Season 4; Episode 4: 'Oathkeeper'; *Have NOT* Read the Books

desertcircus

Naydy wrote: »

Ooh, maybe that's the big twist?! Oh, you know all those kings and betrayals and plotting and cute little battles you've had? Doesn't matter, cause one or two people with superpowers are gonna bulldoze through everything anyway, sorry.

Matter by Iain M Banks has a plotline quite close to that. About one-third is Game Of Thrones-style medieval plotting and murders, and the remaining two thirds details what's going on several civilisational levels up the food chain, which is on an unimaginably vast scale compared to the sordid stabbings and murders.

Penn

desertcircus wrote: »

The Daenerys storyline is causing problems for me. In terms of scale, her achievements dwarf anything going on in Westeros: she's taken three cities that each look vast compared to King's Landing and has an army big enough and lethal enough to annihilate any opposition in Westeros. And she has three dragons. It makes the focus of the show feel out of balance - a conquering queen ripping the known world to shreds and massacring the ruling class across the sea, a child who can possess human beings north of the Wall, and the show spends 75% of its time focusing on the people in the middle who are neither dragon-wielding forces of nature or crippled children in possession of a skill that could make them unstoppably lethal.

I don't agree. She has the dragons, sure. But there was only around 8,000 of the Unsullied, and the rest of her army are pretty much all slaves. Probably no more than 50,000 total. Stannis, after taking Renly's army had over 100,000 proper soldiers and he failed. He even knew Kings Landing's weak points and had hundreds of ships and was badly defeated.

The Unsullied are probably some of the best fighters having been trained from birth, but they're still hugely outnumbered, and like the slaves in this week's episode said, the slaves don't know how to fight. Plus, she still needs to find a way to get her army across to Westeros.

Her main advantage are the dragons, but they're not fully grown yet. So they're stretching out her story until then.

snausages

I agree with the criticisms about that scene. It was way too much and the narrative justification for it is flimsy. We know Westeros is a **** place for women, every episode this season has highlighted that fact. I don't care what the fanboys think, the series has way too many of those scenes.

snausages

ben.schlomo wrote: »

Lots of sensitive Simons around here after that epsiode. It wasn't overly graphic at all, nothing being done was a main scene, some background stuff which was mostly noisy and off camera almost. Decent episode, big improvement on previous week. More Tyrion/Jaime/Wights, less Dani/Sansa, no Sam/Gilly.

I think putting it just off a little bit in the periphery makes it worse personally. It was an extremely graphic scene by any standard. It's not needed (certainly not with 2 or 3 rape scenes already all within the last few weeks) and the episode wouldn't have lost anything by its omission. There's nothing puritanical about that.

pickarooney

Penn wrote: »

Glad to see there's finally some proper movement in Bran's story. Looks like Daenerys' story might start slowing to a crawl again now though.

Best part of the episode was Tommen saying how Joffrey threatened to kill his cat and feed it to Tommen. Even after his death he's still the biggest pr*ck in the show

I burst out laughing at what felt like an overt reference to Eric Cartman.

How is Daenerys going to feed this massive army she's gathering?

snausages

But all that aside, it was an excellent episode. I just think, like someone else said, that there should be some more balance if they're going to depict all the gritty stuff.

Bacchus

pickarooney wrote: »

I burst out laughing at what felt like an overt reference to Eric Cartman.

How is Daenerys going to feed this massive army she's gathering?

She'll probably need to put them back to work.

Grimebox

desertcircus wrote: »

The Daenerys storyline is causing problems for me. In terms of scale, her achievements dwarf anything going on in Westeros: she's taken three cities that each look vast compared to King's Landing and has an army big enough and lethal enough to annihilate any opposition in Westeros. And she has three dragons. It makes the focus of the show feel out of balance - a conquering queen ripping the known world to shreds and massacring the ruling class across the sea, a child who can possess human beings north of the Wall, and the show spends 75% of its time focusing on the people in the middle who are neither dragon-wielding forces of nature or crippled children in possession of a skill that could make them unstoppably lethal.

