This keeps getting worse.

Thenns are basically illiterate cannibals and barbarians, when in fact the free folk considered them the most sophisticated of all the tribes/cultures living beyond the wall. Hell, they were even the best equipped. Now though? Apparently the guys writing this thought it'd be great to just completely remake them into slobbering maniacs who go full blown edgy by taunting a child how they're going to eat their dead parents. I just... what the fuck is wrong with these people?

Isn't it enough that they raped Jaime's character in this episode as well? Isn't it enough for them to make the audience dislike Stannis, but now are aiming for Jaime as well? Will they try to show off Cersei as some kind of victim, when in truth, it's the reverse in the books (not literally so, but you get the gist), as Jaime turns out to be the fool out of the two, while Cersei goes on to bitch and bemoan her fate of how she should have been born a man, and how she fancied herself the true child of Tywin Lannister. The only time she said "No" to him during the whole thing was here:

And then it turned to this:

There's more I'd take issue with concerning this episode, but these two are probably the most notable ones for me, when all else is pushed aside.

I'm just wondering what the fuck are they trying to do with this show.

 

Because they love Lena Headay.

Personally, I don't mind the lighter aspects of TV! Cersei. Makes for a more nuanced character and I can enjoy the performances she gives as a result and it's also helped develop characters like Joffery more as well.

But this weird rape scene... at first I was like "not in the books, this is really stupid, why are they ruining Jaime!" and then the apologists started popping up, saying Cersei didn't really say no or she started getting into it a bit at the end or whatever and I think that's a bullshit cop out.

As is... it's the fucking Lannister twins. If they didn't do something horrifically fucked up when around each other (Bran getting thrown out a window anyone?), especially after a stressful time such as this, then I would be rather surprised.

That doesn't mean I like it though.

Edit: And yeah, pretty much most of the additions the writers have made to the mythology for the TV adaption (with the exceptions of the Tyrion/Bronn/Pod bromance, Arya/Whoever, Ros's run, Joffery's brief glimpses of intelligence and humanity and the endearing Talisa/Robb scenes) have been for the worse, IMO.

 

"Me watches episode 2"

Don't worry Joff, there's plenty of Starks on the other side to keep you company.

"Me watches episode 3"

I kinda wonder how their going to do Sansa and Littlefinger's up coming parts, I mean...

Spoiler

I don't care if it Is acting, it would be a bit squicky to see Littlefinger's actor kiss Sansa's actor.

But that's just me.

 

I think the reason why the Thenns are depicted as cannibals is to give us some reason to actually consider the wildlings wild. So far they've seemed no less civilised than those of Westeros. It's just they happen to be on the other side of the wall.

So the cannibal Thenns remind us that Mance is the exception, not the rule, and that most wildlings are in fact dangerous and antithetical to civil society.

 

Ding, ding, ding! That's the point. They are just people who found themselves born on the wrong side of the wall. That's all there is to it. People aren't banished beyond the Wall for some imaginary crime, they're sent to man the Wall or are executed. They're Free Folk, only the Southerners call them wildlings.

They however do not kneel, their women don't take to being courted like the women of the south, and to them, everything is the south, even the land most of Westeros calls north.

Are some of them (as both individuals and tribes) utterly fucking wild? No doubt. But create an OC tribe if you wish, don't corrupt a preexisting one that's rather relevant for a subplot and interactions with some of the more often encountered POVs.

I haven't an idea how far along you've read the books, but in one of them Jon basically arranges that the leader of the Thenn marries Alys Karstark, and thus forms the House Thenn.

Do you really see that happening with this much alteration already present? Do you really see him allowing such a thing to happen?

Most likely, when Stannis arrives at the Wall, he's going to burn them. That's it. Evil fire-king with his Red Witch, just burning as usual.

 

There's plenty of opportunity to still arrange a marriage with a "civilised wildling" without it having to be a Thenn. They can just introduce an OC specifically created for that purpose.

And wildlings are not "just people who found themselves born on the wrong side of the wall". They have a completely different culture to that of Westeros.

