slow clap for the Harry Potter fandom. . when all you want is for your favorite character to be happy but all they get to be is dead or worse min the fly: at funny Harry Potter
Click to expand

*slow clap for the Harry Potter fandom*

when all you want is for
your favorite character to
be happy but all they get
to be is dead
or worse
min the fly: at
  • Recommend tagsx
Views: 45778
Favorited: 44
Submitted: 03/08/2014
Share On Facebook
Add to favorites Subscribe to usamajime Subscribe to funny submit to reddit


What do you think? Give us your opinion. Anonymous comments allowed.
User avatar #40 to #6 - inametoasted ONLINE (03/09/2014) [-]
Have you guys noticed that this series is just a really advanced version of the chair game?
User avatar #62 to #6 - mondominiman (03/09/2014) [-]
I don't understand, if all the characters are dying every few pages how does someone have a favorite character to begin with?
Ch 1: Oh I love this guy he sounds amazing
Ch 2: Oh he's dead now, I feel bad.
#72 to #62 - rundas (03/09/2014) [-]
Have you READ these books? Or watched the show if you're a peasant
Ice and Fire's characters are probably the most interesting of any book series I've ever read.
User avatar #76 to #72 - mondominiman (03/09/2014) [-]
I haven't read them or seen the show because I don't find medieval stuff entertaining be it a game, show, or book. I'm not saying it's bad but the fandom has put a bad image in my head for those books.
User avatar #89 to #76 - snowshark (03/09/2014) [-]
Just a little example of what I mean. Syrio Forel - Your dancing master - Arya Stark
User avatar #85 to #76 - snowshark (03/09/2014) [-]
I thoroughly agree with you about the Medieval stuff. I find it boring as piss! It's muddy everywhere, it's usually boring as **** , and I just can't be ****** to care about the dull as planks of chipboard characters!

However there are exceptions to the rule. Have you ever seen Knight's Tale? A bunch of really fun and interesting characters (not terribly imaginative outside of Chausser but good fun) in a Jousting romp played to half badass epic choral music and half 60s-80s classic rock! It's just great fun all around!

Game of Thrones is another exception. The first two episodes really made me piss bored with the series because it seemed to fit all the staples of the genre. Dull colours, boring, bland, guuh, guuh, bleargh... Except around the time of the third episode it grabbed me by the balls and since then it has been swinging me every which-way by my nutsack and every now and then it gives 'em a good chew just to make me cry in pain.

There are a slew of really interesting characters in the series and if you know your **** about writing you quickly identify the ones that are important in the series and figure out that the boring characters and the cliche characters are there for the sole purpose of dying to further the stories of the actually interesting characters. The music is really well made, the jokes aren't exactly frequent but when they appear they're never forced and always work, the colour palette is deceptively varied and it will become brighter and brighter as the seasons go on and the series is actually high-fantasy disguised as low-fantasy and the magical elements will become more and more in-your-face as the seasons press onwards.

I won't pretend that it's not a medieval-esque setting, because it is. And it does take itself seriously. But the series is most certainly worth a watch to see if it is to your tastes because if it is then you're getting your money's worth. If I were you I'd shell out for the first season on DVD and see what the fuss is
User avatar #87 to #85 - mondominiman (03/09/2014) [-]
You know what, you actually made it seem pretty interesting. I'll check out the first couple episodes now.
User avatar #90 to #87 - snowshark (03/09/2014) [-]
Aye. Most people are content to wave their arms about in some wild attempt to communicate, assuming we all work on the same frequency. I hope you enjoy.
#77 to #76 - rundas (03/09/2014) [-]
What exactly has the fandom done?
Also ASOI&F isn't like other Fantasy series. The characters are super realistic and developed.
#114 to #6 - anon (03/09/2014) [-]
Bran Stark is alive. Tyrion is alive. Jon Snow is possibly alive. Arya Stark is alive. Brienne of Tarth is alive.

All is good on my end.
User avatar #21 to #6 - amanaman (03/09/2014) [-]
i never pick a favorite cause everyone i love dies anyway
danni master race
User avatar #48 to #21 - snowshark (03/09/2014) [-]
This isn't a direct spoiler however what follows is gonna be a deconstruction of the Game of Thrones narrative style that should leave you some idea of who is/isn't going to die in the series barring a complete heel-turn of tone, which I don't think is likely to happen:

Ned and Rob were dead from the word go. It's very clear that their places in the series were mostly to enable the storylines of other characters and then die. Ned was to be the force that worked to set the world at each-other's throats and then Rob is there to drive the plots of the Lannisters and Arya. There was never any question of his death because he never lost a battle. His entire storyline was crafted for the sake of other characters and poorly disguised as that of a main character.

Game of Thrones follows a simple logic. There are two kinds of characters. There are the main characters (John Snow, Arya, Tyrion, Daenerys, Davos, etc) and the supporting characters (Geoffrey, Renley, Half-Hand), Some of the supporting characters are disguised as main characters to make their presence in the story feel more important however they can only look the part, never truly accomplishing something themselves, rather being springboards for the real main characters to work off of, and when it is convenient they are removed from the story in the most effective manner.

