Everything else we see in the vision is of great significance, and either really happened in the past (as far as we know) or is something that we can predict will happen in the future, like the dragon over King’s Landing. If it’s there merely for visual effect or represents the Mad King’s imagination, it’s unlike every single other image in the vision.
Bolding mine.
Randyll did a lot of blathering on about the greatness of his house and the need for it to be preserved. I could see him justifying murder, in that having a wildling and his hated son’s bastard wildling spawn living in his estate was an affront to his ancestors. That the honor gained by eliminating them quickly and painlessly was greater than that lost by betraying guest privilege. Even if not, I could easily see him simply flying of the handle for minor affronts (such as seeing her in a hallway), and throwing them out. But that’s just my opinion.
It’s important to note, however, that Sam ultimately chose to take Gilly and Little Sam with him. As you said, he knows his father best, and after that dinner, he no longer felt that his family was safe in Randyll’s house.
I have the opposite take on it. The supernatural exists. Different religions attribute supernatural manifestations to different gods. None of the gods actually exist, they are just names for how people explain the supernatural. (This is rather like the Many-faced God for the Faceless Men, it just extends to all aspects of the supernatural.)
And also there would have been way better ways to tie an image of Wildfire to the Mad King than to show it exploding in the containment area.
He didn’t feel unsafe leaving them there. He said his goodbyes. It was only after Gilly said “he doesn’t know who you are”, which inspired him to take that act of rebellion against his father.
Gilly was trying to say to Sam that he’s grown, he’s a better man now, he shouldn’t take shit form his father, and Sam responds by running away and stealing the family’s heirloom.
So… yeah, Sam’s father did know who he was.
And just in case anyone’s wonder why Lord Tarly looks so familiar; this isn’t the first time James Faulkner has played an obnoxious nobleman. He played Lord Sinderby on Downton Abbey.
Aegon the Conqueror founded Kings Landing; it’s where he first set foot in Westeros proper.
Hasn’t Sam wanted to be a maester ever since he was little? :dubious: If his father wasn’t such a gigantic ass obsessed with “making a man out of him” sending him to the Citadel would’ve accomplished removing Sam from the succession without death threats.
It’d be funny if Sam’s brother died and his father get’s so desperate for a male heir he’s forced to petition the Iron Throne to release Sam from the Night’s Watch and/or legitimize his “grandson”. 
Tommen serving as the Faith’s champion is utterly nonsensical for the reasons others have pointed out. Also even if Cersei was being tried by the Crown instead of the Faith I highly doubt the King ever fights in person. It’d be like the High Sparrow deciding to face off against Mountainstein himself.
Loras is out of the question too since the Faith has it’s own plans to try him for sodomy. What are they going to do; save time & combine both trials by combat with Loras serving as the Faith’s champion against Cersei who’s champion Mountainstein is also the Faith champion against Loras? :dubious:
Lancel is a much more likely candidate for the Faith’s champion, I also think it looks like the High Sparrow find some way to avoid giving Cersei a trial by combat.
Still, taking the family sword was a huge mistake. Just “stealing” Talla’s dress is probably enough to earn a commoner like Gilly something horrible (like whipping, or a getting her hand cut off).
As others have pointed out, I think it’s more complicated than that. In fact, I thought it was really well done. Sam has clearly been growing and maturing while away from his father. But then when he’s back in his old home, suddenly the old patterns reassert themselves, and he’s back to being weak and soft. Which was kinda sorta an act, but only kinda sorta.
I also agree there’s no reason not to believe that Gilly and the child would be safe. If he actually worried for their safety, he wouldn’t have even considered leaving them there in the first place. His change of heart wasn’t “oh, wait, I just remembered that my father is capable of murder, that had slipped my mind earlier”, it was “I can’t live without you, and I’m too busy rebelling against my father just for rebellion’s sake to really think through this plan. Or the plan of stealing the sword”.
The supernatural explanation is very unsatisfying but none of it makes any sense otherwise.
