Season 3: Episode 3 *** Have NOT read the books/SPOILERS ***MOD Note Post#1

krudler

I hated the end credit song, shock finale then comedy sounding rock cover of a Westeros ballad, didnt work.

am liking this season, its building nice, no real wasted screentime for anyone, its 10 episodes again this year yeah?

catch--22

squonk wrote: »

Who did the music over the end credits? They sounded Northern Irish.

The Hold Steady.

http://www.rollingstone.com/music/news/the-hold-steady-deliver-bawdy-game-of-thrones-drinking-song-20130415

golfball37

squonk wrote: »

Who did the music over the end credits? They sounded Northern Irish.

Ellio and Linda informed us on Thronecast they were from the Bronx, no less.

mikemac1

Excuse the noob question but I'm lost.

End of Season 2 had Theon giving his speech in Winterfell and he was knocked out by his own men and it seemed that they escaped from the seige somehow though not before burning the place.

Season 3 opens and he is in a torture chamber and being interrogated for information

Sorry but who were holding him and why? Where are his own men gone?

heebusjeebus

mikemac1 wrote: »

Excuse the noob question but I'm lost.

End of Season 2 had Theon giving his speech in Winterfell and he was knocked out by his own men and it seemed that they escaped from the seige somehow though not before burning the place.

Season 3 opens and he is in a torture chamber and being interrogated for information

Sorry but who were holding him and why? Where are his own men gone?

I don't think we are supposed to know.

pixelburp

mikemac1 wrote: »

Excuse the noob question but I'm lost.

End of Season 2 had Theon giving his speech in Winterfell and he was knocked out by his own men and it seemed that they escaped from the seige somehow though not before burning the place.

Season 3 opens and he is in a torture chamber and being interrogated for information

Sorry but who were holding him and why? Where are his own men gone?

We haven't been explicitly told, but I think there's wriggle-room to make educated guesses.

Theon I believe is in the custody of the Boltons, who now also have Brienne & Jamie, as not only were they the ones surrounding Winterfell back in season2, Theon's method of torture matches the Bolton insignia (a man being crucified). So I would guess that the Iron Islanders did a deal with the Boltons: to allow safe passage out of Winterfell in exchange for their leader Theon. Rather than take him straight back to Rob, I guess the Bolton son decided to make an example of Greyjoy.

Where things get sticky is that Rob was told by the Boltons that Winterfell lay in ruins when they arrived, which of course we know to be completely false. So my further guess is that the Boltons are either working with the Iron Islanders directly, or else are completely mercenary and out for their own gain. Now that they have Jamie, I suspect they'll get even bolder. One has to imagine it was the Boltons who set Winterfell ablaze, or else walked away and allowed the Islanders to do it; either way I don't trust them an inch.

In fact I'd go one further and wonder if they'll try and sell Jamie back to the Lannisters, in an attempt to feign loyalty

mikemac1

Cool, thank you both

iamanengine

That episode had so many laugh out loud moments!

Thought the ending was absolutely brilliant.

Teg Veece

pixelburp wrote: »

Where things get sticky is that Rob was told by the Boltons that Winterfell lay in ruins when they arrived, which of course we know to be completely false. So my further guess is that the Boltons are either working with the Iron Islanders directly, or else are completely mercenary and out for their own gain. Now that they have Jamie, I suspect they'll get even bolder. One has to imagine it was the Boltons who set Winterfell ablaze, or else walked away and allowed the Islanders to do it; either way I don't trust them an inch.

In fact I'd go one further and wonder if they'll try and sell Jamie back to the Lannisters, in an attempt to feign loyalty

I'd say things are going to come to a head here very soon.

Rob is away from the front lines at his grandfather's funeral at Riverrun. It wouldn't be hard to imagine Lord Bolton making some kind of power play for the armies of the North. He holds Harrenhal and Jamie while even Rob's close generals seemed to be getting a bit disheartened being led by a king that can't defend his own castle and let the Kingslayer escape.

robby^5

pixelburp wrote: »

So my further guess is that the Boltons are either working with the Iron Islanders directly, or else are completely mercenary and out for their own gain.

I'm working off the same theory based on the different costumes seen in the Theon scenes in ep. 2 and 3.

