Those are mutually exclusive. Ned couldn't be both.Costin_Razvan wrote...
...
the fool
...
the most competent military commander Westeros has
...
HBO's Game of Thrones
Débuté par
horacethegrey
, avril 05 2011 04:55
#976
Posté 13 juin 2011 - 04:26
Obadiah
-
- Members
- 5 765 messages
Retour en haut
#977
Posté 13 juin 2011 - 04:31
LTD
-
- Members
- 1 356 messages
KenKenpachi wrote...
Well you can't expect much from a budget TV show. Ah well makes me doubt they'll do it for the other books.
Ahh but we speak of HBO here! I think we are allowed to expect a bit more. Huge battle scenes are far from unheard of on small screen.Rome making easiest point of comparsion.
It was bit humm thought provoking they didn't even mention the ever charming young Walder&Walder boys to be send as wards. Clearly folks at HBO aren't even considering the possibility they'd someday need em:o
Modifié par LTD, 13 juin 2011 - 04:43 .
#978
Posté 13 juin 2011 - 04:35
KenKenpachi
-
- Members
- 5 768 messages
Very well.
Hmm to keep this short,
George Washigton, on his death bed freed his slaves, and actully paid them while he had them, and was reported to never having beat them, which though slavery is considerd wrong it speaks of his character in that reguard. Also fought at the frontline with his troops. Also at the end of the war several of his commanders wanted him to become King of the US to which he said "I did not fight to replace King George the 4th with King George the 1st." Honorable no?
Peter the Great of Russia, though he engaged in numerous political and taxtation manuverings, he is one of the few Russian leaders that showed some honor and at the very least did not maintane his rule with Force or security forces. Helped turn Russia from a backwards state to what at the time was a major power.
Saladin, Warlord of the Islamic Armies in the Crusade period. Was a very honorable man and delt kindly with prisoners of war, more so than his Christian opponets, save maybe Richard the LionHeart.
Uesugi Kenshin who used his army to break a seige on a long time rival to bring in supplies namely salt. And was qouted as saying to another who asked why he would do this he replied. "I make war with swords, not salt." Numerous other Japanese Leaders can be listed here. But for sake of space I will not.
Teddy Rosevelt for reasons too numerous to list is another as is to a less extent Winston Churchill . Who though many might say was a bastard was far more honest and up front than most members of Parlament before or after.
King Edward the First, Juiles Ceaser, Alexander, Vsevolod Mstislavich aka Prince of Pskov, where he rallied the defense of the city against a German invasion, are also noteable mentions. As to a Less extent numerous other American presidents, among them namely, Grant, and Ike. Ramses the great, and even biblical figures such as King David and Solomen short of a few human erorrs are also somewhat in that region if the tales are to be taken at face value.
Among military Commanders you have numerous most well known among those would be Patton, and Rommel from WW2. While different in personality neither would say the other wasn't an honorable man and a hard fighter. One was a loud mouth but cared for his men more than he let on. One loved his family and nation to the extent of killing him self at Hitlers orders to save his family and did attempt to save his nation from Madness. Giap of Vietnam though his tactics may seem less than honorable is another example and dispite defeating two major powers is often enough a voice of peace and had respect for his opponets.
Confederate General Robert E Lee is another example as is General Sherman to an extent, with the later doing a horrible event in order to end the war faster to save lives, and never tried to gain higher status for that sake alone, the former when it was clear the South could not win surrenderd his forces and spent the rest of his life trying to help the country heal.
Various leaders of China's various dynasties can also be listed when taken a look at into more stable periods as well. And Ghengis Khan is in a manner. Though he used harsh methods to reach his goals, the results often more than not weren't so bad. It was said an old woman could wander the whole of the Mongol Empire with a purse of gold and not be attacked given the effectiveness of Mongol law, he was also not in the least bigot and surprisingly very forgiving, to a point. However when wronged it was like opening the gates of hell. He also made use of defeated enemies and placed people into postions based on merit, family and race ment nothing. One of his best Generals Subutai was in fact Chinese, and was from a poor family, he could be listed. Another military man of note is Admiral Yi Sun-sin, the Hero of Korea, as could be Horatio Nelson, and in later years Admiral Yammamoto, but as I said various Japanese could fall into this post.
