26

(39 replies, posted in Off Topic)

I mean...congratulations. On the ADORABLE baby.

27

(39 replies, posted in Off Topic)

Baby!!

28

(93 replies, posted in Off Topic)

fireproof78 wrote:
Dorkman wrote:

I'll see it because everyone I know will want to talk about it. I have zero interest.

What Zap said matches my feelings quite well. I think the shots where the robot uses a big ship like a sword were supposed to be the clincher, but for me they were the nail in the coffin that this movie is going to be dumb, and most likely not fun-dumb.

But hey, I didn't hate WORLD WAR Z, so there's no telling until after the show.

But, WWZ had something going for it, whereas I am not sure what Pacific Rim has going for it except that it wasn't a Hasbro license  hmm

Idris Elba and Rinko Kikuchi are the only things I'm interested (maybe excited?) to see this. Hopefully I'll actually get to see them amongst the robot punching.

29

(2,068 replies, posted in Off Topic)

TechNoir wrote:
Allison wrote:

Recently saw the Bling Ring. I was incredibly disappointed, though it might have been worth the $5 to hear Emma Watson's Valley accent for two hours.


That was actually somewhat on my radar (cause it's got women in it most likely...), but now I'll probably skip it.

I'd say it's worth a matinee ticket or a rental (do those still exist?), but not full price. It just seems lazier than Sofia's other films as far as characterization goes.

redxavier wrote:
Allison wrote:

No, I'm concerned that the character is written as a person of color with a naturally dark complexion, which is rarely seen on TV, and they've cast him as a light skinned guy from Orange County. Representation is important, and I'm tired of Hollywood whitewashing roles where race is a central aspect of the character.

I appreciate how you might have a dog in this race, but I think that greatly diminishes the character of Oberyn when you say that, as if there's nothing more to him than his skin colour. Oberyn is a fantastic character because he's Dornish, and GRRM has built up a fascinating and exciting culture and a concept of what that means in terms of behaviour (passionate, fiery, and uninhibited), not because he's coloured. Tyrion's thoughts aren't constantly about his skin colour, so I can't really see how you'd reach that conclusion.

I'm not saying there's not more to him than skin color. But it's silly to say that skin color isn't an important aspect of his character. Look at the way people talk about Elia. Look at the way Dornish folk are viewed by the rest of Westeros. Skin color is an important dynamic to discuss when talking about Martells, in the same way gender is an important dynamic to discuss when talking about Catelyn. I'm not "reducing" Catelyn to a woman when I talk about how her gender is important when you look at how men perceive her political advice. Talking about how other's perceive her without talking about gender would be useless.


redxavier wrote:

What about Daenerys' eye colour? The Stark kids' hair colour? Because it seems a double standard to be a book purist for some characters and not for others.

Eye color and hair color are not really the same as race. I have yet to see people being systematically disenfranchised and devalued because they are brunette instead of ginger, in the real world or Westeros/Essos.

redxavier wrote:

This isn't Hollywood though. It's the UK, where colour-blind casting has been in practice for the last decade or so (see Robin Hood and Merlin for prime examples). I can see how you might be frustrated with the lack of racial diversity in American TV, but that's not the case over here and GOT is no exception.

I will shut up if you can come up with a list of, hm, 10-15 POC on Game of Thrones that a) have names and/or lines and b) have not been killed off unnecessarily, like Dany's handmaids. Currently, it's only think Missandei and Grey Worm. If you count people who died, you've got Drogo and Dany's khas. It's hardly a rainbow coalition.

Brian wrote:

Maybe they had to make a trade off between casting the best actor for the part and the best skin tone.

Or maybe the casting call called only for white actors, like 70% of them do.
http://www.twirlit.com/2012/11/21/white … fographic/
http://www.slate.com/articles/arts/cult … tices.html

I am fairly sure that there are non-white talented people out there. But were they allowed to audition? Were they seriously considered?

