RebKell's Junkie Boards
Board Junkies Forums
 
Log in Register FAQ Memberlist Search RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index

Got G.o.T.?
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index » Area 51
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
pilight



Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 59303
Location: Where the action is


Back to top
PostPosted: 05/13/19 2:55 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

cthskzfn wrote:
pilight wrote:
cthskzfn wrote:
Is it Dany laying King's Landing to waste rather than being the benevolent ruler she claimed to be and, generally, had been?


Daenerys Targaryen had a list of cruel behavior and war crimes before this episode that stretched a mile long. She happily watched her brother die, had people locked in a vault to suffer a slow death, burnt countless people alive, had people crucified and fed to her dragons because they were from the same class that owned slaves and/or ran the Sons of the Harpies when we never have any proof these people actually committed crimes or even took part in slavery, and wanted to have her dragons burn down the cities which returned to their old ways once she “freed” them. This is the person who talked about “breaking the wheel” and establishing a new fairer world… yet lived in a giant pyramid amid luxury while she tried to enforce a military occupation of a city she understood nothing about and had just up-ended society in which as a result descended into anarchy and deaths of countless civilians.

Why is it such a shock that this person who’s constantly talked as though she was personally betrayed because the people of Westeros wouldn’t bow to her, effectively a foreigner at the head of a foreign army, the moment she appeared and waiting to betray her again in favor of Jon would slaughter a city, when the likely thought process she has is that they deserve it when they could’ve surrendered months ago without her armies (and now friends) dying? They should’ve just understood she’s their “rightful” queen and would always win and surrendered, as though the common folk of Westeros have any power.


Did her brother abuse her?


I don't recall seeing any physical abuse



_________________
On Christmas Day, the Gingerbread Man said, ‘Ladyfingers, be my wife.’
justintyme



Joined: 08 Jul 2012
Posts: 7683
Location: Northfield, MN


Back to top
PostPosted: 05/13/19 5:31 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

It all comes down to Ethos, Pathos, and Logos, the building blocks of character. We need our characters to feel real. To behave in a fashion that makes sense within the context of the forces that drive them. We don't want to just have our characters do random things because it is convenient for the story, or because we think it would be a fun twist for the story, or it feeds some greater theme that we want to press, because when we do that there is a disconnect with our readers. When a well written character takes an action, the response should be of course that is what they did. A well written story should be both surprising and yet feel inevitable.

I also believe, as I teach my students, that using "people don't change" as a theme in writing is pretentious bullshit, unless it is to subvert that theme (think House where it is a major theme and House says it constantly, yet he changes more than anyone throughout the show's run). Change is constant, growth is constant, and if your characters end in book 7 making the same decisions they would have made in chapter 1, why did you bother writing the book in the first place? Why did you waste your reader's time? Sure, there are stagnant people in the world, but we don't write books about them for the same reason we don't watch paint dry. So, assuming your character does change, does grow, suddenly reverting to chapter 1 character "because people don't really change" is just an excuse for poor writing.

So, Where does that leave me on the writing of this season...specifically this abomination of an episode.

Thematically? I was perfectly fine with it. I actually like the concepts that they went for. Dany as a Queen of Nothing, ruling over a kingdom of ash doing what the Night King could not. That is a cool, bittersweet ending that fits the larger themes of the novel and meets the standards of being both surprising (kind of) yet inevitable. I'd even been fine with a complete heel turn on the part of Dany where she slowly breaks bad and becomes the villain. That too could work and would fit the above requirements. Jaime and Cersei going out just as they came in, together, full circle? Sure. Makes sense on a theme level. Not super surprising though (other than his whole character arc being a major bait-and-switch, but more on that below), but it works.

But overall, the story itself is rounding up fine. Where the pieces end up make sense on a plot level, on a theme level, even on a coolness factor level. And I enjoyed the episode immensely on a spectacle level with its amazing cinematography and top-notch direction.

But...

