Game of Thrones Thread

[remydat]

In the interview, Martin says he hopes to use the character of Jaime as a way to explore redemption.

One of the things I wanted to explore with Jaime, and with so many of the characters, is the whole issue of redemption. When can we be redeemed? Is redemption even possible? ... Woody Allen: Is Woody Allen someone that we should laud, or someone that we should despise? Our society is full of people who have fallen in one way or another, and what do we do with these people? How many good acts make up for a bad act? ... I want there to be a possibility of redemption for us, because we all do terrible things. We should be able to be forgiven. Because if there is no possibility of redemption, what's the answer then?

https://www.bustle.com/articles/221...me-lannister-to-woody-allen-joffrey-to-hitler

There is your proof, now STFU

No this isn't proof because the article is clearly talking about the books and how they diverge from the TV show. Hence why they talk about the sex scene next of Joffery's corpse being consensual in the books but rape in the TV show.

So all this proves is that Martin wants to explore whether redemption is possible for Jamie in the books. However, as you already admitted, the books diverge from the TV show and Jamie in the books doesn't stand there and do nothing after Tommen kills himself because in the books Tommen is not dead.

So you are being dense. I was never referring to the books when I discussed Jamie's redemption as I made it quite clear that from my perspective, Jamie's chance for redemption ended when Tommen hit the pavement. That obviously is a reference to the TV show not the books because again Tommen isn't dead in the books.

You are claiming it's not speculation because it's in the book after already admitted the books diverge considerably. That's just stupid. Jamie in the show diverges considerably from Jamie in the books.

 

[Camden Cutler]

i laughed

 

[nc0gnet0]

No this isn't proof because the article is clearly talking about the books and how they diverge from the TV show. Hence why they talk about the sex scene next of Joffery's corpse being consensual in the books but rape in the TV show.

So all this proves is that Martin wants to explore whether redemption is possible for Jamie in the books. However, as you already admitted, the books diverge from the TV show and Jamie in the books doesn't stand there and do nothing after Tommen kills himself because in the books Tommen is not dead.

So you are being dense. I was never referring to the books when I discussed Jamie's redemption as I made it quite clear that from my perspective, Jamie's chance for redemption ended when Tommen hit the pavement. That obviously is a reference to the TV show not the books because again Tommen isn't dead in the books.

You are claiming it's not speculation because it's in the book after already admitted the books diverge considerably. That's just stupid. Jamie in the show diverges considerably from Jamie in the books.

So show Jamie is different, but show LF is not, got it! LMFAO

This is what you said, and I quote:

I am fully aware that others may see Jamie as being on some redemptive arc. I am fully aware that that may even be the intent of the Martin and the showrunners. I am simply saying, you have produced no direct statement from them confirming this fact like you seemed to suggest you had and I am saying Jamie can't really be redeemed from my perspective at this point when he's sat idly by and let his sister and son run rampant.

Martin is one of the "them": I produced a quote from him, game, set, match.

Spoiler

As for the Sansa debate, she will discover that the maester at WF has saved and documented Ravens since he has been there, she will discover multiple ravens from LF sent to Ramsay, outlining his true intent all along, and confirm thee fact in show universe she has never been anythng but a pawn

 

[The Hawk]

Ima post naked old Melisandre pics till u guys knock this off...

Ares just posted a picture of his main squeeze is all.

 

[number51]

Ares just posted a picture of his main squeeze is all.

HOw really weakminded you really are. You really should stop because you are really an embarrassment. Obviously you do not have anything to add to this discussion other than to insult people.

 

[ruprecht]

This thead got vortexed like a motherfucker

 

[Warden of the Northeast]

Leak?

 

[RacerX]

Ima post naked old Melisandre pics till u guys knock this off...

Meh, I've had worse.

 

[ruprecht]

Spoiler

dont know

 

[Ares]

Leak?

Still nothing on torrents

 

[Ares]

Ares just posted a picture of his main squeeze is all.

My... main squeeze?

Man you sure are the cat's pajamas...

 

[remydat]

So show Jamie is different, but show LF is not, got it! LMFAO

This is what you said, and I quote:


Martin is one of the "them": I produced a quote from him, game, set, match.

Spoiler

As for the Sansa debate, she will discover that the maester at WF has saved and documented Ravens since he has been there, she will discover multiple ravens from LF sent to Ramsay, outlining his true intent all along, and confirm thee fact in show universe she has never been anythng but a pawn

No again you are being dense. I know for a fact Jamie is different because I know for a fact the Jamie in the books has not dealt with Tommen killing himself. However, I don't think anything that happened in the books prior to the point of divergence is changed by this fact. By contrast, I accept that LF and Sansa are different in the books but that difference doesn't change the fact that when commenting on the TV show, Martin and the showrunner explained that LF's feelings for Sansa are complicated, that he was her teacher, and that she is his weakness. Hence my argument is not logically inconsistent because in neither scenario am I arguing that their divergence from the books changes what they experienced in the TV show prior to divergence. So I have never argued that LF is the same as in the book. I've argued that them being different doesn't change their history that actually happened in the show which according to the showrunner was LF being a teacher to her and according to Martin is still complicated.

However, your argument is stupid because on one hand you say the show diverges considerably from the books and talk about the butterfly effect but then when the convo turns to Jamie, you completely ignore what you just said and act like Jamie must be redeemed in the TV show based on a comment Martin made about the books.

Finally I was referring to you producing a comment from Martin or the showrunners with respect to the TV show which is what I have been talking about. The Martin comment I provided to you was Martin speaking about the TV show hence why the video is from HBO and Martin is referenced in the video as an executive producer of the TV show. I would have no reason to ask you for a comment from Martin about the books when you already said the books diverge from the TV show so whatever Martin said about the books is irrelevant as it relates to the TV show.

