Game of Thrones Season 4 Discussion (TV Spoilers Only)

[streetad]

Poor Brienne. She ends up breaking every oath she has ever given....

[LaCroix]

Poor Brienne. She ends up breaking every oath she has ever given....

I think it's intentional - she was always riding the high horse about honor and hounding Jamie for his broken ones...

[Napoleon the Clown]

At this point, I don't think Arya is able to actually make friends anymore. She's well and truly broken, now. So much bad shit has happened to her so close together that she basically thinks it's her against the world and nobody is safe. The Hound was her muscle, that's it. He was her bodyguard. His injuries meant that, even if he survived somehow, he'd be no use to her. And why give him the satisfaction of a merciful death? He still murdered her friend. She may have thought that killing him once he was crippled, helpless, and wanted to die wouldn't count and this is the closest she was gonna get to checking him off her list in a way that will satisfy her.

The actress has stated outright that Arya is definitely not a hero anymore. I forget where I saw the comments, but she basically said that Arya's lost her innocence and is very definitely no longer a good person. Look at how casually she's started killing people. Think of the age of the character. She's supposed to be what, 13 if that? Think about how fucked up a kid her age would need to be to be so casual about sticking a sword in someone's heart, as she did with Rorge, or shoving the blade through Polliver's throat. Her emotional reaction to things isn't going to be normal anymore.

[biostem]

I liked the episode, but honestly, I liked the battle of the wall from the previous episode, better.

A few oddities stood out in my mind:

1. How did Stannis get his men to the other side of the wall? Did he maybe take ships around the coast, disembark, then march down to where they were?

2. Since Arya's aunt is dead now, why did the Hound keep her around - was it a case of maybe him having a soft spot for her?

3. Was that coin that Arya gave the ship captain something she got form that assassin that could change his face?

4. OK, so Brienne made a vow to bring Arya back to her family - why not offer to accompany them to the Wall or something? That's where Arya ended up heading anyway - or was that only a result of the fight leaving the Hound "unavailable"?

[Meest]

Agreed for the others, disagree with the above, they looked like stop motion animation, and the fireballs were a bit shitty as well.

I liked the pace of their movements at least, weren't shambling corpses. On the look and feel I think it's a homage to effects artist (Ray Harryhausen) who did Jason and the Argonauts and Clash of the Titans etc. http://youtu.be/pF_Fi7x93PY

[Iroscato]

I liked the episode, but honestly, I liked the battle of the wall from the previous episode, better.

A few oddities stood out in my mind:

1. How did Stannis get his men to the other side of the wall? Did he maybe take ships around the coast, disembark, then march down to where they were?

2. Since Arya's aunt is dead now, why did the Hound keep her around - was it a case of maybe him having a soft spot for her?

3. Was that coin that Arya gave the ship captain something she got form that assassin that could change his face?

4. OK, so Brienne made a vow to bring Arya back to her family - why not offer to accompany them to the Wall or something? That's where Arya ended up heading anyway - or was that only a result of the fight leaving the Hound "unavailable"?

1. Possibly, or perhaps he was simply allowed through the gates by the Night's Watch once they learnt he was here to help. Jon would've taken a while to get to Mance's camp, maybe they arrived just after he set out. Plenty of time to get in formation when on horseback, as far as I'm aware.

2. Maybe once they learnt Lysa was dead, they didn't bother to stick around. There's no way they could know Baelish and Sansa were there, after all...they I guess they could've asked the guards. The Hound was still looking for somebody to buy Arya's freedom, but I do think he was growing fond of her in his own small way. It was decidedly not mutual, however.

3. Yes. In the last episode featuring Jaqan so far (season 2 I think), he gave her the coin and told her if she ever wanted to meet with him again, give it to any man from Braavos with the words, 'Valar Morghulis'. He then changed his face and walked away.