Then you have the white walkers which will undo everything else. They are pretty much invincible as nobody really knows how to fight them. Nobody is going to care who poisoned a inbred brat of a king when they arrive.

naughto

Grimebox wrote: »

Then you have the white walkers which will undo everything else. They are pretty much invincible as nobody really knows how to fight them. Nobody is going to care who poisoned a inbred brat of a king when they arrive.

Dident the fat lad kill one of them so I don't think there invincible.
I doubt they would like the weather we are getting at the minute either
Edit is there anybehinde the scenes floating about?

tricky D

Dany's story line has hints that it might take a turn: Grey Worm's comment to Missandei might suggest some sort of backlash. Coupled with her not heeding the advice of Barristan Selmy. It won't be her first sting in the tail she's experienced.

The number of story lines per episode seems fine imho. It's a fairly standard editing technique for multiple story lines and mirrors the books' format. (There was a Geoffrey Archer interview yesterday on NewsTalk about this kind of thing, where he explained how he wrote Cain and Able as two completely separate long sections only for his editor to insist on interweaving them in snappier sub-sections, resulting in a much more coherent read.)

As for the brutality and treatment of women, that was established pretty much from the get-go. Perhaps a discussion on that would merit its own thread - it's a bit distracting from the episode-based discussion imho.

And Hodor must survive. If he gets killed off, I'll be a very unhappy chappy. Hodor.

Grimebox

naughto wrote: »

Dident the fat lad kill one of them so I don't think there invincible.
I doubt they would like the weather we are getting at the minute either
Edit is there anybehinde the scenes floating about?

By a blade that seems extremely rare. The vast majority wouldn't be able to fight them.

Dan_Solo

The whole speed of seasonal change thing and invasion/retreat of species in Westeros sounds like it was lifted entirely from Aldiss' Helliconia series TBH.

Grimebox

Dan_Solo wrote: »

The whole speed of seasonal change thing and invasion/retreat of species in Westeros sounds like it was lifted entirely from Aldiss' Helliconia series TBH.

Nobody has an original thought any more

Akrasia

Grimebox wrote: »

By a blade that seems extremely rare. The vast majority wouldn't be able to fight them.

Wasn't it 'dragon glass' that killed the white walker?

I wonder where they could get more dragon glass from if they needed it??

Dan_Solo

Grimebox wrote: »

Nobody has an original thought any more

Probably too harsh by me there... I guess he could have come up with it on his own. I wonder if he's ever been asked if there's a link? Helliconia was never filmed anyway (though it should be!) so I think it's more fair game.

Grimebox

Akrasia wrote: »

Wasn't it 'dragon glass' that killed the white walker?

I wonder where they could get more dragon glass from if they needed it??

This website is good for information because you can easily avoid book related stuff. Dragon glass is obsidian which is made from volcanic rock, so maybe its not that rare. It does shatter on contact of a walker though. If the white walkers reproduce in such a strange manner, there probably isn't all that many of them.

ben.schlomo

snausages wrote: »

I think putting it just off a little bit in the periphery makes it worse personally. It was an extremely graphic scene by any standard. It's not needed (certainly not with 2 or 3 rape scenes already all within the last few weeks) and the episode wouldn't have lost anything by its omission. There's nothing puritanical about that.

It was nowhere near as 'graphic' as last weeks, i dont remember the two others youre mentioning. The point of it was to show just how depraved, low and bad a character that the mutineer chap is. Therefore placing Bran in huge harm as a result and mking Jons arrival all the more urgent. So you think if a rape was in the forefront of the scene that would be better? More graphic and in your face style?

celica00

Grimebox wrote: »

Then you have the white walkers which will undo everything else. They are pretty much invincible as nobody really knows how to fight them. Nobody is going to care who poisoned a inbred brat of a king when they arrive.

Thats wrong, Sam killed one with the dragon glass

celica00

Akrasia wrote: »

Wasn't it 'dragon glass' that killed the white walker?

I wonder where they could get more dragon glass from if they needed it??

you can also see in one episode how Sam digged a good few out and gave a bit of it later to Bran.

So there is might more hidden somewhere?

Dan_Solo

Akrasia wrote: »

I wonder where they could get more dragon glass from if they needed it??

From somebody with a dragon?
Is that a trick question?

