Be a part of the community.
It's free, join today!
I believe Ros was made to allow characters to give their own character expositions. So far we learned about Theon and Littlefinger's backgrounds through her. Works better than characters just popping from the side of the screen to say "hey know how the hound got that scar?"
Yup, Littlefinger puts the "Ass" into class, ya gotta love 'im.
Agreed, Ned dumb like stick, great guy but wow, talk about doing absolutely nothing to achieve your 'noble goal' of putting the proper heir on the throne, other than just enough to get your ass arrested by the guy you're trying to usurp. Good lord, when Renly displays more political competentence than you, by simply running away...man, you deserves some prison lovin'.
Finally, the Dorthraki feel kind of menacing (and slightly more numerous than the ten guys on horses we've seen so far), loved the Drogo rant at the end...was hoping, however, for a 'hear da lamentation of der wemon' call-out, but ya can't have everything...
As to spears, no they are not really designed to be punched right through people, remembering that that is two thick layers of muscle, not to mention two layers of clothing and armour. They are really designed to poke really big holes in horses (or people if they're dumb enough to get in the way) inflicting a lot of damage on internal organs and disrupting the structural integrity of one of the big muscle walls, making it really hard to stand, let alone fight...they're also good for allowing tubs of bleeding, which also tends to ncapacitate quickly.
Having written all that I've just realized that your question was likely rhetorical and I look like a big nerd...or a really creepy guy.
They're heading to Riverrun, the homeland of the Tullys. I don't think many people know that Tyrion is/was at the Eyrie.
Ah, you're right, that makes more sense. Still can't wait to see what Tyrion makes of all the fallout from the mess he'd already got himself out of.
I believe Ros was made to allow characters to give their own character expositions. So far we learned about Theon and Littlefinger's backgrounds through her. Works better than characters just popping from the side of the screen to say "hey know how the hound got that scar?"
Problem with that is we already got Littlefinger's story in-show, by calling back to it it was too much handholding for the audience and really spoiled the surprise you should have at his betrayal.
Problem with that is we already gotten Littlefinger's story in-show, by calling back to it it was too much handholding for the audience and really spoiled the surprise you should have at his betrayal.
agreed. It really telegraphed it.
Honorouble/stupid Ned though. I was literally shouting at the screen for him to accept Renly's offer of 100 men to take the throne now.
And Jason Momoa did a mean Haka at the end :)
Surprise Charles Dance! That's why I don't read spoilers or watch promos. And dang that looked like a real stag.
Meanwhile:
So far the TV series is kicking the source material's ass. I'm reading the books right now and while the plotting and characterization are great, the prose is painful to get through at times. One gets the feeling reading the books that the author REALLY loves food. 2 or 3 paragraphs are devoted in each chapter to what a character is eating for supper or when they "break their fast". The style of writing in these scenes is not unlike a love scene. The only thing the books have that the TV show at this point doesn't have is a sense of scale but that's a budget thing and can be worked out.
I really don't understand when people say this. All the things that people are enjoying were taken directly from the books, including plot twists and dialogue. Everything that newcomers are enjoying is what made the books great. And the casting that is enhancing what was already great storytelling was heavily influenced by the author's input. Saying the show is better than the books is like saying the Potter movies were better than the Potter books.
I'd even argue that the show has missed a few opportunities by rendering some characters much more two dimensionally than the books (ie Sansa and Daenerys), and being a little too on-the-nose in parts (Tywin skinning a Stag = Obvious Symbolism 101). The show is very good, and can be better, but there is nothing about the show that I would say is better than the books at this point - largely because the show adheres so closely to the source material. So, if you're enjoying the show, it's because the original material was so ripe for adaptation.
Now, Martin certainly did over-do it with the meal descriptions. If you've seen a photo of him, you'll understand why though. He Hongreh!
By that logic, no adaptation can ever improve on it's source. Ever.