I've barely scratched the surface of more who I can name, in more modern times I could Nominate General Norman Schwarzkopfof, and General Shinseki of the US Army to this posting, but very few modern age politcal leaders. Many of those I could hazard a guess at, haven't done anything wrong, or good to earn that merit. On the other hand it seems good leaders only spring up from conflict, when the drift wood is culled, or at random almost every 100 years, and for every good one I can name 100 who weren't. However the impact of the good ones is often more long lasting and rememberd. While those of the corrupt may be of high reguard in life out of fear, as soon as they are dead, people will line up to destory what they built or to insult them, such as was the case with Josef Stalin.
Hmm to keep this short,
George Washigton, on his death bed freed his slaves, and actully paid them while he had them, and was reported to never having beat them, which though slavery is considerd wrong it speaks of his character in that reguard. Also fought at the frontline with his troops. Also at the end of the war several of his commanders wanted him to become King of the US to which he said "I did not fight to replace King George the 4th with King George the 1st." Honorable no?
Peter the Great of Russia, though he engaged in numerous political and taxtation manuverings, he is one of the few Russian leaders that showed some honor and at the very least did not maintane his rule with Force or security forces. Helped turn Russia from a backwards state to what at the time was a major power.
Saladin, Warlord of the Islamic Armies in the Crusade period. Was a very honorable man and delt kindly with prisoners of war, more so than his Christian opponets, save maybe Richard the LionHeart.
Uesugi Kenshin who used his army to break a seige on a long time rival to bring in supplies namely salt. And was qouted as saying to another who asked why he would do this he replied. "I make war with swords, not salt." Numerous other Japanese Leaders can be listed here. But for sake of space I will not.
Teddy Rosevelt for reasons too numerous to list is another as is to a less extent Winston Churchill . Who though many might say was a bastard was far more honest and up front than most members of Parlament before or after.
King Edward the First, Juiles Ceaser, Alexander, Vsevolod Mstislavich aka Prince of Pskov, where he rallied the defense of the city against a German invasion, are also noteable mentions. As to a Less extent numerous other American presidents, among them namely, Grant, and Ike. Ramses the great, and even biblical figures such as King David and Solomen short of a few human erorrs are also somewhat in that region if the tales are to be taken at face value.
Among military Commanders you have numerous most well known among those would be Patton, and Rommel from WW2. While different in personality neither would say the other wasn't an honorable man and a hard fighter. One was a loud mouth but cared for his men more than he let on. One loved his family and nation to the extent of killing him self at Hitlers orders to save his family and did attempt to save his nation from Madness. Giap of Vietnam though his tactics may seem less than honorable is another example and dispite defeating two major powers is often enough a voice of peace and had respect for his opponets.
Confederate General Robert E Lee is another example as is General Sherman to an extent, with the later doing a horrible event in order to end the war faster to save lives, and never tried to gain higher status for that sake alone, the former when it was clear the South could not win surrenderd his forces and spent the rest of his life trying to help the country heal.
Various leaders of China's various dynasties can also be listed when taken a look at into more stable periods as well. And Ghengis Khan is in a manner. Though he used harsh methods to reach his goals, the results often more than not weren't so bad. It was said an old woman could wander the whole of the Mongol Empire with a purse of gold and not be attacked given the effectiveness of Mongol law, he was also not in the least bigot and surprisingly very forgiving, to a point. However when wronged it was like opening the gates of hell. He also made use of defeated enemies and placed people into postions based on merit, family and race ment nothing. One of his best Generals Subutai was in fact Chinese, and was from a poor family, he could be listed. Another military man of note is Admiral Yi Sun-sin, the Hero of Korea, as could be Horatio Nelson, and in later years Admiral Yammamoto, but as I said various Japanese could fall into this post.
I've barely scratched the surface of more who I can name, in more modern times I could Nominate General Norman Schwarzkopfof, and General Shinseki of the US Army to this posting, but very few modern age politcal leaders. Many of those I could hazard a guess at, haven't done anything wrong, or good to earn that merit. On the other hand it seems good leaders only spring up from conflict, when the drift wood is culled, or at random almost every 100 years, and for every good one I can name 100 who weren't. However the impact of the good ones is often more long lasting and rememberd. While those of the corrupt may be of high reguard in life out of fear, as soon as they are dead, people will line up to destory what they built or to insult them, such as was the case with Josef Stalin.
