Game of Thrones - Book Readers' Thread - - - - - - - Part 24

[Reek]

Yea i know man... No point in putting our hope in seeing that bear again.

 

[TheFuture]

Aye Roose, but I wouldn't expect George to say "yeah lads, she's in, last scene of episode 10, get hype!!" He wouldn't ruin the surprise.

HBO would probably be out for his blood if he did that.

We'll probably know for certain in the next two episodes as I don't expect Brienne to be in the bastards episode. If she meets Jaime in 7 or 8 then game on.

 

[Roose Bolton]

Well his comment was very pointed. "It would have been different if I was still involved with the production" Whereas I think if she was in the mix, knowing GRRM he would have said something more ambiguous like "You'll have to keep watching to find out."

Plus there's the spoilers of Thoros going around, which is pretty damning. I do have reason to trust that information.

 

[Reek]

maybe brienne comes across walder frey... he was an old friend... turned foe.

 

[Marvolo]

Oh good to know. The adverts during GoT here are a right pain. They go on forever.

You live in the UK, right?

I ****ing hate ads. That's one thing I love about premium cable channels in the U.S.. HBO, Starz, Cinemax, and Showtime have no commercial adverts on their channels. They advertise their own stuff in between programs but they don't show any ads during episodes.

You'd think HBO would try to get their own channel in the UK instead of broadcasting their stuff through networks like Sky.

 

[Marvolo]

I think the season (series?) finale of True Detective was movie length wasn't it?

IMDB says it was 86 minutes.

 

[Iceman]

You live in the UK, right?

I ****ing hate ads. That's one thing I love about premium cable channels in the U.S.. HBO, Starz, Cinemax, and Showtime have no commercial adverts on their channels. They advertise their own stuff in between programs but they don't show any ads during episodes.

You'd think HBO would try to get their own channel in the UK instead of broadcasting their stuff through networks like Sky.

Yes. That's cool, didn't know.

On GoT on Sky Atlantic the ads sections are really long. Even if you record and watch after fast forwarding through them they are still really long. Unless you do it on the highest speed and then you shoot forward into the rest of the episode and spoil it.

 

[Infinity9999x]

Well his comment was very pointed. "It would have been different if I was still involved with the production" Whereas I think if she was in the mix, knowing GRRM he would have said something more ambiguous like "You'll have to keep watching to find out."

Plus there's the spoilers of Thoros going around, which is pretty damning. I do have reason to trust that information.

Unless HBO got on him for essentially giving way Jon not being dead in his books (and therefore making his "surprise" come back a non surprise to anyone who really looked for it) and he's doing a better acting job.

I still think odds are she isn't in it, but you never know.

 

[The Apocalypse]

LS seems pretty irrelevant anyway.

 

[ThePhantasm]

Unless HBO got on him for essentially giving way Jon not being dead in his books

lmao what?

 

[Roose Bolton]

GRRM himself, at least in regards to the books, doesn't outright say that Jon died from his stab wounds, he never even goes as far to admit the character's state. I've not seen all of his interviews in regards to the show but I can't imagine he'd ever give away a big spoiler like that when he makes pains to avoid it for the books.

 

[ThePhantasm]

even then... what right would HBO have to "get onto" him for spoiling something? he's in control of the source material, and the show is an adaptation

 

[TheFuture]

even then... what right would HBO have to "get onto" him for spoiling something? he's in control of the source material, and the show is an adaptation

GRRM would be spoiling the show, not his own material. A show that is a very expensive production. So for me, if GRRM did give something away about important plans for the show, I'd see that as bad form.

 

[Roose Bolton]

Infinity said that GRRM's comment was him mentioning that Jon wasn't dead in the books, not the show. (Though I highly doubt GRRM would ever actually go out of his way to spoil what was essentially the biggest cliffhanger of the 5th novel)

If he's just talking about his own material then HBO wouldn't or shouldn't have gotten onto him about it.

 

[TheFuture]

We'll probably know for certain in the next two episodes as I don't expect Brienne to be in the bastards episode. If she meets Jaime in 7 or 8 then game on.