Actually Juice, I still say the best parts of the TV series , hands down, are the elements that the screenwriters have either out right invented or at least conglomerated from several other smaller scenes: Robert and the Queen, Littlefingers 'lesson' the his ho's, Littlefinger throws down with The Spider, Greyjoy's backstory (now, with more weiner!), why is it better? Because those are the times the characters actually seem quite a bit more human. Don't get me wrong, Ilike Martin's plotting and narrative, but a lot of his actual writing is pretty weak...lots of the dialogue is pretty forced and stilted and loads and loads of overblown description.
Mind you, the thing that has made me happiest about the show is that not once have I heard the words: "raper", "craven", "mummer" (Bloody or otherwise), "maid", "lemon-tart" thus far, nor has the phrase 'nipple-tweak" arisen even once! Let the bells ring out and the banners wave!
They have done great work with the Danerys plot line. I was so afraid it was going to be whiny princess time, but this marriage is developing beautifully.
I'm shocked at how much I'm invested in those two, especially considering how horrified I was by how they got started. I damn near swooned when he rushed toward her in the tent. His voice broke with emotion when he first addresed her. Shit, I'd have his horse-baby.
In fact, an adaptation can improve on it's source by doing differently (and well) what the source does poorly. So far, this show, while good, does not improve on the few weak areas of the book, and in fact does an injustice to some aspects that are done well in the books. And really, it doesn't need to do much, if anything at all, differently from the books to be a great show. HBO didn't spend $50 mil because they thought the book was crap and they'd take a huge risk trying to improve on it.
Actually Juice, I still say the best parts of the TV series , hands down, are the elements that the screenwriters have either out right invented or at least conglomerated from several other smaller scenes: Robert and the Queen, Littlefingers 'lesson' the his ho's, Littlefinger throws down with The Spider, Greyjoy's backstory (now, with more weiner!), why is it better? Because those are the times the characters actually seem quite a bit more human. Don't get me wrong, Ilike Martin's plotting and narrative, but a lot of his actual writing is pretty weak...lots of the dialogue is pretty forced and stilted and loads and loads of overblown description.
Mind you, the thing that has made me happiest about the show is that not once have I heard the words: "raper", "craven", "mummer" (Bloody or otherwise), "maid", "lemon-tart" thus far, nor has the phrase 'nipple-tweak" arisen even once! Let the bells ring out and the banners wave!
I agree completely about those specific scenes, but I would argue that the reason those scenes are so effective is that they do what Martin does in the book and take us inside the minds of those characters and really fleshes them out; they are the closest we get to replicating the POV style of the books. But remember, the characters' back stories and motivations are no different in the show than they are in the books, they are just brought to life brilliantly by the acting. HBO's success isn't that they better the characters, it's that they have done an admirable job of translating the depth of the characters. One of the most lauded aspects of Martin's books is that the characters are three-dimensional and human - they are complicated and unpredictable. The show in this regard is just doing well on screen what Martin did in print, with a few exceptions like Sansa. That isn't a knock on the show, that's giving the author credit for a story that HBO picked up exactly because it transcended usual fantasy genre offerings.
I actually think dialogue is a strong point for Martin, and that comes from his experience writing for television as much as anything; his is witty, it gets to the point, and it drives the plot forward. It doesn't surprise me that most of the dialogue on the show is lifted verbatim from the books. I'll agree about many of the descriptions in the book being tedious; meals and armor and battlements described in almost obsessive detail can get grating after some 800 pages. We have, though, heard a few of those words you mention, and we've even come close to a nipple tweak. But let me add on more to your list: boiled leather.
Actually Juice, I still say the best parts of the TV series , hands down, are the elements that the screenwriters have either out right invented or at least conglomerated from several other smaller scenes: Robert and the Queen, Littlefingers 'lesson' the his ho's, Littlefinger throws down with The Spider, Greyjoy's backstory (now, with more weiner!), why is it better? Because those are the times the characters actually seem quite a bit more human. Don't get me wrong, Ilike Martin's plotting and narrative, but a lot of his actual writing is pretty weak...lots of the dialogue is pretty forced and stilted and loads and loads of overblown description.