Modifié par KenKenpachi, 13 juin 2011 - 04:41 .
#981
Posté 13 juin 2011 - 04:42
Seagloom
-
- Members
- 7 094 messages
W00t! Stone heart! Yes! Does that make me like Shale? 
I got a lot more out of it in film form that I do these stills. Seeing Arya's expressions frozen in time do not faze me. The GIF of Catelyn and Robb is a bit better; if too short and repetitive.
@KenKenpachi and Costin_Razvan
I would be very careful with that line of discussion. The last thing we need is this thread locked on account of political discourse.
I got a lot more out of it in film form that I do these stills. Seeing Arya's expressions frozen in time do not faze me. The GIF of Catelyn and Robb is a bit better; if too short and repetitive.@KenKenpachi and Costin_Razvan
I would be very careful with that line of discussion. The last thing we need is this thread locked on account of political discourse.
#982
Posté 13 juin 2011 - 04:43
KenKenpachi
-
- Members
- 5 768 messages
Yeah I'm done with it, if he wan'ts to keep it going, thats what PM's are for.Seagloom wrote...
W00t! Stone heart! Yes! Does that make me like Shale?
@KenKenpachi and Costin_Razvan
I would be very careful with that line of discussion. The last thing we need is this thread locked on account of political discourse.
On the topic, I wonder if the next book will come out on time.
Modifié par KenKenpachi, 13 juin 2011 - 04:44 .
#983
Posté 13 juin 2011 - 04:49
dreamextractor
-
- Members
- 922 messages
Aw, no! I heard about Blackfish but Dolorous Ed? They better not cut him out, his character is awesome!
#984
Posté 13 juin 2011 - 04:56
Brockololly
-
- Members
- 9 032 messages
Addai67 wrote...
@Brock: Hot Pie and Lommy have already been cast for season one- I am assuming we'll see them in the final.
There is fan rumor that the Blackfish and Dolorous Ed may be cut and their roles shifted to others. I am worried that the Reeds will also be cut and their roles taken over by Osha.
Yeah, I thought I read somewhere how the next episode kind of cuts into the beginning of CoK as far as Arya goes. It will be cool having Gendry around too for all that.
Without getting too spoilery, I don't know how they'd cut the Reeds and shift that to Osha considering how things go with Rickon...that would be a pretty significant break from the books, especially considering what knowledge Jojen brings to the table for Bran.
The way the books are structured in terms of cliffhangers and such makes them pretty easy to adapt in terms of TV I think; the problem being the number of characters keeps growing as the books go on, with some disappearing for books at a time. Thats what I'll be wondering for season 2- will they stick with the books and have certain more major characters from GoT absent or will they change up things to keep them in the foreground?
#985
Posté 13 juin 2011 - 05:16
LTD
-
- Members
- 1 356 messages
Theon Greyjoy's looks are just perfect. It is so easy to imagine that man mucking about on some cold, gray damp and depressing stony shore of Iron islands. Any and all of his big moments are yet to come.. I'm curious to see how well he (the actor) will handle them.
Modifié par LTD, 13 juin 2011 - 05:23 .
#986
Posté 13 juin 2011 - 05:17
Addai
-
- Members
- 25 850 messages
Wat.KenKenpachi wrote...
lol thats hillarious, he's like "My god thats an ugly woman."*snip*
from here
That's a seriously touching moment. Now you're making me want to go on a rant about how female actors face scrutiny that male actors don't, although I admit I had always pictured Catelyn as more classically beautiful.
#987
Posté 13 juin 2011 - 05:20
Addai
-
- Members
- 25 850 messages
Yes, but... I thought the big battle scenes in Rome were some of the weakest moments. Not to mention that Rome blew its budget and got dropped because of it. To me, big battles are boring. The best you can do with them is to follow one particular character, but if nothing interesting happens character-wise, I'd just as soon not see the limb hacking and shouting.LTD wrote...
KenKenpachi wrote...
Well you can't expect much from a budget TV show. Ah well makes me doubt they'll do it for the other books.
