|
Post by Weasel Pie on Jun 22, 2016 15:03:49 GMT
I have been up to my eyeballs in renovations so haven't had much time to discuss, but imma dump these thoughts here now just to clear them from my brainspace. Please spoiler-tag anything you guys feel is too revealing. OPINION: I predict that the whole Rickon thing will indeed play out in the books. Based on my Marvel stuff plus the hamhanded show plot, IMO House Stark will be betrayed and Rickon/Osha handed over to Ramsay, but not by the Umbers. House Manderly is going to do this honor. Remember two things: 1) The show never introduced a Manderly character ever....there's a guy with a merman/trident sigil on his surcoat flashed during the Red Wedding, but no actual character interaction with someone pegged as Manderly. Umber, however, was worked into the script with the whole "King in the North" thing; ergo, House Umber is "known" to viewers and can be used as the replacement Judas House. 2) In the books, Wyman has sent Davos to retrieve Rickon and Osha from Skagos. I think we'll see Davos fulfill his mission and then join Jon at the Wall, which puts all characters at the same point/place as show-world. However, Wyman is going to deliver Rickon to Ramsay in a massive shit betrayal of the Starks. (For the record, the Marvel plot arc of Dr. Strange in the Crypts of Kaa-U covers this as well.) If Rickon does indeed get executed via bolt from Bolton, the whole "why the hell didn't you zigzag?" thing makes sense as Rickon is, like, five. 5yos don't make wise decisions as a general rule, this I know from experience. Anyway, as far as Sansa is concerned, obviously none of her show arc is going down in the books, so my speculation on her is that she will arrive WITH Baelish and the army from the Vale in time to save the day, but with full intent of staking her claim to Winterfell (and eventually bequeathing it to Creepfinger via some machinations like marrying him or something equally revolting ). This pits her against Jon, and again allows intersection with the show. Back to painting! lemme drop that mic for ya... supremely sound logic.
|
|
|
Post by Ser Duncan on Jun 22, 2016 15:59:27 GMT
2) In the books, Wyman has sent Davos to retrieve Rickon and Osha from Skagos. I think we'll see Davos fulfill his mission and then join Jon at the Wall, which puts all characters at the same point/place as show-world. However, Wyman is going to deliver Rickon to Ramsay in a massive shit betrayal of the Starks. (For the record, the Marvel plot arc of Dr. Strange in the Crypts of Kaa-U covers this as well.) This would assume that the battle for Winterfell was lost and that Stannis is dead. It also assumes Wyman himself doesn't get killed due to his treachery. Wasn't the plan to get his troops outside and once battle was engaged, to slaughter the Freys and their allies from behind? (sorry I'm a little fuzzy on this, I didn't read Dance as many times as the other books.) Now I can see him using the information of where Rickon is as way to save his fat arse. If caught he'll tell Roose where to find the boy, leaving out the information that he's already sent Davos to fetch him, that way he'd be seen as telling the truth, but hoping Davos would've gotten the child out before anyone comes looking. Or he may even tell them the whole truth, that he's sent a man to retrieve him and is awaiting their arrival at White Harbor. I just don't see how this plays out clearly enough. Sorry. And on that note, of battle and king lost, would Davos go to the Wall? Why wouldn't he just go home and raise his 2 remaining sons? None of Selyse's men see him as a knight, let alone a lord. Selyse herself has little love for him, probably only marginally more than Davos has for Mel. In the show it makes sense he's at the Wall, he was sent there, and before he could return everything he believed in died. He has no sons left on the show, and now no lands or king/overlord. The Wall is the only place he can do some good. Not so in the books, there he's got family and land to defend.
|
|
|
Post by Ser Duncan on Jun 22, 2016 16:20:45 GMT
She'd have zig zagged.
|
|
|
Post by Melifeather on Jun 22, 2016 16:29:13 GMT
I predict that the whole Rickon thing will indeed play out in the books. Based on my Marvel stuff plus the hamhanded show plot, IMO House Stark will be betrayed and Rickon/Osha handed over to Ramsay, but not by the Umbers. House Manderly is going to do this honor. This will break my heart! All the details in the book lead the reader to hope the Manderlys are helping Davos and the Starks.
|
|
|
Post by cooterian15 on Jun 25, 2016 3:59:54 GMT
I predict that the whole Rickon thing will indeed play out in the books. Based on my Marvel stuff plus the hamhanded show plot, IMO House Stark will be betrayed and Rickon/Osha handed over to Ramsay, but not by the Umbers. House Manderly is going to do this honor. This will break my heart! All the details in the book lead the reader to hope the Manderlys are helping Davos and the Starks. Going to agree 100% on this one. Okay, I watched E9 again and I found this. The whole scene with Ramsey, half-beaten by Jon ends up in the cage shackled with chains and confronted by Sansa and her last jab at Ramsey...(and I paraphrase)...."you said so yourself, your dogs haven't eaten in 7 days..they are hungry". If you rewind that scene, Ramsey tells this to Jon and everyone else at the parlay...after....after...Sansa leaves on her horse. In other words, Sansa is never present to hear Ramsey tell them that his dogs haven't been fed. It's nit-picking...but I don't have any other nit's to pick.
