I agree there are definitely crazies out there, but without the lens of the books I still feel there was some clumsy writing. But I certainly agree that not being in the books doesn't constitute it automatically being bad. I thought Tyrion and Dany meeting, for example, was a great addition.

There were less people on the wall with Thorne than at the murder of Jon, and in both cases the same aftermath and arguments with the same people will happen.

I would guess Shireen dies in the books and Melisandre completely abandons Stannis through her sacrifice to bring back Jon. Just a guess though.

We got a Melisandre POV.

Surely you've heard of exaggeration or hyperbole, my friend?

- Shireen will die in the books, but it won't spin out of nowhere as on the show, and Stannis won't be involved. His involvement WAS for shock value.

In fairness this EW interview isn't dated, but I know that it was still long a couple of weeks ago, exactly.

"I look like Jim Morrison right now. I don’t know what to do with it. I can cut it if I want, but it’s probably wise to leave long until I know what the next part is. I’ve kind of grown accustomed to it, it would feel weird to change it."

"Oh, golly, foiled again."

"Tis a wonderful thing to be born of incest, daddy, truly."

I really hope it turns around, otherwise S6 will be off on some awkward footing for that arc indeed.

I won't deny there's brooding, but as someone who has brooded on whole after episodes for a lot of the season I do like to think it's justified haha. And that broodiness only ever spawned from insight.

I'm glad I wasn't the only one who thought some of the dialogue this season was uncharacteristically cringeworthy.

But Quentyn served a purpose. He wasn't filler.

Honestly I know it's not for some people and that's totally fine, but being so immersed as if you're reading history rather than a fictional story is an amazing feat, and for people too complain about these mammoth books being 'too wordy' has always seemed a bit ridiculous to me.

That's their own loss. I know a lot of people hate the "fillers" but George has said endless times everything he puts in has a purpose. He knows Chekhov's Gun. A lot of the appeal of the books at least to me is the sheer detail and amazing work that goes into them.

I still enjoy the show, but I hate being lumped in as a villain simply because I've read the books, and let's not mistake that a lot of the talk that goes on here, even if it's critical, is still analysis of the show, just highlighting a lot of its weaker parts which particularly shine through the lens' of a book…

I've always tried to be a good book fan, protect people from spoilers, etc, but no, we can't have opinions, we're just "butthurt bookfags" because we can critique a story. More people complain about book fans than there are actual book fans.

That's what he's saying, defying the concept that somehow seeing stuff in the show that *may* happen in the books warrants skipping chapters.

What's with this notion the show fans who hate book fans have that we're getting stuff "spoiled?" Not only do I firmly believe the show, different as it is, can't "spoil" stuff- article: http://moviepilot.com/posts… - I also think they fail to acknowledge the large amount of stuff unsorted in the show.