32

(2,068 replies, posted in Off Topic)

Recently saw the Bling Ring. I was incredibly disappointed, though it might have been worth the $5 to hear Emma Watson's Valley accent for two hours.

redxavier wrote:
Allison wrote:

It is analogous to Spain, but Oberyn is explicitly described as having olive skin and dark hair. Some Dornishmen don't, but he does.

He's described as a salty Dornishman by Tyrion when he first appears. And later we get this description:

All three sorts seemed well represented in Doran’s retinue. The salty Dornishmen were lithe and
dark, with smooth olive skin and long black hair streaming in the wind. The sandy Dornishmen
were even darker, their faces burned brown by the hot Dornish sun. They wound long bright
scarfs around their helms to ward off sunstroke. The stony Dornishmen were biggest and fairest,
sons of the Andals and the First Men, brown-haired or blond, with faces that freckled or burned
in the sun instead of browning.

So whilst he's olive skinned, the fact that there's a darker, burned brown look in Dorne suggests that salty befits a Mediterranean than Arabic or Indian ethnicity.

I'm confused by your differentiation between those types (there are dark Greeks and light Indians?) but either way: Pedro Pascal does not have olive skin. He is of a similar skin tone to all the Western and Northern Westerosi we see.

redxavier wrote:

I can see how you might be concerned that we might missing an opportunity to differentiate racially the Dornish characters from the rest of Westeros. However, I also think if you cast too eastern, you risk confusing the audience as they'd look like the show's version of Dothraki. Then you'd have people wondering why this Dothraki character has popped up in Kings Landing but doesn't know the Khaleesi etc. Besides, they'll likely use costume, accents and mannerisms to accentuate the cultural distinctiveness of the Dornish, rather than relying on real world short-hand like 'hey look, these people are different because they look different!'.

No, I'm concerned that the character is written as a person of color with a naturally dark complexion, which is rarely seen on TV, and they've cast him as a light skinned guy from Orange County. Representation is important, and I'm tired of Hollywood whitewashing roles where race is a central aspect of the character.

And, really? If we see a brown person the audience will assume that they're Dothraki? Even if they have different accents, speak the common tongue, dress differently, and act differently? I know Game of Thrones can be tough for people but it's not like people mix up Sansa and Margaery just because they're both pale.

tl;dr: It is not that hard to cast brown people in major roles, but for some reason no one does it.

redxavier wrote:

I've always considered Dorne to be analogous to Spain, soI think the casting is pretty spot on.

It is analogous to Spain, but Oberyn is explicitly described as having olive skin and dark hair. Some Dornishmen don't, but he does.

redxavier wrote:

And didn't thhey cast a black actor in a role clearly specified as white in the book (Xaro Xhoan Daxos)? So they've gone both ways so far.

Is Xaro from Qarth? I'd assumed her was a merchant prince who had settled there, not a native. In any case, his skin tone is not described in the book (he's just "the bald man") while Oberyn's is.

Ash, I don't think the show runners have messed up casting, but the race politics of the show are not great. Did anyone read Sean T Collins' post on the Mhysa scene?

For me, ideally Oberyn, Arianne, and some other Martells would all be dark skinned POC. Indian, Middle Eastern, Asian, I don't really care. But it's pretty clear that characters that Elia and Oberyn are racially coded by other Westerosi, and I worry we'll lose that dimension if they're all just tanned. Other Dornishmen, like Tyene Sand, can be lighter skinned but still not white, since she's stony instead of salty.

Who is that for Arianne? She looks perfect!

Yeah, the point of Dorne is that there is also a wide spectrum of skin tones (salty, sandy, stony) but Oberyn is pretty explicitly a dark haired, olive skinned Salty Dornishman. Tyene, one of the Sand Snakes, is a mix of stony and salty so she has dark skin and light hair/eyes.

I don't trust the show runners, since casting agencies have a habit of not casting people of color and, when they do, they cast very light skinned ones for POC roles. I'd like to see the casting call for Oberyn, personally.

White and Latin aren't mutually exclusive. I mean, Alexis Bledel is also Latin@ but I wouldn't cast her as Arianne, you know?

