him a little, but that could just be the beard. Also, you spelled his name wrong. And your image is broken.

ShaggyMarco
2010-12-14, 10:50 AM
I always read the first book with an understanding of Ned being the main character, then the rest of the books sort of focused on the Stark children. But definately not as him being the main character of the entire series, interesting indeed but I envoke my power of interpretation as I prefer to read the books with the Stark children as the main characters (by Stark children I mean all of them, Robb, Jon, Sansa, Bran, Arya and Rickon). Im not sure how others read it.

Huh. I started reading the books with the understanding that
Ned is just a distraction from the real main characters: The Targarean Children: Dany (Definitely the daughter of Aerys Targaryen and Rhaella Targaryen), Jon (Probably the son of Rhaegar Targaryen and Lyanna Stark), and Tyrion (Maybe the son of Aerys Targaryen and Johanna Lannister.)

Dienekes
2010-12-14, 11:18 AM
Huh if you started reading the books thinking those last two you either really had someone spoil it for you or great precognition.

Also
I hope Tyrion isn't a hidden Targ. He is Tywin's writ small. Not saying it isn't a possibility, but of all the potential plot twists that's the one I like least. Well other than Gregor is Sandor's brother (http://asoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/topic/5513-crackpot-theory-gregor-clegane-and-sandor-clegane-are-brothers/). But that's so crackpot it's hardly worth mentioning.

Closet_Skeleton
2010-12-14, 03:19 PM
Huh if you started reading the books thinking those last two you either really had someone spoil it for you or great precognition.

Also
I hope Tyrion isn't a hidden Targ. He is Tywin's writ small. Not saying it isn't a possibility, but of all the potential plot twists that's the one I like least. Well other than Gregor is Sandor's brother (http://asoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/topic/5513-crackpot-theory-gregor-clegane-and-sandor-clegane-are-brothers/). But that's so crackpot it's hardly worth mentioning.

I agree.

If Martin had meant us to think that Gregor and Sandor were brothers, he would have hinted it obscurely. Why would he just tell us it if he intended it to be true?

They're completely differant sizes. Gregor is obviously part giant.

Gregor
Sandor
Hodor

It makes sense. If any of those three were related it would be the two big ones.

BridgeCity
2010-12-15, 06:39 AM
I love the books, but they do suffer from constantly killing my favourite characters.

Spoilered just in case, they are Ned, Sandor, the Onion Knight and the guy who fights and poisons Gregor with his spear, can't remember his name right now.

Coupled with losing these guys, I really cannot stand Daenerys or Arya, which is a pity because they are clearly beloved by GRRM.

But the show, apparently, revolving alot around Ned? Brilliant. I always loved his line saying that the man who passes the sentence should swing the sword. Summed up his character perfectly, so I'm also really happy it made it's way in.

Closet_Skeleton
2010-12-15, 07:06 AM
I love the books, but they do suffer from constantly killing my favourite characters.

Spoilered just in case, they are Ned, Sandor, the Onion Knight and the guy who fights and poisons Gregor with his spear, can't remember his name right now.


Only two of those guys are definately dead.

Davos was killed offscreen. He may come back for a few chapters and then die when he's claimed to have, or survive. Sandor might not be dead at all. (http://www.towerofthehand.com/blog/2010/09/16_the_golem_and_the_/index.html)

The J Pizzel
2010-12-15, 09:16 AM
Only two of those guys are definately dead.

Davos was killed offscreen. He may come back for a few chapters and then die when he's claimed to have, or survive. Sandor might not be dead at all. (http://www.towerofthehand.com/blog/2010/09/16_the_golem_and_the_/index.html)

Sandor is almost surredly alive. All the evidence points to the silent man with the hood to be Sandor. Walks with a limp (from the wound), is good with dogs, the guy speaking to Brienne says speafically "The Hound is dead" and later "Sandor is at peace". I think it's generally agreed that Sandor survived.

As for Davos, I'm not sure what's gonna come of that. I don't want him to die, although he's similar to Ned in his idealism and honor, so we'll see what happens.

Dienekes
2010-12-15, 10:33 AM
Coupled with losing these guys, I really cannot stand Daenerys or Arya, which is a pity because they are clearly beloved by GRRM.


Not touching the who's dead thing, as that's been covered. But not liking Arya the stabby homicidal Stark, that's just wrong on a fundamental level. She's my favorite protagonist.

As for Dany I at first didn't particularly like her, however I have found she grows much more interesting if
[spoiler]You assume she is going insane like her father and brother. While she behaves intelligently mostly, she shows signs of a disconnect with reality several times in the series and personally I think GRRM is setting us up for her mind to completely derail. That would be awesome indeed

My one regret with the story is actually that GRRM killed
Joffrey and Tywin. Hear me out, Joffrey because he's such a slime really helps draw in the story. I love to hate him, I think most everyone did. While I liked Feast, I do think it suffered from lack of a focus for putting all our hate and aggression into. Cersei, bless her, tries to fulfill this role, but it's not the same.
As for Tywin, we are not without a competent villain. Fine we have Petyr, but he's sneaking around and hard for our protagonists to really match up against. Really without Tywin the Lannisters are without an organized head, and with all the mistakes Cersei is making they won't last long.
My personal hope is that the Bolton family steps up to take their place, but their position really isn't secure without a baking from Tywin, so I rather doubt it.

3SecondCultist
2010-12-15, 11:09 AM
Coupled with losing these guys, I really cannot stand Daenerys or Arya, which is a pity because they are clearly beloved by GRRM.

I agree with the whole Arya thing (she took WAY too long to get anywhere near reuniting with her family, and then she leaves Westeros? That's BS), but Daenerys is actually my favorite (you know, the ACTUAL heir to the Iron Throne?) contender for power, and is a part of a three way tie for my favorite character of the series. :smallsmile:

BridgeCity
2010-12-15, 11:39 AM
Not touching the who's dead thing, as that's been covered. But not liking Arya the stabby homicidal Stark, that's just wrong on a fundamental level. She's my favorite protagonist . . .

To me she just has a raft of bad or annoying qualities with pretty much nothing to redeem her to me.

I find Danny arrogant and annoying, while still having Mormont, who I really liked, fall in love with her for no real reason other than she was there. She just really irritates me and the obviousness of her being so special and important makes it worse. She seems very mary-sue to me.

But I do like the sound of your spoilered theory concerning her.


. . . but Daenerys is actually my favorite (you know, the ACTUAL heir to the Iron Throne?)

To me, being the 'actual heir' means nothing, given that the Targaryen family took the throne through conquest in the first place. I don't hold her claim to be any more relevant than any other would be conquorer. You could say that because the family held the throne for so long it gives her claim more weight, but again I don't agree with that, because where do you stop? After how many years is ones conquest now seen as legitimate? 10? 100? There is no defined benchmark, so I personally don't care how long the throne has been in any one family.

I'm not trying to belittle your opinions, or trying to change your mind. I like it when people disagree becuase it leads to nice discussions. I'm merely pointing out my thoughs and reasons, so please don't think I'm attacking anyone else's in any way :smallsmile:

As for the Dead people stuff . . .

It's pretty clear that Sandor is still alive and has become a brother of that temple place (can't remember it's name). There is a novice brother, face hidden, who walks with a limp and is shown with a dog. The elder brother says the lines that Sandor is at rest, the Hound is dead, which can easily be taken as Sandor has become a new person and is seeking a new life with the brotherhood. What I was saying was that, as the Elder Brother said, the "Hound" part of Sandor is dead, which is a pity because I really liked his conflicting personalities as a character.

Edit: Just noticed this was already said.

I know the Onion Knight may still be alive, but GRRM has taught me to not hold much hope.

Dienekes
2010-12-15, 12:23 PM
but Daenerys is actually my favorite (you know, the ACTUAL heir to the Iron Throne?)

Horsecrap. The Targs lost their claim to the thrown when Jaime stabbed the Mad King and Robert crushed Rhaegar under heel. The only thing she's heir to is silver hair, violet eyes, and madness.


To me she just has a raft of bad or annoying qualities with pretty much nothing to redeem her to me.

You just hit the nail on the head why I liked her.


I find Danny arrogant and annoying, while still having Mormont, who I really liked, fall in love with her for no real reason other than she was there. She just really irritates me and the obviousness of her being so special and important makes it worse. She seems very mary-sue to me.

Ehh, Mormont had been eyeing her for awhile. And really, staying with the beautiful, powerful, intelligent girl who trusts your judgment after your wife left you to hang around in brothels or whatever. I can definitely see why Mormont would be after her.

Then again, I was never much a fan of Mormont. He knew exactly what the effects were when the lords strive for power, and even shows some pity for the smallfolk. Yet still is willing to help stir up a war just so he doesn't have to be punished for being a slaver.

Closet_Skeleton
2010-12-15, 04:06 PM
I don't think that Dany is going crazy. She's a teenage girl whose gone through a lot and has taken on probably too much responsibility than she can handle right now, but she's not going loopy in the head.

Severely messed up maybe, but not "mad tyrant" yet.

3SecondCultist
2010-12-15, 04:32 PM
To me, being the 'actual heir' means nothing, given that the Targaryen family took the throne through conquest in the first place. I don't hold her claim to be any more relevant than any other would be conquorer. You could say that because the family held the throne for so long it gives her claim more weight, but again I don't agree with that, because where do you stop? After how many years is ones conquest now seen as legitimate? 10? 100? There is no defined benchmark, so I personally don't care how long the throne has been in any one family.
[/SPOILER]

Fair enough, I respect your beliefs as well. The only thing that bothers me with this whole scenario is that, by your own logic, there isn't a legitimate heir. The Targaryen dynasty ruled for quite a while, and even though obviously many of them were widely considered to be insane, they were generally accepted as rulers until the Baratheon brothers and Ned Stark drove them out. The fact that Jaime Lannister (who I actually like as a character as well) killed the last Targaryen king doesn't really help either.

Where does it say that the Targaryens even conquered Westeros? Who did it belong to before that? :smallconfused:

warty goblin
2010-12-15, 04:46 PM
Fair enough, I respect your beliefs as well. The only thing that bothers me with this whole scenario is that, by your own logic, there isn't a legitimate heir. The Targaryen dynasty ruled for quite a while, and even though obviously many of them were widely considered to be insane, they were generally accepted as rulers until the Baratheon brothers and Ned Stark drove them out. The fact that Jaime Lannister (who I actually like as a character as well) killed the last Targaryen king doesn't really help either.

Where does it say that the Targaryens even conquered Westeros? Who did it belong to before that? :smallconfused:

Aegon the Conquerer conquered the Seven Kingdoms, which were actually seven kingdoms when he did it. That is to say he created Westeros as a single, (pseudo)cohesive entity; it simply did not exist before he showed up.