When he's being tortured there are several Iron Islanders watching on in the background. The shots of them are really quick but you can notice the Greyjoy symbol on their chest plates and their helmets are the same as those worn by the Ironborn is season 2.

In this weeks episode when they chase him down in the woods the torturer is definitely dressed differently to the three men with him, who are wearing no Greyjoy symbols but have those same helmets as the Ironborn and also the same cloaks that draped over each shoulder.

MadYaker

That was a great episode but imo there are too many concurrent story lines at the moment and as a result each one is progressing really slowly with each episode, or else they are leaving out massive chunks. They need to kill off a few people! Or else make each episode 2 hours long!

The ending was also spoiled for me by some poster in one of these threads. I don't understand why people who have read the books feel the need to post in these threads, there is a separate thread just for them!

krudler

iamanengine wrote: »

That episode had so many laugh out loud moments!

Thought the ending was absolutely brilliant.

Jaime showing some morals trying to talk Brienne (sp?) out of being raped then having it backfire was great, if he's said nothing he'd still have his hand. I love that about the series and books that even "bad" characters have morally upstanding moments.

I did chuckle at the opening with the arrows missing the funeral boat

username123

krudler wrote: »

I love that about the series and books that even "bad" characters have morally upstanding moments.

Ah complex characterisation - something we dont often see done too well on tv. Its great!

allybhoy

robby^5 wrote: »

I'm working off the same theory based on the different costumes seen in the Theon scenes in ep. 2 and 3.

When he's being tortured there are several Iron Islanders watching on in the background. The shots of them are really quick but you can notice the Greyjoy symbol on their chest plates and their helmets are the same as those worn by the Ironborn is season 2.

In this weeks episode when they chase him down in the woods the torturer is definitely dressed differently to the three men with him, who are wearing no Greyjoy symbols but have those same helmets as the Ironborn and also the same cloaks that draped over each shoulder.

Jesus u really pay attention! I dont even know half their names

Syferus

Kirby wrote: »

It's worth bearing in mind that this is the same person who pushed a child out of a window.

Yes, he did a good thing in attempting to stop the rape but he just did what he always does.....talk. He assumed the attempt would cost him nothing. Just words. Had he known it would cost him his hand......would he have done it?

Would he f*ck. :P

Having said that, I found it quite shocking. It's also robbed us of a great sword wielding character. Yes, I know we have plenty......but he did it with such wit!

The countdown to when he inevitably kills half a dozen men-at-arms with a shortsword has begun.

pixelburp wrote: »

After that ending, I couldn't help but think of Arrested Development...
J Walter Weatherman: and that's why we don't sass-mouth our captors.


I'd love to say that the ending took me by surprise, but thanks to thoughtless eyebrow-wiggling and hint-dropping in what I thought were safe threads around here, I knew it was coming. Very very annoying because otherwise it's a massive moment for that character. The fight on the bridge & Jamie's chat with Brienne earlier now seem like foreshadowing; what little Jamie had to boast of is now taken from him. It could also change the dynamics in the family Lannister. Jamie's a cripple now, and doubtless will return to the family a broken, changed man (I suspect Cersei will want nothing to do with him). That leaves Tyrion, will will feel no desire to cosy up to those who have effectively disowned him.

Hardly. Her love for Jaime is probably the purest thing in the Lannister family.

Pardon the pun.

Anachrony

Syferus wrote: »

Hardly. Her love for Jaime is probably the purest thing in the Lannister family.

She's shown a lot more emotion when it comes to her children than with Jaime, which matches her advice to Sansa about loving your kids first. About to kill her younger son when the city was in danger, grief stricken with her daughter being sent away, and paranoid about Tyrion trying to get Joffrey killed. I don't recall her showing quite that much intensity over Jaime. She could have pushed harder to negotiate for his release.

Her main reaction to Jaime's absence was to start sleeping with her dimwit cousin.

Syferus

Anachrony wrote: »

She's shown a lot more emotion when it comes to her children than with Jaime, which matches her advice to Sansa about loving your kids first. About to kill her younger son when the city was in danger, grief stricken with her daughter being sent away, and paranoid about Tyrion trying to get Joffrey killed. I don't recall her showing quite that much intensity over Jaime. She could have pushed harder to negotiate for his release.