What a surprise, they cast a white dude...

Sean T Collins over at All Leather Must Be Boiled has done a wonderful combined reading order. There is one that is spoiler free, and one that is not. I'm definitely going to do it when I get to that part of my re read.

Doctor Submarine wrote:
Allison wrote:
redxavier wrote:

I wouldn't expect to see Winds of Winter until late 2014/early 2015 at the earliest. It certainly won't be done this year and will take up most of next. ADWD only came out 2 years ago, and GRRM apparently didn't start writing again until 2012.

There were six years between Books 4 and 5, and that was before Germ was busy writing for the show and doing Dunk and Egg. I think he's also got a new television show in the works? I'm placing my money on 2017/2018 at the earliest.

With the TV show hot on his heels, I think that 2016/2017 is a good estimate. Any later and the show will overtake the books, and there's no way he'll let that happen if he can help it.

Fair point. If they continue 2 seasons for each book, 2016/2017 will be perfect timing. But that doesn't leave much time for A Dream of Spring...

redxavier wrote:

I wouldn't expect to see Winds of Winter until late 2014/early 2015 at the earliest. It certainly won't be done this year and will take up most of next. ADWD only came out 2 years ago, and GRRM apparently didn't start writing again until 2012.

There were six years between Books 4 and 5, and that was before Germ was busy writing for the show and doing Dunk and Egg. I think he's also got a new television show in the works? I'm placing my money on 2017/2018 at the earliest.

Alex wrote:

Consider Eowyn's story: she is a symbol of feminine strength. In the Middle Earth mythology, that is her role--the idealized feminine realized through struggle. Her entire story revolves around being doubted as a woman and then proving that women can be just as strong, or stronger/more influential, than men. If every woman character did that, it wouldn't matter as much.

...no. Not at all.

Alex wrote:

Jackson's approach seems to be the opposite: rather than trying to underline a woman's story line in order to outline the genders' strengths, he's poising a preemptive strike by simply throwing in a female character with a lot of screen time but without much depth. It's like he's saying, "See? She has tons of screen time! Don't get mad at me about there being so many dudes!" As if he would be the one to blame in the first place.

I agree that it is a preemptive strike. But, seriously, you can have quantity AND quality with ladies. It's not like you can have 1 woman who is 100% strong or 5 who are 20% strong. You can have lots of great women! Jackson/Tolkein/basically everyone just chooses not to.

I've heard a lot of people say Tyrion, but I dislike him so I reject that theory out of hand. 

I'm assuming it will actually be Aegon Targaryen, although I doubt the person we've been told is Aegon is actually him.

Hey, GRRM makes the rules. I just call 'em as I see 'em.

redxavier wrote:

Quite surprised to see Sansa described as having feminine strength. She's essentially knocked around by everyone she interacts with, and doesn't really influence them in return. She has had no plan of her own and has required others to get her out of her situation (the Hound, Littlefinger etc.). I think people are vastly overestimated her impact on the story beyond being the 'marriage vector' that brings the Vale into the war on the Stark/Tully side. Maybe I'm just not remembering things well, but she hasn't really shown much political acumen or the kind of cunning that Littlefinger displays which would lead me to predict that that's where she is going, though I confess to being biased! She has shown improvement in terms of observation though.


I see surviving as requiring strength, and Sansa has done a surprising amount of surviving. Yes, she hasn't started to influence people yet, but she has dealt with a lot of "knocking around" (systematic physical, sexual, and mental abuse) without letting it compromise her ability to empathize with people and love. She's getting stronger without changing who she is. I think that's a cool character to have around. 

And, let's be real, all your favorites will probably be dead soon so you may as well get used to liking Sansa Stark now.

-inserts photo of me hugging the sansa season three subway ad-

redxavier wrote:

Ned Stark isn't naive and he doesn't trust that people are good... at all. This is a common misconception about his character that isn't supported by the book. Please read his chapters again, he's wary of everyone he meets (specifically thinking this of Pycelle, Varys, and Littlefinger). His demise occurs because he trusts Littlefinger (which he does only after his darling wife said that he could be trusted) and Cersei takes extremely drastic and risky steps to win, first murdering the King then destroying the official Royal will.