The point is, Rob Stark never accomplished anything of importance on his own. Nor did Arya's fat little friend. Nor has blacksmith lad (yet). They're just tools to further the stories of the main characters. Yes there are some main characters that die like Ned, but even then they die when they are more useful to the story dead.

Arya won't die. - There's no point.
Daenerys won't die. - There's nothing any one character could gain from her death of worth. (Though she may die as a Martyr to spur on many characters like Grey Worm... it is unlikely though.)

So if the character has a lot of use in the story, they won't die.
#70 to #48 - rundas (03/09/2014) [-]
I kinda had a feeling that Martin planned for Robb to die from the beginning, since he was the only Stark aside from Rickon to not have his viewpoint shown in the books. But then again, both Ned and Catelyn had perspectives, and each of them died (I'm sure there are others as well). And the show is just a dumbed-down version of the books, so you can't really categorize all the characters based on the show. There's plenty of minor characters that seem like they should be killed off, but instead Martin goes on a tangent with them and has whole subplots with them.
User avatar #99 to #70 - snowshark (03/09/2014) [-]
That is essentially exactly what I just said, yes.

Except I'd argue that the live-action version is actually a streamlined version of the books, as opposed to being dumbed down. It takes the most important aspects and puts a lot more depth into them than the books can through the use of sets and actors. By having less happen, the things that 'do' happen become all the more memorable and important and the series takes its time to present these selected moments in a superior form (at least I'd say it's superior because everything that goes into making those moments good is all done spectacularly. More goes into the moments than in the books and I personally am a glutton for analysis and looking past what's shown and just having a good poke about with the sets and the characters and how shots are composed and... yeah it's just a goldmine for me, something that the books never really did. They're great books but they can only ever tell you one thing at a time and because of that it's harder to hide things and individual moments become less detailed. In the book you don't follow every subtle movement and gesture made by the characters but you can in the series. In the book that would be tedious and mentioning them merely removes the object of them being subtle.)

So yeah, there's an argument for/against here.

However yes, Rob and Ned were dead from the word go. As was Renly. Renley existed to be a showcase for the Red Woman's powers, as a platform for us to meet Briane, and to show us more of Staniss.
#101 to #99 - rundas (03/09/2014) [-]
I'm not going to disagree on the last part. But for me, I love the show, but in a lot of waysit was kinda disappointing. It seemed to oversimplify a lot of the plots. Like, for example, executing Ygritte. In the book, Half-hand told him to do it to test him. But in the series, he volunteers to do it. Even that subtle difference offers less development for Jon. And also there are a lot of interesting characters that the series either misses or doesn't mention until they're absolutely crucial. That's not a fault, it's inevitable, but it's one reason I prefer the books. Sorry I can't come up with good examples, it's been a while since I read the books and I haven't finished season 2.
User avatar #104 to #101 - snowshark (03/09/2014) [-]
It's cool, bro. But I'll clear up something here.

I'd argue his volunteering is actually more important. See Half-hand making him do it is development for Half-Hand but later on down the line he is again forced to execute someone and doesn't do it. By having Ygritte's execution being something he volunteered for his development enters his own hands. Rather than it being forced on him it is showing that he is trying to change but can't escape who he truly is, something he comes to terms with by the time he is actually forced to execute the farmer in the shadow of the windmill. It sets up a good contrast but also allows the scenes to not feel like re-plays of one-another.

In that sense it works. That's not because it's a T.V. show, but just because as I said before they're different stories. Written with little changes and those changes are important. You are right that some characters are left out until they become important but that's what I mean when I say 'streamlining'. The series gets on with what it's got to do and doesn't let itself get side-tracked as books are so often found to do. It is more focussed and puts its attention where it needs it the most. Yes sometimes that means characters may never make it into the story at all but it also means that they weren't important in the first place and the story is narrower and made to focus on the characters that are important.

Either way, it's just a case of how different mediums allow for different things. I love books but I prefer live-action/animation because of the amount of work that goes into them and all the different elements at play. I have a very active mind so the more I have to analyse/decode the more fun I can have with the story and really that's just something the live-action version appeals to better. If I read the books first I expect it would be the same way.
#107 to #104 - rundas (03/09/2014) [-]
Again, I've got no problem with the series. I just read the books first, so inevitably I get annoyed when the series isn't portrayed the way I imagined it or they leave out something I like from the books. The books may lose focus, but I like them for it: they make it more immersive. I know it's probably stupid for me to complain about the series, but like with all series, it's my role as a book-reader. It's because I love it so much that I bitch about it.
Though two things I REALLY didn't like about the series:
1) They got rid of Jeyne Westerling. Yeah, the nurse chick or whatever is cool, and maybe it helps the less informed of the audience understand the class difference between them, but I though Jeyne was better, even if they didn't show much of their relationship in the books. Also, there were whole theories about the Jeyne after the Red Wedding being a different person, like the pregnant Jeyne was hiding elsewhere. Again, you're right, it does streamline it, but I just don't like it when they get rid of potentially interesting subplots.
2) For all the interesting characters they get rid off for time, they add stupid ones. Like ROSS, some insignificant prostitute who gets more time than the Lord of Riverrun. I could rage so hard about that, and all the unnecessary (and imo often gross) sex scenes.
User avatar #111 to #107 - snowshark (03/09/2014) [-]
I don't think it's innevitable since I read Harry Potter before I saw the movies and the movies are just better at evoking the feeling of mystery and wonder (well... the first two are before everything becomes dark as **** and I start disliking the movies).

