If you know what some of those scenes represent in the preview, it might look even better. I have been told by others who have already seen it that it is even better then this week, which makes good sense.
I do not know what people expect from the HotU. I highly doubt it will be anything like the book. They don't have another 10 million to splash on one scene. Come on people.
And really who cares about the HotU with [BLACKOUT]Jon v. The Halfhand and the three blast[/BLACKOUT]. t:
That was not only probably the best episode of Game of Thrones i've ever seen, but it may be one of the best episodes of any TV Series I've ever seen. Absolutely incredible. Completely transcended the hype.
But first, credit where credit is due: The episode as a whole in and of itself was flat out fantastic. Both, its technical aspects and its pacing were well done - the latter further evidence that a tighter story focusing on fewer subplots and locations make for better storytelling on television. The dialogue was sharp the characters spot on. The only puzzler for me was the Bronn-Sandor scene at the start of the episode. It created a new, antagonistic dynamic between two characters who had previously never interacted with one another in a meaningful way only for said dynamic lead to nowhere in the episode. I suppose it was meant to showcase the tension amongst the soldiers before the battle and using two named characters was simply the show's way of accentuating the point.
That said, it is continuity where the episode suffered and you can tell it was a different writer here than to other episodes; one who didn't quite read all of the previous scripts or at least never saw the final, filmed versions of them to realise what had and hadn't been shown previously.
For starters, there was Sandor's desertion from the battlefield. What had been simply been a case of overwhelming pyrophobia became unclear - looking more like battle fatigue or panic and the Hound wimping out. The only reference to this fear or fire before this was a single offhand comment by Littlefinger back in season 1 in a scene that was more about his brother, Gregor than about Sandor. As such, the show should have brought it up again in a previous episode or in an earlier part of this episode (e.g. have Bronn and his crew sitting by a roaring fire and inviting Sandor to drink by it only for the latter to rebuff the offer and Bronn to taunt him about it) to provide foreshadowing and help the audience remember this minor, forgettable detail.
Second is again about Sandor - though in this case it was the Sandor-Sansa scene. In the past two seasons, it was never established that Sandor treated Sansa any differently than he did other people. In fact, he reported Sansa's menses to Cersei after catching her and Shae trying to cover up for the fact; firmly establishing his loyalty to the crown over his view of this one girl. Over the course of the season, Sandor received less attention and development than I thought he would; certainly not enough to explain this. Perhaps if they had changed it so that Sandor explained wanting an in with the Starks to escape the Lannisters' wrath for deserting his post.
Lastly, there's Loras' arrival. In the books, I vaguely remember it being described in such a way as though it was actually Renly back from the dead taking his revenge on Stannis, when it was in truth Loras wearing Renly's armour. This was mimicked in the show - as seen by Loras' use of a stag helm. Unfortunately, we never got a clear view of said helm and we never saw Renly wear this helm. Perhaps if the show had shown Renly using a more distinctive looking set of armour (e.g. a stag head for a helm a la Sandor's hound head) in the scenes at his camp. However, even I recognise this is nitpicky.
That said, while a number of the issues I highlighted are somewhat nitpicky, I feel these criticisms are justified since said details were clear in the books and the show was indeed aiming to achieve them; based on how the scenes were shot and their approach to remain faithful to the events in the books. In which case, they did not meet their own intentions.
I did find the battle rushed at the end, especially the way Tywin just walked in and said "it's over". Though I'm not sure how long the siege lasted. The first part was paced well. They should have made it a two parter I think.
This episode made sweet, passionate love to my face, but man. A cheek scar? That's it ?
I guess I should have seen it coming. No way they were going to horribly disfigure one of the stars. Just wish the wound was a bit more graphic, even if they left his nose alone.
But first, credit where credit is due: The episode as a whole in and of itself was flat out fantastic. Both, its technical aspects and its pacing were well done - the latter further evidence that a tighter story focusing on fewer subplots and locations make for better storytelling on television. The dialogue was sharp the characters spot on. The only puzzler for me was the Bronn-Sandor scene at the start of the episode. It created a new, antagonistic dynamic between two characters who had previously never interacted with one another in a meaningful way only for said dynamic lead to nowhere in the episode. I suppose it was meant to showcase the tension amongst the soldiers before the battle and using two named characters was simply the show's way of accentuating the point.
That said, it is continuity where the episode suffered and you can tell it was a different writer here than to other episodes; one who didn't quite read all of the previous scripts or at least never saw the final, filmed versions of them to realise what had and hadn't been shown previously.