The recap in the Washington Post mentions a theory I haven’t seen mentioned here; that Bran’s mental time-traveling is what drove the Mad King insane, sort of like how it affected Hodor. It’s not a perfect theory, especially since in his time traveling, Bran seemed to interact much more with Hodor than he did with the Mad King.
I’ve read theories that it may have been Bran’s mentor (the Three-eyed Raven) who inadvertently drove the Mad King insane. The Mad King always said he was hearing voices…
Beg your pardon. No One died. A girl goes back to being Arya Stark ;).
Or he already has read most of the required reading at Maester U (…in a book…) and can already ace the finals as an external candidate. He already knows history and anybody can feed a bloody raven, so besides medicine there’s not much for him there.
[QUOTE=Polerius]
Now, if these are faceless people (“a man” and “a girl”), with no personal desires clouding their judgement, why did the bitch girl want to be the one to kill Arya? It should be all the same to them, no matter who kills Arya.
Having personal feelings and desiring vengeance is against what these people have been touted as being: “faceless” and “no one”.
[/QUOTE]
I thought the same thing. I’m not really surprised the Waif asked - she’s been bitchy at Arya since day one, it’s not surprising that she’d keep at it. But I’m surprised Jaqen H’gar didn’t call her out on it.
Now, thinking back on it, theory : he realized the Waif making it personal is a weakness/fault in her training and fully expects Arya to kill her dead. He considers it a part of both their trainings : for the Waif “yer not so good at it either, but no second chances”, for Arya “you can’t just leave. We’ll just keep coming. A second chance, perhaps ?”
Re: the masks and their magic, I kinda wonder if there’s a connection between the House of Black & White and the Warlocks of Kwarth (finger up Qarth). They too seemed to be able to shapeshift into other humans (including kids)
Another thing I enjoyed from this episode was Mace Tyrell rallying the troops. Riding up in armor so shiny it’s probably never seen a day of combat, giving what he thought was an epic rallying cry, and Jaime shaking his head. That was great. Roger Ashton-Griffiths does a fantastic job selling the “buffoon with delusions of importance.”
I think it’s more likely that it’s Arya vs. Waif and that’s the end of the Faceless Men’s beef with Arya. Since they’re all about balance, I don’t see them throwing more lives at Arya. She’ll almost certainly kill the Waif, and the Faceless Men will put her face on the wall and call it done.
Then again, the show could completely forget about the Faceless Men after the Waif, just like it apparently forgot about the Warlocks. They took one shot at Daenerys and then disappeared for three seasons. I got the impression that they would be coming after her in earnest, but instead they appear to have given up. Unless it turns out that they’re influencing the Sons of the Harpy or something. But that doesn’t seem like their style.
I had that thought as well when Bran had his visions. Brad hasn’t really interacted with the Mad King yet, that we know of, but I wouldn’t be surprised to see Bran go back and witness those events, or even perhaps inadvertently put them into motion like he did with Hodor. I think the King’s outburst “Burn them! Burn them all!” will turn out to have a deeper meaning.
Maybe someone can refresh my memory or let me know I’m wrong. I thought it was mentioned that madness was prevalent in the Targaryen family due to the incest thing. King Aerys was crazy but Rhaegar was not just like Daenerys is not. Of course they can hand wave that away and still say the 3 eyed raven caused it but I thought it was already explained.
In an episode where we were graphically reminded what fire does to the ice zombies I immediately thought that showing the Mad King’s fire was foreshadowing how they will combat the White Walkers.
Random thoughts -
The Bran montage seemed to flash between scenes of White Walkers/wights and the Mad King “burn them all” with wildfire and dragons thrown in (and scenes of Bran’s family being killed). Like anybody wouldn’t know that burning them all was the best course of action, but as others have said, there’ll end up being some connection to time traveling ravens/Brans and the Mad King going mad. Bran traveling to visit the Aeyrs in the past, right when an attack from the Army of the Dead is in progress, the call goes out to burn them all.
Tommen-
If he turns on his mother, with prodding from Margery - who you know still holds a mondo grudge, will she out him as illegitimate to gut him from power? The Mountain has pledged to not rest until all of Cersei’s enemies are dead - would Tommen count as an enemy if he turns on Cersei? She already knows all of her children are going to die. It’d be fitting for her WMD to turn on her last child as it appears WMDs are wont to do. And Margery would be 0 fer 3.