Her main reaction to Jaime's absence was to start sleeping with her dimwit cousin.

How can she? It may be an open secret in some quarters but a good Lannister like Cersei knows not to act out about such a sensitive topic to the family's reputation. Her feelings for Jaime were etched into her face as clear as day during the Small Council meeting in this episode.

Rosy Posy

mikemac1 wrote: »

Excuse the noob question but I'm lost.

End of Season 2 had Theon giving his speech in Winterfell and he was knocked out by his own men and it seemed that they escaped from the seige somehow though not before burning the place.

Season 3 opens and he is in a torture chamber and being interrogated for information

Sorry but who were holding him and why? Where are his own men gone?

Wasn't there a scene in a previous episode when Robb found out that Theon had taken Winterfell where he offered pardon to the Ironborn if they handed over Theon. So after he made his big victory speech his men knocked him out and handed him over to Robb's generals bastard (the Boltons of the Dreadfort) afaicr. A quick google search shows that their sigil is a man being tortured in the same manner as Theon was. I think that these are the same crowd that have Jaime and Brienne. A lovely bunch of lads by all accounts.

FutureGuy

Holy balls,
That was one of the best episodes of tv I have watched in quite some time. Much of the episode lulled the audience into a fall sense of security with brilliant humor and set peices. The positioning of the chairs, the bag over the head for he ugly one, the scene with Podraig. It was perhaps the funniest episode of the show I have watched.

And then, we see a good side of Jaime when he saved Brienne from certain rape. He uses his golden charm for good. At that moment, when combined with the growing relationship between him and Brienne, there is a turning point in how the character is perceived.

And just when it looks everything is going to end on a high, we are dealt a crushing blow. Jaime loses his sword hand. But it's more than that, he loses absolutely everything that makes him Jaime Lannister. His entire character is built on the fact that he is one of the greatest sworsmen in Westeros. Now that's gone.

When we woke up this morning, the FIRST thing my gf said to me was "Jaime lost his hand".

It will be interesting to see how that affects Jaime. It could be the end of him.

I love this show. ANYTHING can happen.

Dave!

Jamie has been held captive for so long that I can't remember how he and the imp left it.... but it'll be interesting to see how their relationship goes now. Tyrion is too good to thumb his nose at Jamie (...for long anyway!)

Jamie will soon develop that sense of empathy that he has been lacking til now.

ArmaniJeanss

Dave! wrote: »

Jamie has been held captive for so long that I can't remember how he and the imp left it....
.

I think the last time they were together was in Season1 Episode 2 at Winterfell having breakfast.

Tzar Chasm

Dave! wrote: »

Jamie has been held captive for so long that I can't remember how he and the imp left it.... but it'll be interesting to see how their relationship goes now. Tyrion is too good to thumb his nose at Jamie (...for long anyway!)

Jamie will soon develop that sense of empathy that he has been lacking til now.

jamie and tyrion are the only lanisters that have anything approaching a normal family relationship, remember the whorehouse scene in season one, very much two brothers muckin about, jamie was fair pissed off when tyrion was abducted, and tyrion were equally annoyed when no one attempted to bargain for james release

Penn

Man, Jamie losing his hand sucks. Always thought he was a great character and him saving Brienne was finally starting to show him in a very positive light too. Now that he's lost his sword hand, I'd say he'll still be a great character, but like someone else said, he's lost what made him "Jamie". Even though it was obvious he was weakened while fighting Brienne and possibly could have taken her, I was waiting since Season 1 for him to get a sword and be fighting again properly. Now it looks like that probably won't happen. And I'd say Tywin won't be too happy either.

The stuff with Podrick was great too.

The Stannis story annoys me though. It was brilliant when the red haired woman gave birth that that thing which killed Renley, but since then (with the exception of during the battle in Kings Landing episode), the Stannis story has just been plodding along too slowly. He just doesn't seem like any kind of threat to the Throne, as opposed to Robb Stark who seems like quite a clever tactician (as evident with the conversation with the fish lord guy, who I presume would be Cat's brother/his uncle)

Gbear

Penn wrote: »

The Stannis story annoys me though. It was brilliant when the red haired woman gave birth that that thing which killed Renley, but since then (with the exception of during the battle in Kings Landing episode), the Stannis story has just been plodding along too slowly. He just doesn't seem like any kind of threat to the Throne, as opposed to Robb Stark who seems like quite a clever tactician (as evident with the conversation with the fish lord guy, who I presume would be Cat's brother/his uncle)

He suffered a pretty comprehensive defeat. It's not surprising he's moping around a bit.