For starters, there was Sandor's desertion from the battlefield. What had been simply been a case of overwhelming pyrophobia became unclear - looking more like battle fatigue or panic and the Hound wimping out. The only reference to this fear or fire before this was a single offhand comment by Littlefinger back in season 1 in a scene that was more about his brother, Gregor than about Sandor. As such, the show should have brought it up again in a previous episode or in an earlier part of this episode (e.g. have Bronn and his crew sitting by a roaring fire and inviting Sandor to drink by it only for the latter to rebuff the offer and Bronn to taunt him about it) to provide foreshadowing and help the audience remember this minor, forgettable detail.
Second is again about Sandor - though in this case it was the Sandor-Sansa scene. In the past two seasons, it was never established that Sandor treated Sansa any differently than he did other people. In fact, he reported Sansa's menses to Cersei after catching her and Shae trying to cover up for the fact; firmly establishing his loyalty to the crown over his view of this one girl. Over the course of the season, Sandor received less attention and development than I thought he would; certainly not enough to explain this. Perhaps if they had changed it so that Sandor explained wanting an in with the Starks to escape the Lannisters' wrath for deserting his post.
Lastly, there's Loras' arrival. In the books, I vaguely remember it being described in such a way as though it was actually Renly back from the dead taking his revenge on Stannis, when it was in truth Loras wearing Renly's armour. This was mimicked in the show - as seen by Loras' use of a stag helm. Unfortunately, we never got a clear view of said helm and we never saw Renly wear this helm. Perhaps if the show had shown Renly using a more distinctive looking set of armour (e.g. a stag head for a helm a la Sandor's hound head) in the scenes at his camp. However, even I recognise this is nitpicky.
That said, while a number of the issues I highlighted are somewhat nitpicky, I feel these criticisms are justified since said details were clear in the books and the show was indeed aiming to achieve them; based on how the scenes were shot and their approach to remain faithful to the events in the books.
Did you watch the episode, or in fact any episodes?
They did show Sandor's fear of fire more then once before the desertion. Look at his reaction to the torch that passes by his face or the threat to strangle a man with his own guts if any of their fire arrows get anywhere near him. They made it quite clear without hammering everyone over the head with it. His reaction to burning man and his line to Sansa sealed it. Sandor was ripping people to bits and threatening to rape the corpses of those that did not fight. It was clear that something big had affected him, and it wasn't simple killing. They have made it clear throughout the series that he enjoys that.
And your second point. Sandor's attachment to Sansa has been established since the second episode of the series, emphasized when saved her life not once (her attempt to kill Joffrey), but twice (the attempted rape). There were also the hanky and the fact that he was the one that covered her up after she had been stripped. There was even the "I didn't do it for you" line to Tyrion.
Remember you can only nitpick if it is true.
Loras didn't wear Renly's armor in the books. It was his brother who did. The show did it better by placing him in the role and if you hadn't picked up by now what the Stag symbolized, much more who was wearing it, that is your own fault.
I did find the battle rushed at the end, especially the way Tywin just walked in and said "it's over". Though I'm not sure how long the siege lasted. The first part was paced well. They should have made it a two parter I think.
The whole point was for Cersei and even the audience to be confused and it worked. The sudden change of fortune was a big "wtf" and played perfectly with the Cersei death pact.
If you have 20 mins of Tywin and Loras battling Stannis, Cersei's reaction, along with the audience's, is completely lost.
The Hound chickened out in the bravest way possible. I know that's an oxymoron but he was completely right. F the King. "The world is built by killers".
The only Lannisters worth a damn are Tyrion & Tywin. Bronn is badass as usual.
They did show Sandor's fear of fire more then once before the desertion. Look at his reaction to the torch that passes by his face or the threat to strangle a man with his own guts if any of their fire arrows get anywhere near him. They made it quite clear without hammering everyone over the head with it. His reaction to burning man and his line to Sansa sealed it. Sandor was ripping people to bits and threatening to rape the corpses of those that did not fight. It was clear that something big had affected him, and it wasn't simple killing. They have made it clear throughout the series that he enjoys that.
Yes, something big certainly affected him. The question though, is what. And while they did show him staring at 'fire' during his breakdown moment and he commented on 'burning' to Sansa shortly after, those terms have so often been used metaphorically in the context of war, death and destruction that it's easy to take it metaphorically.
Put it this way... Otakuassemble (an unspoiled reviewer who goes into detailed analysis/thoughts for each episode) completely missed fire as a reason when he listed his possible reasons why Sandor suddenly turned tail. This confusion was likewise reflected by friends of mine who watch the show but haven't read the books. All of this suggests that while his fear of fire might have been hinted at, those hints weren't meaningful or clear enough.
And your second point. Sandor's attachment to Sansa has been established since the second episode of the series, emphasized when saved her life not once (her attempt to kill Joffrey), but twice (the attempted rape). There were also the hanky and the fact that he was the one that covered her up after she had been stripped. There was even the "I didn't do it for you" line to Tyrion.
