You mentioned that Theon survives to the 5th book and that there's something plot twisty about his rescuer. Yeah, that's a spoiler.
Game of Thrones 3.2 - "Dark Wings, Dark Words" - Rate and discuss
- Thread starter Out Of My Vulcan Mind
- Start date
One of the problems with not establishing Thoros early on is we don't get to see how he has changed from being a drunken charlatan of a red priest (supposedly a missionary of same god as Melisandre) into who he became during his year or so 'off screen' with the brotherhood. This version seems to be neither, which makes me wonder about how they're going to handle that whole story thread.
Show-Thoros seems to be a combination of Thoros and Tom O'Sevens, who after all was the minstrel of the group.
He's still a red priest. So far, the only indication is his slightly reddish chainmail, but some of the season three trailers showed him sharing a scene with Mellisandre.
He also seems to have reddish hair, although not the deep, dark red of Mellisandre. Definitely not what I would have expected for a Red Priest of Myr.
Another solid-to-strong episode. The Catelyn scene was terrible and embarrassing (though well-performed by Fairley given what it was), but I was prepared for it from the early reviews, and I've pretty much given up on the King in the North storyline ever being appropriate to the setting, free of cliches, or remotely interesting. Otherwise, I thought everything worked. I'd been concerned about the Queen of Thorns from early reviews-- it sounded like they might have watered her down-- but even though Rigg's version is more cynical and less exuberant in her sharpness than the book character, I think it works. And the Margaery/Joffrey scene made me think for the first time that the increased emphasis on her character might actually work.
No I didn't. I merely stated that what happens next to is alluded to in the 5th book. Could be from any number of people's perspectives, hindsight or flashback. But with hindsight, I agree it was a bit too much info so I'll be more careful from now on. Sorry if anyone was spoiled for later reading.
I somehow envisioned Jojan Reed to have been a lot younger and his sister to be a lot older and more in charge.
That sounds about right. The actor playing him is in his 20s(!) but looks a lot younger. I agree about him seeming too confident and in charge, when compared to his literary version. I also think he's a little too posh; I'd imagined the Crannogmen as being like the Northmen but poorer and more country bumpkin-ish.
Or it could be that at the time she said "it should have been you" her husband was alive, her land was peaceful, one of her daughters wasn't missing, family friends and advisers were still alive and her home wasn't a pile of ruin.
Since she's a prisoner, she's had more than enough time to herself to think about the bad state of things on the personal front and she's blaming herself.
Really? How so? Most of the negative reaction I've seen comes from people who've read the books. But this isn't the books, and I didn't really have much of a problem with the scene for the reasons stated above.
Last edited:
I'm a loyal fan of the books and had no problem with the scene. Just a different interpretation of the character that, I think, is still valid.
I didn't write that- there must be a misattributed quote somewhere in the thread.
ETA- Brendan Moody said that, in post #27 of the thread.
He's said he may quit screen acting and go into academia full time when Game of Thrones ends, maybe just doing the odd play.
I called the Catelyn scene terrible and embarrassing because it (in the context of other changes made to the character) reduces Catelyn, who in the books subverts fantasy tropes by being assertive and politically savvy but not the stock woman warrior or spunky princess, to someone who frets over being a good enough mom, even when the person in question is not, by the standards of the society, her son. Part of what I admire about A Song of Ice and Fire, and part of what people praise about Game of Thrones, is that it's honest about the grittier, uglier aspects of medieval life, rather than projecting modern values onto a feudal society. But in a feudal society, Jon wouldn't be thought of as Catelyn's son or stepson, and no one would have expected her to love him or suggest he be legitimized. The whole drama of the scene is contrived, and serves no evident purpose except to make Catelyn look bad. If they wanted to show her feeling unreasonably guilty, there are plenty of more concrete things she could, with hindsight, regret.
It's especially baffling since the series had previously downplayed the awkwardness between Jon and Cat by removing the "It should have been you" line from their scene in "The Kingsroad" (which was, given the difficulty of communicating her mental state at the time, a reasonable decision). But this makes her general attitude toward Jon far nastier than it was in the books. It's not the worst thing in the world, but it's another bad decision in adapting one of the few characters in the source material who really deserves the series' reputation for breaking with conventions.
It's especially baffling since the series had previously downplayed the awkwardness between Jon and Cat by removing the "It should have been you" line from their scene in "The Kingsroad" (which was, given the difficulty of communicating her mental state at the time, a reasonable decision). But this makes her general attitude toward Jon far nastier than it was in the books. It's not the worst thing in the world, but it's another bad decision in adapting one of the few characters in the source material who really deserves the series' reputation for breaking with conventions.
Yeah, that was weird and it's been corrected.
What? You don't remember him as the kid from Batman Begins?
But yeah, he's doing an awesome job at playing an evil bastard.