Sleepy

It's Obsidian. Sam says so when they first found the cache.

BASHIR

Fire isn't too hard to get either!

seligehgit

KerranJast wrote: »

I disagree. He's been wonderfully devious. That whole Chaos is a Ladder scene with Varys last season was great.

Totally agree,mystified by the lack of love for Aidan Gillen,plays the machiavellian Littlefinger really well.Loved his one on one scheming interludes with Varys.His absence from Kings Landing has greatly lessened the devious back biting and politicking that was so prominent in earlier seasons and which was a personal highlight.

Certainly his Jack Sparrow like accent is pretty annoying,here's hoping he returns back to his accent in earlier seasons.

Mickeroo

seligehgit wrote: »

Totally agree,mystified by the lack of love for Aidan Gillen,plays the machiavellian Littlefinger really well.Loved his one on one scheming interludes with Varys.His absence from Kings Landing has greatly lessened the devious back biting and politicking that was so prominent in earlier seasons and which was a personal highlight.

Certainly his Jack Sparrow like accent is pretty annoying,here's hoping he returns back to his accent in earlier seasons.

Thought Gillen was grand this week since his accent seemed to revert back to Season 1 Littlefinger for the scene.

Chet T16

Can i get a quick recap on the mutineers at crasters and how they got there? Googling is never a safe option

Mickeroo

Chet T16 wrote: »

Can i get a quick recap on the mutineers at crasters and how they got there? Googling is never a safe option

The Nightswatch all legged it there after the WW attack. Tensions rose between Craster and a few of them as they were accusing him of keeping the food supply from them, then the mutiny happened, Mormont was murdered and Sam legged it with Gilly.

EyeSight

Chet T16 wrote: »

Can i get a quick recap on the mutineers at crasters and how they got there? Googling is never a safe option

Remember when the Knights watch were staying there? And their leader was attacked and killed by there own guys? It was when Sam ran off with Crasters daughter(one of them anyway).
Well they guys who killed their own leader and started that mutiny stayed there. That's them

Penn

Chet T16 wrote: »

Can i get a quick recap on the mutineers at crasters and how they got there? Googling is never a safe option

I'm currently on a rewatch of the whole series. Once Season 4 started I realised that I remember f*ck all of Season 3 bar one or two of the main plot points.

Grimebox

Honestly, this website is brilliant for keeping up to date: http://gameofthrones.wikia.com/wiki/Karl_Tanner. I often pause it if there is mention of someone I can't remember. The show is far better if you aren't confused by the little things

iamanengine

I think Gillen actually portrays his character well but the accent does let him down, I didn't mind it at all in the 1st few seasons though and I think it also wasn't as bad this episode.

In regards to the graphic scenes, I think they kind of have to put them in in a sense. They have created a world where this is largely an acceptable or at least regular act. It wouldn't make sense for them to create that world but yet then when a bunch of the scummiest people in that universe find themselves in compete control of a group of women that they would just decide to leave the girls alone. It was also important to show the danger Bran is in.

I really like the Bran story-line but I just cannot stand the actor who plays him, and his damn long hair!! :pac:

Degag

Bacchus wrote: »

I found myself really warming to Jamie again. Himself and Tyrion are great on screen together and there were lots of nice nods to events in previous seasons here. Those scenes when Brienne were awesome. I don't think he realised he loved her until that moment she was leaving. Great scene. And Pod!! Looking forward to the adventures of Brienne and Pod.

Anyone else think that Jaime is only sending Brienne to find Sansa to keep Cersei happy and put her head on a spike?

Degag

Grimebox wrote: »

This website is good for information because you can easily avoid book related stuff. Dragon glass is obsidian which is made from volcanic rock, so maybe its not that rare. It does shatter on contact of a walker though. If the white walkers reproduce in such a strange manner, there probably isn't all that many of them.

Does the "In the books" section of that website contain future spoilers?

Grimebox

Degag wrote: »

Anyone else think that Jaime is only sending Brienne to find Sansa to keep Cersei happy and put her head on a spike?

How the feck did Cersai know Brienne was in love with Jaime? Even I didn't know that until Cersai confronted Brienne

Grimebox

Degag wrote: »

Does the "In the books" section of that website contain future spoilers?