At least some of the Great Houses of Westeros were actually kings before the Targaryan conquest. The Starks were kings in the north, the Martells ruled Dorne, I think King Haran (who built Haranhall) ruled the Riverlands, but was actually an Ironman who had taken the area in the not terribly distant past.

Dienekes
2010-12-15, 05:05 PM
I don't think that Dany is going crazy. She's a teenage girl whose gone through a lot and has taken on probably too much responsibility than she can handle right now, but she's not going loopy in the head.

Severely messed up maybe, but not "mad tyrant" yet.

Probably. Like I said it was a crackpot theory, I just really happen to like it.

It'd explain why she'd walk into a pyre, several of her more stupid ruling decisions, her firm desire to plunge a country into war because it's her right, and many of her more violent outbursts. It can also be explained as you have, but hey, where's the fun in having normal reasons for things?

And remember, even Mad King Aerys was once a promising, intelligent, and kind kid.


Fair enough, I respect your beliefs as well. The only thing that bothers me with this whole scenario is that, by your own logic, there isn't a legitimate heir.

Of course, in the end the proper heir is whoever can actually rule it. In that respects Renly was right. It isn't pretty, but then, that's Westeros for you.

Terraoblivion
2010-12-15, 06:31 PM
A variety of local kingdoms, pretty much following the divisions between the areas controlled by the major houses in modern Westeros. I'm surprised you managed to miss this part given how many pages are actually spent describing various events during the Targaryen conquest and all the references to that family being foreign conquerors.

Knaight
2010-12-15, 06:50 PM
Of course, in the end the proper heir is whoever can actually rule it. In that respects Renly was right. It isn't pretty, but then, that's Westeros for you.

All while several people have claims good enough to go for the spot. The lack of any real heir is part of the reason that aspect of the story works so well.

Valameer
2010-12-15, 07:42 PM
I don't like getting my hopes up about this sort of thing (DAMN YOU LUCAS!!!!), but that trailer looked awesome!

I think Sean Bean can bring forth Ned's presence well, even if his appearance is off. Ned is totally the main character of the series, by the way.

The series to me feels like a "What if the main character died in book 1?" scenario. Had Ned went to the Wall we probably could have easily wrapped this saga up in one book. Maybe two. Ned's loss leaves a palpable incompleteness to the books, as many other characters reflect on how he probably would have restored order already, for better or worse.

I'm not sold on Daenerys' role in the books. I don't normally hate Mary Sues, so it's not because she can do no wrong - it's just that a Mary Sue is completely out of place in this story. She cleary CANNOT BE KILLED in a book with people who can, and often do, die. When she 'fails' it's some over-dramatic thing that was prophesied and totally makes her come across in an even more favorable light. When she wins she pulls off shenanigans like tricking people out of their city - three times in a row.

Dany is probably going to sweep into Westeros more-or-less as a deus-ex through books 6 and 7. That would normally be fine except in this case it belittles all the struggles of the mortal, fallible characters who are currently fighting for Westeros. I mean, why should we care about anything Tyrion did if Dany is just going to come in and fix it all singlehandedly by the end? (albeit after some apocalyptic type war that the Others bring down against her)

She's a Mary Sue in a setting that otherwise seems to try to avoid such cliche'd tropes. And it's obvious that she is Martin's favorite character. I'm pretty sure she gets the most hawtsex scenes, and that's probably a big clue right there.

So - If Daenerys DOES come in and save everyone - what was the point of the other storylines? And if she doesn't - then what was the point of her storyline? I also hated when Catelyn died, because her chapters were boring as hell, and her story accomplished nothing except to slightly show us what Robb was up to. Robb should have been a POV character, not Catelyn.

Dienekes
2010-12-15, 09:57 PM
Not that it matters much about your opinions of the character. But GRRMs gone on record that his favorite character is Tyrion.

Also an important note on Cat. Notice, none of the 5 kings were ever POVs, neither are any of the big players really (Tywin, Petyr, Varys). I think GRRM wanted it that way specifically. He didn't want to focus on the young warrior king. He wanted to show the tired, battered mother just trying to keep a shred of her sanity while her family is being torn all around her. I think that that's an important note on his stories, all the people that are effected by power struggles, not just those pulling the strings.

That's partially why I have the feeling Dany will never see the throne. Well, that's my hope at least. As well as she'd be terrible at it, shown by her inability to run the cities she's conquered and the fact that she (possibly) is barren.

To be fair, as far as mary sues go, I always thought Jon Snow was worse.

BridgeCity
2010-12-15, 11:34 PM
. . . The only thing that bothers me with this whole scenario is that, by your own logic, there isn't a legitimate heir . . .

It's already been said but since I brought up the idea I figured I'd better reply as well. Yes, I feel there is no legitimate claim to the throne. Thrones belong to those who are strong enough to take them. As I said, and was confirmed, the Targaryens only have the throne by taking the thrones of other people, so anyone who can rise up and take the Iron throne has just as much claim as Danny.


. . . I'm not sold on Daenerys' role in the books. I don't normally hate Mary Sues, so it's not because she can do no wrong - it's just that a Mary Sue is completely out of place in this story. She cleary CANNOT BE KILLED in a book with people who can, and often do, die. When she 'fails' it's some over-dramatic thing that was prophesied and totally makes her come across in an even more favorable light. When she wins she pulls off shenanigans like tricking people out of their city - three times in a row.

Dany is probably going to sweep into Westeros more-or-less as a deus-ex through books 6 and 7. That would normally be fine except in this case it belittles all the struggles of the mortal, fallible characters who are currently fighting for Westeros. I mean, why should we care about anything Tyrion did if Dany is just going to come in and fix it all singlehandedly by the end? (albeit after some apocalyptic type war that the Others bring down against her)

She's a Mary Sue in a setting that otherwise seems to try to avoid such cliche'd tropes.

You have perfectly put into words the reason I cannot stand her, and I thank you.


. . . That's partially why I have the feeling Dany will never see the throne. Well, that's my hope at least. As well as she'd be terrible at it, shown by her inability to run the cities she's conquered and the fact that she (possibly) is barren.

I really hope you are right about this. For me, it would be a massive let down in what has been an awesome series if Danny ends up in power.

Xondoure
2010-12-15, 11:46 PM
Dany is probably going to sweep into Westeros more-or-less as a deus-ex through books 6 and 7. That would normally be fine except in this case it belittles all the struggles of the mortal, fallible characters who are currently fighting for Westeros. I mean, why should we care about anything Tyrion did if Dany is just going to come in and fix it all singlehandedly by the end? (albeit after some apocalyptic type war that the Others bring down against her)

She's a Mary Sue in a setting that otherwise seems to try to avoid such cliche'd tropes. And it's obvious that she is Martin's favorite character. I'm pretty sure she gets the most hawtsex scenes, and that's probably a big clue right there.


Not that I disagree with the dislike of her (and Jon Snow for that matter) due to them being nothing more than walking archetypes for generic fantasy protagonists but it can hardly be called Deus Ex Machina when she's been building towards it since the beginning.

Valameer
2010-12-15, 11:48 PM
Actually, now that you mention it, Tyrion does have more erotic scenes than Dany - so even by my own (silly) logic I was wrong.

I know, it probably wouldn't be right to have Robb be a POV. It's just personal preference of course, but Catelyn just doesn't interest me at all. I would rather have another way of following Robb - perhaps one of his bannermen.

As for Dany not being able to govern her cities - that's why she's there, plot wise. She'll fail and she'll need to push on to Westeros instead of growing fat and comfy - but doesn't that failure just make her even better to save the day in the end?

She'll undoubtedly learn from her mistakes and become a better ruler. We're even being set up for a "is she insane, or isn't she?" scenario.

And that's what I mean when I say she doesn't seem to be able to mess anything up. Even if she dies, which she probably will, it will be a death that saves Westeros or some such.

If she falls off her horse and strikes her head, then dies in a coma a book later (which could probably happen to anyone else outside of a few key plotty characters) I would be completely surprised.

And don't read any of this thinking I actually hate Dany. I like her, she's interesting. I don't think her story fits very well with the rest of the book, unless the book really is her story, and we just get to read a bunch of filler chapters about how bad things are without her.

Edit: You're right, I used 'deus-ex' incorrectly. I don't know how to reword it, but I hope my meaning gets through regardless.

Brewdude
2010-12-15, 11:58 PM
I call Mary Sue abuse. They are Protagonists, not Author Inserts, whose every utterance is full of win, whose farts smell like rose scented cocoa butter, and who all other characters naturally admire. They suffer adversities. Bad things happen to them. They make horrible decisions. A Mary Sue wouldn't lose control of a city she conquered. A Marty Stew would have figured out how to stop the wildling horde by himself instead of having a bunch of other characters solve it for him.

Just because a character is successful in a series does NOT mean they are a Mary Sue. You can hate a character perfectly well for being poorly crafted without attempting to shoehorn it into the every expanding use of the term "Mary Sue".

Sheesh, if ASOIAF ain't good enough, I don't know what is.

Valameer
2010-12-16, 12:18 AM
Fine. Mary Sue means a lot of different things to a lot of different people. You act like I'm saying a moose is an invertebrate.

She's a relatively infallible character, who's written as if she's the author's personal fantasy girl, who gets magic, dragons, prophecies and allies at the drop of a hat in a setting where they are otherwise scarce. At 15 she can outwit the government of three entire cities, back to back, no less. Her only flaws are tragic betrayals from cruel, spiteful people. She shows no fear or weakness, but is never incorrect in being headstrong. Even her foes come to love her, and weep when she sends them away. The only reason she can't run her city is because she's too pure to be able to be cruel enough to these people who were so recently slaves (that she liberated, whilst abolishing slavery... but the world wasn't ready for that, yet).

She's heir to the throne, a god reborn, has an unusually tragic past, is stunningly beautiful, she has PURPLE EYES, is desired by every man who comes near her, and is immune to flaming. I mean fire.

Now - it's still to be seen, but it's looking like she's going to save the day, probably by martyring herself for the good of her people, and everyone will weep bitter tears.

Just to reiterate, her chapters reek of author wish fufillment to me. Even when she screws up she does it in a perfectly tragic way. Nothing about her jives with the rest of the setting (except Snow).

Given the already ambiguous nature of Mary Sues... yeah, I'm gonna call this one.

Edit: ASOIAF is great. Everything is a trope these days, and anything can be done well. Wouldn't the book suck more if everyone was Catelyn? I just had to say - Dany is jarring, that's all. Like, I can see her plot armor. It feels like two separate books. So far, it might as well be.

BridgeCity
2010-12-16, 12:25 AM
I call Mary Sue abuse. They are Protagonists, not Author Inserts, whose every utterance is full of win, whose farts smell like rose scented cocoa butter, and who all other characters naturally admire. They suffer adversities. Bad things happen to them. They make horrible decisions. A Mary Sue wouldn't lose control of a city she conquered. A Marty Stew would have figured out how to stop the wildling horde by himself instead of having a bunch of other characters solve it for him.