Spoiler

Well it looks like Brienne and Jaime are indeed colliding next week, so unless Episode 10 is a climatic battle between them, that Episode 10 sypnosis is looking quite interesting now.

I thought it was also interesting to note that McShane was dealt with by hanging. Those bandits were definitely the BwB given the Lord of Light theme and the yellowish/lemony cloaked bloke (bit of a stretch I know) saying the night full of terrors line.

And why didn't they show the massacre? The show has never shied away from violence before, so was it just out of convenience that we stayed with the Hound's absent point of view? Or did they not show the massacre because there was someone present that they didn't want to reveal.

 

[Reek]

more importantly...

why was there a massacre ????

 

[Marvolo]

Random guys randomly slaughtering random people to set off The Hound so he can slaughter random people.

 

[Matt]

Spoiler

Well it looks like Brienne and Jaime are indeed colliding next week, so unless Episode 10 is a climatic battle between them, that Episode 10 sypnosis is looking quite interesting now.

I thought it was also interesting to note that McShane was dealt with by hanging. Those bandits were definitely the BwB given the Lord of Light theme and the yellowish/lemony cloaked bloke (bit of a stretch I know) saying the night full of terrors line.

And why didn't they show the massacre? The show has never shied away from violence before, so was it just out of convenience that we stayed with the Hound's absent point of view? Or did they not show the massacre because there was someone present that they didn't want to reveal.

What is this synopsis you speak of?

Anyway, I agree with your theory regarding someone being present. My theory from the other thread:

I am mixed on The Hound's return IN THIS CONTEXT. It would be one thing if he were brought ought as a champion of the Faith to fight against his brother (and that may be the end game). But to introduce some nameless Septon, this late in the game, only to kill him off (and kinda waste Ian McShane) and set the Hound on a quest for revenge against the Brotherhood Without Banners...it just seems a bit pointless.

With one or two seasons left (so at most 23 episodes, and if the rumors are to be believed more like 15 or 16), this is the point where story lines should be converging and the plot should be becoming more streamlined (which is mostly happening...Arya is on her way back to Westeros, the Stark children are slowly but surely reuniting, Dany is having all kinds of Westerosi characters seek her out with the hope to expedite her return, Kings Landing characters are dropping like flies, Jamie and Brienne are on a collision course, etc). That makes The Hound's story feel all the more out of place. A random quest for revenge that does not seem to be tied to anything or have much potential to tie up any loose ends/advance the plot in a meaningful way just feels superfluous.

Of course, the behavior of the Brotherhood (which is very different from when we last saw them and have taken to hanging people...a tactic of their new leader perhaps?), the timing of their reintroduction, and the other clues scattered throughout the past few episodes certainly indicates that the Hound is about to enter into conflict with Lady Stoneheart. But if that is the case, why? What is the end game? You have all of the principles of that story line in Riverrun; Jamie, Brienne, Podrick, the Brotherhood. Why bring the Hound into it? The only justification I can see for reintroducing the Hound as a reformed man is to kill him at the hands of Stoneheart. It would make sense. Rather than hanging faceless, meaningless Lannister and Frey bannermen, we see her hang the Hound...a character that the audience not only knows, but also knows has reformed. It would have an emotional impact, pull at the viewer's heartstrings and show, due to his reformed nature, the monster that Catelyn has become. Plus killing someone as formidable as the Hound would certainly up her threat level. It would also feel very Game of Thrones-esque to reintroduce a popular character with an entire episode devoted to him being convinced that he still has a purpose, set him on a badass quest for vengeance, only to kill him a few episodes later would be very fitting of the show. It would also have a nice circular nature to it. The Brotherhood spared the Hound because the Gods demanded it (through him winning trial by combat). For Lady Stoneheart to say "to hell with the Gods" and kill him anyway...its all fitting.

I dunno, I am spitballing...but it is the only meaningful impact I can see the Hound having at this point, based on the trajectory he is on.

