1. (Source: flawlessvevo, via beycreative)

     
  2. 1,453 notes
    Comments


  3. If Daenerys and Margaery were ever to meet, do you think that they woud get along or would there be some tension between them?

     I don’t like this false binary being established between “tension between them” and “get along.” I think there could be plenty of tension between them, thick viscous electric tension, but they could get along so very very very well anywayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy cough

    (Source: stormborns, via homicidalbrunette)

     
  4. 6,714 notes
    Comments



  5. dmanchak said: Regarding the Tower of Joy and its remaining mysteries (if there are any). I suppose I mean the fight itself... seven Northerners, who seem to be just dudes, manage to overcome the White Bull, the Sword of the Mourning and another crack member of a pretty ace Kingsguard. I dig Ned's surreal remembrances, and I suppose I'm just hoping we don't get Howland giving a detailed account. As is, the Tower of Joy seems like a nice, dreamy bookend to the equally gauzy Summerhall.

    I mean, what would we gain from a blow by blow? I don’t really think it’s any great mystery what happened. Ned’s not just a dude, you know? And the other guys — this is the cream of the crop, or else Ned wouldn’t have brought them with him to face down three of the greatest knights in the land. Seven on three. Seven win. It’s not rocket science.

     
  6. 5 notes
    Comments



  7. wiserbloodthananybody said: RE: your BLAH on dunk and egg, and specifically genre pastiche (good catch!): if grrm is indeed doing a series of stories that cite one literary genre at a time, could the series perhaps close out with a horror-tinged Tragedy of Summerhall?

    I think Summerhall will be a tragedy, as you say, not a horror story.

     
  8. 5 notes
    Comments



  9. metaphysics-of-the-hangman said: Another quick question. Not including the prologue, the first chapter in ASOIAF took place in Winterfell. Where do you think the last chapter of the series will take place? (My bet is on Winterfell, I think it would tie up nicely)

    I hadn’t thought of it before. Winterfell would be nice for sure, but my guess is we’ll get Bran for symmetry, the character being more important than the locale. And if it’s Bran, he’ll be parked under that weirwood, while his mind roams here there and everywhere, final montage of The Wire style.

     
  10. 10 notes
    Comments



  11. metaphysics-of-the-hangman said: RE your response to the Tower of Joy question. The Kingsguard of the time were considered some of the finest knights of all time. How did both Ned AND Howland manage to best them? Could Howland have done something particularly impressive? I've even seen a theory that he warged into Dayne in order to turn the tide. Thoughts?

    Jesus, no, it was a numbers game. Seven vs. three is long odds for anyone. Fuck the idea of Howland Reed “warging” into anyone.

     
  12. 18 notes
    Comments


  13. doopliss:

    A very accurate pixel portrait of me drawn by Michael DeForge.

    I got one of my favorite cartoonists to draw a pixel portrait of one of my other favorite cartoonists (who I happen to be in love with) and I got my Ask inbox down to zero so damn right it was a good day

     
  14. 38 notes
    Comments



  15. ASK INBOX ZERO! WE HAVE ACHIEVED ASK INBOX ZERO!

     
  16. 17 notes
    Comments



  17. moonisacircleofghosts said: Rowling knows Snape was both petty/self-serving and shrewd in his actions, after all, he was a Slytherin, that's the definition. He watched out for himself at the same time as taking risks. He may not have Petyr's pervier instincts towards the daughter of his dead lust-object or sense of delight at murder plots, but he did coldly watch as several people he knew were killed in order to maintain cover and goad others into action that got them killed, yet Harry forgives and praises him as brave.

    Everyone the Sorting Hat put in Slytherin should have been summarily executed the moment they left the damn dining hall.

     
  18. 6 notes
    Comments



  19. kawaiimehappy said: Hi Sean, love your blog! Just curious how you got into writing about TV for a living. Did you study film or journalism (or maybe both?)?

    I did study film, although that had little to do with it! After I graduated college I worked as a production assistant on a few shows and movies in NYC. The work was grueling and not rewarding. One day I bumped into an old friend from both high school and college who remembered the writing I’d done for the student newspaper and the sketch comedy group I was in. He told me he was working at A&F Quarterly, Abercrombie & Fitch’s magazine/catalog/soft-porn hybrid thing, as an editor, and that they needed freelance writers. I gave it a shot, enjoyed it, quit my PA job and became an assistant editor there within something like three months. From then on I’ve worked consistently as a writer, mostly covering pop culture in one way or the other. I got plenty of experience writing about music, film, literature, you name it, and interviewing big names in each. Comics in particular have been my specialty — I had a day job at Wizard magazine that I got in part by having blogged about comics in my spare time since 2002 or so. Ditto a freelance gig with The Comics Journal, and covering comics for mainstream publications like Giant and Maxim. But both professionally and on my personal blog at seantcollins.com I would write about whatever struck my fancy. I think Lost was the first show I wrote about regularly, for Wizard. Battlestar Galactica followed.