Just because a character is successful in a series does NOT mean they are a Mary Sue. You can hate a character perfectly well for being poorly crafted without attempting to shoehorn it into the every expanding use of the term "Mary Sue".

Sheesh, if ASOIAF ain't good enough, I don't know what is.

I think it is not that she is successful therefore people hate her, it is that her success is rather at odds with the rest of the world.

As has been said, the world is such that major characters can and will die, often. They can be great warriors and amazing combatants, and still die, and their mistakes often have terrible consequences for themselves - for example Robb not marrying the Frey girl ended pretty badly for him. They can be highly respected and honoured, and still be betrayed by those they thought friends. The War of five Kings was pretty much all about great warriors and nolbe(ish) knights failing and being brought down.

Danny on the other hand is a completely untrained, unskilled little girl who seems to command the complete respect of a warrior race that have never been lead by a female before, manages to steal three cities from people who have been in the business of treachery and warfare far longer than her, and her mistakes all seem to be about making her a better person. And more.

This type of character is common, and by no means badly written, it is more that she just doesn't really fit with the way the rest of the characters get treated, and it comes across as "Danny can do no wrong." She doesn't fit the rest of the story for me.

So yeah, maybe Mary Sue is the wrong term, but I feel the arguments against her are perfectly valid, regardless.

warty goblin
2010-12-16, 12:47 AM
I would hardly say Dany is infallible, or that her mistakes are free of consequence. Trusting Miri maz Dur didn't end so well, now did it? I'm sorry but if your definition of mistakes without consequence include losing your husband, your child and the possibility of ever having more children, it's really time to relax it a bit. Yes she did end up with dragons, but that was hardly ooh shiny thing for the magical girl without cost.

BridgeCity
2010-12-16, 12:51 AM
I would hardly say Dany is infallible, or that her mistakes are free of consequence. Trusting Miri maz Dur didn't end so well, now did it? I'm sorry but if your definition of mistakes without consequence include losing your husband, your child and the possibility of ever having more children, it's really time to relax it a bit. Yes she did end up with dragons, but that was hardly ooh shiny thing for the magical girl without cost.

I'd counter this by saying that I didn't say her mistakes don't have consequences, I said they seem to be about making her better. Losing her husband and child forged her into the strong willed person she is today, gave her the determination to take on her enemies. Gaining the dragons has given her the loyalty and respect of an entire people, and the ability to visit destruction on her enemies.

Robb not marrying the Frey girl ended in the death of alot of family and friends and the end of justice for Ned, with no silver lining for him.

So yes, I see a difference between the two.

As for telling me to relax, seriously if you think that two people calmly expressing different points of view is a bad thing then perhaps forums are not where you should be. This isn't a fight, it's a discussion, so please don't treat it like one or attempt to turn it into one.

DranWork
2010-12-16, 03:20 AM
I just dont find dany interesting at all after her brother err.. leaves. Jon Snow is another one that I dont find interesting. But hey everyone likes different things. For me I just prey that theres more Greyjoy in the future.

BridgeCity
2010-12-16, 03:29 AM
Back to the actual topic, from my memory of my readings Drogo was somewhat fat. Well muscled, but rather rotund as well. Did I get that wrong?

Edit: this is coming from looking at who I assume is Drogo in the trailer.

DomaDoma
2010-12-16, 09:17 AM
I'd counter this by saying that I didn't say her mistakes don't have consequences, I said they seem to be about making her better. Losing her husband and child forged her into the strong willed person she is today, gave her the determination to take on her enemies. Gaining the dragons has given her the loyalty and respect of an entire people, and the ability to visit destruction on her enemies.

Robb not marrying the Frey girl ended in the death of alot of family and friends and the end of justice for Ned, with no silver lining for him.

So yes, I see a difference between the two.

So, what you're saying is that you don't want any bad situation to work out well for people, even if it's in a roundabout, painful "everything happens for a reason" kind of way. You're thus probably closer to Martin's core demographic than I am, so - for the knowledge of future generations - why do you follow this series? (Hope that the situation will get better lies at the core of pretty much every enthusiasm I've ever had for a story, so I'm not really sure of the point of view of a typical Ice and Fire reader.)

3SecondCultist
2010-12-16, 09:34 AM
Back to the actual topic, from my memory of my readings Drogo was somewhat fat. Well muscled, but rather rotund as well. Did I get that wrong?

Edit: this is coming from looking at who I assume is Drogo in the trailer.

I'm in concordance with you here, although HBO is obviously going to make everyone look better. Tyrion isn't supposed to be just a dwarf, he is supposed to be ugly as well...

warty goblin
2010-12-16, 09:38 AM
I'm in concordance with you here, although HBO is obviously going to make everyone look better. Tyrion isn't supposed to be just a dwarf, he is supposed to be ugly as well...

I really cannot remember Drogo being described as fat anywhere, and it wouldn't make much sense for him to be so. Remember he rides all day every day and leads through basically being the best warrior around. These are not characteristics that make you rotund.

BridgeCity
2010-12-16, 09:55 AM
I'm in concordance with you here, although HBO is obviously going to make everyone look better. Tyrion isn't supposed to be just a dwarf, he is supposed to be ugly as well...

Yeah, though I'm definately pleased at their casting choice for Tyrion, regardless of his looks, he will do a brilliant job.


So, what you're saying is that you don't want any bad situation to work out well for people, even if it's in a roundabout, painful "everything happens for a reason" kind of way. You're thus probably closer to Martin's core demographic than I am, so - for the knowledge of future generations - why do you follow this series? (Hope that the situation will get better lies at the core of pretty much every enthusiasm I've ever had for a story, so I'm not really sure of the point of view of a typical Ice and Fire reader.)

I think you've missed what I'm saying. Bad things working out well for people is all good, but it's the seemingly special treatment that Danny recieves above and beyond everyone else that irks me. As I said, better and more seasoned characters than her fail at what they are supposed to be good at, while she succeeds massively at stuff she has no training or ability in. It breaks the realism of the story that GRRM set up, to me at least.

I read the books because it is a damn good story and I love it. One bad character treatment isn't enough to change that.

Don't get me wrong, hope that it all works out is definately a stong thing for me, I just don't like the way Danny hasn't really done anything to obtain everything she has. I want it to work out well, but I wan't that happy ending to be earned.


I really cannot remember Drogo being described as fat anywhere, and it wouldn't make much sense for him to be so. Remember he rides all day every day and leads through basically being the best warrior around. These are not characteristics that make you rotund.

I'm not sure at all why I had him as fattish in my mind.

I'll point out though that many great warriors from fantasy have been rather large men. Big, fattish bear like men from frozen northlands is pretty standard, so it's not such a weird thing to think of big strong warriors as a bit chubby too. Also, you burn calories on a horse while it's actually running, not so much when its just walking, and there is no way Drogo's horse is running the whole time. That wouldn't make sense.

warty goblin
2010-12-16, 10:09 AM
I'm not sure at all why I had him as fattish in my mind.

I'll point out though that many great warriors from fantasy have been rather large men. Big, fattish bear like men from frozen northlands is pretty standard, so it's not such a weird thing to think of big strong warriors as a bit chubby too. Also, you burn calories on a horse while it's actually running, not so much when its just walking, and there is no way Drogo's horse is running the whole time. That wouldn't make sense.

Big certainly, but I really don't remember many actual warriors being fat. Armor and weapons are tiring enough, nobody needs the weight of a spare tire as well.

And the point is that he leads a very active life. It's actually pretty hard to get fat when you're working physically many hours a day. Particularly if you're a warrior, and really can't afford to get pudgy.

Valameer
2010-12-16, 11:13 AM
Back to the actual topic, from my memory of my readings Drogo was somewhat fat. Well muscled, but rather rotund as well. Did I get that wrong?

Drogo is described as "big", which I think means "tall and broad" in this case. I don't think he was large or round. Just compared to Dany, he's a very big man.

I think he's described as fairly lean, given his large build. He's only 30 years old or so, after all.

Now the Northern Bannermen, otoh, tend to be rather Large men, in every sense. Same with a lot of the Ironborn. In the colder regions, that extra padding helps you stay healthy and warm, like real man!

Derthric
2010-12-16, 02:35 PM
The only people I picture as particularly rotund in ASoFaI are King Robert and the Eunich warrior that arrived to protect Dany with Arstan. Most of the rest are Tall and Broad shouldered, at least in my mind.

Eldan
2010-12-16, 02:41 PM
I thought of a lot of the Northerners as bearlike, as others said. Big, broad-shouldered, barrel-chested, a little overweight, but not really fat. Karstark just seemed like that.

thorgrim29
2010-12-16, 02:53 PM
There's no way the Umbers aren't at least a bit fat, to name only them. Remember, in combat fat (not in crippling amounts obviously) helps you shrug off (lighter) bludgeoning hits and blows to your armour (if you get hit on your chainmail in an area where you have fat, it'll be a lot less painful then if you have a bone there). It helps you survive the rough conditions of the campaign trail, such as cold and starvation. Plus if you have an active life with a bit of a spare tire (not out of the question seeing how much those people eat and drink), you'll get stronger. Now I'm not saying that most of the northmen are obese, just probably a bit chunky.

thorgrim29
2010-12-16, 02:56 PM
There's no way the Umbers aren't at least a bit fat, to name only them. Remember, in combat fat (not in crippling amounts obviously) helps you shrug off (lighter) bludgeoning hits and blows to your armour (if you get hit on your chainmail in an area where you have fat, it'll be a lot less painful then if you have a bone there). It helps you survive the rough conditions of the campaign trail, such as cold and starvation. Plus if you have an active life with a bit of a spare tire (not out of the question seeing how much those people eat and drink), you'll get stronger. Now I'm not saying that most of the northmen are obese, just probably a bit chunky.

IthilanorStPete
2010-12-16, 05:03 PM
And then there's the Manderlys, who are borderline obese, definitely overweight.

Knaight
2010-12-16, 08:29 PM
Neither of these groups spend most of every day riding around on horses. Drogo has no good reason to be fat, at all, some nobles and Strong Belwas do. Though Strong Belwas really needs to die already, preferably to poison, his shtick is asking for it.

Closet_Skeleton
2010-12-17, 08:31 AM
You can be fat and excersise a lot. Fatless bodybuilder physiques are quite hard to get and unnatural. Simpy excersising a lot and eating well will give you muscles with a layer of fat over them.

Knaight
2010-12-17, 09:22 AM
Sure, there will be fat, but the person won't be fat. The bodybuilder physique requires around 2-4% fat by body weight, someone with Drogo's lifestyle should probably be in the 8-12% range, where actually being fat is more on the 18%+ range.

thorgrim29
2010-12-17, 05:42 PM
I agree for Drogo, my point is that the Northmen assuredly look more like weightlifters then bodybuilders

Closet_Skeleton
2010-12-17, 06:34 PM
This is the kind of guy I was thinking of (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C5%BDydr%C5%ABnas_Savickas). Which is the extreme end of things.