|
|
|
Post by Weasel Pie on Jun 25, 2016 10:15:58 GMT
If you rewind that scene, Ramsey tells this to Jon and everyone else at the parlay...after....after...Sansa leaves on her horse. In other words, Sansa is never present to hear Ramsey tell them that his dogs haven't been fed. I caught this too! It's not nit-picking. Whoever keeps track of continuity needs to be sacked.
|
|
|
Post by Ser Duncan on Jun 25, 2016 15:12:45 GMT
I'm guessing it's still Cogman then. Don't know if anyone saw a copy of the letter Brienne presented the Blackfish, but it too was a complete mess. Pitiful really when there are so many book readers that would love that job.
|
|
|
Post by azriel on Jul 21, 2016 20:20:28 GMT
So curious about the Stark line question. Was it ever mentioned that Bran couldn't have children? Just because he is paralyzed doesn't mean he can't function completely as a man, unless it was mentioned and I missed it.
|
|
|
Post by Ser Duncan on Jul 21, 2016 21:50:13 GMT
So curious about the Stark line question. Was it ever mentioned that Bran couldn't have children? Just because he is paralyzed doesn't mean he can't function completely as a man, unless it was mentioned and I missed it. Off hand the only reference I can remember from the books is Ned tells Arya that just because Bran won't be a knight doesn't mean that he can't be useful to Robb as a bannerman. But this would be in book and season 1 if it was mentioned on the show at all. I want to say the Ned said no to having a children, but don't quote me on that, lol. But I agree with you, not all paralysed men are incapable of having children. Depends on the type of paralysis, and I don't think it's clearly defined in the books what kind Bran is suffering from. All they say is that he'll never walk again.
|
|
|
Post by azriel on Jul 21, 2016 22:16:14 GMT
So curious about the Stark line question. Was it ever mentioned that Bran couldn't have children? Just because he is paralyzed doesn't mean he can't function completely as a man, unless it was mentioned and I missed it. Off hand the only reference I can remember from the books is Ned tells Arya that just because Bran won't be a knight doesn't mean that he can't be useful to Robb as a bannerman. But this would be in book and season 1 if it was mentioned on the show at all. I want to say the Ned said no to having a children, but don't quote me on that, lol. But I agree with you, not all paralysed men are incapable of having children. Depends on the type of paralysis, and I don't think it's clearly defined in the books what kind Bran is suffering from. All they say is that he'll nevr walk again. At the time Ned would have said that he wasn't really thinking that Bran would be responsible for carrying on the Stark name, so it probably really wouldn't have come up. So I think there may still be hope for the Stark name...but that is just me being hopeful.
|
|
|
Post by Ser Duncan on Jul 21, 2016 22:29:04 GMT
At the time Ned would have said that he wasn't really thinking that Bran would be responsible for carrying on the Stark name, so it probably really wouldn't have come up. So I think there may still be hope for the Stark name...but that is just me being hopeful. In the history of House Stark it's happened before that the name nearly died out. What they did in one instance was take the bastard son of the Stark maiden and a wildling King beyond the Wall called Bael the Bard, and turn him into the Stark heir. So there is precedent for Sansa to carry on the line. Say she's pregnant from her marriage to Ramsay, she could call her child a Stark instead of a Bolton, especially since the Boltons got obliterated by her.
|
|
|
Post by azriel on Jul 21, 2016 22:30:27 GMT
Good one, didn't even think of that, that would make sense, totally.
|
|
|
Post by azriel on Jul 23, 2016 1:44:28 GMT
I can't remember who but someone had mentioned how Sansa was during the first season, how she wasn't supportive of her family. Do you really think that it was that she wasn't supportive, or more of a "I'm in an abusive relationship and if I don't obey, I don't know what he will do" kind of attitude. I mean she was obviously disgusted by Jaffrey but I don't think she knew what to do since she really had no allies in King's Landing. I do think that all that she has been through has made her harder, but I don't think she didn't care what happened to her family, I think it was more of she had no options. Also, I am curious to see what happens to her, because it seems those that get revenge get hit hard with karma's hammer.
|
|
|
Post by Melifeather on Jul 23, 2016 2:25:48 GMT
Well Sansa is not one of the surviving Stark kids listed in GRRM's original synopsis/outline sent to his publisher.
|
|
|
Post by azriel on Jul 23, 2016 2:30:46 GMT
Well Sansa is not one of the surviving Stark kids listed in GRRM's original synopsis/outline sent to his publisher. Ah I was not aware of that, thanks for the insight.
|
|