4. I'd put that down to simple shock, to be honest. Brienne is awesome, but I think she can be very driven and single-minded. Her instincts to get Arya away from The Hound at any cost overrode any other train of thought. It's not as if either of them are great talkers, anyway.

Hope this clears things up.

[Ralin]

At this point, I don't think Arya is able to actually make friends anymore. She's well and truly broken, now. So much bad shit has happened to her so close together that she basically thinks it's her against the world and nobody is safe. The Hound was her muscle, that's it. He was her bodyguard. His injuries meant that, even if he survived somehow, he'd be no use to her. And why give him the satisfaction of a merciful death? He still murdered her friend. She may have thought that killing him once he was crippled, helpless, and wanted to die wouldn't count and this is the closest she was gonna get to checking him off her list in a way that will satisfy her.

The actress has stated outright that Arya is definitely not a hero anymore. I forget where I saw the comments, but she basically said that Arya's lost her innocence and is very definitely no longer a good person. Look at how casually she's started killing people. Think of the age of the character. She's supposed to be what, 13 if that? Think about how fucked up a kid her age would need to be to be so casual about sticking a sword in someone's heart, as she did with Rorge, or shoving the blade through Polliver's throat. Her emotional reaction to things isn't going to be normal anymore.

When Arya kills someone other than in self-defense it's because she thinks, usually accurately, that they are rapist torturer scum of the earth. If it was Robb Stark or Tyrion doing it I'm pretty sure we'd be talking about how awesome and badass they were.

[Vympel]

I liked the episode, but honestly, I liked the battle of the wall from the previous episode, better.

A few oddities stood out in my mind:

1. How did Stannis get his men to the other side of the wall? Did he maybe take ships around the coast, disembark, then march down to where they were?

In the books, IIRC Stannis landed at Eastwatch-by-the-Sea and went to Castle Black that way. Presumably he went through the Wall there.

Agreed for the others, disagree with the above, they looked like stop motion animation, and the fireballs were a bit shitty as well.

I love Jason and the Argonauts!

[Pelranius]

How large was Stannis's army? It looked like probably the whole original, pre-Braavos job lot of 4,000, but I'm not quite sure.

[Vympel]

How large was Stannis's army? It looked like probably the whole original, pre-Braavos job lot of 4,000, but I'm not quite sure.

Someone did a count on SB.com, it was something like over 3,000 men. Sure to be only a fraction of his force given he'd have infantry too.

[Raw Shark]

Agreed for the others, disagree with the above, they looked like stop motion animation, and the fireballs were a bit shitty as well.

I liked the pace of their movements at least, weren't shambling corpses. On the look and feel I think it's a homage to effects artist (Ray Harryhausen) who did Jason and the Argonauts and Clash of the Titans etc. http://youtu.be/pF_Fi7x93PY

I'm glad I wasn't the only one who thought that. :] It may not even have been intentional - a lot of movie and tv animators were probably at least partly inspired by Harryhausen's fighting skeletons, enough that they might just always imagine undead skeletons moving jerkily...

Agreed on the fireballs and the depiction of Treebeard being weaksauce. I thought the Brienne/Sandor fight was pretty boss, have never been more impressed with Hinds as The Mance, loved the creepy Qyburn scene, loved Cersei vs Tywin, and totally nailed my out-loud prediction of the final scene, down to the slightly-more-epic-sounding version of the theme song. It didn't knock my socks off like last week, but (ignoring the books) I think it's one of the stronger episodes of the series.

[Vympel]

Ah, it was an intentional Harryhausen homage:

http://winteriscoming.net/2014/06/18/di ... -4-finale/

[xerex]

I didn't really like Arya leaving the Hound to die. I just didn't really think it made any sense. I mean, what was the point of them having their little heart-to-heart and Arya treating his bite wound two episodes ago only for her to treat him so coldly there? She's been talking for an entire season about how she is going to kill him, then she doesn't? I just don't really understand why they made that decision, and I think it was just sort of an unnecessary break from the character arc.

