John Dunbar
correct about everything
How many children did Scarlett O'Hara have?
which is more important, the number of her children or the fact that one of them died in a horsey accident?
How many children did Scarlett O'Hara have?
Which universe?
The same universe where we've had villains like Karl the Fookin' Legend Tanner? Whose badass band of rebels killed the Lord Commander and drank from his skull?
The same universe with the unkillable Mountain - slayer of children and raper of women, who is now a walking zombie bodyguard who rips off the faces of Cersei's enemies and dashes the skulls of those who talk shit about her?
The same universe where the Sand Snakes and their strong female leader betrays all the men and slays them where they stand, looks over the prince's body and says "Weak men will never rule Dorne again!"?
Or maybe the same universe where the zombie threat from beyond the Wall is led by a named leader called the Night King, who was a biological weapon created by the Children of the Forest, and loves posing in imposing ways at the camera to remind the audience that he is the One True Big Bad?
In this same universe filled with supervillains, over the top villain tropes, and even teams of villains, Ramsay Bolton, a sadistic bastard son of an evil traitorous lord, who shows intellect and battle ability, being thematically matched against Jon Snow, a noble bastard son of a good honest lord, who shows willpower and battle ability, is a bridge too far? No, I'll say it fits right in. The universe of Game of Thrones may have shades of grey in the middle, but where it counts, it has always been black and white.
Which universe?
The same universe where we've had villains like Karl the Fookin' Legend Tanner? Whose badass band of rebels killed the Lord Commander and drank from his skull?
The same universe with the unkillable Mountain - slayer of children and raper of women, who is now a walking zombie bodyguard who rips off the faces of Cersei's enemies and dashes the skulls of those who talk shit about her?
The same universe where the Sand Snakes and their strong female leader betrays all the men and slays them where they stand, looks over the prince's body and says "Weak men will never rule Dorne again!"?
Or maybe the same universe where the zombie threat from beyond the Wall is led by a named leader called the Night King, who was a biological weapon created by the Children of the Forest, and loves posing in imposing ways at the camera to remind the audience that he is the One True Big Bad?
In this same universe filled with supervillains, over the top villain tropes, and even teams of villains, Ramsay Bolton, a sadistic bastard son of an evil traitorous lord, who shows intellect and battle ability, being thematically matched against Jon Snow, a noble bastard son of a good honest lord, who shows willpower and battle ability, is a bridge too far? No, I'll say it fits right in. The universe of the Game of Thrones show may have shades of grey in the middle, but where it counts, it has always been black and white.
FTFY
Well, seems to be what he's saying. Only they have actually been consistently so.No but you don't understand, it deviates from the books. D&D are fucking idiots.
FTFY
And while I'd argue that the first few seasons were a lot more grounded, logical, and believable, at this point, you're pretty much right. I think around S3/4 (around when Karl Tanner was on, ironically) is when the show started to shed the more "boring" (as D&D might say, or as they may worry we perceived) intricacies and gray areas that were faithfully translated.
The only nonsensical thing about that scene was how Jon's men just stood there and let Ramsay fire arrow after arrow into his shield.
Not to mention the North supporting a man who would shoot arrows at and into a fleeing child.
Nah I liked that part, there was a big theme on the episode of good leaders fight for their men (Dany and Jon), bad leaders don't (slavers and Ramsay). The men didn't really know if they should intervene at that point, because it was his fight.
Nah I liked that part, there was a big theme on the episode of good leaders fight for their men (Dany and Jon), bad leaders don't (slavers and Ramsay). The men didn't really know if they should intervene at that point, because it was his fight.
It wasn't merely a child, it was the king of the north for all intents and purposes!
The north loyalty fluctuated depending on plot needs I guess.
wait, dany is a good leader?
The books have plenty of black&white characters. You'll have a hard time to find any grey in joffrey, ramsay, jon or davos, and those are just the ones that just came to my mind.
Which universe?
The same universe where we've had villains like Karl the Fookin' Legend Tanner? Whose badass band of rebels killed the Lord Commander and drank from his skull?
The same universe with the unkillable Mountain - slayer of children and raper of women, who is now a walking zombie bodyguard who rips off the faces of Cersei's enemies and dashes the skulls of those who talk shit about her?
The same universe where the Sand Snakes and their strong female leader betrays all the men and slays them where they stand, looks over the prince's body and says "Weak men will never rule Dorne again!"?
Or maybe the same universe where the zombie threat from beyond the Wall is led by a named leader called the Night King, who was a biological weapon created by the Children of the Forest, and loves posing in imposing ways at the camera to remind the audience that he is the One True Big Bad?
In this same universe filled with supervillains, over the top villain tropes, and even teams of villains, Ramsay Bolton, a sadistic bastard son of an evil traitorous lord, who shows intellect and battle ability, being thematically matched against Jon Snow, a noble bastard son of a good honest lord, who shows willpower and battle ability, is a bridge too far? No, I'll say it fits right in. The universe of Game of Thrones may have shades of grey in the middle, but where it counts, it has always been black and white.
wait, dany is a good leader?
