Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 1, 2018 18:43:20 GMT
My prediction for Jaimie Lanister's fate:
He will kill Cersei.
There are two main things associated with the character. 1) He is the Kingslayer. 2) He loves Cersei.
It seems too perfect that he would end up in a similar position to the one of his backstory. Cersei will engage in something drastic involving the fate of many innocents (which was foreshadowed by her destroying the church) and Jaimie will have to face the same choice again.
Of course, him being involved in the fight against the Whitewalkers make this a lot less likely...
|
|
|
Post by Aj_June on Sept 1, 2018 20:32:44 GMT
My prediction for Jaimie Lanister's fate: He will kill Cersei. There are two main things associated with the character. 1) He is the Kingslayer. 2) He loves Cersei. It seems too perfect that he would end up in a similar position to the one of his backstory. Cersei will engage in something drastic involving the fate of many innocents (which was foreshadowed by her destroying the church) and Jaimie will have to face the same choice again. Of course, him being involved in the fight against the Whitewalkers make this a lot less likely... If the allies win against WW then Cersei can engage in something really drastic! Whether Jaime kills her may depend on whether he survives. May be his death triggers Cersei to go totally apeshit.
|
|
|
Post by Leo of Red Keep on Sept 2, 2018 1:42:42 GMT
This is what every fool and his dog believes so this is what will not happen.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 2, 2018 1:56:02 GMT
This is what every fool and his dog believes so this is what will not happen. They believe it because it has been blatantly set up. Good endings are not about surprises. Just because an ending is relatively predictable does not make it bad. This would bring his character full circle. It would be a fitting end for the King Slayer.
|
|
|
Post by Leo of Red Keep on Sept 2, 2018 2:00:47 GMT
This show both foreshadows and misdirects. Characters barely ever get to do what they say they would, so Arya will not tick off all names from her list, Daenerys will not take the throne, Euron will not marry Cersei…
Real foreshadowing comes only once and there have been two very explicit cases of a strong announcement never repeated, which I believe will come true for this very reason. Both were in S3: Melisandre telling Arya they would meet again and Jojen telling Sam armies can't stop White Walkers. These two things went so completely off the radar they must be waiting for a surprising "told you so" sort of return.
There's a third one about Jaime. When discussing death in S5, he was made to tell Bronn he wished to die "in the arms of the woman he loves".
|
|
|
Post by Leo of Red Keep on Sept 2, 2018 2:02:22 GMT
This is what every fool and his dog believes so this is what will not happen. They believe it because it has been blatantly set up. Good endings are not about surprises. Just because an ending is relatively predictable does not make it bad. This would bring his character full circle. It would be a fitting end for the King Slayer. I am not discussing the quality of this idea, just saying it won't happen because GoT doesn't give people what they expect by principle.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 2, 2018 2:09:53 GMT
They believe it because it has been blatantly set up. Good endings are not about surprises. Just because an ending is relatively predictable does not make it bad. This would bring his character full circle. It would be a fitting end for the King Slayer. I am not discussing the quality of this idea, just saying it won't happen because GoT doesn't give people what they expect by principle. That is true. In fact, it's a bit of a criticism that I have with the writing style sometimes. Personally I'd like to have a properly set up pay off for all the characters. I don't really need to be surprised. Twists are great, but shocking endings written just for shock value are generally shallow and unsatisfying in my opinion.
|
|
|
Post by Leo of Red Keep on Sept 2, 2018 2:19:55 GMT
I am not discussing the quality of this idea, just saying it won't happen because GoT doesn't give people what they expect by principle. That is true. In fact, it's a bit of a criticism that I have with the writing style sometimes. Personally I'd like to have a properly set up pay off for all the characters. I don't really need to be surprised. Twists are great, but shocking endings written just for shock value are generally shallow and unsatisfying in my opinion. In a revealing interview, GRRM, author of the books, said how he saw fans correctly guess outcomes. He then went on to say he would not let himself be swayed by this and would stick to his plans. The way he explained this showed he had to resist the urge of rewriting the stuff in order not to deliver what people had guessed. He reasoned why he had to and it was clear he saw it as a slightly disappointing situation. He is all about twists and shocks.