The good things you do , do not undo the bad things youve done. That's the real "moral" of this story.

I liked the episode, but honestly, I liked the battle of the wall from the previous episode, better.

A few oddities stood out in my mind:

1. How did Stannis get his men to the other side of the wall? Did he maybe take ships around the coast, disembark, then march down to where they were?

3. Was that coin that Arya gave the ship captain something she got form that assassin that could change his face?

4. OK, so Brienne made a vow to bring Arya back to her family - why not offer to accompany them to the Wall or something? That's where Arya ended up heading anyway - or was that only a result of the fight leaving the Hound "unavailable"?

1. Yes

3. Yes

4. Arya is going to Bravos not the Wall.

[xerex]

double

[Mr Bean]

To reiterated, Jaquen told her in Season 2? That if she showed that coin to any man of Braavos she could have passage back to Braavos. She showed the coin to a Braavosi captain and thus gets a free trip to Braavos.

[Thanas]

This episode was surprisingly disappointing given that it was so well-shot and dramatic. I think it's due to the fourth season being so good, Snow's storyline being the least interesting, the fighting falling into LOTR conventions and the Wall itself making no sense.

I know we have a human history of building ridiculous fortifications such as the Great Wall of China, Maginot Line, etc, but have they ever really proven effective?

Yes, otherwise people wouldn't have kept building them for enormous expense.

Heck, the walls of Constantinople alone saved the entire empire multiple times.

As to the siege tactics of the ones doing the besieging and the besieged, the less said the better. This reaffirms my belief that with a trained force (like a tagmata or a Roman legion) the wall can be held indefinitely.

Ceasar could tame the barbarian horde and put them to work as good civilised folk.

Unfortunately, he's leading it.

Niiiiice.

[Scrib]

As to the siege tactics of the ones doing the besieging and the besieged, the less said the better. This reaffirms my belief that with a trained force (like a tagmata or a Roman legion) the wall can be held indefinitely.

Honestly, doesn't the fact that the millennia-old Wall stand prove your point before we even have to resort to inferring how RL troops would fare?

The good things you do , do not undo the bad things youve done. That's the real "moral" of this story.

More like, expecting character arcs to land perfectly is a bad idea. Arya and the Hound may have stayed together a while because of aligning interests and a certain level of shared neuroses but that doesn't equal some sort of "reconciliation" arc. When the Hound is dying Arya remembers that hey...he's the fucking Hound, the same guy that beat down some old men and left them there because he was certain that they'd die. Oh, and he killed Mycah. The fact that they're both cynical, scarred bastards now and they might have gone on to have a relationship other than "bound by ransom" is neither here nor there.

True, it doesn't quite match the aforementioned arc but ask Oberyn "Today is not the day I die" Martell about how much you can trust

[Thanas]

As to the siege tactics of the ones doing the besieging and the besieged, the less said the better. This reaffirms my belief that with a trained force (like a tagmata or a Roman legion) the wall can be held indefinitely.

Honestly, doesn't the fact that the millennia-old Wall stand prove your point before we even have to resort to inferring how RL troops would fare?

Apparently not because just a few posts above somebody was questioning if RL walls were ever worth it.

[Ziggy Stardust]

True, it doesn't quite match the aforementioned arc but ask Oberyn "Today is not the day I die" Martell about how much you can trust

But I thought that was perfectly in keeping with his character arc. He was undone by his well-established arrogance and obsession with Tywin. Just because something is unexpected or bucks convention doesn't mean it isn't a logical extension of a character arc. Same can be said for the Starks and numerous other casualties in GoT.

[jollyreaper]

Castle Black is by design poorly defended to the south. Their mandate is to stand in the way of invaders from the north, after all; if the Night's Watch (with all of its resources) ever needs to be taken down, the southerners need to be able to do it without too much trouble. So their difficulty in defending against the raiding party is easily understood.