She's had lots of hurdles but her mission overall is motivated more by the good of all people than for personal gain. I know people will say "nah she's totally a villain cause she wanted to burn cities and shit" but it's obvious she's being written as a character that will do more good than harm to the world. Freeing slaves as a major story arc, etc.
Which universe?
The same universe where we've had villains like Karl the Fookin' Legend Tanner? Whose badass band of rebels killed the Lord Commander and drank from his skull?
The same universe with the unkillable Mountain - slayer of children and raper of women, who is now a walking zombie bodyguard who rips off the faces of Cersei's enemies and dashes the skulls of those who talk shit about her?
The same universe where the Sand Snakes and their strong female leader betrays all the men and slays them where they stand, looks over the prince's body and says "Weak men will never rule Dorne again!"?
Or maybe the same universe where the zombie threat from beyond the Wall is led by a named leader called the Night King, who was a biological weapon created by the Children of the Forest, and loves posing in imposing ways at the camera to remind the audience that he is the One True Big Bad?
In this same universe filled with supervillains, over the top villain tropes, and even teams of villains, Ramsay Bolton, a sadistic bastard son of an evil traitorous lord, who shows intellect and battle ability, being thematically matched against Jon Snow, a noble bastard son of a good honest lord, who shows willpower and battle ability, is a bridge too far? No, I'll say it fits right in. The universe of Game of Thrones may have shades of grey in the middle, but where it counts, it has always been black and white.
The books have plenty of black&white characters. You'll have a hard time to find any grey in joffrey, ramsay, jon or davos, and those are just the ones that just came to my mind.
Jon is an oathbreaker (...) earns that stabbing from the NW because he can't put his duty in front of his desires.
I took it as Ramsay issuing a challenge of his own, the men looked at Jon and he seemed more than willing to take him on 1 v 1.The only nonsensical thing about that scene was how Jon's men just stood there and let Ramsay fire arrow after arrow into his shield.
Maybe its because I keep thinking about the books as most of what you wrote about is D and D. He shows battle ability, but then that gets abandoned for his futile arrow shots into Jon. His men shoot hundreds of arrows at Wen Wen but it is only Ramsay's arrow that kills him. They completely oversell Ramsay's abilities for multiple seasons and when he does go down, he puts up a pathetic fight.
Show Ramsay is made into this top of Westeros killer and strategist and it just got boring for all his plans and actions to work flawlessly when those plans and actions were incredibly improbable.
wait, dany is a good leader?
apparently you understand "good" as "benevolent" and not as the opposite of bad
I think she is a bad leader and that is what will turn her from a benevolent leader to a fire and blood leader
apparently you understand "good" as "benevolent" and not as the opposite of bad
I think she is a bad leader and that is what will turn her from a benevolent leader to a fire and blood leader
Breaking bad rules does not qualify as being morally grey IMO.
Maybe its because I keep thinking about the books as most of what you wrote about is D and D.
Ramsay shows intelligence?
nah
Anyways the problem with Ramsay is that he gets rewarded for being stupid evil which is what doesn't fit in this universe
I'll judge Jon's new character when I read it
I doubt GAF still exists then but if yes we can pick that up again
and a past as a smuggler is not grey. first because it's in the past and second because smuggler is literally the least criminal you can be. I don't even think it's bad.
So why would you be thinking about the books when wondering what fits in the universe of this critically acclaimed series which has increased viewership season on season for five years now?
Are there total numbers for downloads? It would be super weird if people got into the show late but never went back to catch up. I hear casual watchers complain about being confused all the time and I wonder if it's because they just skipped three seasons or whatever.
Like Jon isn't getting involved with the Boltons for the greater good. He just doesn't like them especially since he thinks they're marrying Arya to Ramsay. He's purely antagonizing them out of love for his family.
I'll judge Jon's new character when I read it
I doubt GAF still exists then but if yes we can pick that up again
and a past as a smuggler is not grey. first because it's in the past and second because smuggler is literally the least criminal you can be. I don't even think it's bad.
WOW!!! This track is AMAZING and creepy as hell in the last part!
(Probably a 6x10 track, so spoiler)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MFK0yG8xG5I
He's an intelligent young man. Obviously not some genius scholarly meister sort, but he has battle smarts. He knows when to take a small team of 20 good men to destroy the enemy's supplies, and he knows when to command an army of 5000 not-so-good men out into the field to fight. He knows how to push people's buttons and make them overreact.
I'm not sure what doesn't fit into this universe here. Walder Frey is a pretty stupid and bitter old man who likes to molest his own underaged daughters, and he's very much still alive and he has been rewarded several times now. I think people just want to see what they want to see. They don't like Ramsay, so they make up stuff to claim he's a "bad character". He's the rock upon which Game of Thrones has been built on for a few seasons now. Certainly the highlight of Season 5. A great villain which everyone loves to hate. The final two seasons might struggle without him.
Nope. Not once does this happen or is anything close to this alluded to in Game of Thrones.
In the show he's the one with justification to fight the Boltons.
