to make more White Walkers even in the books. Why else would they leave Craster's alone, and why leave them alone if they just killed them or ate them or whatever? I assumed that the babies were a lot more important to them, and that seemed the most logical explanation.
So far I like the changes from the book in the show. What I never liked about the books is that Martin was notorious to not resolve things. He adds intrigue about something but just drops it, and most people just lose interest in caring anymore about that thing like the identity of Jon's mother. He made Coldhands so different you figured he had to be someone special, but apparently he isn't since he was left out of the show, and the greenseer apparently tells Bran that he was just some nobody from the Watch that died a long time ago. So why the hell was he so vastly different from all the other walking dead and helped Sam and Gilly and then Bran and his group? From his interview in Rolling Stone I get the definite impression that in writing the books Martin starts these intrigues about characters with no clue as to where they're headed and then forgets about them in going on with some other plot. By the fourth book I was getting really aggravated that he was bringing in yet more characters and plots and story lines yet still resolved nothing he'd written before that you got you excited about, and here we are at the end of book five and still nothing is coming together.
I like what the show is doing with the rebels at Craster's since in the book Martin just left that hanging like so much else. I guess you're supposed to assume that the White Walkers come in and kill everyone or something. And with Bran and his group at Craster's and Jon's group going there is a hell of a lot more interesting than just letting the story line of rebels hang out in the wind unresolved and nothing really going on at all with Bran and his group other than traveling until they finally reach the cave.
The one thing that I don't like about the show is that although Martin's intent was to show the both good and bad of characters - there were no all heroes or all devils - the show is doing that especially with the main characters like Tyrion, Jon and Daenarys. The show is starting to make never-do-wrong heroes out of them when it's so much better when they make mistakes. That's what makes them so much more interesting and real and gives intrigue in never knowing if they'll get something right or step in it.
After thinking about it, I think Locke's presence at the Wall is because Roose and Ramsey are the only ones that know that Bran and Rickon are still alive and Locke was sent there by them believing that they both went to the Wall to be under Jon's protection having no where really else to go, and Locke's mission is to go to the Wall to kill them. I think this is the reason why Locke volunteered to go with Jon to Craster's having discovered that Bran and Rickon aren't at the Wall and are likely on their way and would likely stop at Craster's for help or be somewhere in that vicinity. He's obviously trying to make friends with Jon so that he doesn't expect to be betrayed by him. Thorne may also have something to do with this and may have extended the killing to include Jon just because he hates him. As the acting lord commander he could have gotten messages from Roose/Ramsey about Locke. With Thorne involved it also opens the door for men of the Watch to not want him as lord commander and vote for Jon instead once Jon eliminates Locke and finds out about this intrigue. I never did understand in the books how Sam was able to convince so many to vote for Jon as lord commander anyway.
= new reply since forum marked as read