Ahh but we speak of HBO here! I think we are allowed to expect a bit more. Huge battle scenes are far from unheard of on small screen.Rome making easiest point of comparsion.
#988
Posté 13 juin 2011 - 05:21
Alpha-Centuri
-
- Members
- 582 messages
Michelle Fairley was a recast. The original Catelyn, Jennifer Ehle had to back out due to conflicts of schedule. She looked way better.
She looked more like how I pictured Catelyn
She looked more like how I pictured Catelyn
Modifié par Alpha-Centuri, 13 juin 2011 - 05:26 .
#989
Guest_Capt. Obvious_*
Posté 13 juin 2011 - 05:27
Guest_Capt. Obvious_*
Guest_Capt. Obvious_*
-
- Guests
Chances are they'll get rid of Dany(for the 2nd season) because she does nothing in the second book. They could cut out Jaime for the entire season and then in the next season explain that Catelyn set him free. No need for an anti-climatic cutscene involving her raising a sword or anything and leaving the audience in suspense. Bronn doesn't have to be in the next season. Neither that boy that got stabbed in the throat when Gregor's men found Arya. There are actually a lot of characters that don't need to be there.Brockololly wrote...
Addai67 wrote...
@Brock: Hot Pie and Lommy have already been cast for season one- I am assuming we'll see them in the final.
There is fan rumor that the Blackfish and Dolorous Ed may be cut and their roles shifted to others. I am worried that the Reeds will also be cut and their roles taken over by Osha.
Yeah, I thought I read somewhere how the next episode kind of cuts into the beginning of CoK as far as Arya goes. It will be cool having Gendry around too for all that.
Without getting too spoilery, I don't know how they'd cut the Reeds and shift that to Osha considering how things go with Rickon...that would be a pretty significant break from the books, especially considering what knowledge Jojen brings to the table for Bran.
The way the books are structured in terms of cliffhangers and such makes them pretty easy to adapt in terms of TV I think; the problem being the number of characters keeps growing as the books go on, with some disappearing for books at a time. Thats what I'll be wondering for season 2- will they stick with the books and have certain more major characters from GoT absent or will they change up things to keep them in the foreground?
They could very well cut out most of Theon Greyjoy's chapters and then reintroduce him in the series with him taking over Winterfell as a plot twist to the audience who haven't read the books, and then explain everything that happened prior to that moment. There are a lot of directions they could go.
Modifié par Capt. Obvious, 13 juin 2011 - 05:40 .
#991
Posté 13 juin 2011 - 05:41
LTD
-
- Members
- 1 356 messages
Addai67 wrote...
Yes, but... I thought the big battle scenes in Rome were some of the weakest moments. Not to mention that Rome blew its budget and got dropped because of it. To me, big battles are boring. The best you can do with them is to follow one particular character, but if nothing interesting happens character-wise, I'd just as soon not see the limb hacking and shouting.
Mmm! Sure. I wouldn't shed many tears over a battle scene that just shows some 2000 faceless CGI heroes clashing either. However, both Whispering woods and Green fork(?) would have had ample pile of potential screen friendly POVs. Jaime realizing he is in trouble, making a desperate go for Robb. Catelyn listening, fearing and trying to see just what is happening admist the trees. Tyrion realizing just why he and his mountaineers ended up as a van. Tyrion claiming his hostage. All good, TV friendly stuff involving characters we'd love to see in action. It irks me to have borderline hardcore girl+girl+Littlefinger scene that lasts longer on screen than a civil war. All that said, Cat waiting for Robb was really cool scene. Wish it had been delivered with litlte more screen time and free-of-haste set up.
Modifié par LTD, 13 juin 2011 - 05:48 .
#992
Posté 13 juin 2011 - 07:48
Fayth18
-
- Members
- 16 messages
Costin_Razvan wrote...
Here's hoping they increase the budget in S2 so we can finally have some battles.
Addai: Cersei is a vain fool, as you well know. She is scared ****less of the Stannis that she is ignoring that the north can be a greater threat. Hell her plan was to risk setting lose the most competent military commander Westeros has ( I do believe Stannis is capable, but Ned was fighting there side by side with Robert in all the major battles of the Rebelion ). WAAY too big a risk, since if Ned had gone free and broken his promise then he would have supported Stannis for king...and since you've read the books I guess you know how that particular line of thought would have ended for Cersei ( hint her head on a pike ).