That little scene was probably important because it solidified the smoke baby rules. It goes into more depth when it kills Renly in the books.

Without the explanation of Stannis' "fires burning low", it's a little deus ex machina.

Degag

FutureGuy wrote: »

When we woke up this morning, the FIRST thing my gf said to me was "Jaime lost his hand".

:pac:

Precious flower

I was squirming in my seat watching the knife so close to Jamie's eyes and then watching his hand get chopped off. I had a feeling though they weren't falling over his charm though. I suppose it's nice to see Jamie actually do something for another person, but I still haven't warmed completely too him just yet. It was quite a funny episode I must say and I loved that! The slave owner was quite a laugh too. However, I still feel things are going too slowly some of the story lines I've stopped caring about e.g. The red haired woman one, sorry I know none of their names!:P

krudler

Melisandra is the red haired woman, yeah the Stannis storyline is the one I couldnt care less about tbh, I'd rather more of Arya, she was the best thing about season 2, her chemistry with Tywin was brilliant.

Anachrony

Precious flower wrote: »

I suppose it's nice to see Jamie actually do something for another person, but I still haven't warmed completely too him just yet.

It takes a lot more than doing 1 good thing to counterbalance attempting to murder a child to cover up your incestuous affair and murdering your cousin for a chance at an escape attempt that just as easily could have been accomplished non-lethally. If you do something good half the time and something evil half the time, that makes you evil. A good person wouldn't do certain things even infrequently. Atoning for one sufficiently awful crime can take a whole lifetime of trying to do good.

I wasn't happy to see that happen to Jaime, but on the list of injustices in this show it ranks pretty low for me.

Syferus

I think trying to deal in labels as clunky as 'good' and 'evil' in this show is a fallacy.

Anachrony

Syferus wrote: »

I think trying to deal in labels as clunky as 'good' and 'evil' in this show is a fallacy.

Nonsense. Just because there is moral ambiguity doesn't mean every character is ambiguous. There aren't many characters without significant moral flaws, but there are plenty who are completely horrible and can quite comfortably be described as evil. It's not a black and white good vs. evil scenario like some simplistic fantasy, but there are numerous clear examples of evil in various forms. Jaime isn't the very worst on the show, but he's certainly not one of the better ones either.

Bacchus

Syferus wrote: »

I think trying to deal in labels as clunky as 'good' and 'evil' in this show is a fallacy.

Anachrony wrote: »

Nonsense. Just because there is moral ambiguity doesn't mean every character is ambiguous. There aren't many characters without significant moral flaws, but there are plenty who are completely horrible and can quite comfortably be described as evil. It's not a black and white good vs. evil scenario like some simplistic fantasy, but there are numerous clear examples of evil in various forms. Jaime isn't the very worst on the show, but he's certainly not one of the better ones either.

I think I get where you're coming from, that there are people in the show who are clearly evil (i.e. Geofrey) or clearly good (e.g the Starks and their bastard brother John) but the very ambiguity you mention is exactly why you can't label the majority of characters good or evil. A few examples....

The Hound: Loves to kill people but you get the sense that he is honourable and he's protected Sansa on more than one occasion.

Tywin: Portrayed as a ruthless general (and is an absolute prick to Tyrion) but there's more to him than that as we saw in season 2 with his interactions with Arya.

Daenarys: Has a long list of people she intends on raining fire down upon and has no qualms about using slaves but really, she's just a child who wants her Iron Throne back and is full of good intentions about protecting the innocent.

Jamie: His evil deeds have been listed already but I don't think he's evil. He did those things out of reaction to a situation, not premeditated. Not that that makes him good or innocent but his character is all about self-preservation, AND as we are seeing, the preservation of the people he cares about. First his family and now Brienne.

Theon: Nice boy... did a very naughty thing (to try and earn his fathers love) and just kept digging a hole for himself to the point of no return by killing those two children.