Mind you, the thing that has made me happiest about the show is that not once have I heard the words: "raper", "craven", "mummer" (Bloody or otherwise), "maid", "lemon-tart" thus far, nor has the phrase 'nipple-tweak" arisen even once! Let the bells ring out and the banners wave!
While some of the added scenes are very good, or great even, the Littlefinger Ho scene and Littlefinger/Varys were the two worst scenes in the series so far. Generally Littlefinger is just awful in-show, they might as well just have given him a curly-q mustache to twirl.
As for the show being better than the books, no way. There are certainly additions that would have been great to have in the book, and kudos to the writers for creating those scenes, but this is like a spoon-fed, club-you-over-the-head-until-you-get-it version of the story. That said, it is still great to see it make it onto TV and overall be better than I expected.
eta - I think the acting has been fantastic and really love a lot about the show, even Littlefinger (but scripted so poorly in the show), just I think they're undercutting some of the story and weakening it.
I'd say it's about 50-50 books and show. I'd actually like to elaborate on this, but I'll take it to the thread for people who have already read the books, as should everyone else, I think.
And for the record, the Harry Potter movies ARE better than the books, and for one of the same reasons as Game of Thrones: you don't have to read Rowling's awful, clunky prose.
As for the show being better than the books, no way. There are certainly additions that would have been great to have in the book, and kudos to the writers for creating those scenes, but this is like a spoon-fed, club-you-over-the-head-until-you-get-it version of the story. That said, it is still great to see it make it onto TV and overall be better than I expected.
I can't say I agree about those scenes being the worst. I think some of the early Dany and Viserys stuff was god awful. But, I think you're absolutely correct that Littlefinger is almost cartoonish in his treachery (and this is one advantage that the books have - when characters like Jaime and Littlefinger can sit in the background, they can subtly work their way into the narrative, their motivations revealed gradually enough that they don't appear one-note and obvious). Peter should be more subtle. Just as people have no idea what Tyrion's motives are to this point, Littlefinger should come off the same.
One interesting thing I've noticed is that many viewers, even some Chewers, see Ned as being dumb as a brick. In the books he doesn't come off that way, just morally rigid in a way that prevents him from playing the game. The writers have been a little tone deaf when it comes to his character. Just as Liittlefinger is too villainish for this point in the story, Ned is too dumb, Dany used to be too vacant, etc. It recalls the early Dany and Drogo scenes that again came off as if the writers didn't know how to translate the subtlety of their relationship. I'll give the actors credit though for maximizing what they've been given.
For every great subtle scene like Arya's first dancing lesson, or Robert and Cersei's tete-a-tete, there's an overly obvious scene like Littlefinger's moustache-twirling monologue while instructing his whores, or Tywin skinning the Stag, etc.
I thought Ned was pretty dumb in the book, too.
I thought Ned was pretty dumb in the book, too.
Ned wasn't dumb in the books. He knew exactly how dangerous the Lannisters were and how dangerous King's Landing was. Every opportunity he had to curtail the Lannisters also necessitated seriously compromising his beliefs, something he is unwilling to do. The show makes it appear as if he doesn't understand the depths of the Lannisters' treachery, that the Mountain that Rides is the only 7 and a half foot tall man in Westeros, and that others are more willing to play the game than he is. He's one-dimensional and that's why people are furious at him - they can't understand his reasoning because Weiss and Benioff haven't been able to properly translate it. It's the same disbelief people had when after her wedding night Dany seemed eager to please her new (and seemingly rapeist) husband.
Originally Posted by dajuice7
...there's an overly obvious scene like Littlefinger's moustache-twirling monologue while instructing his whores, or Tywin skinning the Stag, etc.
Overly obvious? Can't disagree more. Those scenes are working on different levels simultaneously.
To be fair, after his speech in the tent and the promises therein, I don't think Khal Drago can really be described as seemingly rapeist. Dude likes his rape, that's all.
Rape in the name of love, though.
I don't get any kind of sense of Ned being like this and I've never read a page of the books, all I see is the honourable man unwilling to compromise his ideals regardless of the price. I just don't get the interpretation he's a dumbass personally.
Rape in the name of love, though.
