I'm going to be annoyed if they deflect all of Ramsay's awfulness onto Bitch Girlfriend. Seriously annoyed.

Eh. I think it was so obvious to many viewers that Jon's story would lead him here that people would have quickly grown impatient with a long drawn-out politicking plotline, especially since it would involve new characters that no one knows or cares anything about. The time could be better spent elsewhere, IMO.

That's a really good point. You're right, Ollie doesn't have the same sort of duty to the Wall that either Marsh or Thorne has. He's new there, he's not sworn in, he's just a kid. He wouldn't be doing anything for the Watch; he'd be doing it, I dunno, for his parents or something. A very different motive for…

Generally speaking, I think the show has done a really good job improving the antagonists: Viserys, Thorne, Cersei, Locke (standing in for Hoat)…they're all more nuanced and dimensional than their book counterparts. GRRM goes in for pretty cartoonishly evil antagonists, really. b

(sorry - double post)

No matter how many times I try, I still can't make sense of the decision to end ADWD where it did. What was the editor thinking? "I know! Let's end the book right *before* all the plotlines come to their climax! It'll be brilliant!"

The wardrobe, the makeup, the dark hair dye, the horse allergy… and also, I think, that desaturated filter they use to shoot all the scenes taking place in the North. It's not a flattering light at all. Michelle Fairley really suffered under it as well, I seem to remember.

Yeah, I didn't either. The first time someone on-line referred to the event by using that particular phrase, it took me forever to figure out what they were talking about. I guess I didn't find it as memorable a line as many others did.

Yeah, I was a bit disappointed in her, really. Even leaving aside the pettiness of it, it just seemed…foolish. Certain truisms about cornered animals come to mind. Grace to defeated enemies is almost always the wiser course of action.

I love her too! I love that she manages to enjoy sex, and that Bolton's all "explain to me this earth thing you call orgasms, human" about it. "She does this very strange thing in bed where she squeals and shudders. None of my other wives did that!"

There's no reason that show characters need to have an exact one-to-one correspondence with book characters. It's perfectly possible for Thorne to occupy the Marsh role of "high-ranked peer who disagrees with Jon's decisions," while Olly occupies the Marsh role of "regretful and weepy Brutus."

It looked to me like Thorne was pretty much just washing his hands of him.

OH RIGHT. BOOK 5 SPOILERY STUFF HERE:

Fair play. How could I forget Varys? I retract the "only."

He talks about his surgery here:

I'm pretty sure I remember Locke overhearing them talking about it, and that being the reason he knew to look for Bran north of the wall. Wasn't that the reason he volunteered for the mission to Craster's?

I like him because in a fictional world filled to the brim with female characters who struggle to perform femininity properly, Sam is the only male character who has trouble performing masculinity. He's the lone sissy-boy in a veritable sea of tomboys. Even Tyrion is only shut out of the boy's club due to his physical…

'Cause they can't just say "No news is good news" like normal people. Noooo, they have to Westerosi it up.

That's too bad. Siddig el Fadil is an awesome name.

Also, in the show, Jon *knows* that Bran is still alive — or at least, that he was still alive when he met up with Sam. So he wouldn't only be breaking his Night's Watch vows; he'd also be usurping the position from one of Ned Stark's Trueborn children. In this world, where bastards are already considered morally…