1) Absolutely agreed. I like it when there's interesting sub-plots going on. However cuts needed to be made so I shaln't complain. However... I never liked the nurse in either medium... probably because I never liked Robb and she was really there to just play off him and I was more interested in Arya and Brann and yeah you get the idea. Either way it's not something that matters to me in this particular case but there are other cases where I would have prefered if it could have been handled differently... but then you get into the argument of messing with pacing and flow (two things the series does REALLY well) and adding more things would harm it and ouigh... minefield.

2) The sex scenes aren't unnecessary for the most part. They're an atmospheric element a lot of the time. However maybe that's just 'cause I come from a different country to you where we have different sensibilities? Though I'm with you. I never liked Ross... !!BUT!!! (and it's a big but, as you can see) I love the way she is killed off in the series. I really ******* love how she dies. The shooting of it, the buildup to it... goooh! She is a character who clearly serves the purpose of furthering the other characters' stories and when she dies she dies in a -really- effective manner!
#113 to #111 - rundas (03/09/2014) [-]
Maybe we just have different tastes, though I agree with you that with certain exceptions, the HP movies are objectively better. I really do like how the series handled certain things (again, can't come up with any examples atm) but I'm just a book purist.

But, back to the original topic. Like you, I kinda knew Robb was going to die. I knew it had to happen eventually, but I didn't think it would happen then. It just seemed to...obvious, when they were talking for so long about how Frey might betray them. What always gets me in the books is how the characters act surprisingly predictable. Like Frey and Bolton. At first I thought they were just there to show that the Northern cause wasn't all good. But then they act according to their natures and betray their liege for power.
User avatar #116 to #113 - snowshark (03/10/2014) [-]
Well, there's also characters who act very contrary to there stereotype like the Hound and Arya Stark. The series takes a lot of chances with it's characters so you're always expecting something unusual to happen... and then right when you're convinced you misjudged the characters you're proven wrong and yep they really are sacks of **** and teeth!

However in the t.v. series they do a good job with making them seem more subtle. There's a glance that Frey gives Robb when the bride is revealed and it this really heartwarming, lechy-old-guy kinda "Surprisingly hot, ain't she?!". That was a really convincing moment for me because it painted Frey as a different kind of bastard. See, normally you'd look at Frey as an evil old son of a bitch. But the show presents him as just a grumpy old lech. He is shown to not be a good person so to speak but to have some humour and good feeling inside him.

Now, wether those are really there or if it's just an act it did help pull one over on me. Another reason why I love live-action more than writing. It's just a lovely little moment that made me giggle and think "Maybe he's not such a bad guy after a- **** YOU DAMN IT YOU SACK OF **** meh I didn't like them that much anyway."
#117 to #116 - rundas (03/10/2014) [-]
Yeah I agree, both the show and GRRM do a good job of subverting your judgments of a character. Though I was really disappointed with the Hound. It seemed like he had a change of heart, then Arya left him to die, and you hear he was raiding the countryside like he might return--nope, he actually was dead back there.
User avatar #119 to #117 - snowshark (03/10/2014) [-]
That's more about Arya than the Hound. Plus, if he stuck with her he'd just be weighing her down. She travels better when she can look and act like a small child and she knows it. She is growing up to be one cold-hearted bitch and I can respect that.
#120 to #119 - rundas (03/10/2014) [-]
Oh no, I don't blame her for it. I just wish the Hound was developed more before he was killed off.
User avatar #68 to #48 - rjgnal (03/09/2014) [-]
only you know....jon snow actually dies. he wouldve been more useful NOT dead. and i take you on that, every character that died wouldve been more useful NOT dead. Rob was about to take casterly rock, ned was about to take the lannisters off the throne, renly had the biggest army and wouldve won, and so on and so forth. this is how i see the writer do it: whenever there is a plan in the middle, like a seriously well developed plan, someone dies. just think on that.
User avatar #74 to #68 - snowshark (03/09/2014) [-]
Yeah no. That's not how it works. You are seriously misunderstanding the context of the term 'useful'. 'Useful' in your context is referring to the well-being of the characters within the narrative, whilst 'useful' in the context I'm using it is in reference to the narrative. If Ned had just dethroned the incest-bastard-freak then everyone would be happy, but that isn't useful to the narrative because it makes the story less interesting and doesn't push it towards its ultimate conclusion (which I have my own thoughts on and won't be sharing them here). Ned wasn't useful in spurring on the narrative alive, but dead he would spur on a lot of characters who would in turn progress the narrative. The same is true of Rob. His life was spent letting other characters move to where they needed to be in the story. Jamie, Katlyn, Theon, and in his death he pushes the Lannister characters and Arya towards their own eventual positions for the climax. Rob himself was of no use to the story alive anymore, the fact that he never lost a battle was evidence enough that his role in the story was never to be beset by tension, rather to inspire tension inside the more important Lannister characters.