Knaight
2010-12-18, 01:36 AM
This is the kind of guy I was thinking of (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C5%BDydr%C5%ABnas_Savickas). Which is the extreme end of things.

Of course, even for nobles there is horse riding and combat practice, both of which are far closer to cardio exercises than weight lifting. Its simply that they need to be fit and healthy, not visibly muscular, some weight is to be expected, including some fat, without an incredible amount. The more sedentary nobles can be fat, but even then its only fat, not obese. The actual obese ones have no reason to be anywhere near competent in physical actions, and one would expect them to be very rare.

Valameer
2010-12-18, 11:45 AM
Question for you guys: How do you pronounce Jaime?

I went through all the books hearing "Jay-mee" (hard J) in my head as if it were spelled Jamie. A little bit after finishing A Feast for Crows I realised that it's probably promounced "High-mee."

I could also see it being pronounced "Jaym"

Is there anything official on this?

Sneak
2010-12-18, 12:28 PM
I always heard it the Spanish way in my head, but I believe George RR Martin himself pronounces it like Jamie. I think there's a clip of him saying it that way in the long "Making of" video HBO recently released.

Oh, and I'm pretty sure Drogo was never supposed to be fat. He's a big guy, sure, but more muscular than fat (which is not to say that the two are necessarily mutually exclusive).

warty goblin
2010-12-18, 12:49 PM
Question for you guys: How do you pronounce Jaime?

I went through all the books hearing "Jay-mee" (hard J) in my head as if it were spelled Jamie. A little bit after finishing A Feast for Crows I realised that it's probably promounced "High-mee."

I could also see it being pronounced "Jaym"

Is there anything official on this?

In the audio books it's pronounced Jay-mee, for what it's worth.

thorgrim29
2010-12-18, 05:11 PM
I always figures it was like James but without the s.

Turalisj
2010-12-20, 07:43 PM
Finally, a Game of Thrones trailer worth posting.

http://www.hbo.com/video/video.html/...ones&view=null

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=atFX6keD95o

Was that Boromir with the executioner's sword? :smallconfused: :smalleek:

thorgrim29
2010-12-20, 08:21 PM
Yeah, "Boromir" is the main character of the series

Until he bites it, afterwards I wonder if they'll settle for a main character of follow GRRMs lead and leave it unclear.

Corras
2010-12-20, 08:47 PM
I'm pretty stoked for this, but seeing as I live in Denmark, how can I watch the series short of torrenting it illegaly or hoping for a DVD release?

Samurai Jill
2010-12-24, 06:51 AM
Danny on the other hand is a completely untrained, unskilled little girl who seems to command the complete respect of a warrior race that have never been lead by a female before...
I haven't read the complete series yet, so I can't comment on your other points, but I think the whole thing with hatching dragons after walking unscathed through fire might have something to do with commanding said loyalty. I really, really, wish people wouldn't omit this kind of significant detail before framing their argument.

As for the idea that she (and Jon Snow) don't 'fit' with the rest of the characters- well, yes. That's specifically because they're the most closely associated with the namesakes of the series, the Fire and Ice respectively. If there's an overall moral 'point' to the series, it's that the internecine feuding of the various great houses, motivated largely by the impulse of revenge and hunger for power on all sides, is a massively cruel, petty, self-destructive, pointless business, when the real threat is the sweeping undead armies from the north.

What we'll probably eventually see is Jon and Dany teaming up, in some shape or form, so that the dragons (fire) take out the undead (ice.) (Or, conversely, failing to, and see the ice extinguish all life. Which would be a total downer, but would also fit perfectly with the basic theme of the series.) Jon and Dany have to be held 'apart' for that very purpose. This is why I don't buy the idea of ASoIaF lacking a clear conflict between good and evil- the overarching good/evil conflict is there, it's just very long-term and being built up to slowly.

warty goblin
2010-12-24, 09:00 AM
This is why I don't buy the idea of ASoIaF lacking a clear conflict between good and evil- the overarching good/evil conflict is there, it's just very long-term and being built up to slowly.

The way I see it, the Others aren't really evil. They strike me as just being, sort of like an earthquake or snowstorm.

The real evil in the books is, to me, people, and far more horrifying for it. Vargo Hoat, Gregor Clegane, Armory Lorch and their ilk on all sides are so utterly debased, and yet so completely believably human

Dienekes
2010-12-24, 10:42 AM
I haven't read the complete series yet, so I can't comment on your other points, but I think the whole thing with hatching dragons after walking unscathed through fire might have something to do with commanding said loyalty. I really, really, wish people wouldn't omit this kind of significant detail before framing their argument.

The problem comes in, she had a small but significant loyal following among Dothraki before she went all whacko and decided walking into a blazing pyre was a good way to spend an afternoon. This could be explained away that she was supposed to give birth to the Dothraki version of Genghis Khan, but then again she already had that baby and it turned out disappointing to say the least. Raising dragons did pretty much cemented that loyalty though.


As for the idea that she (and Jon Snow) don't 'fit' with the rest of the characters- well, yes. That's specifically because they're the most closely associated with the namesakes of the series, the Fire and Ice respectively. If there's an overall moral 'point' to the series, it's that the internecine feuding of the various great houses, motivated largely by the impulse of revenge and hunger for power on all sides, is a massively cruel, petty, self-destructive, pointless business, when the real threat is the sweeping undead armies from the north.

My only problem with Snow is really how he became second youngest ever Lord Commander of the Night's Watch after admittedly breaking his vows and possibly being on trial for treason and abandoning his post. More than Dany's ability to inspire loyalty this bothered me. I didn't really buy the 14 year old Padme being elected queen of a planet. I wasn't all to thrilled with the 15 year old Jon being elected ruler of well anything.


What we'll probably eventually see is Jon and Dany teaming up, in some shape or form, so that the dragons (fire) take out the undead (ice.) (Or, conversely, failing to, and see the ice extinguish all life. Which would be a total downer, but would also fit perfectly with the basic theme of the series.) Jon and Dany have to be held 'apart' for that very purpose. This is why I don't buy the idea of ASoIaF lacking a clear conflict between good and evil- the overarching good/evil conflict is there, it's just very long-term and being built up to slowly.

And this sounds kinda cheesy and standard fantasy to me. Doesn't mean you are wrong, but Dany rising from the Free Cities to come to Westeros just in time to aid the stalwart, young, sociable and attractive Lord Commander of the Night's Watch against the evil hordes. I don't know, it just isn't what I've grown to love within the series. Though I suppose I trust GRRM to write the story as he wants and as long as the writing style is of the same level, I'll enjoy it immensely.

Closet_Skeleton
2010-12-24, 11:05 AM
The problem comes in, she had a small but significant loyal following among Dothraki before she went all whacko and decided walking into a blazing pyre was a good way to spend an afternoon.

No she didn't.

Its clearly stated that she only had her handmaids and those too young, old or weak to join the tribes that were formed when Drogo's split up.

Her followers are stated to be utterly insignificant, and then a ton of them die when she has to get out before she runs into another tribe and gets butchered for some random reason.


My only problem with Snow is really how he became second youngest ever Lord Commander of the Night's Watch after admittedly breaking his vows and possibly being on trial for treason and abandoning his post. More than Dany's ability to inspire loyalty this bothered me. I didn't really buy the 14 year old Padme being elected queen of a planet. I wasn't all to thrilled with the 15 year old Jon being elected ruler of well anything.

The politics of it all were explained in depth.

The Lord Commander's role is to not be an experianced leader with a strong power base. His role is to stop the experianced leaders with strong power bases from being at each others throats.

Admittingly breaking your vows still puts you above the 80% of the night's watch who pretend not to have broken them.

He didn't abandon his post. He was sent on a scouting mission, followed the orders of his superior, scouted the enemy and then came back.

Dienekes
2010-12-24, 01:20 PM
No she didn't.

Its clearly stated that she only had her handmaids and those too young, old or weak to join the tribes that were formed when Drogo's split up.

Her followers are stated to be utterly insignificant, and then a ton of them die when she has to get out before she runs into another tribe and gets butchered for some random reason.

She still kept the loyalty of 3 of Drogo's ko's, and a handful of warriors. As I said, small but significant considering the ko's are the rough equivalent of a Dothraki Kingsguard.


The politics of it all were explained in depth.

The Lord Commander's role is to not be an experianced leader with a strong power base. His role is to stop the experianced leaders with strong power bases from being at each others throats.

Admittingly breaking your vows still puts you above the 80% of the night's watch who pretend not to have broken them.

He didn't abandon his post. He was sent on a scouting mission, followed the orders of his superior, scouted the enemy and then came back.

He did not, to bad it was shown that many did not believe him. The concept is that all the powerful members of the Night's Watch rallied behind a 15 year old boy who claimed that he really did not betray them, even though he lead a horde of wildmen to their gates and was going to be put on trial, or just got off it. I can't remember which and don't have the books in front of me.
The politics were explained in depth, and it was a fun read. But each reread I do it seems more odd and out of place. I keep waiting for one of the two main night's watch lords to laugh in Sam's face.
Though maybe I'm just sad that Dolorous Edd didn't win.

Closet_Skeleton
2010-12-24, 03:10 PM
She still kept the loyalty of 3 of Drogo's ko's, and a handful of warriors. As I said, small but significant considering the ko's are the rough equivalent of a Dothraki Kingsguard.


Most of those Ko laughed at her until the 'mother of dragons' thing. They just had to stick around until Drogo was properly buried. They were also kind of selected for loyalty as well. I vaguely remember them continuing to be a bit sceptical.

If they'd been the real Kingsguard then keeping only 3/5 would be a sign of weakness.

BridgeCity
2010-12-25, 06:35 AM
I haven't read the complete series yet, so I can't comment on your other points, but I think the whole thing with hatching dragons after walking unscathed through fire might have something to do with commanding said loyalty. I really, really, wish people wouldn't omit this kind of significant detail before framing their argument.

I'd rather you didn't assume I overlooked that detail. I took it into consideration when I formulated my argument, and I feel it works as evidence towards what I was saying, not against it. A completely untrained and unskilled little girl manages to command the respect of an entire warrior nation that has never been led by a woman before by waltzing into a fire, surviving magically and hatching the first dragons for over a hundred years.

My entire point was that the story is about better and more honourable people than Danny being brought down and destroyed, it was gritty and realistic and put forward the idea that even the best of people fail, yet here is Danny succeding massively by nothing but sheer damn luck and possibly her ancestral blood. As I said, I think that her character breaks the feeling of the world.