No. Rowling's prose is simplistic, but it never gets in the way of reading. Martin's prose is clunky enough to make working through each book a chore.
I'm glad that you see him that way because that's certainly how he was written in the books - a foil for the corruption of Westeros' social-climbing elite - and why he's one of my favorite characters. However, the show's writers' insistence that every single moral dilemma Ned is presented with must be made mind-numbingly obvious by some other character (usually Littlefinger) makes him come off as thick, naive, and a little slow, and the interpretations I've seen all over the web reinforce that. It's not that Ned is dumb, it's that he's unwilling, even unable, to compromise his beliefs. But, the writers have apparently been unable to get this through to an audience that seems to just think that he's slow. It's the same lack of subtlety and depth that had Drogo coming off like a rapist on his wedding night, Viserys coming off ten times more cartoonish than the book, Catelyn coming off shrill and unlikeable (as many on the web believe), etc. For all the talk about how much better the show has been than the books, one thing the show has failed to do in many instances is imbue its characters with the complexity that the books do. It's why the book had us simultaneously loving and hating a character while the show seems to elicit strong reactions either one way or another for those same characters. It's a testament to the actors, and to the source material that the show is still as great as it is. I'm just not willing to overlook its shortcomings by claiming it's better than the books.
I don't get any kind of sense of Ned being like this and I've never read a page of the books, all I see is the honourable man unwilling to compromise his ideals regardless of the price. I just don't get the interpretation he's a dumbass personally.
Sorry, earlier I said Ned was dumb, on second thought, I have to agree with you, not dumb, but just plain butt-ignorant...both as to how the game was really to be played and to just how quick the worm could turn and how high the price could escalate...if that makes anymore sense?
Great with the U2 sub-reference, I actually shot coffe out my nose with that one...
Ned is dumb for trusting Littlefinger, a guy who could not be more obviously untrustworthy and has an obvious reason to work against Ned. I saw Littlefinger's betrayal coming a mile away in the books. There's being noble and there's completely failing to read people.
I couldn't disagree more. I think Martin's prose is significantly better than Rowling's, and neither of them are any great shakes. Rowling also can't do characterization for shit, and her plotting is often rambling and unfocused. The movies improved all of these things.
I'm glad that you see him that way because that's certainly how he was written in the books - a foil for the corruption of Westeros' social-climbing elite - and why he's one of my favorite characters. However, the show's writers' insistence that every single moral dilemma Ned is presented with must be made mind-numbingly obvious by some other character (usually Littlefinger) makes him come off as thick, naive, and a little slow, and the interpretations I've seen all over the web reinforce that. It's not that Ned is dumb, it's that he's unwilling, even unable, to compromise his beliefs. But, the writers have apparently been unable to get this through to an audience that seems to just think that he's slow. It's the same lack of subtlety and depth that had Drogo coming off like a rapist on his wedding night, Viserys coming off ten times more cartoonish than the book, Catelyn coming off shrill and unlikeable (as many on the web believe), etc. For all the talk about how much better the show has been than the books, one thing the show has failed to do in many instances is imbue its characters with the complexity that the books do. It's why the book had us simultaneously loving and hating a character while the show seems to elicit strong reactions either one way or another for those same characters. It's a testament to the actors, and to the source material that the show is still as great as it is. I'm just not willing to overlook its shortcomings by claiming it's better than the books.
Well the show was made for a mainstream audience - and obviously its working if the ratings are any indication - whereas the books were written for geeky informed fantasy fans. What you're seeing as clunky writing I simply see as trying to make the story as accessible as possible. Of course it seems rudimentary to you - you're not only a fantasy fan well versed in the tropes of the genre you've actually read the books in question as well.
As for Ned being some unflinching paragon of honor, I present to you Tyrion's kidnapping. An uncompromising, completely loyal to the crown and smart Hand of the King upon hearing the news that his wife kidnapped the Queen's brother would immediately and publicly order that everyone involved should be dragged to King's Landing to be judged. Not try to cover for her thus guaranteeing civil war.