George Double Pretentious Authorial Letter Martin's writing style is that he moves all of the important characters through the story to where they need to be for the eventual climax and all of the other characters that have expended their usefulness to that goal or are more useful dead are removed from the story for one reason or another. Geoffry's siblings only existed so that Tyrion could send them away and his sister could hate him. They served no other purpose to the story and are the most transparent example of characters existing solely for the sake of motivating other characters. It's not bad writing, actually it's very good writing, however it is fairly transparent to anyone who understands the formula and thinks ahead according to it.
User avatar #82 to #74 - rjgnal (03/09/2014) [-]
i see your point, and i agree with you, although i still think he gives away most of the unexpected deaths, when things suddenly take a turn for the character for the better, when they actually have a plan in succeeding in their mission.
User avatar #93 to #82 - snowshark (03/09/2014) [-]
Except that's not the case with Daenerys. She is continually succeeding and is a beacon of hope in the story. She is either going to become the kind, benevolent leader that unites Westeros or she is going to die in some manner and become a martyr to her freed peoples.

The same is true for Sam. Things just get better for him. There's some bumps along the way but he is well on his way to becoming the next head of the Night's Watch, especially as he is one of the four named Night's Watch characters left, one of which is old and blind, another is John snow who (spoilers) dies... as if it weren't obvious from him being dull as his elder brother, and Pip... who is just there for the most part.

Yes he likes to build up your hopes and crush them, because that's how a good writer works. However he also isn't doing it for the sake of doing it. He isn't hurting the readers for the sake of hurting them. Essentially all he's doing is cleverly capitalising on what has to happen in order to make the story move onwards. There's some characters that the story doesn't need anymore? Well let's at least make their deaths important/memorable. The Braavosi swordsman who trained Arya... Servio? I forget his name. He served two purposes in the story. 1: To outline Arya as an action-girl (not to train her in swordfighting... because at no point in the series does that become important for her (yet) and she's too young and weak for it to matter, no, it's about outlining the character's tone ("What do we say to death?"). 2: To put the seed of Braavos in her mind and make way for Jaqen.

He was then no longer needed so... he dies. Only he might as well die in a memorable way. He's interesting because he needs to make the audience like the idea of Braavos as well as he needs to be a good character for Arya to play off so she can develop, and that makes us like him, so his death is treated with some import, even if his character only existed to further another's plot.
#97 to #93 - anon (03/09/2014) [-]
There are loads more named Nights Watch members(Edd, Bowen Marsh, Leathers etc.) Sam is on the other side of the continent training to bea maester so he isn't becoming the Lord Commander any time soon. Jon isn't a dull character in my opinion anyway; he's one of the most action packed POV's and he does a lot of maturing and all that character development **** . Also is he **** dead, GRRM will revive him because he's a legend
User avatar #108 to #97 - snowshark (03/09/2014) [-]
Those other named characters have no real personality of import. Sam is fiercely dedicated to the Nights' Watch and he's an unconventional pick... so him becoming the Lord Commander really fits in with Martin's writing style. He favours the underdogs and the maligned characters.

He loves to give the characters who suffer what they want and give the characters who succeed what they don't... unless they're villains... if they're villains they get what they want because there needs to be tension in the series.