As for the idea that she (and Jon Snow) don't 'fit' with the rest of the characters- well, yes. That's specifically because they're the most closely associated with the namesakes of the series, the Fire and Ice respectively.

Just because there is a reason doesn't make it a good one, or make the jarring any less detrimental to the story.


If there's an overall moral 'point' to the series, it's that the internecine feuding of the various great houses, motivated largely by the impulse of revenge and hunger for power on all sides, is a massively cruel, petty, self-destructive, pointless business, when the real threat is the sweeping undead armies from the north.

What we'll probably eventually see is Jon and Dany teaming up, in some shape or form, so that the dragons (fire) take out the undead (ice.) (Or, conversely, failing to, and see the ice extinguish all life. Which would be a total downer, but would also fit perfectly with the basic theme of the series.) Jon and Dany have to be held 'apart' for that very purpose. This is why I don't buy the idea of ASoIaF lacking a clear conflict between good and evil- the overarching good/evil conflict is there, it's just very long-term and being built up to slowly.

I'm not sure if any of that was still in response to what I said, because I never mentioned moral points or good versus evil.

Samurai Jill
2010-12-25, 07:29 AM
The problem comes in, she had a small but significant loyal following among Dothraki before she went all whacko and decided walking into a blazing pyre was a good way to spend an afternoon...

Walking into a blazing pyre makes you 'whacko'. Coming out unscathed with live dragons makes you divinely inspired. I don't see anything remotely surprising about being able to command anyone's loyalty in the aftermath. It's possibly the single most awesome moment in the entire series.

I'd rather you didn't assume I overlooked that detail. I took it into consideration when I formulated my argument... yet here is Danny succeding massively by nothing but sheer damn luck and possibly her ancestral blood.
And I'd rather you actually stated the counterargument up-front, rather than blithely assuming your readers are too dense to notice that particular chink in your logic.

What about courage? What about love? What about grief and perserverance and sacrifice and bitter lessons and ironic punishment and every other underlying theme woven into the narrative that culminates in that pyre scene? If you object to the use of the supernatural as an emotionally-laden-plot-device, then I honestly don't understand why you're reading a genre called fantasy in the first place. Obviously, it's impact is in inverse proportion to frequency, but I thought it's narrative application here was absolutely and unconditionally masterful.


Just because there is a reason doesn't make it a good one, or make the jarring any less detrimental to the story... I'm not sure if any of that was still in response to what I said, because I never mentioned moral points or good versus evil.

My only problem with Snow is really how he became second youngest ever Lord Commander of the Night's Watch after admittedly breaking his vows and possibly being on trial for treason and abandoning his post...

Again, I'm not familiar with the entire series, but my general understanding is that he was a better candidate than anyone else available, which is not outstandingly difficult in the Night's Watch- Gods know half the Crows break their vows on a regular basis, at least he did so under explicit orders from a superior. (Plus, Mormont was grooming him for office and he did have a sound reputation.)

It all feeds back into one of the underlying themes of the story- that, as Maester Aemon puts it, "love is the bane of honour, the death of duty". That even the human emotions we consider positive are often indirectly destructive, precisely because they promote a form of favouritism blind to common needs. Snow is the best illustration of that principle- by separating himself from family, he's the only frontline character who isn't squandering his energy and resources in fighting his own kind. (Drogo and Dany's determination to defend their child- by invading the seven kingdoms, murder, rape and looting included free of charge- illustrates the same principle.)

And this sounds kinda cheesy and standard fantasy to me.
I don't see a way to escape this basic conclusion. GRRM has been dropping half-tonne hints on our hands that (A) Winter is Coming, (B) it's gonna be a really bad one (C) the Others are on the march and (D) the only weapons that are effective against them are fire-based (including Dragonglass.) Like whatsherface said to Stannis, this whole business with the noble houses is just the squabbling of children compared with the looming war between Fire and Ice. Plus, it's hardly cheesy standard fantasy if the Ice wins. :P

For my own part, while I do find myself rooting for many of the characters, I have to say that beyond a certain point the interminable and inconclusive power-scrabble seems to get a bit tedious for my tastes. Nothing, in the long term, is really being accomplished- which is, again, the point. I'm looking forward to something more streamlined.

BridgeCity
2010-12-25, 08:52 AM
Walking into a blazing pyre makes you 'whacko'. Coming out unscathed with live dragons makes you divinely inspired. I don't see anything remotely surprising about being able to command anyone's loyalty in the aftermath. It's possibly the single most awesome moment in the entire series.

I've never said I found it surprising, I said I found it irritating and mood breaking. I feel that because of what Danny has managed to achieve through no real self worth, her character doesn't fit in with the rest of the story for me. Yes you can say she is divinely inspired and surviving a fire unharmed should make people love her, I still say that doesn't fit with what I like about the story.


And I'd rather you actually stated the counterargument up-front, rather than blithely assuming your readers are too dense to notice that particular chink in your logic.

Do you also want me to go through every book and pick out every single instance and piece of information I have thought about in considering my view and reproduce it all here in one massive post that no one will read and that takes up far far too much space and that serves no purpose, or is it better that I just put forward a simple overview of my thoughts and then discuss them as people see fit? I think the latter. I don't consider it a chink in my logic, and attempting to pre-emptively counter every possible counter-arguement is just silly.


What about courage? What about love? What about grief and perserverance and sacrifice and bitter lessons and ironic punishment and every other underlying theme woven into the narrative that culminates in that pyre scene? If you object to the use of the supernatural as an emotionally-laden-plot-device, then I honestly don't understand why you're reading a genre called fantasy in the first place. Obviously, it's impact is in inverse proportion to frequency, but I thought it's narrative application here was absolutely and unconditionally masterful.

It all feeds back into one of the underlying themes of the story- that, as Maester Aemon puts it, "love is the bane of honour, the death of duty". That even the human emotions we consider positive are often indirectly destructive, precisely because they promote a form of favouritism blind to common needs. Snow is the best illustration of that principle- by separating himself from family, he's the only frontline character who isn't squandering his energy and resources in fighting his own kind. (Drogo and Dany's determination to defend their child- by invading the seven kingdoms, murder, rape and looting included free of charge- illustrates the same principle.)

I don't see a way to escape this basic conclusion. GRRM has been dropping half-tonne hints on our hands that (A) Winter is Coming, (B) it's gonna be a really bad one (C) the Others are on the march and (D) the only weapons that are effective against them are fire-based (including Dragonglass.) Like whatsherface said to Stannis, this whole business with the noble houses is just the squabbling of children compared with the looming war between Fire and Ice. Plus, it's hardly cheesy standard fantasy if the Ice wins. :P

For my own part, while I do find myself rooting for many of the characters, I have to say that beyond a certain point the interminable and inconclusive power-scrabble seems to get a bit tedious for my tastes. Nothing, in the long term, is really being accomplished- which is, again, the point. I'm looking forward to something more streamlined.[/spoiler]

Again, I have no idea if this is still aimed at me, because it still deals with things that have nothing to do with what I'm talking about and you didn't clear it up the last time I asked.

You seem to be trying to explain why things are justified story-wise, which is unneccesary because I'm not an idiot and I can comprehend what I read. My issue with Danny is not her place in the story, or what role she may or may not play, or that the various themes and ideas do or do not relate to her. It is how different her character is non-diagetically treated. I really cannot make that much clearer. I feel her character gets special treatment, where she obtains power through no skill and her mistakes wind up making her better, whereas other people's mistakes actually have major detrimental consequences for them. She just doesn't fit for me.

I'm not trying to change anyone's minds here, merely stating my thoughts on one aspect of the books.

Samurai Jill
2010-12-25, 10:18 AM
I've never said I found it surprising, I said I found it irritating and mood breaking. I feel that because of what Danny has managed to achieve through no real self worth...
...Do you also want me to go through every book and pick out every single instance and piece of information I have thought about in considering my view...
For a given level of detail and causal impact or thematic relevance, yes. Your basic point is that Dany commands the loyalty of the Dothraki, with the implication that this is unearned, excessive, or underexplained. There is a very, very obvious and immediately relevant counter to this point that you seemingly didn't think was important to mention. And again, what makes you think she lacks self-worth? She demonstrated enormous courage and force of conviction just by being there and doing what she did.

You seem to be trying to explain why things are justified story-wise, which is unneccesary because I'm not an idiot and I can comprehend what I read. My issue with Danny is not her place in the story, or what role she may or may not play, or that the various themes and ideas do or do not relate to her. It is how different her character is non-diagetically treated.
Again, I would contend that a fuller analysis of the series would reveal that she is, in the grander scheme of things, not being treated non-diagetically with respect to the other characters- that her individual story has an unfolding relevance both to large-scale events and the underlying moral point(s) that the author is trying ot make.

I mean, as for the idea that a lot of other characters with many personal strengths and virtues regularly fail, and fail hard- well, statistically speaking, yes, that would 'realistically' happen. Statistically speaking, however, a small number of people will conversely succeed against all odds. How many in the books? Two, out of a cast of dozens. Why is this somehow excessive?

Samurai Jill
2010-12-25, 10:33 AM
The way I see it, the Others aren't really evil. They strike me as just being, sort of like an earthquake or snowstorm.

The real evil in the books is, to me, people, and far more horrifying for it. Vargo Hoat, Gregor Clegane, Armory Lorch and their ilk on all sides are so utterly debased, and yet so completely believably human
I can see what you mean, insofar as the Others come across as sort of detached and impersonal. In story terms, though, they still serve the same function as a BBEG, insofar as they're an all-consuming destructive force that have to opposed at all costs.
One interesting complication here might be the suggestion that the Others are actually sacrificed human children (e.g, Craster's sons.) I dunno, we'll see how that works out. They don't seem to be gratuitously cruel per se, unless you consider raising wights to be a war crime...

Dienekes
2010-12-25, 11:51 AM
Walking into a blazing pyre makes you 'whacko'.
Of course it does, I'm glad we're in agreement.


Coming out unscathed with live dragons makes you divinely inspired. I don't see anything remotely surprising about being able to command anyone's loyalty in the aftermath. It's possibly the single most awesome moment in the entire series.

After the fact? Yeah, she's impressive enough, before the fact? When she was giving her weapons away to the 3 remaining ko's who were following her for no reason? Yeah, that confuses me a might bit.


What about courage? What about love? What about grief and perserverance and sacrifice and bitter lessons and ironic punishment and every other underlying theme woven into the narrative that culminates in that pyre scene?


What about them? She's shown no greater courage than Ned, no greater love than Cat, no greater grief or perseverance than Arya, no greater bitter lessons than Sansa. Still don't see any of them thinking it's a good idea to go walking into a fire/the moon door/or anything else that's possibly suicidal.



Again, I'm not familiar with the entire series, but my general understanding is that he was a better candidate than anyone else available, which is not outstandingly difficult in the Night's Watch- Gods know half the Crows break their vows on a regular basis, at least he did so under explicit orders from a superior. (Plus, Mormont was grooming him for office and he did have a sound reputation.)