And let's face it, it's not like Ned is some kind of underdog. He was the second most powerful man in the kingdom, with House Stark, House Tully and House Aryn 100% behind him and after Lannister heads. After Robert's death House Baratheon too. With Cersei and her bastard within easy striking distance. I don't care how smart, rich and powerful the Lannisters are he at least should have done a better job protecting the throne from being usurped. As for trusting Littlefinger? I don't know if Ned was ever around men but I wouldn't trust a man who's been in love with my wife all his life only to be humiliated and disfigured by my family with keeping the drinks cold. Much less with my life and the future of the kingdom. Even less shifty dudes than Littlefinger would still hold a grudge.
I don't know, I took that as Ned being loyal to his family over everything.
And goddamn he was nearly out. He'd expressed his hatred for all the bollocks, resigned as Hand, wanted to get the fuck out of King's Landing and was at great pains to try and kleep that secret, but he got dicked by Little FInger side tracking him with bassterds (sorry, couldn't resist the accent) and then Jaime turning up to try and free his brother.
He knew how much shit he was in but was loyal to Fat Bob. And as Fat Bob said he couldn't trust anyone else. Ned's all about family and friendship. In a lot of ways I see his actions as almost trying to redeem Bob's failings.
Well it's clearly impossible to tell which is better, as the season isn't over yet. There's positives and negatives on each side, but I'm fairly certain I won't ever be rereading the book but I'll likely be buying the series on Blu.
GEEZ PEOPLE! - dajiuce7 in particular - Please move this book comparison talk to where it belongs - In the GOT DISCUSSION for BOOK READERS thread. Here is a helpful link: http://www.chud.com/community/forum/thread/132186/official-game-of-thrones-discussion-for-those-who-have-read-the-books
This page has been little more than book comparison arguments, and it does not belong here!
I don't know, I took that as Ned being loyal to his family over everything.
And goddamn he was nearly out. He'd expressed his hatred for all the bollocks, resigned as Hand, wanted to get the fuck out of King's Landing and was at great pains to try and kleep that secret, but he got dicked by Little FInger side tracking him with bassterds (sorry, couldn't resist the accent) and then Jaime turning up to try and free his brother.
He knew how much shit he was in but was loyal to Fat Bob. And as Fat Bob said he couldn't trust anyone else. Ned's all about family and friendship. In a lot of ways I see his actions as almost trying to redeem Bob's failings.
This very much mirrors my view on the honourable Lord Eddard. Thing is we're so used to a world of double dealing, two-faced backstabbing and mendacity that a character that puts honour and loyalty first - even to seemingly his own detriment - can seem frustrating to some people.
He kinda reminds me of Liam Neesons Rob Roy actually - another honour-bound stubborn bastard who'd rather make his life a living hell than compromise his principles or risk his family.
...and like Liam Neesons Rob, I've developed a pretty big mancrush on old Ned.
Yeah, the Stupid Ned Stark meme that's starting to spring up is kind of funny:
I saw the preview for episode 8, and the footage of Joffrey wearing the crown already gets my blood boil. Looks like the Starks will be in a real pickle in the next episode.
GEEZ PEOPLE! - dajiuce7 in particular - Please move this book comparison talk to where it belongs - In the GOT DISCUSSION for BOOK READERS thread. Here is a helpful link: http://www.chud.com/community/forum/thread/132186/official-game-of-thrones-discussion-for-those-who-have-read-the-books
This page has been little more than book comparison arguments, and it does not belong here!
Chill. The conversation was about the show, with references to the book to make specific points. People have been good with not spoiling anything, or even addressing anything that hasn't been shown in the television series so far. The moment someone spoils something, or doesn't have anything to say about the episodes then you can put them on blast. Until then, calm down.
I think the problem with Ned Stark is that he absolutely refuses to deal with the world on its terms. He’s actually kind of deluded and it makes him come across as incompetent. It also doesn’t help that he’s perfectly happy accepting the incompetence and misrule of his friend, but becomes an honour-bound force of vengeance when dealing with the Lannisters.