It's like you are so confused that you've forgotten your own argument. You can't claim the books diverge from the TV show and then when I produce comments from Martin and the Showrunner specifically about the TV show, you respond with comments about the books.

 

[Warrior Spirit]

We do not know if they are taken prisoner and there certainly will be a rescue operation. I could be Jamie killing the mother snake for her killing of his daughter but sparing the young snake as a favor to Bronn.

On the preview for next episode it showed Dany addressing the Lannister army, saying they need to bend the knee or die. don't know how those 2 could get away as they seemed to be sinking with that armor on and would need help. The daughter has already been poisoned. She is already dying. Do you expect Bronn to concoct an antidote out of nowhere?

 

[Warrior Spirit]

You just said the show diverged from the books on the point about LF and Sansa so yes it's speculation. You've got no clue how things will end. Further in the books, Tommen doesn't committ suicide due to his mother so the butterfly effect you keep referencing is huge.

Jamie in the books isn't as cowardly as Jamie in the TV show because Jamie in the books doesn't just blindly ignore the fact his son killed himself because of Cersei because his son is still alive. The Jamie in the books is on a completely different path than the Jamie in the TV show so Jamie in the books.

So again this is the problem with your analysis. When it suits you, you want to argue the books and TV show are different regarding LF and Sansa despite my evidence coming from what people said about the TV show not the books. Yet when it is clear that book Jamie is different from TV show Jamie, you completely disregard it and act like it is a fact that their redemption will play out the same despite the fact TV show Jamie cowardly did nothing as his son committed suicide.

I don't see Jaime as a coward in the TV show. He just charged at a dragon ffs. Neither him nor Cersei are great parents but he hasn't had that kind of relationship with any of his kids cause they've hid the fact he is their dad. He just had that one moment with his daughter right before she died. Is he somehow different with the kids in the book?

 

[xer0h0ur]

 

[Ares]

I don't see Jaime as a coward in the TV show. He just charged at a dragon ffs. Neither him nor Cersei are great parents but he hasn't had that kind of relationship with any of his kids cause they've hid the fact he is their dad. He just had that one moment with his daughter right before she died. Is he somehow different with the kids in the book?

On that note, I read a recap where they said he idiotically charged a dragon with a spear, trying to kill it.... he was gonna kill Dany lol, he had no illusions of killing Drogon.

 

[remydat]

I don't see Jaime as a coward in the TV show. He just charged at a dragon ffs. Neither him nor Cersei are great parents but he hasn't had that kind of relationship with any of his kids cause they've hid the fact he is their dad. He just had that one moment with his daughter right before she died. Is he somehow different with the kids in the book?

I said he was a coward as it relates to Cersei. Once again, Jamie is a decent dude and can be honorable and courageous when he is not influenced by Cersei.

Further, even his dwarf brother slapped Joffery around when necessary. Jamie is a ***** plain and simple when it comes to Cersei and his family. What makes his cowardice even more pathetic is the fact that we know he can be courageous when dealing with others.

But hey if I missed all these times where he courageously stood up to his sister or Joffery, let me know. If I missed where he chastised Cersei when she said Tommen betrayed them after he committed suicide, let me know.

Until then, stop defending this cuckold's embarrassing display around Cersei. At this point it is clear Cersei has the penis in their relationship.

 

[nc0gnet0]

No again you are being dense. I know for a fact Jamie is different because I know for a fact the Jamie in the books has not dealt with Tommen killing himself. .................................. Martin is still complicated.

However, your argument is stupid because on one hand you say the show diverges considerably from the books and talk about the butterfly effect but then when the convo turns to Jamie, you completely ignore what you just said and act like Jamie must be redeemed in the TV show based on a comment Martin made about the books.

Finally I was referring to you producing a comment from Martin or the showrunners with respect to the TV show which is what I have been talking about. The Martin comment I provided to you was Martin speaking about the TV show hence why the video is from HBO and Martin is referenced in the video as an executive producer of the TV show. I would have no reason to ask you for a comment from Martin about the books when you already said the books diverge from the TV show so whatever Martin said about the books is irrelevant as it relates to the TV show.

It's like you are so confused that you've forgotten your own argument. You can't claim the books diverge from the TV show and then when I produce comments from Martin and the Showrunner specifically about the TV show, you respond with comments about the books.

Seriously, your proof that jamie is different in the books is because he hasn't dealt with the Death of tommen, But yet the littlefinger/sansa dynamic is unchanged, despite the fact LF used Sansa as a pawn when he shipped her to Ramsay?

That's your final argument? Good luck with that. We will see how it all plays out, and who is right in the end, I kinda like my odds..............

 

[Warrior Spirit]

On that note, I read a recap where they said he idiotically charged a dragon with a spear, trying to kill it.... he was gonna kill Dany lol, he had no illusions of killing Drogon.

Would make more sense but I saw a preview with Bronn asking Jaime what the hell is wrong with him and why did he charge at a dragon.

 

[Ares]

Would make more sense but I saw a preview with Bronn asking Jaime what the hell is wrong with him and why did he charge at a dragon.

I mean Dany was 2 inches from Drogon.... Jamie had to charge at both of them to try to kill Dany.... lol I can almost guarantee he gonna tell Bronn "I was trying to take out the girl, if I killed her, this might end before it begins"

Of course then you have 3 wild dragons with no mama roaming Westeros and a bunch of pissed off Dothraki with no one to rein them in...