That's Sandor simply being a decent human being. I gave my counter-example in my original comment. Remember; the case must be made that he treats Sansa differently from other women since his offer was made to her and her alone and in my example, he clearly doesn't since he willingly and knowingly betrayed her to Cersei.
Loras didn't wear Renly's armor in the books. It was his brother who did. The show did it better by placing him in the role and if you hadn't picked up by now what the Stag symbolized, much more who was wearing it, that is your own fault.
Regardless of who wore the armour, Renly's physical appearance at the battlefield triggered Stannis' troops to flee/panic into thinking there was a supernatural element at work. In the show, Loras' appearance simply showed that Renly's spirit lived on and that he got his vengeance through Loras as proxy. Meanwhile, the book itself evoked the sense that Renly himself was back in the flesh - which if the show was trying to recreate, it did not succeed.
And my brother who hasn't read the books got it instantly. My mother, who can barely remember who Renly is, understood the fire bit. Not the writers or directors fault some people are thick. It would be understandable if it was one moment. It was several. At some point you have to connect the dots. Not to mention the big scar we all know was caused by.... FIRE!
You second point makes no sense because Sandor is never a good human being to anyone except... Sansa. That is the entire point. We are talking about the one person he makes an effort with, even though he clearly shouldn't, as it conflicted with his job. Her fiance, his master, has his men strip and beat her. Sandor saves her, protects her, comforts her. The dichotomy is clear.
Tonight he literally told the king to F' off, but did not do so with Sansa. He offered to rescue her. His feelings were made very clear.
As to Renly's Ghost. The ending was suppose to be a cluster you know what. A shock to the system as it was to Stannis and Cersei. However, Renly's vengeance was made clear the most Loras took off his helmet. The last time we saw him he was crying over his dead love's body. It will be made even more clear in future episodes. I wouldn't be surprised if Stannis didn't bring it up next week with the return of the priestess herself.
Still, the scene showed Stannis spooked at a warrior in the armor that I am pretty sure Renly wore in every episode he was in this season with the exception of his bed time with the Tyrell siblings. The armor was removed right before his death.
Renly wore distinct armor? I vaguely recall him wearing a distinct crown. That was probably lost to non-readers. Might have worked if he had a distinct helmet.
I guess they wanted to give out the shock reveal of the Tyrell's joining the Lannister's compared to it being mentioned earlier in the book following Renly's death. Thought it was handled well though.
And I wonder if that random soldier who slashed Tyrion's face could still have been Mandon Moore or not. I guess it would have been expensive for Tyrion to continue the remainder of the show without a nose too. I can live with it. Just better hope they still have Jaime [blackout]lose his hand by the Goat though.[/blackout]
Yes, something big certainly affected him. The question though, is what. And while they did show him staring at 'fire' during his breakdown moment and he commented on 'burning' to Sansa shortly after, those terms have so often been used metaphorically in the context of war, death and destruction that it's easy to take it metaphorically.
Put it this way... Otakuassemble (an unspoiled reviewer who goes into detailed analysis/thoughts for each episode) completely missed fire as a reason when he listed his possible reasons why Sandor suddenly turned tail. This confusion was likewise reflected by friends of mine who watch the show but haven't read the books. All of this suggests that while his fear of fire might have been hinted at, those hints weren't meaningful or clear enough.
That's Sandor simply being a decent human being. I gave my counter-example in my original comment. Remember; the case must be made that he treats Sansa differently from other women since his offer was made to her and her alone and in my example, he clearly doesn't since he willingly and knowingly betrayed her to Cersei.
Regardless of who wore the armour, Renly's physical appearance at the battlefield triggered Stannis' troops to flee/panic into thinking there was a supernatural element at work. In the show, Loras' appearance simply showed that Renly's spirit lived on and that he got his vengeance through Loras as proxy. Meanwhile, the book itself evoked the sense that Renly himself was back in the flesh - which if the show was trying to recreate, it did not succeed.
Just because they didn't spell it out doesn't mean they didn't a good job in making it deducible. I figured the first two things out and I have never read the books.
You are right about the Renly one though, they were simply playing it differently. They seemed to be trying to keep it a bit of a mystery until he took off his helmet, for those who didn't already know who it was. There's no real visceral way to make it seem like Stannis's men thought it was Renly, without having to stop the fighting, which kind of moves away from the realistic tone the series seems to stick with. It makes sense that in the translation to the screen they decided to have a different goal. It also gets across the same thing about the character of Loras. they definitely didn't do a good job of conveying the supernatural element, but I think that was there for the people who knew it, but accomplishing a more visceral goal of surprise and tension of trying to figure out who is saving them.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.