Cersei wanted Ned alive. She says several times in the book that Joffrey having him killed was a mistake but that she couldn't stop the King's order in front of everyone. The priests end up very angry that their sept was defiled by an execution, so it was planned to send him to the wall.
#993
Posté 13 juin 2011 - 07:56
Costin_Razvan
-
- Members
- 7 010 messages
And how does one reach the wall if not through the North? If Ned had wanted to break his promise he would have and nothing could have stopped that once Cersei let him out of King's Landing, armed guard or no.
KenKenpachi: I'll give a detailed answer to your post later, but suffice to say that a good leader ( though I should say I was refering to the good leader of a state not a good general ) will give the appearance of honor but he will not be honorable. Even Muhammad ( you know, prophet of God and all, really puts Saladin to shame in what one could call honorable behaivour ) lied to create and strengthen his Arab state, and he is considered one of the most honorable people in Arabic History.
There is no real honorable person, as in someone who would follow a code of morals for how to lead a nation, it just doesn't work because leading a nation well means you HAVE to be flexible. You can't stick with a moral code and expect it to work in every situation because it won't However breaking that code would mean losing your honor so there is no trully honorable leader.
Not to say that there haven't been leaders who have acted with honor when they could or those with honorable intentions or both. You mention Ghenkis Khan, and yes I agree that he was not the brutal monster that he is portrayed today. He was an exceptional leader who created a country from nothing, but he was not really honorable even though he acted as such on ocassion.
KenKenpachi: I'll give a detailed answer to your post later, but suffice to say that a good leader ( though I should say I was refering to the good leader of a state not a good general ) will give the appearance of honor but he will not be honorable. Even Muhammad ( you know, prophet of God and all, really puts Saladin to shame in what one could call honorable behaivour ) lied to create and strengthen his Arab state, and he is considered one of the most honorable people in Arabic History.
There is no real honorable person, as in someone who would follow a code of morals for how to lead a nation, it just doesn't work because leading a nation well means you HAVE to be flexible. You can't stick with a moral code and expect it to work in every situation because it won't However breaking that code would mean losing your honor so there is no trully honorable leader.
Not to say that there haven't been leaders who have acted with honor when they could or those with honorable intentions or both. You mention Ghenkis Khan, and yes I agree that he was not the brutal monster that he is portrayed today. He was an exceptional leader who created a country from nothing, but he was not really honorable even though he acted as such on ocassion.
Modifié par Costin_Razvan, 13 juin 2011 - 11:58 .
#994
Posté 13 juin 2011 - 08:08
Fayth18
-
- Members
- 16 messages
Ned wouldn't have broken his promise... That's not how Ned is. Thats the whole reason for Neds downfall. There were so many times when he could have secured power but didn't, because it wasn't the honorable thing to do. If he were sent to the wall, he of all people would not break his oath. That's the whole point of allowing him to leave.
#995
Posté 13 juin 2011 - 08:17
Nerevar-as
-
- Members
- 5 375 messages
It´s not just about Ned keeping his promise. As a Wall Guard he no longer has his old status, so he would have less supporters outside the north. And people from the north take their promises more seriously, so maybe not even there.
Tywin had the right idea, Ned was too valuable a hostage to just kill.
And am I the only person who saw his death coming before reading half the book? The world was too dark for someone like Ned to survive long.
Tywin had the right idea, Ned was too valuable a hostage to just kill.
And am I the only person who saw his death coming before reading half the book? The world was too dark for someone like Ned to survive long.
#996
Posté 13 juin 2011 - 08:58
Maverick827
-
- Members
- 3 193 messages
I'm not entirely convinced that Ned, if allowed to, would have taken his oath-swearing under coercion seriously once he reached the North. Hell, can one even take the oath while not at the Wall? If not, there would be nothing - honor or law - stopping him from simply never going past Winterfell.
Sure, he's a man of honor, and sure, he respects the Night's Watch, but is it really honorable to let the Night's Watch be used as a pawn for a false king to take the throne in the first place?
That said, I suppose the Lannisters would always have had Sansa regardless.
