[OT: Game of Thrones 4/28]

Submitted by cozy200 on April 28th, 2013 at 10:00 PM

Solid episode. Always nice watching dudes healed up by fire haha

Mod edit: Changed the title. JGB.

Comments

Rabbit21

April 28th, 2013 at 10:17 PM ^

Because the Bran walk is pretty boring until later in the season.  That and there are some major plotlines that got set up in this episode.  I loved what they did in this episode, especially with Jamie's confession in the bath and his lines to refuse the painkiller.  

MGoBender

April 28th, 2013 at 10:22 PM ^

Gotta love the Jaime story combined with Robb "becoming" Nedd.

Nedd was loyal to a fault - he would not have listened to Jaime's argument for killing the mad king. Jaime becomes the "Kingslayer" much to his dismay and it shapes and molds some of the poor choices he makes, but in the end he is really a tragic figure (that attempted to murder an innocent boy, but you get what I'm saying).

That alongside Robb Stark perhaps giving up his chance at winning the war because he - like Nedd would have - giving in to these very gray notions of honor and loyalty like they are always black and white.

 

ijohnb

April 29th, 2013 at 11:03 AM ^

He is just a phenomenal actor period.  However, the story of him being branded the Kingslayer and what transpired has been covered.  It was a relealing scene in that he seems to be essentially letting go of what he was entirely and it had a certain baptism/exorcism feel to it, but I thought it was a little too much exposition.  I believed that most of what he said had been implied by his journey and that scene ate like 10 entire minutes of screen time. 

Characters have to be developed, thoughts have to be conveyed, but I do believe that things have to start moving here pretty quick.  Most what I saw last night I already knew, and hearing and seeing it again is proving somewhat tiresome.  I judge this show with high-level type criticism, so I am not saying it was bad by any stretch, the worse Game of Thrones episode is better than the best of anything else(save maybe Breaking Bad), but I think things got a little bogged down last night right when I thought they were really starting to cook.

M-Wolverine

April 29th, 2013 at 2:45 PM ^

I don't really recall them explaining how mad the Mad King was at the end....just insinuating his final line of life, but not the context it was in.  Though it was another case of sexposition since they had to tell us about it with two naked people.

I thought anything would pale next to last week, and I do think other than that scene (and the last) it did cover a lot of the people I care far less about....Rob Stark, Stannis, and so forth.  But I thought it advanced the plot and characters along.  We learn a lot more about Stannis this episode than we ever have.  A lot of the dealings in King's Landing. Snow finally doing it. And other great tidbits.

But then maybe it's my perspective, because I'm not in a rush. I feel the show is far more about characters than big battles or big plot points. I get the feeling that's not the books strength, outside of SHOCK AND AWE moments that break traditional narrative. I'd rather they go through them in more detail, and take their time, vs. running up to where they books are at currently with a reaaaaallllllyyy slow author.  But I see it as more of a soap opera with dragons than Thor, or even the Lord of the Rings (which has a lot of moments that seem like we've been there and done that....there and back again, if you were).

ijohnb

April 29th, 2013 at 3:12 PM ^

them all" was covered briefly, that is all I meant.  The scene also seemed a little misplaced to me also because, while I have not read the books, the show has not implied "Kingslayer" to be a label of shame, if anything, it has been referenced as kind of a badge of honor.  It seemed to me to be a bit of a forced compare and contrast with Robb Stark's execution of Karstark and his sense of honor and justice.  I don't know, it just seemed as though Jaime felt the need to explain something that previously had not required explanation.  Now if he wanted to search for forgiveness with regard to the two kids that he has either killed or attempted to kill on screen I could buy the anguish.  That being said, perhaps the show has just not done a good enough job setting forth that the "Kingslayer" should be seen as more of a curse than a badge of honor.

BTW, why the balls is Robb Stark not more interesting than he is.  Madden is awesome, the Starks are really the heart of the entire story at least at this stage, why is his character so damn uninteresting right now.  The King of the North was like my absolute favorite arc for almost half of last year and not it is a snooze fest.  Perhaps it is just a sign of impending demise?  I don't know, waiting to see, but come on Robb, wake the fuck up, hey?

ijohnb

April 29th, 2013 at 4:08 PM ^

said it himself in his explanation, by the time he slayed the King there was open revolt and it seems as though even those in the counsel and on the guard knew full well that the man had lost his mind and what no longer governing in any sense of the word.  And Tywin had remained nuetral for as long as humanly possible so it certainly did not appear that Jaime acted for any self-serving purpose.  I don't even remember Ned speaking ill of Jaime for ending the Mad King (though possibly he did).  It does not seem to me that Jaime has been presented as a person resented for slaying the King, frowed upon for opening banging his sister and being an around cock to everybody he meets, sure, but not for obstructing the certain ruin of Kings Landing.  (But once again, no book knowledge so possibly something go lost in the translation to the screen).

ijohnb

April 29th, 2013 at 4:25 PM ^

I see what you're saying.  He acted practically and with utility and that is widely recognized, but the act of killing a King to whom you swore an allegance is in and of itself a dishonorable and inherently "shameful" act regardless of how and why it occurred. 