Nice swipe at Catelyn, but that's an argument for another day. I actually just finished my re-read of Thrones, and Ned being too trusting is supported by the text. He is wary but ends up trusting people in spite of it. He tells Littlefinger that he was wrong to mistrust him (not motivated by Cat, but rather Littlefinger helping him), and continues to trust him, to his sorrow. Ned trusts people enough to give even Cersei Lannister the benefit of the doubt. He offer Cersei a chance to escape, explicitly telling her that he will inform Robert of her adultery, which allows her to get her plans in order. Renly suggested a much better plan (taking control of the castle during the night and not allowing the Lannisters time to think) but Ned dismisses it as dishonorable. This huge mistake happens before Sansa's "betrayal".

redxavier wrote:

There's little evidence that Sansa has been sheltered, just conjecture. Never mind the fact that she's been reared in the cold North by relatively cold people and by a family that took its even younger family members along to an execution.

I wouldn't call the Starks cold, even though the North is. Sansa has, as said in the text, never seen a man die until the Hand's Tourney. Only Robb, Bran, Theon, and Jon were taken along to the execution. Rickon, Arya, and Sansa were left behind. That isn't to say she isn't tough when she does eventually encounter shit - "but Sansa was made of sterner stuff" is how she reacts to Jeyne crying at a tourney death - but she is sheltered at the beginning of the story.

redxavier wrote:

Regardless of how unobservant she is with regards to the politics, Sansa was at least aware of the increasing violence and its effects on people around her. She could see that her father was seriously injured by Jaime Lannister, and is specifically told “I want you back in Winterfell for your own safety. Three of my men were cut down like dogs not a league from where we sit, and what does Robert do? He goeshunting.” Her own father has been hurt and she can't see the danger? Didn't you say that she trusts her father?
And I'd argue that a betrayal is a betrayal regardless of knowledge of the stakes involved and how oblivious the traitor is to the consequences for their victim. "But say nothing of this. It’s better if no one knows of our plans." Her disobedience is a betrayal (this is the same Sansa you argue is owned body and soul by her lord remember) and Cersei credits it as a boon to her plan.  She knew it was wrong, and yet she did it anyway. Not for good reasons, but for purely selfish ones which she gives in her POV. I don't know how you can justify it.

I will point out that her lord is Joffrey, not Ned. And I empathize with her behavior because people  - especially young people - are selfish and stupid when it comes to what they think is love. That's why Robert fought a war. That's why Robb risked the entire northern rebellion (and Sansa'a life). But Sansa never makes the same mistake twice, while her father chose to give Cersei a chance after her brother slaughtered his men.

redxavier wrote:

Which brings me back to what I was saying before, the whole point of her character arc is that she betrays her father and is a selfish girl hiding her feelings behind the veneer of ladylike courtesy, preferring to have babies with a bully because he's the doorway to a life of fanciful bliss. To dismiss this and attempt to rationalise her actions and behaviour, I would argue, is missing the point.

I think Sansa's arc is actually about a girl who has no power of her own clawing her way towards agency by exploiting the system. Whereas Daenerys tears down power systems and builds her own, people like Sansa, Cersei, and Catelyn work within confines to gain power. Sansa is meant to demonstrate a different kind of strength: a feminine strength. While some people fight the game of thrones with swords, women (and the subtler political figures) fight with minds. Her courtesy isn't a veneer, it's "armor". And while she is still far from independent, she is using everything she knows and has learned to get herself out of her situation. Her arc also shows how people can be good despite being abused by everyone. She doesn't want people to be scared of her like they're scared of Cersei: "if I were Queen, I'd make them love me". I cannot wait to see her with Harry the Heir, because I think she was born to be the behind the scenes power player that a queen mother is.