    Cut to 2011. My daughter was born prematurely and spent six weeks in the NICU. Desperate to blow off steam, I started boiledleather just so I’d have a place to write about A Song of Ice and Fire, which I was just crazy about. I wrote about Game of Thrones too, of course, when it finally started airing. In the meantime I wrote about other shows I was watching, like Mad Men and Breaking Bad, just for fun. Eventually I wondered aloud to my good friend Matthew Perpetua, who was then an editor at Rolling Stone, if there was any way I could get paid to do all this TV writing, for which I’d long gotten great feedback from my blog’s readers. Turns out RS was beefing up its TV coverage, so he put me in touch with the right editors to pitch on covering either GoT or Mad Men. I got the GoT gig due to boiledleather. The rest is history!

     
  20. 9 notes
    Comments



  21. archieopteryx said: Thinking about how much you like the source novels, do you think GoT ever had the potential, to get up there in the Twin Peaks/Deadwood/Mad Men level of quality? And if your answer is yes, why doesn't it bother you, that it's not there?

    I had a conversation with a fellow critic a few weeks ago where we discussed this, and one of the conclusions we came to is that Game of Thrones has little room to meander. I mean, they try, they add off-kilter conversational scenes that have really elevated the show. But it’s just such a relentless plot machine, with so many characters and storylines packed into comparatively few hours per season. They can’t follow Vito and Johnnycakes, so to speak. They can’t have a Ginsberg. So that’s what separates it from Mad Men and The SopranosDeadwood, and to a lesser extent The Wire, more or less invented their own ways of speaking — entire language patterns, ways of articulating the characters’ experience of the world with dialect and idiom. I once called Deadwood's writing “gutter Shakespeare” and The Wire's “corner koans.” GoT has its moments but it’s just not that kind of project. And Twin Peaks was co-created by literally one of the greatest filmmakers of all time, which shows. Arguably it meandered too much, but when it focused on grief, on violence, on the supernatural, on the surreal, on its best characters, jesus, untouchable. I think the GoT team is talented but not even they would argue they’re at David Lynch’s level.

    Why doesn’t it bother me that GoT isn’t clearing these bars? Because it’s still very very very good. It doesn’t need to be the greatest of all time to be pretty great. 

     
  22. 5 notes
    Comments



  23. suddendefense said: I agree that Rowling isn't a great writer but I don't think that Snape had a "redemption" arc or that Snape is even meant to be seen as an anti-hero. Rowling has said that Snape was very selfish and that the only reason he looked out for Harry was because he loved Lily otherwise he wouldn't have looked out for Harry at all and bullied on Harry even more. but then again tbh I don't see Snape as big of a monster as Littlefinger.

    Well, here’s a situation where Rowling’s skill level lets her down. She may not have wanted Snape to look like he had a redemption arc, but that’s pretty much how it reads as written, if I recall correctly. But it’s so hard to make heads or tails of those books, morally or thematically, because they’re such a mess by the end, so I could be totally wrong.

     
  24. 8 notes
    Comments



  25. hagbardceline said: What're your thoughts on Oz?

    I never watched the whole series, but I remember the first few very fondly. Vividly, even, and not just because I watched an episode on mushrooms one time. Kirk Acevedo cutting himself in the mirror, Adebisi’s little hat and his plaintive pleas for “TITS!!!”, the Beecher saga, the ground glass in the cafeteria food, the honking horns of the theme song, the marvelously dated spoken-word segments, Dean Winters’s character, the spectacle of watching a man shit on a neo-Nazi’s face — this was some incredible television for its time. But it’s very much an artifact of its time. Even then, I thought the “theme of the week” structure — this episode’s about family, this one’s about religion, this one’s about sex — was very Sesame Street. The characterizations are mostly broad and the stories mostly sensationalistic. The Sopranos and The Wire between them delivered on the show’s promise. But of course, neither of them would have existed had Oz not paved the way. 

     
  26. 3 notes
    Comments



  27. teenybopperisland said: Hello! First off, thanks so much for sharing your thoughts with us! Re: your comment on the Varys/Southron Ambitions thread, it would seem that many agree that Varys wants to see a capable king on the throne. But why exactly does Varys care if there's a good king? He has already reached the highest position he'll likely achieve and has no real affinity to Westeros, even if he's a Blackfyre. Am I missing a selfish ambition here, or do you really believe Varys has good underlying intentions?

    Well, I think Varys’s goal first and foremost is for his king to sit the Iron Throne. At that point, he correctly believes everyone would be better off if his king is a good king. But if his main motive was good governance, he wouldn’t have spent the past several years deliberately destabilizing the realm, leading to the deaths of hundreds of thousands. 

     
  28. 4 notes
    Comments



  29. wearedevo said: Brain = Ice. Dany = Fire. Jon = the eponymous Song of Ice and Fire, whose purpose is to somehow balance the opposing elemental forces whose imbalance causes the off-kilter seasons and periodically results in a cataclysm (fire = doom of valyria, ice = the long nights). The periodic cataclysms are what keeps society permanently locked at a medieval level. The imbalance also facilitates the use of magic though, and it will vanish once they are reconciled. The maesters have an agenda here too.

    There’s a lot of ideas in here! But I think it’s Martin, rather than the long winters (which aren’t a factor in Essos at any rate), that keeps society locked at medieval level; I think Jon and Dany are equals, rather than Jon being the synthesis of Dany and some third antithesis.

     
  30. 1 note
    Comments