Except he really wasn't, there were two main candidates that were far better qualified for the position. However events unfolded in such a manner, that felt a little contrived in my opinion, meaning that both these characters willingly gave up their chance to rule. For a 15 year old. He did not have a sound reputation, in fact his reputation was in question. We the reader know he was telling the truth and put in an impossible situation. They as presented were not so sure.


I don't see a way to escape this basic conclusion. GRRM has been dropping half-tonne hints on our hands that (A) Winter is Coming, (B) it's gonna be a really bad one (C) the Others are on the march and (D) the only weapons that are effective against them are fire-based (including Dragonglass.) Like whatsherface said to Stannis, this whole business with the noble houses is just the squabbling of children compared with the looming war between Fire and Ice. Plus, it's hardly cheesy standard fantasy if the Ice wins. :P

I see the hints as well as anyone. I just hope it doesn't go that way. I'd rather see Dany lash out at Jon for being the only surviving son of Ned. I'd enjoy watching Jon take the side of Stannis who saved his life against Dany and watch as both sides claim to be the Prince that Was Promised and tear each other apart. This is far more interesting and entertaining and more close to the feel of the books than watching the obvious hero characters join forces to fight the ancient eldritch evil.


For my own part, while I do find myself rooting for many of the characters, I have to say that beyond a certain point the interminable and inconclusive power-scrabble seems to get a bit tedious for my tastes. Nothing, in the long term, is really being accomplished- which is, again, the point. I'm looking forward to something more streamlined.

That's fine. I disagree completely, but that's fine. For me the story grinds to a crawl when I get to Jon and Bran. Go back to Tyrion or Sansa or Cat so I can see what the politics are rearing. I want to read what stupid decision Cersei has made and how awesome Littlefinger is playing everyone. That is what drew me into the series far more than that one viewing of an Other did in the prologue.

Samurai Jill
2010-12-25, 01:42 PM
After the fact? Yeah, she's impressive enough, before the fact? When she was giving her weapons away to the 3 remaining ko's who were following her for no reason? Yeah, that confuses me a might bit.
What confuses you about it?

What about them? She's shown no greater courage than Ned, no greater love than Cat, no greater grief or perseverance than Arya, no greater bitter lessons than Sansa. Still don't see any of them thinking it's a good idea to go walking into a fire/the moon door/or anything else that's possibly suicidal...
Don't we? We certainly see Ned adhering to honour in ways that certainly endanger life and limb in ways even he could forsee. Dany had already seen (roughly) how blood magic worked, that fire seemed to cause activity in the eggs, that only she could feel their warmth- this was a semi-calculated gamble in an effort to avoid either (A) being slaughtered by another roving khalasar or (B) living out the remainder of her days as an impotent crone. Her story had been building up to this fairly consistently.

Except he really wasn't, there were two main candidates that were far better qualified for the position. However events unfolded in such a manner, that felt a little contrived in my opinion, meaning that both these characters willingly gave up their chance to rule. For a 15 year old. He did not have a sound reputation, in fact his reputation was in question...
Well, I meant *other* than the whole leading wildlings back after going missing... which I have to admit doesn't sound great. Point is, his *prior* reputation presumably counted in his favour(?)

I see the hints as well as anyone. I just hope it doesn't go that way. I'd rather see Dany lash out at Jon for being the only surviving son of Ned. This is far more interesting and entertaining and more close to the feel of the books than watching the obvious hero characters join forces to fight the ancient eldritch evil.
I'm not certain it would be more interesting, but it would probably be more... final, given the Others would likely crush everyone in their path as they picked off the weaker side(s) in the conflict. I can certainly see it happening, though.

That's fine. I disagree completely, but that's fine. For me the story grinds to a crawl when I get to Jon and Bran. Go back to Tyrion or Sansa or Cat so I can see what the politics are rearing. I want to read what stupid decision Cersei has made and how awesome Littlefinger is playing everyone. That is what drew me into the series far more than that one viewing of an Other did in the prologue.
Oh, I enjoyed the initial politics a good deal, but by the time the Red Wedding rolled around I was getting a distinct whiff of ultimate futility from the whole affair. The victories are all transient and the motives are all petty (even Robb, who refused to sue for peace because he wants revenge for his father. That, not Jeyne Westerling, was his downfall.)

Dienekes
2010-12-25, 07:06 PM
Hah, jeez did I waste a lot of time with those spoilers when I could have easily spoilered the whole thing. Thanks for reminding me how to save a lot of effort in making posts.


What confuses you about it?

Why would they stick with the child-girl who shows no skills as a leader and several times stepped over their culture. Worse of all she used a witch for her purposes which was regarded as something of pure evil by the Dothraki.


Don't we? We certainly see Ned adhering to honour in ways that certainly endanger life and limb in ways even he could forsee. Dany had already seen (roughly) how blood magic worked, that fire seemed to cause activity in the eggs, that only she could feel their warmth- this was a semi-calculated gamble in an effort to avoid either (A) being slaughtered by another roving khalasar or (B) living out the remainder of her days as an impotent crone. Her story had been building up to this fairly consistently.

I guess I see suicide by action and suicide of personality as different things. Sure Ned's honor ended up putting him in a position to die. But he never stepped in front of an oncoming train knowingly. Sure Ned did some stupid things for honor, but that was ingrained in how he reacts. Last I checked except for taking very hot baths, Dany never made a habit out of attempting magic by jumping on a fire. I can hardly say any of her actions were a calculated anything. Thinking back to the passage (again, book not in hand) she seemed nearly in a trance and disjointed. And if it was a calculated risk, that would be the dumbest calculation I've ever heard. It worked mind you, but I could say that I trust my friend to shoot a rifle over his shoulder, miss me and hit a deer. Sure, I guess it could happen, but if not I am very very dead.


Well, I meant *other* than the whole leading wildlings back after going missing... which I have to admit doesn't sound great. Point is, his *prior* reputation presumably counted in his favour(?)

He showed some bravery and a minor ability to lead among a select group of new recruits, also an uncanny ability to piss certain members off. I'd be astounded if anyone heard of him, except by his name and position.


I'm not certain it would be more interesting, but it would probably be more... final, given the Others would likely crush everyone in their path as they picked off the weaker side(s) in the conflict. I can certainly see it happening, though.[/qoute]

Maybe, maybe not. We've yet to see their total forces, and besides Sam was able to kill one. Not saying it'll be easy, but I could definitely see GRRM filling the defense against the Others with as much infighting as possible. And personally I think that'd be great.

[quote]Oh, I enjoyed the initial politics a good deal, but by the time the Red Wedding rolled around I was getting a distinct whiff of ultimate futility from the whole affair. The victories are all transient and the motives are all petty (even Robb, who refused to sue for peace because he wants revenge for his father. That, not Jeyne Westerling, was his downfall.)

For some reason, I really liked that feeling. Even the heroes can make huge mistakes and can end up being completely futile. For me it seems more like a real history, and not just a story in a fantasy setting. It's full of failures and petty grievances that lead to great changes and failed revolutions. That sense of futility is what drew me to it, and why the Red Wedding is one of my favorite chapters.

And Robb made many mistakes that lead up to his downfall, Westerling is an important one, but not nearly as important as when he didn't tell Edmure his whole plan on how to capture Tywin. Or when his mother freed Jaime. Or in sending Bolton to attack Tywin directly. Or in failing to whiff out the Bolton plot, even when evidence was presenting itself that Ramsay was alive. He made a lot of mistakes, though if you believe Mal, the major one was that he allowed himself to be named king. Ultimately what was his reason for dying isn't important, not like Ned's was. Really his role in the story was done, now we have a weakened, divided north ripe for the Others to take.

Closet_Skeleton
2010-12-25, 08:04 PM
A completely untrained and unskilled little girl manages to command the respect of an entire warrior nation that has never been led by a woman before by waltzing into a fire, surviving magically and hatching the first dragons for over a hundred years.

I'm sorry, but this doesn't happen anywhere in any of the Dany chapters in the A Song of Ice and Fire series. If you don't like a character for successes you don't think they've deserved, at least don't claim they've succeeded in things they haven't.


After the fact? Yeah, she's impressive enough, before the fact? When she was giving her weapons away to the 3 remaining ko's who were following her for no reason? Yeah, that confuses me a might bit.

They weren't following her at all. Dany didn't move camp after Drogo fell seriousy ill. They were humouring her while waiting for their oath to Drogo to end with his burial.

Dany has old men, the sick, the very young, the ugly women, the Ko she was able to force to stick around and a handful of others. Then most of those died when she had to leave the Dothraki lands or be killed by that warrior nation you for some reason think she had the full command of. I never got the idea that she had more than 50 followers when she entered that city full of sorcerers. Then she started gaining followers and did her ludicrous city stealing, but lost two of those cities as quickly as she'd taken them.


Except he really wasn't, there were two main candidates that were far better qualified for the position. However events unfolded in such a manner, that felt a little contrived in my opinion, meaning that both these characters willingly gave up their chance to rule. For a 15 year old. He did not have a sound reputation, in fact his reputation was in question. We the reader know he was telling the truth and put in an impossible situation. They as presented were not so sure.]

There weren't 2 main candidates better qualified for the position. There was one candidate with the experiance but completly lacking in the purpose to lead (Janos) and two candidates with the support, purpose and experiance to lead who would have destroyed each other if either of them gained the advantage.

The Lord Commander's job is to be someone who understands the purpose of the night's watch, has some measure of respectability due to higher social standing and the neutrality to stop it from tearing itself apart. Jon was the best suited for the role.

BridgeCity
2010-12-26, 02:26 AM
I'm sorry, but this doesn't happen anywhere in any of the Dany chapters in the A Song of Ice and Fire series. If you don't like a character for successes you don't think they've deserved, at least don't claim they've succeeded in things they haven't.

I'm not actually the person who suggested this was the reason they follow Danny, you'll find that was Samurai Jill and I was just responding to it, so before you tell me off about something why not read the relevant posts and make sure you have your information straight?


. . .

Again, you really haven't grasped my point. You state what you believe my point is and you are incorrect, so let's just agree to disagree and leave it there.

I think we can all agree that if they manage to pull this off, the TV series is going to be amazing.

Closet_Skeleton
2010-12-26, 09:22 AM
I'm not actually the person who suggested this was the reason they follow Danny, you'll find that was Samurai Jill and I was just responding to it, so before you tell me off about something why not read the relevant posts and make sure you have your information straight?


That wasn't my point at all. Maybe I should have highlighted the part fo the post I was responding to. I wasn't talking at all about the reason why the Drothraki follow Dani, I was trying to remind you that they don't.


A completely untrained and unskilled little girl manages to command the respect of an entire warrior nation that has never been led by a woman before by waltzing into a fire,

This does not happen. As I've stated twice already in this thread.