In the books, he spent all book anatagonizing them from imprisoning one of their allies to kidnapping the Lady of Winterfell to giving northern campaign advice to Stannis to letting Mance go free.
Jon's narrator voice even emphasizes that he's going to battle Ramsay for his sister not for the greater good while he wrestles with what he should be doing:
"I won't say you're wrong. What do you mean to do, crow?"
Jon flexed the fingers of his sword hand. The Night's Watch takes no part. He closed his fist and opened it again. What you propose is nothing less than treason. He thought of Robb, with snowflakes melting in his hair. Kill the boy and let the man be born. He thought of Bran, clambering up a tower wall, agile as a monkey. Of Rickon's breathless laughter. Of Sansa, brushing out Lady's coat and singing to herself. You know nothing, Jon Snow. He thought of Arya, her hair as tangled as a bird's nest. I made him a warm cloak from the skins of the six whores who came with him to Winterfell I want my bride back I want my bride back I want my bride back
"I think we had best change the plan," Jon Snow said.
No, he's stupid evil. That's what I mean when I say the plot rewards him for his idiot moves. Realistically, his 20 man crack squad of ninjas would not have been able to burn as much as they did down when they're in the middle of a blizzard.
Ramsay's tactics was Hollywood tactics. Nothing about it was smart. Shooting arrows into your own men
1) lowers their morale
2) hurts your guys more than the enemy's because your men's backs are facing your arrows while your enemies have their shields facing them
Also surrounding men like Ramsay did will make them fight harder. He should be leaving a corridor for them to route.
And he definitely should've waited for their calvary to charge as his infantry advanced. His spear wall could've handled all the horses on Jon's side.
Er, Walder Frey doesn't like to molest his underraged daughers. Do you mean his wife?
Walder Frey has been rewarded for his betrayal of Robb Stark but he's also being punished too. Which is a reason that LS' removal kinda bugs me but whatevs. Walder Frey has lost more relatives post Red Wedding than he ever has before that and the Frey body count is only continuing to go up.
The Mountain/Ser Robert Strong
Vargo Hoat and the Brave Companions (Rorge, Biter, etc.)
The Mad King Aerys
Euron Crow's Eye
Walder Frey
Victarion
Ramsay
Viserys
I'd say that the books have plenty of supervillains. GRRM seems to really get into writing colorfully sadistic and cartoonishly evil characters in order to push readers' buttons and create a sense of revulsion. The main difference with the show is that because of the show's muted aesthetics, the sadists tend to come off more like average punks and, unfortunately, their dialogue is written by D&D. Plus, due to the way the show handles POV compared to the books, we see a lot more of certain ones like Ramsay, which leads to fatigue when we see their moustache-twirling a bit too often. Whereas they're able to be built up as monsters from afar when we only see them now and then in the books.
Yep. I know. I read all the books. But in this thread we're talking about the TV show, and what you're saying doesn't happen in the show.
The books have plenty of black&white characters. You'll have a hard time to find any grey in joffrey, ramsay, jon or davos, and those are just the ones that just came to my mind.
Viserys is actually a pretty deep character
The Mountain's a deconstruction of the freakishly big evil guy.
Well yeah then why bring it up? I was making comparisons between the books and show.
I never said that this happened in the show. I even said Arya in the original post not Sansa.
I don't think that the book doesn't have black and white characters, but the show often skews towards extremes more than intricacy or dimension.
When it comes down to it, it's a beautiful low brow show. I don't use "low brow" as a pejorative, either. It's just a show that's not interesting in meditating too long on any specific idea, theme, or concept. Right now it's just about watching these characters and what happens to them. The seasons haven't had a unified concept/throughline for years, now. Bits and pieces of them exist here and there through an errant storyline, but nothing significant to follow for 10 episodes other than "what happens next week?"
It's pleasant, in a way. I really miss the show of the first few seasons (with scenes like this that start as nothing more than a discussion on duty and evolves into something haunting and still relevant) but I like sitting down every Sunday and watching this beautifully rendered world that isn't particularly revelatory, just entertaining.
I actually like the concept of show Ramsay a lot but the execution was butchered. I can't say for sure whether or not it was bad writing or bad acting but he just came across as way too cartoonish a villain for my tastes.
He actually got really boring towards the end because it became so predictable what wild and crazy thing he was going to do next.
It seems weird to think of the show individually as "low brow" when the source material is just as shameless and silly.
It's pleasant, in a way. I really miss the show of the first few seasons (with scenes like this that start as nothing more than a discussion on duty and evolves into something haunting and still relevant) but I like sitting down every Sunday and watching this beautifully rendered world that isn't particularly revelatory, just entertaining.
I think it's absolutely fair to say that Ramsay was possibly too cheesy for some people because the performance was really hammed up. Ultimately that's a matter of taste, and not all the characters and how they're handled is going to be up everyone's alley. It worked for me though, because he was like Karl Tanner 2.0 with an actual backstory, so it was cool. But what I'm arguing against is the idea that apparently Ramsay is "doesn't fit the universe". Cause, after 6 seasons of this, not sure how anyone can really say that with a straight face.