Point is, for a fat tub of words like Sam to go from a hated son from the Tarley household to one of the most important heroes in Westeros (not because of his swordplay, but for other, more important reasons) it just strikes a chord with how Martin does things. Maybe he won't, maybe he will, maybe I'm just being a little favouritist.
#71 to #68 - rundas (03/09/2014) [-]
I don't really think Jon is dead. First off there's the whole Azor Ahai thing, Jon is clearly at least one aspect of him (Melisandre believes him to be, even though it would fit into her preaching more if she just ignored him). And AA has to be reborn in some way. Also, he could be the "Ice" in the Song of Ice and Fire. Secondly, in interviews, GRRM really made it sound like he wasn't dead. I don't have a source, but I think he said something along the lines of "You shouldn't trust Ramsay's story"
User avatar #79 to #71 - rjgnal (03/09/2014) [-]
its the books last chapter..."he didnt feel the 4th knife" the first one went into his belly, which, you know, its pretty much a kill wound. do you think theres any chance an angry mob will leave someone alive when their clear reason is not to? also imo azor ahai is gonna turn out to be danny, you know, the meteor appeared when she got her dragons, and the ice will be coming from north obviously. from north north. like beyond the wall. i have this prickly feeling bran got in on the wrong side. i mean when they got to the cave, in the opening there were so many wights, i took them as guards. also they were helped by this dude who himself is a zambie. he didnt eat, had his extremities red and the rest white, like the others, which probly will turn out to be their dead uncle, since he describes him as a ranger, and he knows the lands beyond the wall well. i dunno, i just really feel like this might be a possibility.
#83 to #79 - rundas (03/09/2014) [-]
Again, he's supposed to be resurrected. And I think I remember him having some dream about him being AA. Most of the theories I've heard have had there being multiple aspects of Azor Ahai. One of them involves three Targaryens, like Aegon's three dragons:
Jon (Rhaegar & Lysa's son)
Tyrion (he's got one purple eye, if he wasn't Tywin's it would explain why he absolutely refused to give Tyrion Casterly Rock, even though neither Jaime nor Cersei could inherit it
Also, in the interview, it REALLY sounded like he was saying people misunderstood the ending, and that Jon probably isn't dead. Unless he's just an asshole and wants to get people's hopes up, which is very possible.
User avatar #88 to #83 - rjgnal (03/09/2014) [-]
ok, so im just gonna give you my opinion: azor ahai IS reborn. as daenerys. stannis failed the test the moment he showed the sword to aegon at the wall. it gave off some small light, but did not give off heat, as aegon is quick to notice. im fairly sure it would work in her hands. she already has 3 dragons! so theres that. tyrion doesnt have a purple eye, he has 2 mismatched eyes, 1 green(<--lannister) and 1 BLACK! not purple. jon cant be a dragon since he is half stark half (redwyne was it? i dont remember the womans name). i just think the red woman missed her hero, since stannis was on dragonstone, which was the seat of targaryens.
tywin refused to give tyrion casterly rock because he considers tyrion a monster, and because he "killed" his mother at his birth. also he went on disappointing him time after time, with learning circus tricks and whatnot, and whoring. all that is certain is that jon snow is dead. with other characters that were thought dead, the ending was sketchy. like we didnt get davos' death from his perspective, he was just presumed dead.
also, is no one gonna talk about catelyn coming back to life and raiding the lands with the outlaws? holy **** , whatever happened to her? i thought she will get more attention.
#96 to #88 - rundas (03/09/2014) [-]
Have you seriously not heard the Jon Targaryen theories? Seriously, look it up. It's the only thing that makes sense. Also, Tyrion is actually the most like Tywin: a good Machiavellian ruler who knows how to get things done. Much more so than Jaime. So it think it must be more than that.
User avatar #122 to #96 - rjgnal (03/10/2014) [-]
have you seriously not read the books? you find out who jons mother is in like the 3rd, those "theories" are probably older than that book. also, even in youth, ned was very fair with the people, how fair do you think it would be to haev a child by a woman who house youre tryong to kill?
#123 to #122 - rundas (03/10/2014) [-]
Jon isn't Ned's, it's Lyanna's and Rhaegar's. How much sense does it make for Ned to have a bastard anyway? And it briefly mentions that someone nursed Jon, it never said it was his mother, and even if it did say it was, obviously Ned would have to hide it or else invoke Robert's wrath.
User avatar #124 to #123 - rjgnal (03/10/2014) [-]
wow, where did you come up with that one? if one things for sure, is that jon IS neds kid. ned says that to him (you have stark blood in your veins) and everyone else. that is one of the reasons catelyn hates jon, since he looks more like ned than her own children. the rest you said i just didnt understand
#125 to #124 - rundas (03/10/2014) [-]
Yeah, he does have Stark blood: Lyanna's blood, not Ned's.
User avatar #126 to #125 - rjgnal (03/10/2014) [-]
hah. you do know lyanna dies before having any kid, right? thats why brandon and neds dad went to kings landing, where they died, and when the king requested neds and roberts head, jon arryn helped them by raising his own banners for them. riiiiiiight? and ned had the woman when he went to war, catelyn actually tells the tale once. she says she didnt care about him whoring around, what wounded her is that he brought jon back and raised him like his own son
#127 to #126 - rundas (03/10/2014) [-]
Ned went to the Tower where Lyanna was, and came back with a child. Also, why do you think Lyanna died in the first place? No one would want to harm her. No, she died while giving birth.
User avatar #128 to #127 - rjgnal (03/10/2014) [-]
it says nowhere he comes back with a child, its all just roses and blood. the whole thing is sketchy, since ned cant remember anything
#43 to #6 - cherrypoppin (03/09/2014) [-]
Doesn't matter, Robb Stark will always be the king of my heart
User avatar #46 to #43 - snowshark (03/09/2014) [-]
I knew he was gonna die by the third episode or so of the second series. When a writer invests so much time into creating interesting, boundary-pushing characters like Tyrion, Arya, and Daenerys they just don't give a flying **** about the boring ones. Rob Stark was so simple and generic in a series that is populated with interesting and cleverly-written characters that he was obviously a sacrificial lion (or wolf as it were.)