I can't vouch for every "In the books" section, but in that particular article, there are no spoilers. Just more information about dragon glass and one difference in how the weapons were found.

Faith

Bacchus wrote: »

Oh, one thing I forgot to mention. Screw you showrunners! That "rape em till their dead" scene in the camp with women being brutally raped all around as that evil fcuker drank out of a skull was the final straw for my wife. She has now sworn off the show. Not that I blame her, it was a vile scene, probably as bad as anything shown before. Really wish the showrunners would stop trying to outdo themselves. We get it, Westeros is full of evil and danger, particularly for women. You don't have to shove it so violently in our faces.

110% agree. That scene lifted me totally out of my 'tv watching trance' and plopped me back in the real world. I couldn't settle for the rest of the episode then. It was just too much. Maybe the line would have been enough without the background raping, or else the background raping without the line - either would have conveyed the fúcked-upness of the set-up but the two together was unnecessary and seriously disturbing.

Mickeroo

I don't think the Game of Thrones wiki goes ahead of the show when it mentions the books just says any differences, just don't go into the A Song of Ice & Fire wiki by mistake!

There are some things that may be considered spoilers though regarding certain characters as a result of the show toning down the fantasy aspects of the books so tread carefully.

Naydy

Degag wrote: »

Anyone else think that Jaime is only sending Brienne to find Sansa to keep Cersei happy and put her head on a spike?

He told Brienne to find Sansa and take her someplace safe. King's Landing wouldn't be her first choice I bet!

Amirani

Naydy wrote: »

Totally agree. It's not necessary in my opinion, it's purely for shock value. If they were truly going for a gritty portrayal of life in Westoros, why aren't there more scenes of hanged soldiers ravaged by animals, people fighting over rats during the food shortage in King's Landing, murder of children, even men getting raped? Why is there a focus on the sexual crimes against women? You've more than got your point across, women were horribly exploited, can you stop with these scenes now please.

In fairness, people getting nailed to crosses is pretty brutal, as happened last night. There's fairly horrible murders in most episodes, as well as lots of other horrible stuff. The scene at the start of episode two with the dogs ripping the girl to shreds after the chase was worse than any rape scene for me.

It's not a show for the faint hearted. It depicts some very sick concepts and acts. If you're not comfortable with these scenes you maybe shouldn't be watching the program. This is George RR Martin's story, he can tell it however he wants.

Amirani

snausages wrote: »

Actually a lot of the really controversial stuff seem to be divergences from GRRM's story.

There's a huge amount of rape in the books, some of which people think is excessively glamorised. A female friend of mine wrote a thesis on the subject.

Naydy

Diego Simeone wrote: »

In fairness, people getting nailed to crosses is pretty brutal, as happened last night. There's fairly horrible murders in most episodes, as well as lots of other horrible stuff. The scene at the start of episode two with the dogs ripping the girl to shreds after the chase was worse than any rape scene for me.

It's not a show for the faint hearted. It depicts some very sick concepts and acts. If you're not comfortable with these scenes you maybe shouldn't be watching the program. This is George RR Martin's story, he can tell it however he wants.

I don't deny that violence is important to the core of the story but this scene was close to crossing a line for me. You didn't actually see the girl getting ripped apart, whereas you saw multiple women getting raped with close up shots. As for it being GRRM's story

this scene wasn't in the book I've been reliably informed

Chet T16

Grimebox wrote: »

Honestly, this website is brilliant for keeping up to date: http://gameofthrones.wikia.com/wiki/Karl_Tanner. I often pause it if there is mention of someone I can't remember. The show is far better if you aren't confused by the little things

I had completely forgotten what had happened, or even who Mormont was

I also didn't realise who Locke was even though i recognised his face!

kryogen

Rape em till their dead didnt bother me

The leaving of the baby in the woods did though, and did the first time too. Not comfortable with scenes that depict harm to kids/infants at all, which I suppose is natural!

The rape scene in the keep was run of the mill stuff though, just reminding you and making you fully aware how these men are of no moral code whatsoever and are bad guys, not to be liked or even the slightest sympathy given. Its a cheap story telling trick to be perfectly honest, speeds up development of what the director wants the audience to feel for certain characters.