Holy shit that is a complicated show.

joeyb

April 29th, 2013 at 11:55 PM ^

Much of what is written in the books takes place in very grey areas. Most of the characters are not purely good or evil; they are merely acting out of self interest and he does a very good job of showing that things aren't so black and white. The "Kingslayer" issue is a great example of this. He starts off as an evil character who murders kings and children alike. By the time that you finish book 3, you realize that he is just acting out of self preservation. Killing the mad king should be considered a good act, but the stigma attached to it makes it seem evil. And, while it was horrible to push Bran out of the window, it's what he needed to do in order to spare his relationship with Cersei.

I'd say that this is one of the central themes of the book. There just always seems to be two sides to every story.

joeyb

April 29th, 2013 at 4:06 PM ^

Kingslayer is definitely a label of shame (as you put it) and he just wears it like a badge of honor because that's the only way of dealing with it.

I think the Starks were the focal point to begin with because Ned was the focal point in the first book and they all go in separate directions, which allowed GRRM to cover different aspects of the world. As more characters get introduced and become more important to the storyline, the focus moves to those characters as opposed to characters whose situations aren't really changing all that much. Robb is at war. Sansa is a hostage. Arya is trying to get home. Bran and Rickon are trying to find the three-eyed crow and basically just stay alive. Whenever one of them does something of note, it's in the show.

ijohnb

April 29th, 2013 at 11:12 AM ^

of things, Robb is going to be eating one big shit sandwich and going to Frey for men to take Casterly Rock, and it looks like things are going to start getting "eye-coveringly" gruesome for Theon.  Also, although not focused on in the scenes from the next, my guess is that it will be a Stannis-heavy episode with him either losing his shit completely or get a second wind, tough to tell.

ywc2003

April 28th, 2013 at 10:50 PM ^

No King Joffrey appearance in this episode. Nice!

The story's moving pretty fast. Makes you wonder if they're still planning to split book 3 into two seasons?

jdon

May 1st, 2013 at 10:28 PM ^

Fair enough, I didn't really read it that way but I guess i get it...

that said.  four letters are not a spoiler.  you either know what they are or you don't and even if you wanted to extrapolate and say that someone could guess that those four letters mean two seperate important events, which i guess is possible, there is still no spoiler as I see it because obviously big things will happen...

idk.  I think I'm gonna leave the GoT threads here alone because its too ambiguous as to what you can and can't say...

jdon

 

M-Wolverine

May 2nd, 2013 at 1:06 PM ^

If it has happened in the show, you can talk about it.  If it hasn't happened in the show, you shouldn't.

Does this leave the person who has read the books at a disadvantage in speculating on what they're going to do in the future? Yes. Because they know what SHOULD happen. But that's what spoilers are for.

And I never understand the desire to do so....I mean, when I'm with someone watching something for the first time, I'm more anxious to see their reaction to events, rather than give them hints and make their reaction not as strong. Sit through someone's first time with a Sixth Sense or Star Wars triology, and it's kind of a treat.  Christmas morning is more fun when they don't know what's in the package.

jdon

May 2nd, 2013 at 8:08 PM ^

did you downvote the guy who said the single most memorable event occurs this season?  what about the guy openly speculating about the event that I originally responded to? 

My point is that A.) you are correct it that we don't want to spoil anything  B.) there are a lot of subtle spoilers here.  C.) calling me out is ridiculous in consideration of B.)...

 

idk... whatever.

 

taistreetsmyhero

April 28th, 2013 at 11:23 PM ^

said it was inspired by GoT:

 

 "dude hidea of my life--why the weed movement isn't being taking seriously:

imagine if just in the course of history, weed had been legal from the creation, and drinking frowned upon and eventually illegal, ok...
then, just imagine that the people who kept trying to make drinking mainstream were like the old decrepit drunks that practically live at shitty dive bars
while, at the same time, literally everybody knew that drinking in moderation is morally fine, and most people did that in the first place, even though it was illegal
moral of the story: nobody takes the weed movement seriously because the only people who are really vocal are the ones who abuse the weed the most and are pretty much losers...as weed has taken over their whole lives
imagine instead...
the moderate people drove the movement...maaaaaybe common sense would have a shot
moral moral of the story: lets drop everything we're doing and make weed legal. lets make history dude"

Needs

April 29th, 2013 at 12:36 AM ^

This is really one of the best book to film/tv adaptations ever done. I feel like plot developments and character motivation are actually much clearer in the show than in the books. The enforced discipline of 12 episodes at 55 minutes serves the series well.

But things are really going to get tough for the show runners in a couple seasons when the plot gets very fragmented. Curious to see which plots they won't follow, because they're going to have to give some up. (Reminder about the no spoiler rule).