Sure, he's a man of honor, and sure, he respects the Night's Watch, but is it really honorable to let the Night's Watch be used as a pawn for a false king to take the throne in the first place?
That said, I suppose the Lannisters would always have had Sansa regardless.
#997
Posté 13 juin 2011 - 09:15
Seagloom
-
- Members
- 7 094 messages
Ned's incentive was to rescue his family. This is lampshaded in Jon's conversation with Aemon at the Wall early in the episode. Aemon asks if Ned would choose duty over family, and Jon responds he would always do the right thing. He would never betray his duty. Aemon comments that Ned is one man in ten-thousand or something to that effect.
As it turned out, Ned's character was not as strong as Jon believed. He did betray his honor by lying to save his family. I think a man that believes in his word and duty so strongly would not further taint it by refusing to follow through on his punishment. Like Fayth18 wrote, he had opportunities to grab power and let them slip because of honor. For him to suddenly sink that low would be very out of character.
Ah well, none of this really matters. Fact is Ned's dead.
As it turned out, Ned's character was not as strong as Jon believed. He did betray his honor by lying to save his family. I think a man that believes in his word and duty so strongly would not further taint it by refusing to follow through on his punishment. Like Fayth18 wrote, he had opportunities to grab power and let them slip because of honor. For him to suddenly sink that low would be very out of character.
Ah well, none of this really matters. Fact is Ned's dead.
#998
Posté 13 juin 2011 - 09:43
Fayth18
-
- Members
- 16 messages
Maverick827 wrote...
I'm not entirely convinced that Ned, if allowed to, would have taken his oath-swearing under coercion seriously once he reached the North. Hell, can one even take the oath while not at the Wall? If not, there would be nothing - honor or law - stopping him from simply never going past Winterfell.
Sure, he's a man of honor, and sure, he respects the Night's Watch, but is it really honorable to let the Night's Watch be used as a pawn for a false king to take the throne in the first place?
That said, I suppose the Lannisters would always have had Sansa regardless.
Yes, but that isn't how Ned thinks. It wasn't honorable for Cersei to have children born of incest and pretend they are the sons of the king, or for Bran to have been thrown out of the tower. By the logic you are presenting, Ned would not have had a problem outing Cersei publicly or taking Renly's offer (not the offer from the show, because in the book Renly did not say he wanted to be King, just that he would let Ned use his men to secure the throne and the pretend heir) because they had been dishonourable first. So his honour is not a thing that is dependent upon the honour of other people.
#999
Posté 13 juin 2011 - 10:22
Stakis
-
- Members
- 191 messages
One of the first things i read about this show was " dont get attached to a character... and that works for everyone of them ", then made the mistake of searching around and got realy depressed , anyway i found my peace, im reading the whole thing before season 2 comes, its easier for my little heart to survive.
As for Ned, you know cersei probably was the most honest person he met in kings landing, " youll win or you die " she warn him, someone as hardened in battle as Ned was shouldnt be so foolish in politics, there are loads of magnificent lines in this novel, but heres one when varys goes see Ned in prison, i think it perfectly defines Ned and what truly Game of Thrones is.
"You are an honest and honorable man, Lord Eddard. Ofttimes I forget that. I have met so few of them in my life.” He glanced around the cell. “When I see what honesty and honor have won you, I understand why.”
, anyway i found my peace, im reading the whole thing before season 2 comes, its easier for my little heart to survive.As for Ned, you know cersei probably was the most honest person he met in kings landing, " youll win or you die " she warn him, someone as hardened in battle as Ned was shouldnt be so foolish in politics, there are loads of magnificent lines in this novel, but heres one when varys goes see Ned in prison, i think it perfectly defines Ned and what truly Game of Thrones is.
"You are an honest and honorable man, Lord Eddard. Ofttimes I forget that. I have met so few of them in my life.” He glanced around the cell. “When I see what honesty and honor have won you, I understand why.”
Modifié par Stakis, 13 juin 2011 - 10:42 .
#1000
Posté 13 juin 2011 - 10:27
Obadiah
-
- Members
- 5 765 messages
^^ Yeah. I'm guessing at times that is probably true, and at times probably not. I figure there are enough stories with noble characters triumphing over great adversity. This isn't going to be one of those.