In the grand scheme of things Ned is just trying to fuck over some people he doesn’t particularly like, but because we know that the Lannisters are up to no good it casts his actions in a positive light. However because of his eagerness to fuck with the Lannisters and his complete and utter inability to work within their circles he’s effectively doomed his family.
It reminds me of Llwellyn Moss from No Country For Old Men where his own code and way of life meets something it cannot deal with and in doing so he endangers not only himself, but the people around him.
In Ned's defense, his approach works very, very well in "his" world: in the north, your word and actions are paramount, and your credibility (and ability to get your bannermen to follow you) hinges on your honor and trustworthiness. As with the Lannisters, the Starks are taught the, well, stark and unforgiving reality of life in the north, and Ned simply can't adjust in time. It's too much, too fast, and what we're seeing his Ned very much over his head in a political and cultural sea.
Huh.... I like Ned. He doesn't know everything the audience knows, and he has survived a lot longer in King's Landing than I would have. Besides, if you can't trust a mustachioed, smirking, sniveling whore-house owner....who can you trust?
Chill. The conversation was about the show, with references to the book to make specific points. People have been good with not spoiling anything, or even addressing anything that hasn't been shown in the television series so far. The moment someone spoils something, or doesn't have anything to say about the episodes then you can put them on blast. Until then, calm down.
Not that I agree with Hyperspace's tone or anything but the constant references to the book in this thread kind of make me want to tune out the discussion. Seeing as how this thread is for people who haven't read the book (yet), hearing about the book is odd since we see this more purely as a TV show and are appreciating (or not) on that level. Or maybe some of us don't want all the little details from the book to be spoiled before we eventually read them. From my perspective if I wanted to know how it was in the book at this moment, I'd read the book. Ya dig? Those who are in here who have read the book can't help but compare--that part is natural. I totally get it, and it's a free country and all, but I dunno... If the main thing you have to say is how it's different than the book maybe this isn't the best place to have that conversation. I mean, it's not like those of us who haven't read the book can really participate.
On the Ned note. I like Ned and I don't think he's that dumb. His little wording switcheroo on the King's final words was quite clever. A lot of good it did him, but still. He's stubborn fo sho though. If only he'd know that Drogo was on the warpath. Then he could spend all his time and energy escaping King's Landing with his family and letting Drogo do all his dirty work for him.
Not that I agree with Hyperspace's tone or anything but the constant references to the book in this thread kind of make me want to tune out the discussion. Seeing as how this thread is for people who haven't read the book (yet), hearing about the book is odd since we see this more purely as a TV show and are appreciating (or not) on that level. Or maybe some of us don't want all the little details from the book to be spoiled before we eventually read them. From my perspective if I wanted to know how it was in the book at this moment, I'd read the book. Ya dig? Those who are in here who have read the book can't help but compare--that part is natural. I totally get it, and it's a free country and all, but I dunno... If the main thing you have to say is how it's different than the book maybe this isn't the best place to have that conversation. I mean, it's not like those of us who haven't read the book can really participate.
And it's not like there isn't a place specifically designated to have that discussion one inch down from this one. People have been very good about only discussing it in the abstract so far, but it's a line we don't need to be tip-toeing around given the set up we have.
The BHC ending thing made me laugh way harder than it should have.
Don't forget that Robert himself is the usurper. His true born kids don't belong on the throne either. Dany or go home!
I certainly don't see Ned as stupid, but his honorable actions -- he only told Cersei what he planned to do with his information in order to keep innocent children, incestual bastards or not, from being slaughtered by a predictably enraged Robert -- had the bad luck to be undone by a pig and a drunk king who couldn't spear straight. And though Renly had the much better idea to scarper, his trust in Littlefinger I figure comes more from Catelyn telling him more than once to trust Littlefinger. Ned may know well Petyr's opinion of him, but wouldn't expect him to betray Catelyn. Or at least not to put an old personal grudge ahead of matters as significant as the throne. If anything, Ned's biggest flaw is that his straight-up honorableness makes him a bit short-sighted on the depth of others' lack of it.
No. There is a thread specifically for this conversation. Discuss the book comparisons in that thread. (And hey, I've been reading the books since Clash came out in hardcover, it just doesn't belong here.)