Dany doesn't achieve anything until A Storm of Swords.

Where she conquors three cities and then immediately loses two of them.

By that point Rob had many victories and Stannis had defeated the Wildlings. All of which were arguably more relevant to the plot.

Dany also managed to burn that building down, but that made her more enemies than anything.

On a similar topic, Jon snow doesn't achieve anything until A Storm of Swords either.

What exactly is wrong with achieving something after two books of achieving nothing? Do you not want this series to have any pay-offs in it?

Dienekes
2010-12-26, 11:21 AM
They weren't following her at all. Dany didn't move camp after Drogo fell seriousy ill. They were humouring her while waiting for their oath to Drogo to end with his burial.

Possibly I'm misremembering things, but I seem to recall a brawl where several of the ko's stood up and defended her. And later stood at attention while she rewarded them. This to me seems to indicate a subservient role.


Dany has old men, the sick, the very young, the ugly women, the Ko she was able to force to stick around and a handful of others. Then most of those died when she had to leave the Dothraki lands or be killed by that warrior nation you for some reason think she had the full command of. I never got the idea that she had more than 50 followers when she entered that city full of sorcerers. Then she started gaining followers and did her ludicrous city stealing, but lost two of those cities as quickly as she'd taken them.

I never said she had command of a warrior nation. I said she was able to gain followers for little to no reason. Yes most of her followers have no choice, they make sense to follow Dany. I still have no idea of why the three ko's stuck with her. And partially because of how little characterization they seem to get maybe we'll never know.


There weren't 2 main candidates better qualified for the position. There was one candidate with the experiance but completly lacking in the purpose to lead (Janos) and two candidates with the support, purpose and experiance to lead who would have destroyed each other if either of them gained the advantage.

Very true. And those two had a very firm belief that they should rule. And yet just because a fat bugger talks to them once they're willing to give away their chance at rule.


The Lord Commander's job is to be someone who understands the purpose of the night's watch, has some measure of respectability due to higher social standing and the neutrality to stop it from tearing itself apart. Jon was the best suited for the role.

Says who? The Lord Commander is the man who rules. It is a position of power and prominence among the Night Watch. This is the chance for several people to gain that authority. Jon may in fact be the best candidate. But if the best candidate for president of whatever country you want was a 15 year old kid who was just put on trial for treason of that nation. I will bet you any amount of money you want that they would most definitely not be elected. I'd also bet you that the other candidates wouldn't roll over for them, just because they were deadlocked.


That wasn't my point at all. Maybe I should have highlighted the part fo the post I was responding to. I wasn't talking at all about the reason why the Drothraki follow Dani, I was trying to remind you that they don't.

You're talking about how only a few followed Dany. I'm still wondering why those few bothered. Until the actual flaming pyre incident. Then it makes sense.


Dany doesn't achieve anything until A Storm of Swords.

Where she conquors three cities and then immediately loses two of them.

By that point Rob had many victories and Stannis had defeated the Wildlings. All of which were arguably more relevant to the plot.

It's a question of scale and reaction. When Robb is winning his victories it comes across as truly hard one feats of military prowess. He uses numerous advisers and makes some mistakes (Bolton being captured for instance) that throws his plans in jeopardy. Still throughout this, he gained very little actual land. It just seemed like a more hard won battle.

Stannis also defeated the Wildlings after major losses and nearly losing his chance to gain the thrown completely. We also have Malisandre murkying up any victories he may gain.

Dany contrarily won one of her cities by walking up and yelling "You're free!" The other two both never felt like there was a question that she would win. Now the fact that those she won went to pots is a funny little outcome that I enjoy. But again, maybe it would seem like a real problem if we had more than just her POV, but it never feels like she's actually threatened anymore. Even in her failures, she's still golden.


On a similar topic, Jon snow doesn't achieve anything until A Storm of Swords either.

What exactly is wrong with achieving something after two books of achieving nothing? Do you not want this series to have any pay-offs in it?

Depends what you mean by achieving. Jon learned to respect his brothers in the night's watch. He learned to hold his duty above the needs of his family. He went through the temptations of the Wildling camp and came out still a loyal defender of the Wall. And through this he has gained the respect of Lord Mormont. These are all great victories and achievements. But a huge leap from the guy who cleans the Lord Commander's chamber pots to ruler of the Watch is too jarring.

BridgeCity
2010-12-26, 11:58 AM
That wasn't my point at all. Maybe I should have highlighted the part fo the post I was responding to. I wasn't talking at all about the reason why the Drothraki follow Dani, I was trying to remind you that they don't.



This does not happen. As I've stated twice already in this thread.

Dany doesn't achieve anything until A Storm of Swords.

Where she conquors three cities and then immediately loses two of them.

By that point Rob had many victories and Stannis had defeated the Wildlings. All of which were arguably more relevant to the plot.

Dany also managed to burn that building down, but that made her more enemies than anything.

On a similar topic, Jon snow doesn't achieve anything until A Storm of Swords either.

What exactly is wrong with achieving something after two books of achieving nothing? Do you not want this series to have any pay-offs in it?

Danny not achieveing anything untill Swords has no bearing on the point I was making. I know you are trying to say she has failed lots and only started to achieve later on, and to that I say: well done, I don't disagree, but that is still not relevant to the point I was making.

Similarly, you bring up plot, yet if you had understood what I was saying you would have realised that plot importance also has no bearing on it what-so-ever. I've spelled it out a few times now, and each time whoever has responded to it has missed it, so I'm just going to leave it at that.

Sorry, but I'm really tired of this Danny topic. You haven't presented anything to me that hasn't already been said before and answered, and I just don't care enough to go through it all again. For the answer to me apparently not wanting people to achieve things (which isn't true) just go and read my old posts if you want to, it's all there. Diekenes does a pretty good job of summing up my feelings with the scale and reaction section of his post.

On a side note - Do we know who is playing the Hound?

Dienekes
2010-12-26, 12:05 PM
Rory McCann, apparently he was in Hot Fuzz.

BridgeCity
2010-12-26, 12:06 PM
Rory McCann, apparently he was in Hot Fuzz.

He was? Which one was he?

Edit: Just googled him, I guess I can see him as a decent Sandor. Definately glad they got a nice tall guy.

Closet_Skeleton
2010-12-26, 01:14 PM
Danny not achieveing anything untill Swords has no bearing on the point I was making. I know you are trying to say she has failed lots and only started to achieve later on, and to that I say: well done, I don't disagree, but that is still not relevant to the point I was making.


I wasn't disputing your point. I was just asking you not to exagerate your evidence.

I could say that if you don't seem to have actually read what achievements she has and then make up a ton of new ones, then of course she'll seem to have earned stuff she hasn't. But all I said was that she hasn't actually done the stuff you claimed.

I didn't bother quoting your actual point because I didn't have a problem with it.

For me Lord Tywin seems worse than Dany, because everything he does is offscreen and all we see is everything going his way.

To me Rob's "hard won" battles didn't seem important at all because the story never gives us a reason to care about Rob and more interesting things are happening elsewhere (mainly in the capital rather than with Dany or Jon).

Dienekes
2010-12-26, 01:45 PM
For me Lord Tywin seems worse than Dany, because everything he does is offscreen and all we see is everything going his way.

No we don't. We see him acknowledge that Robb outmaneuvered him several times. We saw his blue screen of death when Jaime got captured. And on the personal level before he died he disowned every one of his children. Also in general, villains get more of a leeway when it comes to their accomplishments for me, because the odds have to be in their favor for the heroes to struggle against.
And if we're going by the guy who always has things go his way, even the mighty Tywin doesn't compare to Littlefinger.


To me Rob's "hard won" battles didn't seem important at all because the story never gives us a reason to care about Rob and more interesting things are happening elsewhere (mainly in the capital rather than with Dany or Jon).

Then we both react to very different things. I found I cared more for Robb than Jon, Dany, or Sansa. I never found much of what was happening with Dany or Jon particularly interesting. Sansa was only good because of her non-POV characters. She really had the best support cast, Tyrion, Sandor, Littlefinger, and Joffrey? Wooh, dream team for her.

Closet_Skeleton
2010-12-26, 02:21 PM
No we don't. We see him acknowledge that Robb outmaneuvered him several times. We saw his blue screen of death when Jaime got captured. And on the personal level before he died he disowned every one of his children.

I don't remember that, but I tended to assume that anything Tyrion said about him was incredibly biased.


Also in general, villains get more of a leeway when it comes to their accomplishments for me, because the odds have to be in their favor for the heroes to struggle against.

I suppose, but it shows that "show don't tell" isn't all that if the guys who we don't see do stuff get cut more slack than the ones that have their actions actually explored.

We've been shown pretty much everything Jon and Dany have done recently. We're just told that Tywin is apparently confident and then random stuff happens in his favour.



Or maybe Dany just suffers from lacking any confident villains compared to the other characters. Most of the villains she meets don't last long after they show up and all make the same stupid mistake. Eg that the girl has dragons.

The only confident villains outside Westaros seem to be the ones on Dany's side.


And if we're going by the guy who always has things go his way, even the mighty Tywin doesn't compare to Littlefinger.

True.

But Littlefinger is probably lying about half his successes. Or telling the truth about them, the effect seems to be the same with him.

The other young Queen's family have been hinted to be even worse at doing important things offscreen.


Then we both react to very different things. I found I cared more for Robb than Jon, Dany, or Sansa

I'd honestly forgotten who Robb was by the time

he dies. Due to reasons that all happened offscreen.

I was mainly put off Robb when the story started ignoring his existance and his POV character went somewhere else.

Sansa only appears to be there to give an alternate opinion to Tyrion.

Marillion
2010-12-26, 06:18 PM
Also in general, villains get more of a leeway when it comes to their accomplishments for me, because the odds have to be in their favor for the heroes to struggle against.

Tywin was a villain?:smallconfused: And here I've been rooting for the only man smart and strong enough to keep Westeros united.

Obvious troll is hopefully obvious

Eldan
2010-12-26, 08:19 PM
Actually, Tywin really was the guy I was rooting for. At least he was shown to be a competent administrator.

Dienekes
2010-12-26, 09:34 PM
Actually, Tywin really was the guy I was rooting for. At least he was shown to be a competent administrator.

Tywin as a character is the most qualified to be the Hand of the King in probably the entire book.

I'd say he'd be most qualified to be king, but look at his progeny. I wouldn't want Jaime or Cersei anywhere near the throne, and Tyrion no matter how great a ruler he would be he'd never be able to command the respect necessary for the office.

However, as far as villains I actually root for, I have to give that to Petyr and the Boltons. Petyr because jeez. You can hate the guy but you have to admire the kind of dedication it must have taken him to pull off what he's been up to. And the Boltons because I'm hoping they fill the villain void left after Storm of Swords. They're ruthless, intelligent, and kings of the double cross.