Then there is the characterization, or in other words, how that story and those themes came about. And that was, in my opinion, terrible.

Let's start with the most glaring one, Dany.

So the backbone of a character is Ethos, Pathos, and Logos. Here, Dany has been most defined over the years through her Ethos and Pathos. In Chapter 1, she is a naive, entitled young girl, abused and used by her older brother. She is sold off like chattel and raped to further her brother's quest. These early years form the fundamental backbone of what will be her ethos and pathos. She abhors slavery, and champions the downtrodden. She hates bullies, while as is often the case, being a bit of a bully herself. Her growth in the first bit of her arc is her learning her own agency in a world stacked against women. She learns ruthlessness is required to survive in this world, a lesson that she employees on numerous occasions. Yet she is not cruel. She does not relish bringing pain and suffering on people who have no agency themselves. Her Pathos is that of the "Breaker of Chains". She is drawn to people who are abused and sold by people of power and as she gains more agency and power herself, this drives her choices. Her ruthlessness is always, always targeted.

As she comes into her own, she is best defined by contrast to the other rulers. She is no Ned Stark, bound by his code of morality and lack of ruthlessness. Yet she is no Joffery reveling in the pain he brings others. Her closest analog might actually be Tywin Lannister, but with a family that extends to all those in chains rather than just the Lannisters themselves, and just a touch more altruism at her heart as opposed to narcissism.

Dany's biggest failing, and the place for most of her growth is in having to learn how to rule. To shed her naivety. Because that combined with her ruthlessness leads to some terrible outcomes. Good intentions that devolve into chaos as the law of unintended consequences rares its inevitable head. She needs to learn what she can, and cannot actually change. And with Tyrion and her advisors, that's been her slow growth. How to make the tough choice. How to be a good ruler, not just a conqueror.

One of the major themes is the idea that "The Gods tossed a coin...". This theme says that each Targaryen was either born great (Aegon I) or mad (Aerys II "The Mad King"). We spend so much time in Dany's head that we know she isn't mad. While it is possible that we could have her break into a Mad Queen, it isn't something you do in an abbreviated 6 episode season. To make it earned, you need to show a slow change to either her Ethos or Pathos, over a couple of seasons. You can't have her still learning to rule effectively one season, have her quite sanely declare that she is not here to "rule over a kingdom of ashes" in one episode, and then three episodes later have her break mad, "because sad".

So, this is the Dany that was written. That has been developed for years. And then suddenly, she decides that she is going to burn King's Landing to ash, along with every man, woman, and child...after the town had surrendered. Why? What in her character development suggests that this is something that she would do? When has she ever held those in chains responsible for the actions of those in power? Reduce the Red Keep to ash? Makes sense. That would be par for the course. Ruthless. Show no quarter to the Lannisters? Same. But this is a total break from her character defining Ethos. Now, if they hadn't surrendered, and it was a byproduct of the war and how as much as she didn't want to be a Queen of Ashes, that is what she was...that would have made sense and been very powerful. Especially if we could then second guess her choices that led to that. But they make it very clear that she didn't have to do this. That she made a conscious choice to lay waste to the city after the battle had been won. That comes off as a random decision rather than an earned inevitable one (outside of the last two episodes where they clearly started to force this plot point).