|
|
|
Post by Leo of Red Keep on Sept 2, 2018 7:06:57 GMT
Jaime killing Cersei is rooted in the "valonqar" theory. It is book-only in that it stems from the end of the prophecy Cersei believes in, in which she was told the "valonqar" (Valyrian for little brother), would "choke the life out of her". In the books, Cersei has mad dreams about Tyrion, her little brother, turning up in her bedroom to kill her, which is why she sets a price on his head and it explains her irrational feelings towards him. The whole thing is meant to show how "prophecies" get people who believe in them to act in otherwise unexplainable ways. It must be added that Myrcella was not killed in Dorne, only hurt and Tommen is still alive in the books, which end before Cersei's trial. Enter the small detail stating that Cersei was born first, making Jaime her other "little brother". Some go on to spin theories that someone else's little brother, not Cersei's, will kill her: The Hound, Theon, Euron, basically whoever had an older sibling, even Arya on the assumption the Valyrian word would be gender neutral. They are thoroughly missing the simple point the author wants to make: "people who believe in crap do stupid things". He's made that point with Stannis too. The show left all that out. The "prophecy" of the resentful "witch" ends without that part so we can believe it will have no impact on the story. There are those, of course, who say it was left out to keep it as a surprise but it isn't one because it has been discussed to death by book readers. The show runners have exploited this by giving Jaime that ambiguous look at Cersei at her coronation. It made people talk and they love to stick a middle finger in the face of book purists. Another example of this in S6 was to have The Hound take a piss in the river. In case you wondered, that sight was not fully gratuitous. So there you have it, Jaime killing Cersei comes from the rambling of fools.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 3, 2018 6:38:46 GMT
That is interesting that Cersei's death at the hands of her brother was part of the gypsy's prediction in the books. I did not know that. It's definately a good thing that they omitted that. In fact, I would've omitted the entire prediction. It felt so gratuitous to me. It's like trying to explain Cersei's psychology away in a flashback. I hate stuff like that.
As for the "people who believe in crap do stupid things"- I like that angle, but it doesn't quite hold up considering that the show basically confirms that the gods are real. I mean, characters are ressurected by them so it's clearly not BS. The God of Light, The Mother, The Many Faced Prick, Dragon Jesus... They're all evidently real in the show's canon and not just made up religions or myths.
And... I actually was wondering: why exactly did they show The Hound pissing in the river?
|
|
|
Post by Leo of Red Keep on Sept 3, 2018 7:46:57 GMT
That is interesting that Cersei's death at the hands of her brother was part of the gypsy's prediction in the books. I did not know that. It's definately a good thing that they omitted that. In fact, I would've omitted the entire prediction. It felt so gratuitous to me. It's like trying to explain Cersei's psychology away in a flashback. I hate stuff like that. As for the "people who believe in crap do stupid things"- I like that angle, but it doesn't quite hold up considering that the show basically confirms that the gods are real. I mean, characters are ressurected by them so it's clearly not BS. The God of Light, The Mother, The Many Faced Prick, Dragon Jesus... They're all evidently real in the show's canon and not just made up religions or myths. And... I actually was wondering: why exactly did they show The Hound pissing in the river? All we know is that something resurrects people. It does not give the forced prediction of some wood witch any value nor does it confirm the nonsense Melisandre had Stannis believe. She was wrong and it led to disaster, even if the "Lord of Light" or something else is real. Character's psychology is always explained by some of their past. It can be a flashback sequence or something someone says. Cersei telling Ned she wanted to love Robert at first was the same kind of thing. Jon telling Sam about not wanting to father a bastard, Stannis telling Davos how he was left aside after the rebellion worked the same way. In the books, the Brotherhood Without Banners comes upon the dead body of an important character floating down the river. Beric Dondarrion sacrifices himself to have this character brought back which becomes known as Lady Stoneheart. This character was left out of the show, to the great dismay of many book readers and every coming season saw people theorising about how it would still happen, then expressing utter disappointment that it didn't. When the Brotherhood returned in S6 and sat by the river while the Hound was taking a piss in it, it was a direct "fuck you" to the purists who had been trashing the show for leaving out their favourite zombie thing.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 3, 2018 9:48:51 GMT
He will be the one sitting on the Iron Throne with Gilly on his side.