So, yes, there are a few clearly 'evil' characters (not many though) and a fair few 'good' ones but the majority are shades of both.

Anachrony

I imagine the Tickler probably had a rough childhood, so he gets a pass. And the Mountain is merely sensitive about his weight. And that slave trader gentleman is nice to his mother.

If you frequently find yourself murdering people because you think it may benefit you, then you're not a good person. He spoke a few words to save Brienne when he had nothing better to do and he thought it was at no cost to him (although if he'd suspected what might happen to him he definitely would have kept quiet and let her get raped). A few hours before he would have gladly slit her throat merely so he could get back to King's Landing on his own terms, even though that's exactly where she planned on taking him anyway. There was no reason he had to fight her. It wasn't life or death for him. He was willing to murder her for petty pride.

username123

Anachrony wrote: »

A few hours before he would have gladly slit her throat merely so he could get back to King's Landing on his own terms, even though that's exactly where she planned on taking him anyway. There was no reason he had to fight her. It wasn't life or death for him. He was willing to murder her for petty pride.

You cant really judge the characters on our version of morality. Killing someone in a one on one sword fight isnt considered murder. If Brienne is going to put on armour and wear a sword, she has to be prepared to wield it. Thats life in Westeros. There is honour in dying by the sword if you live by the sword and you wont be seen as a murderer if you kill someone you fight fairly.

Of course that doesnt mean that head butting your cousin to death, throwing a kid off a tower for seeing you have sex with your sister or killing the king you were sworn to protect isnt immoral

purple_hatstand

I think something's 'up' with Commander Mormont and the rest of the Night's Watch scouts. The tone of their meeting with Craster in this episode was entirely different from the way things were when they stopped by on their journey north at the end of season 2.
We saw Ghost rescue Sam from a White Walker at the beginning of this season but we didn't see if/how the rest of them escaped/fought them off (or maybe they didn't).......?

golfball37

purple_hatstand wrote: »

I think something's 'up' with Commander Mormont and the rest of the Night's Watch scouts. The tone of their meeting with Craster in this episode was entirely different from the way things were when they stopped by on their journey north at the end of season 2.
We saw Ghost rescue Sam from a White Walker at the beginning of this season but we didn't see if/how the rest of them escaped/fought them off (or maybe they didn't).......?

As Mance said to Jon Snow "You know what they are now" about the Nights watch men who lost their lives to the White Walkers.

The same thought is obviously frightening to Mormont.

Witcher

purple_hatstand wrote: »

We saw Ghost rescue Sam from a White Walker at the beginning of this season but we didn't see if/how the rest of them escaped/fought them off (or maybe they didn't).......?

That wasn't a White Walker..that was a wight.

username123

Blay wrote: »

That wasn't a White Walker..that was a wight.

How do you know that?

Witcher

username123 wrote: »

How do you know that?

The guy on the horse last season was a WW, this guy was clearly a human and when Mormont put the torch to him he burst into flame just like the one Jon dealt with back at Castle Black.

username123

Blay wrote: »

The guy on the horse last season was a WW, this guy was clearly a human and when Mormont put the torch to him he burst into flame just like the one Jon dealt with back at Castle Black.

Are you saying that if someone put a torch to the guy on the horse he wouldnt have burst into flame?

And if not, why not?

Mickeroo

username123 wrote: »

Are you saying that if someone put a torch to the guy on the horse he wouldnt have burst into flame?

And if not, why not?

Don't think we know enough about them to answer that, but the guy who attacked Sam was still a wight not a walker. The easiest way to look at it is zombified humans/animals are wights and white walkers are an actual sentient being like the guy on the horse at the end of last season.

username123

Mickeroo wrote: »

Don't think we know enough about them to answer that, but the guy who attacked Sam was still a wight not a walker. The easiest way to look at it is zombified humans/animals are wights and white walkers are an actual sentient being like the guy on the horse at the end of last season.

I feel Im missing something here - I cant remember any difference being explained to us about them?

Mickeroo

username123 wrote: »

I feel Im missing something here - I cant remember any difference being explained to us about them?