Dorkman wrote:

Anyway, they could just have him cover his face with a scarf if they want to hide his identity, though if they show some Benjen Stark action in a "previously on Game of Thrones" intro that'll kind of tip their hand.

Picturing Coldhands with a casual plaid balaclava is a good way to start my day.

Saniss - while it would be more in line with the books to bring back Lady Stoneheart later (thought she does come back before Brienne), I think it would pack more punch for the viewers to bring her in at the finale. It keeps the momentum going when you see LS (or, as a few have suggested, see Nymeria dragging Cat from the river) right after the RW. We might not get her story, but a short scene of her ordering a hanging of some Freys would be a good cliffhanger.

That post probably could have said "If we hate characters for being naive why doesn't everyone hate Ned Stark" or "Seriously, guys, Robb Stark is much less intelligent than Sansa let's shame him instead", but House Swarthmore words are "Why use 10 words when you can use 1000".

Faldor wrote:
Allison wrote:

This is a good time to inform anyone that complaining about Sansa will result in very, very long posts from me explaining why you are wrong.

She spends the first book swooning over Joffrey, the most unlikeable character in recent fiction and wanting an upper class life handed to her, hardly a feminist role model  tongue

I wrote my final paper for Feminist Film and Media on how Sansa is a wonderful female character, so...I disagree.

She is in love with a cute boy when she's 11. God forbid.

At the river she sees a glimpse of who he is, but she also knows that she's bound to him for life. Sansa doesn't know a lot (thanks for sheltering her so much, Ned!) but she does know that she's essentially owned by him and has been raised to defer to her lord. And we all have to acknowledge that her only models of male behavior are her family and their household, all of whom are wonderful. There is no reason for her to believe that an outburst from Joffrey made him a psychopath. Yes, the Hound killed Mycah, but that was probably explained to her as his choice.

In short: Sansa trusts her parents, who betrothed her to Joffrey, and, much like Ned, trusts that people are good. I'm not excusing that behavior, but you can't ignore that later on she knows he can't be trusted. You can say that she doesn't know a lot at the beginning of the book, but she never has to be told anything twice.

redxavier wrote:

I dislike Sansa because she starts out vain, selfish, willingly delusional, and superficial, then betrays her father.

Sansa did not betray Ned, because she had no idea what was at stake. She had been sheltered from the actual politics so much that she thought it would be no different for her family to go home and for her to stay. She hasn't been told not to trust the queen or the prince. So she asks the King (she goes to Robert, her father's best friend, and is only then met by Cersei) to let her stay with her betrothed.  You could blame her if Ned had told her what the situation was, but you can't blame her for not being omnipotent.

Also, it is true that Sansa is being kept alive for her claim, but we can't discount the fact that Joffrey could have had her killed. He went off script at Baelor by executing Ned, and no one could stop him even thought it was a horrible strategic decision. But she is pretty good at understanding his moods, as demonstrated at the Tourney for his name day when she saves Ser Dontos, and in the added show scene before Blackwater.

I think that Sansa is going to be coached by Littlefinger, who will meet a horrible end, and then become a player in her own right. Queen in the North!

I'm wondering what your definition of "steel" is. Is nearly pushing Joffrey to his death (only to be stopped by the Hound) not it? Her later resistances are smaller but she never surrenders. My favorite scene of hers is during the Battle of the Blackwater. When Cersei loses it and leaves all the other women to panic, Sansa stands up, tells them it will be alright, and leads them in a hymn. Despite knowing that she will, in all likelihood, be killed very soon. That girl is made of steel. They added a wonderful scene in season 2 where she almost directly calls Joffrey a coward since he won't be fighting in the vanguard.

I think people dismiss Sansa as a victim when what she actually is is a survivor. She's doing what even Ned Stark couldn't: play the game well enough to stay alive while surrounded by people who want her dead.

There has been a lot of discussion of Shae replacing Dontos in Sansa's stroyline. I'm unsure how I feel about that decision, should it be the case.

Whoever it ends up being, having a midnight godswood meeting where the possibility of escape is mentioned would be a good way to wrap up Sansa for this season.