|
|
|
Post by jon snow loves sansa on Sept 3, 2018 18:51:06 GMT
He will be the one sitting on the Iron Throne with Gilly on his side. who?? jamie? jamie and gilly??? like together ? how and why?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 3, 2018 21:40:26 GMT
That is interesting that Cersei's death at the hands of her brother was part of the gypsy's prediction in the books. I did not know that. It's definately a good thing that they omitted that. In fact, I would've omitted the entire prediction. It felt so gratuitous to me. It's like trying to explain Cersei's psychology away in a flashback. I hate stuff like that. As for the "people who believe in crap do stupid things"- I like that angle, but it doesn't quite hold up considering that the show basically confirms that the gods are real. I mean, characters are ressurected by them so it's clearly not BS. The God of Light, The Mother, The Many Faced Prick, Dragon Jesus... They're all evidently real in the show's canon and not just made up religions or myths. And... I actually was wondering: why exactly did they show The Hound pissing in the river? All we know is that something resurrects people. It does not give the forced prediction of some wood witch any value nor does it confirm the nonsense Melisandre had Stannis believe. She was wrong and it led to disaster, even if the "Lord of Light" or something else is real. Character's psychology is always explained by some of their past. It can be a flashback sequence or something someone says. Cersei telling Ned she wanted to love Robert at first was the same kind of thing. Jon telling Sam about not wanting to father a bastard, Stannis telling Davos how he was left aside after the rebellion worked the same way. In the books, the Brotherhood Without Banners comes upon the dead body of an important character floating down the river. Beric Dondarrion sacrifices himself to have this character brought back which becomes known as Lady Stoneheart. This character was left out of the show, to the great dismay of many book readers and every coming season saw people theorising about how it would still happen, then expressing utter disappointment that it didn't. When the Brotherhood returned in S6 and sat by the river while the Hound was taking a piss in it, it was a direct "fuck you" to the purists who had been trashing the show for leaving out their favourite zombie thing. Backstory is very important. And yes, a single trauma can certainly define a character. No argument there. But the Cersei backstory with the witch is a bit cheap in my opinion because whether it's true or her reaction to it led to some sort of self fulfilling prophecy, it is too simple an explanation for her actions. Especially since it came so late in the series. Her backstory with Robert and her family history was more than enough. She was a complex character with clear motivations. The revelation with the witch was unneeded. Just my opinion. As for the Gods: I think the commentary present is that, real or not, serving the gods of Westeros is a bad idea. The Hound and Sir Davos have been vocal about this as have a few other characters, declaring the gods either useless or just downright evil. It's an interesting commentary, especially considering how much killing has been done in real life in the name of almighty gods, especially in medieval times.
|
|
|
Post by Leo of Red Keep on Sept 4, 2018 5:51:05 GMT
But the Cersei backstory with the witch is a bit cheap in my opinion because whether it's true or her reaction to it led to some sort of self fulfilling prophecy, it is too simple an explanation for her actions. Especially since it came so late in the series. Her backstory with Robert and her family history was more than enough. She was a complex character with clear motivations. The revelation with the witch was unneeded. Just my opinion. As for the Gods: I think the commentary present is that, real or not, serving the gods of Westeros is a bad idea. The Hound and Sir Davos have been vocal about this as have a few other characters, declaring the gods either useless or just downright evil. It's an interesting commentary, especially considering how much killing has been done in real life in the name of almighty gods, especially in medieval times. A point can be made that the story keeps getting worse as it goes along, and I mean the book original, not just the TV show. It gets cheaper, dirtier, crazier and more horrific after the third book and this is where Cersei going mad and stupid takes place (the original book character is a joke, nothing like the show). I have been calling the author a pig and a fat wanker for a reason. I think he's a baseball fan too. That prediction is the reason Cersei goes against Margaery, though, and that could not be removed. There had to be an irrational motive for an otherwise intelligent character to go against her most powerful ally. The alternative solution to this would have been to make the Tyrells more aggressive but they were to remain the "good guys" victimised by the "bad" Lannister queen, I'm afraid. The anti-religious bias is blatantly typical of the completely left-driven entertainment industry. Westeros is their portrayal of a modern society in medieval looking costumes. As a complement to this, here is an aside I posted to the old IMDb forum back in May 2016:
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 4, 2018 6:21:32 GMT
But the Cersei backstory with the witch is a bit cheap in my opinion because whether it's true or her reaction to it led to some sort of self fulfilling prophecy, it is too simple an explanation for her actions. Especially since it came so late in the series. Her backstory with Robert and her family history was more than enough. She was a complex character with clear motivations. The revelation with the witch was unneeded. Just my opinion. As for the Gods: I think the commentary present is that, real or not, serving the gods of Westeros is a bad idea. The Hound and Sir Davos have been vocal about this as have a few other characters, declaring the gods either useless or just downright evil. It's an interesting commentary, especially considering how much killing has been done in real life in the name of almighty gods, especially in medieval times. A point can be made that the story keeps getting worse as it goes along, and I mean the book original, not just the TV show. It gets cheaper, dirtier, crazier and more horrific after the third book and this is where Cersei going mad and stupid takes place (the original book character is a joke, nothing like the show). I have been calling the author a pig and a fat wanker for a reason. I think he's a baseball fan too.That prediction is the reason Cersei goes against Margaery, though, and that could not be removed. There had to be an irrational motive for an otherwise intelligent character to go against her most powerful ally. The alternative solution to this would have been to make the Tyrells more aggressive but they were to remain the "good guys" victimised by the "bad" Lannister queen, I'm afraid. The anti-religious bias is blatantly typical of the completely left-driven entertainment industry. Westeros is their portrayal of a modern society in medieval looking costumes. As a complement to this, here is an aside I posted to the old IMDb forum back in May 2016: Whoa whoa whoa! What's wrong with being a baseball fan? ⚾️ And, forgive me, but I'm wondering why you even watch the show. You seem to really detest everything about it aside from Cersei
|
|
|
Post by Leo of Red Keep on Sept 4, 2018 6:54:34 GMT
And, forgive me, but I'm wondering why you even watch the show. You seem to really detest everything about it aside from Cersei I have liked the show until S5, forgiving its shortcomings for the sake of the intrigue and the discussion potential it offered. My first posts were in defence of Tywin Lannister. I hated S6 and never watched S7.
|
|
|
Post by President Ackbar™ on Sept 4, 2018 17:14:04 GMT
A point can be made that the story keeps getting worse as it goes along, and I mean the book original, not just the TV show. It gets cheaper, dirtier, crazier and more horrific after the third book and this is where Cersei going mad and stupid takes place (the original book character is a joke, nothing like the show). I have been calling the author a pig and a fat wanker for a reason. I think he's a baseball fan too.That prediction is the reason Cersei goes against Margaery, though, and that could not be removed. There had to be an irrational motive for an otherwise intelligent character to go against her most powerful ally. The alternative solution to this would have been to make the Tyrells more aggressive but they were to remain the "good guys" victimised by the "bad" Lannister queen, I'm afraid. The anti-religious bias is blatantly typical of the completely left-driven entertainment industry. Westeros is their portrayal of a modern society in medieval looking costumes. As a complement to this, here is an aside I posted to the old IMDb forum back in May 2016: Whoa whoa whoa! What's wrong with being a baseball fan? ⚾️ And, forgive me, but I'm wondering why you even watch the show. You seem to really detest everything about it aside from Cersei I don't think he does watch it. Or at least he claims not to.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 4, 2018 17:41:59 GMT
And, forgive me, but I'm wondering why you even watch the show. You seem to really detest everything about it aside from Cersei I have liked the show until S5, forgiving its shortcomings for the sake of the intrigue and the discussion potential it offered. My first posts were in defence of Tywin Lannister. I hated S6 and never watched S7. But what about baseball? ⚾️⚾️⚾️⚾️⚾️⚾️
|
|
|
Post by President Ackbar™ on Sept 4, 2018 17:46:10 GMT
I have liked the show until S5, forgiving its shortcomings for the sake of the intrigue and the discussion potential it offered. My first posts were in defence of Tywin Lannister. I hated S6 and never watched S7. But what about baseball? ⚾️⚾️⚾️⚾️⚾️⚾️ YOU MUST BE A BASEBALL FAN !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!3
|
|