Given the end of the third season it's fairly clear how the big points of the next two seasons will play out (but that's 'cus I write for a living and I probably can spot the groundwork for the future where others can't... my friends got kinda pissed when I explained where the Halo series is gonna go with 5 & 6.)
#66 to #46 - rundas (03/09/2014) [-]
Yeah, I agree in the show he was boring, I didn't really care for his character on the show either. But in the books, he was a well-developed character. In the first book, he was a fourteen-year-old who really had no idea what he was doing and he was extremely uncertain, but he just did what he had to do and you could see him develop from insecurity to becoming a great general.
User avatar #81 to #66 - snowshark (03/09/2014) [-]
That is true, except at the same time his story was never meant to be important. It was always meant to push the development of other characters. If he was at any point an actually important character he would have lost a battle. He would have had to face more hardship than he did on the battlefield. Except he didn't... because he wasn't important. However the Lannisters? The people his success was meant to drive the knife of fear into? Yeah they're important. Rob was only to motivate certain characters like the Lannisters and Arya into action. You can usually tell which characters have import to the story invested in their own existence like Arya and Brann from the ones who don't because they have the most interesting personalities. No writer wants to waste their time on characters that aren't important and instead of spending time giving them interesting personalities they devote that time elsewhere.

If someone can write characters as well as George Double Pretentious Authorial Letter Martin can then you'd expect more of his characters to be interesting, except they aren't. We're meant to focus on the more interesting characters because they're the ones that are important to the story. Their personal journeys and destinations are important outside of being motivating forces for other characters.

Both Rob and John aren't interesting. Rob's most interesting moments come when he's talking with his mother (who is an interesting character because she needed to be to stop the audience getting bored due to hanging around with Rob all the time) and John's are his interactions with Sam and Ygritte.

Basically you get the idea... I hope. Both in the books and in the show the character is relatively dull when you set him up next to characters like Tyrion and Arya. He was just George making the best of a character that needed to exist for the sake of keeping the stories of the interesting characters moving.
#84 to #81 - rundas (03/09/2014) [-]
If you read the books, you'll find that Jon and Robb are quite interesting. Jon was actually my favorite. And even though he didn't have a perspective, it did spend a lot of time on Robb, though mostly through Catelyn. I don't really like either of their actors that much, and they kinda made them more boring in the series. I'm just saying, don't say a character's not important or interesting just because he's not in the show.
User avatar #95 to #84 - snowshark (03/09/2014) [-]
Aye, I've read the books, hence why I said 'That is true'. However I maintain that even in the books they're not interesting or important (or at least important in the sense that a character like Arya or Daenerys is).

Jon's journey is important to set up characters like Sam and to give his little brothers a place to head to (Castle Black) whilst also serving as a looking-glass for the audience into life beyond the wall. As a character he never really stood out doing something that seemed outside of the bounds of what I expected of him. He never wooed me and he never made me think "Wow, I like this character.". What he 'did' do well though is interact with other characters that I liked like Ygritte and Sam.

The same is true of Rob. He never did anything I particularly cared for and his angle of being young and stepping up to the plate was nice but at the same time... I've seen it before, I've seen it done better, and it was pretty transparent to me at least that he didn't matter in the overall narrative to the same extent as a character like Arya or Daenerys did.

Also, this is just a pet peeve of mine. If someone talks about Harry Potter without having read the books I'm totally fine with it. Same as if they do it with Game of Thrones. They're two different stories presented in different ways. Tyrion from the books isn't Tyrion from the T.V. show nor is Robb nor is John. Even if I'd only seen the show it wouldn't matter because Book Robb is a different character to T.V. Rob. T.V. Rob is boring as **** but Book Robb might be really interesting but that wouldn't mean Robb is an interesting character, it means that 'one' of them is. We call them 'adaptations' but really they're not the same story and treating them like one only creates animosity between the two parties.