Then there is Jaime. I don't have an issue with where he ends up, but I do have an issue with why, and how they basically said, screw the last few years of his story, none of that mattered anyways. It was a narrative equivalent of the ever-stupid IT WAS ALL A DREAM. Jaime's entire arc in the story has been about him moving away from the toxic love he has for his sister and becoming a man of honor. The more we learn of Jaime, the more we understand his actions. He goes from being a monster who pushes Bran out a window, to being one of the more honorable people still alive. And his transformation is complete when he finally leaves Cersei behind. The story with Brienne is a nice contrast to a pure love versus a toxic one, but it is a symptom of his growth not the linchpin of it. This isn't some romance arc where he is choosing between two women, rather it shows the type of person he is currently drawn towards because of the person who he has become. So the idea that suddenly he has to ride back to die by Cersei's side because she will always be the one he loves, is Hallmark Channel drivel. Now there is some thematic synergy that works here, but they could have accomplished it without making him break character and keeping his growth in check. All they needed to do is have him be clear that he wished he could stay with Brienne, but that Cersei is pregnant with his child. Make it all about the child, and not at all about Cersei, and suddenly it completely makes sense in the context. He can even have a touching moment with Brienne who would likely understand why he would feel the need to do that. In the death scene, have him die covering her belly as if protecting the child and not giving a crap about Cersei. You now have everyone in the same plot positions, without destroying your characters. Not to mention, it also would have had a nice throw back to that Bran scene. Remember why he did it. He pushed Bran out the window...to protect his children. He knew if Bran told, Robert would have killed all three of them. Him dying in a long shot to save one would have been a great circle to that theme as well.

Welp, there's my dissertation for the day. Laughing Cool



_________________
↑↑↓↓←→←→BA
GlennMacGrady



Joined: 03 Jan 2005
Posts: 5673
Location: Heisenberg


Back to top
PostPosted: 05/13/19 7:12 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Many critics have made points similar to JIT's, though not as eloquently. The problem behind all this bad writing is the compressed pace of the narrative. In the past two seasons there have not been enough episodes for rational plot or character development. Thus, we get unrealistic things like accelerated time travel and too-rapid (unearned) character changes.

But I'll just focus on who should get the Iron Throne.

No one.

First, the actual throne probably doesn't even exist anymore, buried under the rubble that was the Red Keep.

Second, no major character deserves it. Dany is leadership toast. She won't have the support of anyone except Grey Worm. Surely, she deserves to be be killed (likely by Arya) or at least sent back forever across the sea.

Jon is the only other one in the Targaryan line. However, he not only knows nothing and says nothing but recently does nothing, moral or otherwise. He used to be a leader of men in the Battle of the Bastards, but was basically a do-nothing in the fight against the Night King, in the air or on the ground, and was merely Dany's amoral lemming in the battle against Cersei. Moreover, he's a sort of dumbass, who has no ambition to be a monarch.

Who does that leave among the major characters? None is in the royal bloodlines. Tyrion might have a claim as the last remaining relative of the last ruler, Cersei, but he's become sort a bumbling decision-maker lately and a Lannister should not be acceptable to the populace.

Leave the throne physically gone and legally vacant. Abdicated forever.

Oh, I can think of a way for Arya to become Queen, but there's not enough time. After Dany and Jon get killed off or renounce the throne, there are no remaining Targaryans. That leaves the Baratheon line: Gendry could be made king. And then Arya could accept his marriage proposal, after which Gendry could be killed off somehow, leaving Arya as sole monarch. I won't bet on this, but anything seems possible in the new video game.


Last edited by GlennMacGrady on 05/13/19 7:32 pm; edited 1 time in total
pilight



Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 59303
Location: Where the action is


Back to top
PostPosted: 05/13/19 7:31 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

The popular notion seems to be that Danaerys "snapped" and burned the city on impulse. Perhaps it was a calculated decision. She doesn't have any loyal allies in Westeros. The army of the north fought with her, but she's been spurned by Jon, treated as an interloper by the other northern nobles, and openly mistrusted by Sansa. Yara Greyjoy and her portion of the Iron Born declined to even participate in the siege. Tyrion went behind her back and she clearly doesn't trust his advice. They won't follow her out of love or duty, so fear it is. How does she make all the seven kingdoms fear her? By showing them what happens to those that oppose her. She burns everybody on the other side. It's the same thing she did in the free cities. They kept rebelling until she took her dragons and burnt their fleets, their leaders, and anyone else in her way. She burned King's landing for the same reason Truman bombed Nagasaki, to show her ally of convenience that she'll have the upper hand if they come into conflict.