That sort of reasoning strikes me as a little funny or maybe only makes sense in terms of this particular setting. I would think any vulnerability placed in a weapon, fortification or supersoldier to make them easier for a master to control would also be a vulnerability an enemy could exploit, as was seen in the attack on Black. It's gets back to the question of whether a bad idea is a believable mistake to make in-setting or whether the writers mistakenly believe it makes sense.

[jollyreaper]

When Arya kills someone other than in self-defense it's because she thinks, usually accurately, that they are rapist torturer scum of the earth. If it was Robb Stark or Tyrion doing it I'm pretty sure we'd be talking about how awesome and badass they were.

I'm trying to think of Tyrion's kills. The only direct and personal kill before the end of season 4 was the enemy soldier in season 1, bashed his head in with a shield I think. I'm trying to think of anyone who died as a result of vile scheming. Obviously enemy soldiers died in Blackwater but that was a proper military defense. He is pragmatic and takes a long view but I don't think he's ever been truly cold and ruthless about murder. Granted, what happened at the end here is him breaking. But it's not been within his character up to this point.

I don't think of Tyrion as particularly badass for what happened in this episode. I think it's tragic and it has to have torn his guts out. I don't know where this leaves him as a person. Given that he's not a sociopath, he has to be pretty much destroyed. I don't know if the novel handled the setup with Shae differently but in the show it started as sheer self-defense that he carried through to the end.

I don't remember Robb's kills in particular, if anything it would have just been battle scenes against unnamed opponents. While murder is murder and everyone has a story, there's still a big difference between whacking a nameless mook and deliberately and with premeditation killing someone with a name, face and story. That's what made that early Breaking Bad episode so powerful, the one with the guy in the basement. Walt knew the guy was a human being, was faced with talking to him, learning his story and still knowing this otherwise likable guy was in a kill or be killed situation and thus so was Walt. It really made the situation feel more real than "Hey, I'm gonna kill this guy in an awesome way, end it with a kickass pose and say something witty." It felt real.

The story so far has been fairly resolute about keeping us from any unambiguous "Aw, fuck yeah!" moments of badassery. Usually the greatest coups are made by the worst characters. Oh, isn't it nice that Ramsey finally won favor in his father's eyes and is now a true Bolton. Oh, you mean the monstrous fuck Ramsey? Um, yeah. Ew. Stannis the Mannis saves the day! You mean the guy who's burning people on bonfires in the name of some creepy-ass god? The guy who's willing to fuck a priestess of evil to slay his enemies with demonic splooge assassins? That guy? Um, yeah. Ew. And even Tywin who is a cold and brilliant shit who knows how to play the game and is utterly competent mofo makes some fucking terrible blunders, the worst of which is never recognizing the value of his smartest son, he dies for that mistake. On another board it was pointed out that he's such a hypocrite with the family thing, not only with completely missing incestfest but for never remarrying. He could have had another wife and more children but he chose for whatever reason to not remarry and so left the whole Lannister legacy to his first children, two of which he liked but couldn't control, the one whom he was incapable of loving or trusting.

I'll grant you that some fans might be cheering for some things and jeering at others but I don't think the narrative is supporting it. Like when idiot teenagers were laughing at the shower scenes in Schindler's List, that's no slight against the movie, right?

[jollyreaper]

How large was Stannis's army? It looked like probably the whole original, pre-Braavos job lot of 4,000, but I'm not quite sure.

I'm curious to know how difficult a force like that would be to move by ship. On screen it looked impossibly huge and almost like the director succumbed to grandiosity but I have no real clue on that count. Historians always like to argue about the actual size of historic armies and whether or not the primary sources were accurate. There's the old saw amateurs talk about tactics, but professionals study logistics. I'm an amateur but I still want to know about logistics.

[jollyreaper]

As to the siege tactics of the ones doing the besieging and the besieged, the less said the better. This reaffirms my belief that with a trained force (like a tagmata or a Roman legion) the wall can be held indefinitely.