0Megabyte
2010-12-26, 09:56 PM
Yeah, I have to agree on the Tywin thing.

Westeros would have been a lot better with Tywin still in charge, as opposed to certain others who will remain nameless.

Yes, he's totally evil. But if you actually look at things from his perspective, a lot of the things he did make sense. The Red Wedding, for example, is a rather pragmatic solution which probably saved lives, and certainly saved the lives of his men. And I wouldn't expect any reasonable, smart person to want to lose more of their men than necessary, especially with the political climate of Westeros. He may need them.

Of course, as a father he was simply terrible, but at least he understood what a douche Joffrey was. "I didn't fight this war to put Robert II on the throne" indeed.

So yeah. I hate the guy, totally. But Westeros would have been better with him than without him. I guess in that way I feel similarly to him as I do to Admiral Cain from BSG.

Closet_Skeleton
2010-12-27, 07:26 AM
Of course, as a father he was simply terrible, but at least he understood what a douche Joffrey was. "I didn't fight this war to put Robert II on the throne" indeed.

Joffrey was slightly worse than that. Robert was merely useless.

Knaight
2010-12-27, 05:47 PM
Joffrey was slightly worse than that. Robert was merely useless.

I believe Tyrion stated he was closer to a second Mad King. He had the right of it.

Samurai Jill
2010-12-28, 05:48 PM
Why would they stick with the child-girl who shows no skills as a leader and several times stepped over their culture. Worse of all she used a witch for her purposes which was regarded as something of pure evil by the Dothraki.
Yes, but they don't 'stick with her.' They all refuse her offer of her bridal gifts as weapons. Their sole reason for being around is to escort Dany to Vaes Dothrak, after which they'll commit ritual suicide to rejoin Drogo (which is the extent of their duty as bloodriders.) So, again, why the confusion?

I guess I see suicide by action and suicide of personality as different things. Sure Ned's honor ended up putting him in a position to die. But he never stepped in front of an oncoming train knowingly.
Dany would not have considered the pyre to be an 'oncoming train' any more than Ned would have considered divulging his plans to Cersei to be political- and quite possibly physical- suicide, even though that was an easily forseeable consequence of his decision. I'm not really seeing the distinction here.

I don't know what more I can say to convince you here. If the pyre scene does not strike you as a hallowed compound of awesome and win, I don't know what does.

He showed some bravery and a minor ability to lead among a select group of new recruits, also an uncanny ability to piss certain members off. I'd be astounded if anyone heard of him, except by his name and position.
Given, again, that Mormont appears to have been grooming him for a command position, and that he saved Mormont's life beforehand, I think his reputation may be better-founded than you suggest. Yes, he made enemies, but Chett and the like are hardly the cream of the crop in the Night's Watch.

Maybe, maybe not. We've yet to see their total forces, and besides Sam was able to kill one...
Oh, nonsense. It's already been established that a single wight can take out a dozen trained fighting men, and they aren't even the core of the Others' army. Sam managed to kill one largely by blind luck (not that this diminishes the courage involved and the attendant character development, but blind luck nonetheless. Though apparently, you only object to luck favouring certain characters.)

For some reason, I really liked that feeling. Even the heroes can make huge mistakes and can end up being completely futile. For me it seems more like a real history, and not just a story in a fantasy setting....
And Robb made many mistakes that lead up to his downfall...
Yes, but at many points he could simply have called the whole thing off and sued for peace. Never mind the specific tactical nuances of how he fought, it's a question of motive- what he is ultimately fighting for? To bring peace? To protect humanity? To defend his honour?- when you get right down to it, Robb is fighting for reasons not so very different from the Lannisters- to grab power and settle scores. Why does this make him a hero?

Besides- it's one thing to point that 'heroes can fail', it's another to demand that they have to do so all the time.

Dienekes
2010-12-28, 06:58 PM
Yes, but they don't 'stick with her.' They all refuse her offer of her bridal gifts as weapons. Their sole reason for being around is to escort Dany to Vaes Dothrak, after which they'll commit ritual suicide to rejoin Drogo (which is the extent of their duty as bloodriders.) So, again, why the confusion?

Do they really? Hmm, about time for a reread then. If they do, then my questions are answered.


Dany would not have considered the pyre to be an 'oncoming train' any more than Ned would have considered divulging his plans to Cersei to be political- and quite possibly physical- suicide, even though that was an easily forseeable consequence of his decision. I'm not really seeing the distinction here.

Stupidly telling someone something you shouldn't and walking into what should be certain death are completely two different actions. Ned had a moment where his faith that he would win got the better of him, and he told Cersei his plans. Idiotic, and in the political reasoning of the story, he deserved what he got as a reaction to it. But it isn't crazy.


I don't know what more I can say to convince you here. If the pyre scene does not strike you as a hallowed compound of awesome and win, I don't know what does.

The fact that she survived and came out with three dragons is awesome. The mindset she would have to be in to even try that is pure unbridled insanity. I guess we should drop this line of argument then, since you won't convince me that anyone who knowingly walks into a funeral pyre deserves anything short of charred skin and a nice padded cell.


Given, again, that Mormont appears to have been grooming him for a command position, and that he saved Mormont's life beforehand, I think his reputation may be better-founded than you suggest. Yes, he made enemies, but Chett and the like are hardly the cream of the crop in the Night's Watch.

He also seems to annoy his superior officers quite a bit, or at least Ser Thorne. Hell, Jon also went to jail for insubordination earlier on. With all the actions and missteps on his path in the Night's Watch I'd think he'd get a more of a reputation as some sort of mad dog. It also hurts that we never really do see him gain the respect or see what reputation he gets through his actions outside of his select group of friends and Aemon.


Oh, nonsense. It's already been established that a single wight can take out a dozen trained fighting men, and they aren't even the core of the Others' army. Sam managed to kill one largely by blind luck (not that this diminishes the courage involved and the attendant character development, but blind luck nonetheless. Though apparently, you only object to luck favouring certain characters.)

Oh that was a joke, and I thought you'd recognize it.


Yes, but at many points he could simply have called the whole thing off and sued for peace. Never mind the specific tactical nuances of how he fought, it's a question of motive- what he is ultimately fighting for? To bring peace? To protect humanity? To defend his honour?- when you get right down to it, Robb is fighting for reasons not so very different from the Lannisters- to grab power and settle scores. Why does this make him a hero?

If there was any single character in the series I would never sue for peace to, it'd be Tywin Lannister. His backstory is full of what he does to people that cross him. As soon as Robb raised his armies to go defend his father it was only going to end two ways. With Tywin gone, or with Robb. Turns out it was the latter during this engagement. Though luck decided that Tywin was to go soon afterward.

Does it make him a traditional hero? Probably not. I also know I don't really care really. And still route for the North.


Besides- it's one thing to point that 'heroes can fail', it's another to demand that they have to do so all the time.

I do not demand that they must fail. I only ask that their victories make sense. To me, Jon defeating the charges of leaving the night's watch makes sense. Jon defeating a wight makes sense. Jon becoming Lord Commander, in the manner presented, does not.

Closet_Skeleton
2010-12-29, 08:26 AM
To be honest after reading 900 pages I'm happy for any plot development, no matter how much sense they make.

I found Jon trying to do all the right things but being irrationally hated for it a lot more annoying than him getting a job despite being hated.

Dienekes
2010-12-29, 10:07 AM
To be honest after reading 900 pages I'm happy for any plot development, no matter how much sense they make.

I found Jon trying to do all the right things but being irrationally hated for it a lot more annoying than him getting a job despite being hated.

And that is a fine and fair assessment. Not one I agree with mind you, but it's hard to argue against an opinion that asks for the story to get moving.

Brewdude
2010-12-30, 05:50 PM
Dany would not have considered the pyre to be an 'oncoming train' any more than Ned would have considered divulging his plans to Cersei to be political- and quite possibly physical- suicide, even though that was an easily forseeable consequence of his decision. I'm not really seeing the distinction here.

Stupidly telling someone something you shouldn't and walking into what should be certain death are completely two different actions.


Note that there are ample examples of Targs both succeeding AND failing at dousing themselves in fire in relation to dragons. Her believing that she MIGHT survive, but that it wasn't a certainty was well founded. That she was willing to take the plunge anyway made it a brave thing, not an insane thing, as she had actually had precedent that this was the method to make this sort of thing happen if it was going to happen. People always said Targs walked the fine line between madness and greatness, with success being the deciding vote which way their actions can be viewed after the fact.

Even if you don't agree, the mere fact that this is an arguable point speaks to the quality of that particular story thread.

Dienekes
2011-01-02, 12:40 PM
Name a Targ that succeeded in raising a dragon by setting themselves on fire. Last I checked the ones to try were Egg, it didn't work too well for him, and Aerion it also didn't work for. They both either killed themselves, or themselves and everyone around them.

Xondoure
2011-01-02, 01:34 PM
One of the main characteristics of the Targaryens is that they are all bonkers. Their insanity is what makes them both one of the most terrifying and brilliant houses. So as much as Dany is bats it's not like it doesn't fit with the rest of her house. Mind you I still don't like her but I understnad her role in the story, and what she does all makes a twisted sort of sense, it's just that I find her boring next to the rest of the characters.

Hawriel
2011-01-05, 04:41 PM
I must get HBO now.

SmartAlec
2011-01-05, 06:02 PM
I do not demand that they must fail. I only ask that their victories make sense. To me, Jon defeating the charges of leaving the night's watch makes sense. Jon defeating a wight makes sense. Jon becoming Lord Commander, in the manner presented, does not.

The Night's Watch is very different to the rest of the world; less byzantine and power-hungry, more simple, purely because of the situation they're in. Pyke and Mallister are very different characters to the scheming lords we see in the Civil war. They weren't looking to become Lord Commander because they wanted to be Lord Commander; they were looking to become Lord Commander because they felt the other guy couldn't do the job - and they both disliked Slynt, because they felt he did want to become Lord Commander for himself. They thought of the Night's Watch and what the Night's Watch needed first. The politics are completely different - more like a family or a gang than a court, as demonstrated when Slynt tries to play the Watch like a court and fails. So it didn't seem weird to me that the two of them - Pyke and Mallister - would be willing to accept a compromise like Jon, for the good of the Night's Watch.

Hawriel
2011-01-19, 08:55 PM
Another video from HBO for the series.

http://www.hbo.com/#/video/video.html/eNo1jDEKAjEQAAmBgH7CyoidEZsrUsjZ2IhfWMzmLrCX1bhRr-TnprEZhilm2etx+0oB+ZiBZkm3nrPgR-RD84Yp-PMVBrzAhEaZ7ypyqdM5+KGF9f7EsUHGwhmfts28c4du17nm+Pa 5EtmYSLD4iCC1YLBQhe8Es5dScaGUUT-WGC6-