In my opinion the live-action version is better than the books, because that's my personal speed. I read the books afterwards and there are differences. Some are good, others not. Different stories.
User avatar #102 to #95 - motherless (03/09/2014) [-]
None of Jon's brothers went to Castle Black(Except when Bran passed through, but that wasnt to see Jon). Jon is more than a looking glass, he makes some impactful decisions for the Nights Watch and for the true king, Stannis the Mannis. Sam and Arya, while maybe being interesting, are less important for the overall story(Sam does effect it but he seems more of a plot device than Jon or Robb to me, while Arya only effects her own arc for the most part.) The importance of a character and whether they live or die is not based on who you like the best. Jon is one of the most important characters for the kingdom.
User avatar #105 to #102 - snowshark (03/09/2014) [-]
Except before they met the brother and sister whose names I never remember they were headed straight for Castle Black. If it weren't for Jon they'd have been headed for Robb which would have taken them in the wrong direction and they'd be meeting the siblings further away from the wall and would have to backtrack. It is more useful for the narrative if they were already headed in that direction.
User avatar #110 to #105 - motherless (03/09/2014) [-]
No, Bran met Jojen and Meera Reed while they were still in Winterfell before Theon came, and from the beginning when they set out they were going to beyond the wall. It was Jojen and Brans dreams that made them go north, not Jon. Jon is more than a narrative aid; he is the main viewpoint of the struggle against the Others, he leads the Nights Watch against the Wildlings and makes some important decisions regarding their fate, and if Robb's letter of legitimization is found he is Lord of Winterfell and King in the North. He is as much of a "main character" as Daenerys.
#98 to #95 - rundas (03/09/2014) [-]
Well, I read the books first so I guess that would explain the difference of opinion. Also, I really don't like Daenerys. Again, it's probably because of the sequence: I like series Dany better than book Dany. But either way, Dany is a complete hypocrite and a bit of a whore. First off, she pretty much fell in love with a murderous warlord because he didn't rape her. Next, she is militant on "the Usurper's dogs" and all that **** , but she makes no attempt to better understand the situation. She understands that Viserys was an asswipe, but she still accepts his version of history. Next, she leads a horde of slavers, but when she finds the people that actually buy the slaves, she is disgusted and has to force her beliefs on them--at their own expense. Pretty much she just causes a bunch of chaos, death, and famine, and in the end things are no better for the slaves. And then there's that whole thing where she refuses to punish slaves for the crimes they committed when rebelling against their masters--murder, rape, whatever. And yet Ned Stark deserves death because he was associated with Robert. And, of course, she exiles the only people who truly believe in her cause, instead of just following her blindly because of some oath.
User avatar #100 to #98 - snowshark (03/09/2014) [-]
Well... I would argue that is more because she is changing and developing as the series goes along. In the beginning she didn't really care for the slaving but it was never a concern for her. She wanted her son to rule and she didn't care which way about it. But then as time went by she became more sympathetic to the downtrodden and the abused. Her goals moved away from other people and more towards herself. How does 'she' want things to be done. She gets power and it starts to change her for the better. However... yeah I'ma have to go back and read the books again since I can see what you're getting at but I don't think it's as clean-cut as you say it is. Either way, I'll go back and give Daenerys' story a read-through and see if I missed anything important.
#103 to #100 - rundas (03/09/2014) [-]
Yeah, maybe it's just me. But I just think she's too judgmental, and a lot of what she does seems to just **** things up for people. I love Emilia Clarke and she does a great job portraying her in the series, but even still I can't stand her character.
User avatar #106 to #103 - snowshark (03/09/2014) [-]
Sometimes characters will just rub you up the wrong way. *shrug* She's very judgemental and pretty cold in the books but she really seems truer to what Martin wanted in the T.V. series. I think part of that comes from the delivery and another part of it comes from the fact that the adapters already knew what did/didn't work about the character and attempted to write around those parts as best they could to improve the characterisation.
#109 to #106 - rundas (03/09/2014) [-]
I agree, same with Tyrion. Book Tyrion was a cool character, but still diabolical in many ways. Series Tyrion is a pretty cool guy. I just wish they did some makeup work on him so he's uglier and fits the role of an outcast better, rather than just being the joker. Cause Peter Dinklage is a sexy mofo no homo
#112 to #109 - snowshark (03/09/2014) [-]
Honestly... I'm perfectly fine with him as he is. He is doing something no other short actor has ever done... making women wet for a midget. They ******* love the **** out of Tyrion and if that opens the doors for other small actors or makes writers more inclined to have midgets in their stories then that's fine by me! Sometimes you just need to send a message with what you do and I think that is more important than making Tyrion uglier.

But that's 'cause I always think of things on a load of levels which kinda distracts from the things themselves.

Also... I'd **** him.
#115 to #112 - rundas (03/09/2014) [-]
Yeah, I never really cared much for putting in characters to show "progress." I agree with you, but Dinklage is already a famous actor and has been breaking ground for a while. I would rather see him as a deformed pariah who has to deal with constant judgment.
User avatar #118 to #115 - snowshark (03/10/2014) [-]
See, I like to see the creative industries as a vast amalgam of everything that exists fictionally since they all affect one-another in their own ways. If a midget becomes a really successful character in something really popular then minds are opened to the idea. Dinklage has been breaking ground for a while but think of it like this.

There were games before Halo that let you have two weapons max. There were almost no games after Halo that let you have more than two weapons.

There were games before Halo where the screen would go red when you're hurt. There were almost no games after Halo when that didn't happen.

Point is, it's not who does it first, it's who does it best. In this case the who is the same person but the platform he is doing it on is more important. It makes the series more memorable and important. But you're right, he would be more true to form as a deformed imp, but as far he stands (well... it's not that far but at least he stands) he works for me in other ways.
User avatar #15 to #6 - lunaisbestpony (03/09/2014) [-]
at least Arya is still alive.
#17 to #15 - rothingham (03/09/2014) [-]
for now...

Who know what mr Martin is thinking of...
User avatar #52 to #17 - jaggedherp (03/09/2014) [-]
Nope, Arya is his wifes favourite. She said she'd poison his food if Arya died
#31 to #17 - anon (03/09/2014) [-]
He kills Stannis Baratheon, and I'm going to riot. Who's with me?!
#63 to #31 - rundas (03/09/2014) [-]
Well...uh, yeah... IF...
#73 to #45 - rundas (03/09/2014) [-]
If it'll get you to write the books faster, sure
#18 - Canithy (03/09/2014) [-]
Thanks Bioware
Thanks Bioware
#10 - mankey (03/09/2014) [-]
#53 to #10 - chonfobetti (03/09/2014) [-]
what is this
User avatar #54 to #53 - mankey (03/09/2014) [-]
Pray you never find out. Save yourself! Flee from this thread! FLEE!