As for Ned, he is used to dealing with Northerners. They approach things directly. He doesn't want to play the Southerners games.
He's an honorable man that is unwilling to do dishonorable things to achieve honorable goals.
No. There is a thread specifically for this conversation. Discuss the book comparisons in that thread. (And hey, I've been reading the books since Clash came out in hardcover, it just doesn't belong here.)
As for Ned, he is used to dealing with Northerners. They approach things directly. He doesn't want to play the Southerners games.
He's an honorable man that is unwilling to do dishonorable things to achieve honorable goals.
Since this series (and the book that it bases on) is called the Game of Thrones, I see Ned Stark as someone who is unwilling and unable to play the game that the people in the South participate in, and since it's a high stake game of winning the throne, like Cersei said it's either you win or you die. At least Ned recognizes his shortcomings and made an effort to get his family out of King's Landing, but his biggest mistake was to trust Littlefingers.
The wife and I just started season 3 of The Wire, which also happens to feature Mr. Pinky, aka Littlefinger. It's slightly reassuring for me that the problems that I have with the actor's performance isn't limited to his interpretation of this character. He seems just as bored with his own words in The Wire as he does in the Game of Thrones. I can kind of dig what some of you are seeing in him when he's given big, broad strokes to play, but when he's just delivering dialog, he sure leaves me cold.
It was interesting for me to finally see the elder Lannister. Interesting that he seemed to think he wasn't long for the world. Is he sickly, or just aware that he isn't a young man anymore? He didn't strike me as weak. Maybe he's just conscious that his part in any coming war would be minimal. At any rate, I enjoyed seeing Jaime in a situation where his smarmy smile or smart remarks wouldn't cut it. Was it just me, or Jaime's hair look darker in that scene than it normally is? Maybe an odd question, but it seemed fairly drastically different. Perhaps I'm just forgetting, since he hasn't been around much lately.
Anyway, another great episode. I'm glad we held off watching it. This season is going to be over far too soon.
Maybe I watched too many Samurai films as a kid, but I always had a skewed concept of honour. I'm not talking about being generally honourable and doing the right thing, but about the people who make declarations about honour. My vision of institutionalised 'honour' brings to mind Samurai's gutting themselves and the Sopranos executing people for slights to their wives, it's often a pretence to hide something else.
Maybe I watched too many Samurai films as a kid, but I always had a skewed concept of honour. I'm not talking about being generally honourable and doing the right thing, but about the people who make declarations about honour. My vision of institutionalised 'honour' brings to mind Samurai's gutting themselves and the Sopranos executing people for slights to their wives, it's often a pretence to hide something else.
Yeah... nah - that's not the kind of honour and honourable character we're looking at here. This is a much more classically celtic/british medieval knights on horseback model.
Like I said, the character Ned most reminds me of is Rob Roy - honour even in the face of your own detriment if not outright annihalation - or as Matt Sutton put it so beautifully a few posts up...
Quote:
He's an honorable man that is unwilling to do dishonorable things to achieve honorable goals.
The wife and I just started season 3 of The Wire, which also happens to feature Mr. Pinky, aka Littlefinger. It's slightly reassuring for me that the problems that I have with the actor's performance isn't limited to his interpretation of this character. He seems just as bored with his own words in The Wire as he does in the Game of Thrones. I can kind of dig what some of you are seeing in him when he's given big, broad strokes to play, but when he's just delivering dialog, he sure leaves me cold.
What? He was pitch perfect as Carcetti. I can't see how you would think he was bored in that role.
I think part of the oddness of the peformance in GOT is due his British accent, which comes off as a little unnatural.
Why is it in fantasy, they so often have British accents? I suppose it is a good thing that they've been consistent.
Well, the actor is Irish, so his American accent in The Wire is the put on. Am I alone in thinking Littlefinger only betrayed Ned because Ned kept making it harder and harder to back him? Had Ned worked with him a little bit more, I can see Littlefinger adopting a subtler means of control. For all his wounds, he seems like a political animal first and foremost.