 

Never said they didn't have a culture of their own, nor meant to imply as such. That however is something that allows them to survive there, in the wilds, where the winter strikes even harder than it does in Winterfell.

That culture however developed because they were born beyond the Wall, because the southern lands are denied to them. I'm not trying to idolize them, to say they are all poor women, children and men simply trying to live. Some are wild, some rape, some kill for no reason but to kill. The same as the South.

The same as it is anywhere in that world. An accident of birth determined their lives, as much as it does any others, albeit harsher in certain regards.

Also, the thing is the Thenns were picked for that because they were the most civilized, most sophisticated of all the Free Folk, who already functioned in a similar, but not quite the same, manner as a Westeros House might. No other is alike them in that regard.

 

Maybe Alys will marry Tormund, to keep the actor around?

 

Ah, but doing so will not create a new noble house, which was the plan all along. It has to do with the Karstark inheritance basically. So no, an ordinary free folk man, no matter how distinguished, is not an equal marriage opportunity as a Magnar of the Thenn is.

 

I doubt HBO will care about such nuances. They've ignored larger details before for the sake of the show's continuity.

 

They did and for a good reasons like having less characters around in one of the biggest casts on the TV show ever. It's actually a good question which characters will appear in the next season and which ones will not. There are speculations that even bigger names may be dropped depending on how important they are for the conclusion of the books. Then again after this season the show will be in a need for an addition of new, charismatic actors.

And is just me or Kit Harington improved his acting? Or maybe it's because he has a chance to play a more badass version of Jon Snow now.

 

Characters: 100% my thoughts

Kit: Again. 100% my thoughts. I think it's because he has a more proactive role. Last season he had to play a character who was in a new environment and wasn't allowed to speak his mind. Before that, Jon Snow was always bemoaning and complaining.

 

They changed Daario's actor, why? He still doesn't have that magnetism to him but whatever never really cared for that storyline in the books.

My biggest complain. No strong Belwas. Seriously the moment that guy rode out, I was waiting to see the show create another memorable moment but instead, we got Daario pissing instead of Belwas shitting in a mans headless neck.

I'm still not sure what they're going to do with the hound, maybe he goes with Arya to Bravos or joins the gold company on the way. I can't remember correctly but there was a hint that he was still alive in the books right?

Also the thing with Stannis is beginning to become annoying. I'm betting they'll make him going to defend the wall have something to do with glory and shit like that other than in the books as the first major person who recognizes and tries to defend against the threat.

 

The actor got offered a place in a movie and took it.

 

To play a young Jason Statham in the next Transporter. Fucking awful. He had more fire to him than this guy; if they'd had him from the beginning, I wouldn't have minded the change, but their portrayals of the same character are too different.

 

I never liked Daario in the books so I'm perfectly happy to dislike him in the show too.

 

It was completely overshadowed by the Jaime/Cersei scene, so it slipped my mind until I heard my coworkers talking about it:
Did anyone else love the Tywin/Tommen interaction? Especially to people who haven't read the books, (Or at least my coworkers) he is an irredeemable monster. My friends were flabbergasted to see him as an able, well intentioned Hand of the King, tutoring Tommen. (Even if it was a bit callous to do it over Joffrey's corpse.)

 

They shouldn't be surprised. When Joffrey was poisoned he didn't even bother with trying to save him and chose protecting his younger grandson. Tommen is his last chance to ensure that the family prevails when he won't be around. That's why I disagree with people saying that he only wants to make him his puppet. He wants him to listen to him, but is aware that he needs to teach him how to say no and make his own decision too.

 

What's with all the uproar about the Cersei/Jaime scene? It was squicky for me...not because of the rape/incest (which is sadly way too common in this show!) but because it was happening next to Joffrey's dead body. I mean...he's their son. The sex itself made sense in the context of Jaime's character development (in the show)...he's desperately trying to reaffirm his previous relationships/responsibilities in the familiar setting of King's Landing because he doesn't recognize how much he's changed/been changed whilst on the road. So I think I'll reserve my final opinions on Jaime's character for the next episode, which should show the repercussions of the rape. And hopefully more Brienne.

 

That scene with Cersei and Brienne was pure gold.