Felt slightly more happened in this first episode than the opener of last season. I also remember it took until about Episode 4 for last season to pick up momentum and we have already had some named character deaths to chew over. All in all a standard opening episode I reckon. I knew that they would not resolve the 'Is Jon Snow coming back' question in the first episode, but surely now either he comes back next episode or the Night's Watch get a hold of his body? Who knows.
Also, I refrained from opening this thread until I had seen the episode. It isn't that hard - if you want to avoid spoilers, don't click on a thread called 'Game of Thrones' until you have caught up on the latest episode!! (ie from around 1am Monday).
Each story got two scenes each mostly, I hope they don't do that too often as they have to squeeze so much story into too few sequences.
This episode had a lot of setting up to do, so it's a hard one to judge. I did find it quite predictable as a result (particularly Sansa) at least until the end. At which point
That ending.. Wow!! I was hoping them bringing Jon back was going to be weird and darker than we thought and it's definitely heading that way! Excellent!
Has there even been a more disappointing character than Areo Hotah? His character descriptor must have been 'be shit and die'.
Don't think they have done such a poor translation of a character. He was bad ass. Think the whole Dorne storyline has been poorly handled, it seems like they are just speeding it along.
Has there even been a more disappointing character than Areo Hotah? His character descriptor must have been 'be shit and die'.
Don't think they have done such a poor translation of a character. He was bad ass. Think the whole Dorne storyline has been poorly handled, it seems like they are just speeding it along.
I was hugely gutted they have pretty much scrapped the Dorne stuff. The stories are going to be at a weird pace now
A friend of mine has an interesting theory. The mad Targaryen king was married to Ed Stark's sister (against her will, but still legal). There's a war, the king kills the sister, and is in turn killed. Ed returns home after the wall with a child he says is his bastard. Now he was, from what we're told, an incredibly honourable man, but here he is with a bastard, a bastard who we're never told who the mother is.
So the theory is that Jon Snow is in fact the mad kings heir, and therefore if the red lady does bring him back then it could be argued he is the rightful king of Westeros.
I've tried to pick holes in the theory, but it hangs together pretty well.
Bastards can't be heirs, and the line was through the Baratheons, even though we know Joffrey and Tommen weren't his sons, legally they were his heirs, so after Tommen, with no siblings left and none of the old kings brothers left it would go to some Baratheon cousin I guess.
A friend of mine has an interesting theory. The mad Targaryen king was married to Ed Stark's sister (against her will, but still legal). There's a war, the king kills the sister, and is in turn killed. Ed returns home after the wall with a child he says is his bastard. Now he was, from what we're told, an incredibly honourable man, but here he is with a bastard, a bastard who we're never told who the mother is.
So the theory is that Jon Snow is in fact the mad kings heir, and therefore if the red lady does bring him back then it could be argued he is the rightful king of Westeros.
I've tried to pick holes in the theory, but it hangs together pretty well.
Not the mad King, the mad kings son, rhaegar was infatuated (not married) with lyanna. Lyanna was promised to Robert and rhaegar "kidnapped" lyanna which sparked robert's rebellion. Lyanna has Jon snow (targaryen) and dies after childbirth, but before she does makes ned make her a promise (what promise that is is never said in the book, but she does make him promise her something). Do you really think the honourable ned stark would cheat on his wife? No. Being honourable and taking his secret to the grave fits his character much better. When Jon is about to leave to join the nights watch in the show he asks about his mother, ned says "next time we see each other, I'll tell you" as Jon would've taken the black and relinquished all claims to titles and be untouchable from King Robert who had sworn to kill all targaryens. Benjen stark, when warning Jon about joining the nights watch re titles and claims, Jon said "he doesn't care about any of that" but benjen answers "you would, if you knew what it meant".
But yes, your theory has been running around as long as the first book has come out. It's repeatedly signposted, both in the book and the show.
It made me laugh when Ser Alliser tried to get his men to take on the Wildlings and only one of them gives it a go. It reminded me of our pitch invasion.
Comments
Also, I refrained from opening this thread until I had seen the episode. It isn't that hard - if you want to avoid spoilers, don't click on a thread called 'Game of Thrones' until you have caught up on the latest episode!! (ie from around 1am Monday).
The last scene tho....distraught.
And I bet Mehmet would
This episode had a lot of setting up to do, so it's a hard one to judge. I did find it quite predictable as a result (particularly Sansa) at least until the end. At which point
A good first episode
So the theory is that Jon Snow is in fact the mad kings heir, and therefore if the red lady does bring him back then it could be argued he is the rightful king of Westeros.
I've tried to pick holes in the theory, but it hangs together pretty well.
Either that or the bastard boy Gendry
But yes, your theory has been running around as long as the first book has come out. It's repeatedly signposted, both in the book and the show.