It's the best character from Gurren Lagann, Kamina, who dies early on in the series.
#25 to #10 - darkangeloffire (03/09/2014) [-]
At least my favourite character survived. But srsly, that moment was feely as ****
User avatar #41 to #25 - tiredofthis (03/09/2014) [-]
I felt for Viral, though. He was *basically* a good guy, even if he was fighting for the other team at the beginning.

But his honor and loyalty pretty much only ever brought him pain.
#19 to #10 - xtrin (03/09/2014) [-]
I honestly didn't believe this guy died so soon in the series (hell, I didn't even believe he can really die), I was waiting for like 10 episodes for him to show up alive, I was so sure it was just a sick joke and he was alive somehow, somewhere, waiting... oh well, needless to say, he didn't show up.
User avatar #22 to #19 - mankey (03/09/2014) [-]
Same here, ruined the show for me. It's like having a Batman series and killing off Batman in the first 3 episodes. Then carrying it on with The Boy Wonder as your main character.
User avatar #20 to #19 - drtrousersnake (03/09/2014) [-]
I thought he just fell asleep until his funeral, my denial was strong
User avatar #35 to #19 - chillingbear (03/09/2014) [-]
Really? He wasn't supposed to be the main character it was pretty obvious from the start for me. I mean he was way to prominent in every moment to not be killed since he wasn't the main character.
User avatar #42 to #19 - fzjoss (03/09/2014) [-]
Yeah, me too...
#2 - infinitereaper (03/09/2014) [-]
pretty much how i've felt about watamote
User avatar #24 to #2 - tomahawkkit (03/09/2014) [-]
atleast there could be a season 2
User avatar #27 to #24 - infinitereaper (03/09/2014) [-]
yeah, I might just read the manga though, I had read it before I heard about the anime, I have to say its less cringy reading
#55 to #2 - yuukoku (03/09/2014) [-]
At fist it's funny because we can sort of relate to her, but it gets sort of sad. I mean, she has to be happy as some point, right? We all kind of want her to be happy.
#7 to #2 - hugsta (03/09/2014) [-]
That opening though
User avatar #12 to #7 - legitimately (03/09/2014) [-]
Man, that opening was sick as ****
#32 - bitchesbanthymine (03/09/2014) [-]
I was really upset at the end of the episode of Adventure Time 'Betty'...
I was really upset at the end of the episode of Adventure Time 'Betty'...
#33 to #32 - bitchesbanthymine (03/09/2014) [-]
When  the Ice King just wanted to die but Betty saved him anyway.
When the Ice King just wanted to die but Betty saved him anyway.
User avatar #38 to #33 - jimmytwoshoes ONLINE (03/09/2014) [-]
and it was only 15 minutes... it should have been longer =/ kind of an important episode...
#57 - newforomador (03/09/2014) [-]
Comment Picture
#37 - zombieicecream (03/09/2014) [-]
oh god why did he have to die
oh god why did he have to die
#69 to #37 - newdevyx (03/09/2014) [-]
Why must you remind me?
#49 to #37 - snowshark (03/09/2014) [-]
Because it's kinder for him to die. Better that the one character with even a glimmer of personality... no matter how unimaginative or cliche it may be... to die so he doesn't have to suffer the rest of that god-awfully written series.

< Now that?! That **** would be an interestingly written game!... well one would hope so at least. I mean... at least they have personalities.

Spoilers Ahead - Gears A' War
#8 - kvimik (03/09/2014) [-]
Super relevant
#39 to #8 - aryastarkismywaifu (03/09/2014) [-]
FJ needs more katanagatari
#51 to #39 - yusay ONLINE (03/09/2014) [-]
Not really, this site drives anything popular into the ground.
#4 - dcj (03/09/2014) [-]
Read it in Hermione's voice. Was not disappointed.
Read it in Hermione's voice. Was not disappointed.
#61 - theshadowed ONLINE (03/09/2014) [-]
When the Roose is loose, everyone gonna 			*******		 die
When the Roose is loose, everyone gonna ******* die
User avatar #26 - OptimusPrimal (03/09/2014) [-]
Basically Attack on Titan
#75 - bootface (03/09/2014) [-]
Comment Picture
#29 - tristess (03/09/2014) [-]
It's really not a nice feeling.
It's really not a nice feeling.
#59 - hazador (03/09/2014) [-]
Oh god Clannad why
Oh god Clannad why
#50 - jpniels (03/09/2014) [-]
Finished this not long ago. This moment hit my balls.. i only cried a little
User avatar #67 to #50 - mondominiman (03/09/2014) [-]
I didn't cry but it did make me feel sad.
#23 - makotoitou (03/09/2014) [-]
Comment Picture
User avatar #64 to #23 - douevensax (03/09/2014) [-]
Are you implying his death wasn't glorious?
User avatar #121 to #64 - makotoitou (03/10/2014) [-]
No, Makoto did nothing wrong.
User avatar #94 - proudnerd (03/09/2014) [-]
More like Game of Thrones...
User avatar #92 - hentaisweetie (03/09/2014) [-]
So many examples of this. (lookin' at you FMA!)
Leave a comment
 Friends (0)