Honestly, doesn't the fact that the millennia-old Wall stand prove your point before we even have to resort to inferring how RL troops would fare?

Apparently not because just a few posts above somebody was questioning if RL walls were ever worth it.

Just because people keep repeating a strategy does not mean that it is a sound strategy, merely that it appears to be so.



The valid point that was made concerning Mance is that he doesn't have an ideal army, he has the army he has and has to work within those limits. That can explain tactics born of desperation rather than prudence.

[Thanas]

Apparently not because just a few posts above somebody was questioning if RL walls were ever worth it.

Just because people keep repeating a strategy does not mean that it is a sound strategy, merely that it appears to be so.

Are you really that ignorant of history that you believe that huge fortifications have no value?

[Scrib]

True, it doesn't quite match the aforementioned arc but ask Oberyn "Today is not the day I die" Martell about how much you can trust

But I thought that was perfectly in keeping with his character arc. He was undone by his well-established arrogance and obsession with Tywin. Just because something is unexpected or bucks convention doesn't mean it isn't a logical extension of a character arc. Same can be said for the Starks and numerous other casualties in GoT.

Yes, but it didn't fit the shoe-horned cliche arc you would think of when you saw the plot move. Same might be said of Stark as well. Married for love bucking tradition, had mercy on kids, shit should work out eventually right? True, Martin set up his world so that different (actual) consequences follow but it's easy to lapse into thinking of people's actions as falling into more cliche arcs.

That sort of reasoning strikes me as a little funny or maybe only makes sense in terms of this particular setting. I would think any vulnerability placed in a weapon, fortification or supersoldier to make them easier for a master to control would also be a vulnerability an enemy could exploit, as was seen in the attack on Black. It's gets back to the question of whether a bad idea is a believable mistake to make in-setting or whether the writers mistakenly believe it makes sense.

It wasn't a bad idea at the time because the people weakening the Night's Watch were a noble house with the sort of prestige and legacy that one could only dream of having in the real world and the Night's Watch itself was an actual military organization at the time. If the Starks hadn't disintegrated (seemingly a one-in-a-millenia event) or the NW had been better garrisoned the little attack from behind wouldn't have been a problem.

The guy who's willing to fuck a priestess of evil to slay his enemies with demonic splooge assassins

Maybe it's because I haven't read as much fantasy as everyone else, but I've always found the focus on Melisandre's shadow assassins to be quite...strange. It's one of the things I can never agree with the fandom about. Don't get me wrong Stannis (inexplicably) jumped off the slippery slope on the show, the only character to fully do so, but the shadow assassin thing was really one of the least evil things he ever did. Instead of Melisandre sacrificing someone else to do his bidding he sacrificed a bit of himself. Instead of killing someone for being religious he killed a fellow claimant.

Is it that shadow baby/dark things==evil is some fantasy trope I'm supposed to recognize and apply here? I don't really see why I should. I haven't seen any hints that magic operates like Harry Potter or Star Wars, and certain branches of it are intrinsically wrong rather than wrong when used for evil. If dark==evil then Dany burning that woman to get dragons is far, far more evil imo.

/rant.

The valid point that was made concerning Mance is that he doesn't have an ideal army, he has the army he has and has to work within those limits. That can explain tactics born of desperation rather than prudence.

You contradict yourself. If your opponent is stuck with a certain strategy then the only competent thing is to make best use of that strategy for them and your competence comes from having a method to counter it.

Mance CANNOT be better than he is for both social and logistical reasons. The previous Kings-Beyond-The-Wall can also not be much better for the same reasons. If the Others don't get them they'll just collapse because it takes both an incredibly charismatic man to unite them and some great cause. If the Night's Watch plays solely to counter Mance's concrete limitations then they're being competent. It may not be the best objective strategy against all enemies, but it doesn't have to be.