It's pretty easy to tell from just looking at them tbh? It's also been established throughout both seasons through several conversations and scenes. Just read the GoT wiki entry on them here if it's not clear enough, one on wights here too (don't read the "in the books" section on those links, it doesn't go ahead of the show or anything, just goes into more detail).

username123

Mickeroo wrote: »

It's pretty easy to tell from just looking at them tbh? It's also been established throughout both seasons through several conversations and scenes.

No I dont think so. I thought the ones you are calling wights just looked more human because they were recent dead, whereas the guy on the horse was ancient. They both have the bright blue eyes so that was the only association I made on screen.

I have read the books btw, but its a source of confusion for me how you would know to look at one that one is a wight and one is a WW - and certainly, I dont know how you could tell from what we see onscreen if we accept that they are both dead things with bright blue eyes.

Im not arguing with the Wiki etc... or disputing any point. But if its a source of confusion for me, it must be confusing for other people as well and I havent noticed it being spelled out on screen.

Here is a wight:


Here is a white walker:


Now call me mad, but I think image 2 just looks like an ancient image 1.

Or have I just lost the plot?

Block (8

I thought they were all the same and the one attacking sam was just one somehow left behind from the army at the end of season 2.

Is there any spoilers in those wiki links?

Mickeroo

I think you've just misinterpreted it, to me the second one just looks like something that isn't supposed to be human. I read the books too, but not until after season two and I had made the differentiation between walkers/others and wights from the show alone.

We've seen wights with limbs missing, half their faces gone...they're zombies more or less they plod along without any sign of sentience. They guy on the horse (and also when we see one at the start of season 1 & at craster's keep) are much taller than a human and move more gracefully than the animated corpses.

Block (8 wrote: »

I thought they were all the same and the one attacking sam was just one somehow left behind from the army at the end of season 2.

Is there any spoilers in those wiki links?

The GoT wiki is catered to the show, so it doesn't go into book spoilers. The wiki of ice and fire is the one to avoid. EDIT: actually there is a section on that page called "In the books" now I look at it, so don't read that bit.

Cookiemunster

username123 wrote: »

No I dont think so. I thought the ones you are calling wights just looked more human because they were recent dead, whereas the guy on the horse was ancient. They both have the bright blue eyes so that was the only association I made on screen.

I have read the books btw, but its a source of confusion for me how you would know to look at one that one is a wight and one is a WW - and certainly, I dont know how you could tell from what we see onscreen if we accept that they are both dead things with bright blue eyes.

Im not arguing with the Wiki etc... or disputing any point. But if its a source of confusion for me, it must be confusing for other people as well and I havent noticed it being spelled out on screen.

Have to agree with Mickeroo here. Wights are reanimated corpses. Thats why the wildlings burn their dead so that that can't come back to life (like the Nights Watch guy who tried to kill Mormont). The white walkers are a sentient species who bring the wights to life. Don't know how you didn't get that, especially if you read the books.

username123

Mickeroo wrote: »

We've seen wights with limbs missing, half their faces gone...they're zombies more or less they plod along without any sign of sentience. They guy on the horse (and also when we see one at the start of season 1 & at craster's keep) are much taller than a human and move more gracefully than the animated corpses.

I cant agree with the above. The one that tried to kill Mormont obviously had at least enough sentience to do that.

And the tallness could just be they were tall in life. It wasnt obvious from the guy on the horse that he was particularly tall and we barely saw the one at Crasters Keep. I havent noticed them moving more gracefully either.

Again, Im not disputing that there are differences (or that I may have misinterpreted things) - but I just fail to see where a clear distinction has been drawn onscreen.

username123

Cookiemunster wrote: »

Don't know how you didn't get that, especially if you read the books.

I do get it from the books but this is a thread for non book readers. Im pointing out that its not that clear on the show.

Witcher

username123 wrote: »

Are you saying that if someone put a torch to the guy on the horse he wouldnt have burst into flame?

And if not, why not?

I'm not getting into a debate over it with ya. I'd have to give spoilers to explain it.

Point is; it was a wight.

username123

Blay wrote: »

I'm not getting into a debate over it with ya. I'd have to give spoilers to explain it.

Thank you Blay, that is exactly my point, you would have to get into spoilers to explain it, ie, its not that clear on screen.

so earlier in the thread when you asserted:

Blay wrote: »

That wasn't a White Walker..that was a wight.

I dont think that it made sense in the context of this being a thread for show watchers only.