I think Stoneheart's return is inevitable. Not to become a Stoneheart conspiracy theorist, but last night we saw the Brotherhood Without Banners hang a man. A self-proclaimed former soldier who committed atrocities in war (including killing a boy in front of his mother...seems like the type of thing that would spark an interest from a revenge driven mother). We don't know what house he fought for, but I will bet it was the Freys, the Boltons, or the Lannisters.

 

[Matt]

My theory continued:

Another possibility, of course, is that the Hound becomes Lady Stoneheart, or at least the show's equivalent. When we last saw Beric and the Brotherhood, they had gone from honorable men, hunting the Mountain on Ned Stark's behalf, to thieves and hostage takers. They sold out Gendry to the Red Woman without a second thought. They'd kinda lost their way and their leader Beric said that every time he died and came back, he lost a piece of himself (and seemingly with him, so did the Brotherhood). The last thing Beric told the Hound, when they fought in trial by combat was that God had a purpose for him; basically the same exact thing that the Septon told him last night.

Last night, the Hound was set on a path of vengeance. Lady Stoneheart is a character who is driven by desire for revenge. Perhaps, in his quest for revenge, the Hound is going to kill Beric, once and for all, assume command of the Brotherhood, and the Hound will turn on his old masters, the Lannisters. In essence, becoming the show's version of Stoneheart.

 

[Victarion]

In the books, I think there's a kind of contract going on between Stoneheart and the Red God: you'll get your fill of vengeance (seems to be what's driving her) in exchange for a service. That service? Delivering Robb's crown to Jon.

A scion of fire delivering a crown to the King in the North. Fire and Ice.

 

[godisawesome]

What is this synopsis you speak of?

Anyway, I agree with your theory regarding someone being present. My theory from the other thread:

I don't see them establishing the Hound here just to kill him; the majority of his scenes here were about establishing his new personality as a man seeking righteousness and learning compassion for others. After taking time to establish that the Hound has this new perspective, "feeding" him to Stoneheart would be counterproductive. If they just wanted to show Stoneheart as a threat and more evil, they could do that with any number of characters...like say, poor Podrick "Tri-Pod" Payne, who we can see being threatened and captured by somebody in next week's preview.

It would also make their dedication of time to his story versus Arya's seem stupid; maybe they'd want to get the audience back on Sandor's side just to kill him, but why not use some time to make Raya seem less stupid?

I think your second prediction is more likely; I feel they're prepping Snador for some kind of major role in the coming awar for they Dawn, probably just a logistics one, but an important one nonetheless. A short rampage by Snador and then an exit would be exactly the kind of thing to be shuffled away by the show, not kept in just for building up another character.

 

[Rowsdower!]

Podrick "Tri-Pod" Payne

That's the best nickname for him! I can't believe I've never heard that one before.

 

[godisawesome]

It's from TvTropes.

 

[Infinity9999x]

Infinity said that GRRM's comment was him mentioning that Jon wasn't dead in the books, not the show. (Though I highly doubt GRRM would ever actually go out of his way to spoil what was essentially the biggest cliffhanger of the 5th novel)

If he's just talking about his own material then HBO wouldn't or shouldn't have gotten onto him about it.

I don't think they would have really gone after him or anything, but GRRM was coy enough about Jon's "death" at the end of his book (and yes, he never confirmed he died, I know) but his "I don't know, maybe he is, maybe he isn't" comment was enough to have me not worried for a moment about his fate.

HBO may have just asked him to be a bit more tight lipped in terms of potential spoilers. And I will say, these past few episodes have been hinting at Lady Stone Heart a lot. Though it's just as likely the corruption of the BHWB will simply come around of their own choices instead of choosing to follow the resurrected Catlyn.

And Matt, in terms of your theory: I don't see them bringing back the Hound only to have him offed by Stoneheart (should she appear). It just doesn't make a lot of sense story-wise. There are tons of other characters they could use to establish her as a threat. I think a Cleganebowl is pretty much guaranteed at this point. The novels hint at it hardcore, and I don't see them not doing it now.

 

[Roose Bolton]

With the "No One" synopsis released it proves that the previous reported ones were fake. So the Brienne thing with a friend turned foe is likely bogus.