Cersei is already going to be pissed at Tommen for banishing Jamie from King’s Landing, if he goes full Faith Militant against her, it might not go so well.
Littlefinger-
He lied to the leader of the Knights of the Vale (Royce?) about Sansa being kidnapped, lets him live, then he tries to hook Sansa up with that army. What if she took him up on it, met the leader, and he offers his condolences for the dreadful kidnapping? Whoops, what? So that guy will need to get killed by Littlefinger before they run into Sansa or it’s gonna get awkward.
Sam-
Why didn’t his dad kill him for breaking his Knight’s Watch vows? Did Sam and Gilly ever say Little Sam wasn’t Sam’s? I think I remember Dad referring to him as a bastard, so they must have known it wasn’t Sam’s, but just having a steady GF, even if they didn’t pass themselves off as married, should have been a no no. Seems like the only female companionship that was acceptable was a quick trip to Molestown, nod nod, wink wink. The guys at Castle Black looked the other way, but seems like a Crow traveling with a “family” would be a bit strange to those on the outside.
If all of this Sam story was just a ruse for him to end up with a Valyrian steel sword, that’s a heck of a lot of screen time for a sword - it better be something special.
Boltons/Freys/Tulleys-
The Lannisters want the Tulleys out of River Run, the Freys want the Tulleys out of River Run, and the Boltons screwed up their Lannister alliance with the whole Sansa deal. Wouldn’t this make Sansa and the Starks/Tulleys end up fighting the Lannisters/Freys alongside the Boltons of all people? Are are the Boltons so hated that they are a house apart?
Sam hasn’t exactly shown himself to be a good judge of how others will react. Often he’s unrealistically optimistic.
Sam’s father theoretically would have been justified in executing him for violating his Night’s Watch oath. Sam told the family that Little Sam was his. Little Sam would be a bastard regardless since any marriage between Sam and Gilly would have been invalid due to Sam’s oath. In any case, although they may be married according to wildling custom, they have not been married in front of either a septon or a weirwood tree, so their marriage wouldn’t be recognized anywhere south of the Wall.
Emphasis mine : quite yet.
But she seemed a little too content with herself when burning the khals, and was quick to order a whole lot of people crucified without thinking twice about it. Then had the head of a prestigious family munched by dragons pretty much at random (or at least without a shred of evidence, suspicions or anything of the sort). And that’s just the first few months of her rule. She’s about to set loose a horde of rapey savages on people she also expects to really love her, which is about as cognitively dissonant as you can get.
Aerys didn’t start out wanting to burn everyone, either.
I’m definitely rooting for Daenerys to turn out to be a villain - it would make her story interesting in retrospect since it’s been the most straightforward fantasy story of the series, excepting Bran perhaps. If all just goes well for her and she invades and saves the day and becomes a good ruler … meh.
Hodor’s affliction was based partially on the Bran timewarg, but also from Meera saying “hold the door” over and over. Could be that Daenerys is going to say “burn them all” while Bran is nearby, timewarging into the Mad King. Maybe she’s giving the order to burn all of the White Walkers, or maybe it’s a villainous attack on human enemies. If someone gets Hodor’d, odds are it will be Bran plus one other person causing it.
I kind of hope that the whole time loop thing doesn’t become too much of a plot point in the series. It has a lot of potential to be silly. Still, Hodor’s loop could be foreshadowing a more significant loop.
How many people actually know about the wildfire under King’s Landing? Jamie and Cersei Lannister, Tyrion, the old alchemist, maybe Bran now if he understood what he was seeing. If the explosion seen in Bran’s vision is a future event, then how many characters are in a position to cause it? I could easily see Cersei detonating the wildfire after Tommen is dead and she’s lost all hope of wielding power again.
Undoubtedly. I predict that Bran greensees back about 1000 years and drags some poor schmuck into a tree to become the Three Eyed Raven. Obvious, but necessary to prevent all sorts of paradoxes.