Michelle Fairley on Margot’s demise

Michelle Fairley
Michelle Fairley

TV Guide has interviewed Michelle Fairley about the shocking moment in the ninth episode.

Right. But did you know at the beginning that her death would come before the end of the season?
Because it was 12 episodes instead of 24, the producers had a basic guideline. They know the story arcs and how it’s going to work, but they hadn’t decided what episode it was going to be in. They are constantly tweaking, and it’s a very organic, high-stakes process that they go through. But you know contractually how many episodes you’re going to be in, but they didn’t say at that point, you’re going to go [out] in this episode. It was exciting every time to get a script because you didn’t know what way they were going to take her. It was always thrilling.

What did you like about this character? She’s obviously doing bad things, but she isn’t pure evil.
In her mind, she’s a very honorable woman. She’s very intelligent and she’s completely committed. It’s her purpose and her drive. She has taken something on, and she will see it through to the end. So, you play this woman’s passion, you play her commitment. In her mind, she isn’t evil. She’s achieving a goal that is pertinent to her. It involves a loss of love with her husband…. but she’s also trained her mind to not be emotional. Her emotions are very intact; they are not emotions that can send her out of control. They keep her focused, they keep her driven. She is cool under pressure.

I suppose she showed some honor when she kept her word about downing all the other drones.
I admired the writers for putting that in. It shows that when she made that deal with the president, they both were giving their word. It’s important … because she had achieved her goal. She wasn’t just going to annihilate the rest [of London]. She was prepared to draw the line once President Heller was dead. That was what she set out to do. And therefore, when she realized that [Heller] had lied, it makes the betrayal doubly hard for her. She kept her word, but she’s thinking, again, “Why did I believe them? I should have trusted my instincts.”

Check out the TV Guide interview below for more, but be warned that it contains Game of Thrones spoilers.

Source TV Guide


Comments Closed
She was so great on Game of Thrones. One of the best TV dramas this or any other year.

So, she loses her son then gets killed seconds later.

Twice, haha!

I can’t help wondering if it was intentional.

Of course she had to die. She has to come back in Game of Thrones as Lady Stoneheart.

Personally, I didn’t really think the character was that believable as a terrorist – essentially, she was the age-old cliché of a villain trying to exact revenge for a loved one she lost. Playing her up as the wicked witch of the west and Mommie Dearest didn’t help the credibility – so I was relieved the writers got her out of the way as the opening act and hopefully have a more convincing arc waiting with a more sinister motive.

P.S. If you took all of the villains to ever appear in the series, I’d rate Margot at the bottom of the list.

shame on you

At the very least, Margot is best of the bacon dodgers, with Marwank being the worst.

What if Margot was actually trying to kill Heller because Heller is instigating an attack on China for revenge on what they did to Audrey? Heller (in his revenge) was going to create a World War (sound familiar, Jack?)

Margot could have stopped it by killing a few to stop the slaughter of billions, but Jack just killed her without listening about her foreshadowing the many deaths on the hands of Heller and Jack.

Jack unknowingly helping the cause for a new World War would be an absolutely amazing twist and profound ending to a series where many viewers, who are jackass redneck ‘muricans, screamed for people to die real good.

Hopefully we can all become progressive like you who realize terrorists are just giving us what we deserve!

Does the United States not terrorize other countries and its own people for political and monetary gains? Drones in the air, pointed at your head. You disobey us and we’ll blow you up. “No, not terrorizing at all.”

You are an idiot and a terrorist.

Do you just come her to troll and insult most of the people on this website? Maybe your argument would be taken more seriously if you could debate without resorting to name calling, because it pretty much shows you have nothing. Maybe your Al-Qaeda sympathies would be taken more seriously else where. You must be one of the few people who watch 24 hoping the terrorists (or freedom fighters if your eyes) succeed. Your a bit of a naïve tool.

Allow me to bring peace to both sides and declare you both tools.

Now there’s a little show not many people have heard of called 24, do you fancy talking about that?