The nailing of the lads to the crosses was worse then that scene actually

2ndcoming

snausages wrote: »

I agree with the criticisms about that scene. It was way too much and the narrative justification for it is flimsy. We know Westeros is a **** place for women, every episode this season has highlighted that fact. I don't care what the fanboys think, the series has way too many of those scenes.

I think they use these shocking scenes to demonstrate "the bad guys". In a world so full of murky characters who reside in the grey area between it's a kind of dumbing down (I imagine) of the original story for TV purposes so they can clearly demonstrate the few characters you're actually supposed to have zero sympathy for such as Joffrey, Locke and the Bolton's, the Mutineers up in Craster's, etc.

Dan_Solo

kryogen wrote: »

Rape em till their dead didnt bother me

The leaving of the baby in the woods did though, and did the first time too. Not comfortable with scenes that depict harm to kids/infants at all, which I suppose is natural!

It's uncomfortable reading, but leaving babies to die of exposure was incredibly common throughout history. (Just think of how Hansel and Gretel ended up in the woods).
And in fairness to the White Walkers, they are saving these children. GO TEAM WHITE WALKERS!

2ndcoming

kryogen wrote: »

The rape scene in the keep was run of the mill stuff though, just reminding you and making you fully aware how these men are of no moral code whatsoever and are bad guys, not to be liked or even the slightest sympathy given. Its a cheap story telling trick to be perfectly honest, speeds up development of what the director wants the audience to feel for certain characters.

Replied before I read your comment, exactly my thoughts on it.

Nerdlingr

Diego Simeone wrote: »

In fairness, people getting nailed to crosses is pretty brutal, as happened last night. There's fairly horrible murders in most episodes, as well as lots of other horrible stuff. The scene at the start of episode two with the dogs ripping the girl to shreds after the chase was worse than any rape scene for me.

It's not a show for the faint hearted. It depicts some very sick concepts and acts. If you're not comfortable with these scenes you maybe shouldn't be watching the program. This is George RR Martin's story, he can tell it however he wants.

But that scene was off camera. It was left for you as the viewer to decide and imagine the horror and suffering that girl went through with the dogs ripping her apart. The rape scene in crasters is unneccessarily shown imo. We know they're a degraded lot. We dont have to have every last detail of their inhumanity projected on screen. Sometimes its better for the viewer to imagine the atrocities for themselves.

The story is George RR Martin's , but this is an interpretation of it for TV. I dont feel the producers/directors have done a really good job at all this season of interpreting the books.

mayordenis

Nerdlingr wrote: »

The story is George RR Martin's , but this is an interpretation of it for TV. I dont feel the producers/directors have done a really good job at all this season of interpreting the books.

If you're of that opinion you probably shouldn't be posting in this thread.

Nerdlingr

mayordenis wrote: »

If you're of that opinion you probably shouldn't be posting in this thread.

Probaby not but reply was in relation to someone saying this was "GRR Martin's story and he can tell whatever way he wants" . My point is valid whether you've read the books or not. This is a TV show and any TV show based on a series of books is an interpretation of the original authors works. Sure Martin himself had to come out and distance himself from the jaime/cersei rape scene last week. People who've not read GoT shouldnt use the books as a justifcation as to what goes on in the TV show.

I'll be off now. :P

golfball37

Nerdlingr wrote: »

Probaby not but reply was in relation to someone saying this was "GRR Martin's story and he can tell whatever way he wants" . My point is valid whether you've read the books or not. This is a TV show and any TV show based on a series of books is an interpretation of the original authors works. Sure Martin himself had to come out and distance himself from the jaime/cersei rape scene last week. People who've not read GoT shouldnt use the books as a justifcation as to what goes on in the TV show.

I'll be off now. :P

Exactly- I've read a few bad reviews of this TV episode on IMDB because some of the material is not in the books or it wasn't true to the books.

What that has to do with the merits of something being a good or bad hour of TV mystyfies me to be honest.

Da Shins Kelly

It's not George RR Martin's story though, so I don't know why that's being used to defend it. The rape stuff doesn't happen in the books. It is definitely HBO including it for the sake if being provocative.