Gryzemuis on 6/6/2013 at 11:26
Quote Posted by Chimpy Chompy
Yeah it's three characters at once, and pretty much the end of one of the major factions.
Four maybe even. Depends on whether you count Talisa as a major character.
But Grey Wind (Robb Stark's Dire Wolf) is certainly a major character. It seems more viewers were upset about a dying animal than upset about dead people.
Quote:
(there are still Stark kids around but I don't see any of them leading an army in the near future).
I'm already looking forward to little Rickon growing up.
"I'm gonna get medieval on your ass".
jimjack on 6/6/2013 at 14:41
The King who never lost a battle and died by the most base treachery. Damn.
Nicker on 6/6/2013 at 19:52
I think there has been objectively gorier and more egregious scenes of violence on screen before but none where so many characters we have come to care about all die within a minute of each other.
But I think my shock was partly what Chimpy Chompy touched on. It's one thing to off the occasional beloved character once in a while to ramp up the emotions but NOT to seemingly eliminate an entire story line or at least put it on hold for a generation. What now? Two seasons of Joffrey prancing about the palace murdering whores while the Stark boys grow up?
Should be interesting. And There be Dragons.
Phatose on 6/6/2013 at 20:52
Nah. In a bizarre turn, Season 4 is primarily a romantic comedy starring Sansa and Tyrion and the wacky adventures they have trying to convince everyone they're actually having sex.
Pyrian on 6/6/2013 at 21:58
Quote Posted by Renzatic
Yeah, I think we're all well acquainted with the fact that the show is pretty violent, along with the fact that no one's safe, and any character can die at anytime.
And yeah, we were all expecting some trouble with the Frays for a good long while now.
But what I just saw? No one was expecting that. It was brutal even by the show's already brutal standards.
What you missed
isn't that the level of brutality "could" escalate. It's that it
had to - more than that, that it's the whole
goal, the reason this work exists, the subject Martin set out to write about. And this was entirely obvious by the end of the first book.
Scots Taffer on 7/6/2013 at 01:50
Martin obviously takes a certain level of sadistic glee in subverting expectations. Killing the "good guys" is bad enough, but killing them in the most underhand, treacherous and gruesome fashion in an environment where both the readers and the characters feel at ease is definitely the work of a devious mind. It's admittedly a fantastic achievement to pull off as a writer, creating a sequence that literally enrages people with its sudden, unfair but totally logical (in retrospect) turn of events, but that doesn't diminish that he clearly enjoys fucking with people, particularly people who hold lofty ideals without any pragmatism to achieve modest goals in the direction of those ideals.
I think the emotional suckerpunch is more than just that though. I think it hurts because it's the death of the audience's hope in an archetypal triumph of good over evil. Despite us knowing and understanding the ugly reality of Westeros, we want to see the evildoers punished by the "good" - even if the "good" lack the pragmatism and self-awareness to see how deeply flawed their strategies or actions are. The death of Robb, the avenging son hero archetype, and Catelyn, the flinty grieving wife, drive home that there will likely be no vengeance for Ned's death and the audience still has an emotional anchor in the Starks from Ned's storyline in the first novel.
Ultimately Martin wants to show how good and evil are simply matters of perspective, which he does admirably with characters like Jaime, and part of this is showing how principled idealism can cause as much damage as rampant self-interest.
Phatose on 7/6/2013 at 03:00
Well, on the bright side Ned's killer is a character in Game of Thrones, and therefore has a 99% probability of meeting some horrible, painful end. Like everybody else.
faetal on 7/6/2013 at 08:33
Quote Posted by Nicker
What now? Two seasons of Joffrey prancing about the palace murdering whores while the Stark boys grow up?
Thanks, my monitor is now covered in tea.
faetal on 7/6/2013 at 08:37
Quote Posted by Pyrian
What you missed
isn't that the level of brutality "could" escalate. It's that it
had to - more than that, that it's the whole
goal, the reason this work exists, the subject Martin set out to write about. And this was entirely obvious by the end of the first book.
Also, did no one wonder what Tywin Lannister was up to all of that time in King's Landing, writing on his little parchments with his little quill? Both this subtle element of the TV series and alluded to in the books - Tywin wasted no time in offering land, titles and wealth to anyone willing to turn against Robb Stark. Which probably explains why, other than seeming vexed after strategic defeats, he never came across as terribly worried about the big picture, since everyone has their price.
To be fair, once the Tyrells came on board for the Lannisters, it was all over for the rebels anyway. What these stories highlight greatest of all is that you can choose honour or victory, but rarely both.