How will it end? Next episode, someone (Tyrion, most likely) will poison Drogon and Dany will be in the same place Cersei was this episode, a queen with no subjects and no way to hold the throne.



_________________
On Christmas Day, the Gingerbread Man said, ‘Ladyfingers, be my wife.’
cthskzfn



Joined: 21 Nov 2004
Posts: 11825
Location: In a world where a dbag like Trump isn't potus.


Back to top
PostPosted: 05/13/19 7:57 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

GlennMacGrady wrote:
Many critics have made points similar to JIT's, though not as eloquently. The problem behind all this bad writing is the compressed pace of the narrative. In the past two seasons there have not been enough episodes for rational plot or character development. Thus, we get unrealistic things like accelerated time travel and too-rapid (unearned) character changes.

But I'll just focus on who should get the Iron Throne.

No one.

First, the actual throne probably doesn't even exist anymore, buried under the rubble that was the Red Keep.

Second, no major character deserves it. Dany is leadership toast. She won't have the support of anyone except Grey Worm. Surely, she deserves to be be killed (likely by Arya) or at least sent back forever across the sea.

Jon is the only other one in the Targaryan line. However, he not only knows nothing and says nothing but recently does nothing, moral or otherwise. He used to be a leader of men in the Battle of the Bastards, but was basically a do-nothing in the fight against the Night King, in the air or on the ground, and was merely Dany's amoral lemming in the battle against Cersei. Moreover, he's a sort of dumbass, who has no ambition to be a monarch.

Who does that leave among the major characters? None is in the royal bloodlines. Tyrion might have a claim as the last remaining relative of the last ruler, Cersei, but he's become sort a bumbling decision-maker lately and a Lannister should not be acceptable to the populace.

Leave the throne physically gone and legally vacant. Abdicated forever.

Oh, I can think of a way for Arya to become Queen, but there's not enough time. After Dany and Jon get killed off or renounce the throne, there are no remaining Targaryans. That leaves the Baratheon line: Gendry could be made king. And then Arya could accept his marriage proposal, after which Gendry could be killed off somehow, leaving Arya as sole monarch. I won't bet on this, but anything seems possible in the new video game.



Sansa?



_________________
Silly, stupid white people might be waking up.
justintyme



Joined: 08 Jul 2012
Posts: 7683
Location: Northfield, MN


Back to top
PostPosted: 05/13/19 8:13 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

GlennMacGrady wrote:
The problem behind all this bad writing is the compressed pace of the narrative. In the past two seasons there have not been enough episodes for rational plot or character development.

100%

With the way they told this story, it is very heavily front-loaded. Which means they spent a lot of time developing these characters through the first 5 seasons. These arcs got a lot of depth, and since they drew very heavily from the source material those characters were also reinforced by the thousands upon thousands of pages of written development for anyone who has read the novels. So through 6 seasons you have very well rounded and defined characters who people identify with.

Now, it is very possible to add trauma or shatter these characters in such a way that forever alters their path...to make them "break bad" or to send them on an entirely new trajectory. But if you do it, you need to to do it with just as much care and consideration as you did building them up. Think Walter White in Breaking Bad. He starts sympathetic, but every single season they slowly deconstruct his character until he is clearly the villain and you are asking yourself why the heck you are rooting for this guy at all. This gets you "Ozymandias", the show's antepenultimate episode and one of the greatest TV episodes of all time.

But after those 6 seasons, there has been only 2 shortened ones. And those two seasons left the source material far behind, so there is nothing to add depth beyond what we watch.

Instead, with 60+ episodes of character building, but 4-ish dedicated to any sort of fall, it plays more as a poorly executed "bait-and-switch". Haha, we got you. You thought this was the hero, but there are no heroes! Isn't that an awesome theme? There simply was not enough time for them to pull this sort of theme off with their shortened seasons and be able to do it justice. There were better themes, and better directions to go that could have been even more powerful that would have had similar results, and end with characters in the same general positions.



_________________
↑↑↓↓←→←→BA
justintyme



Joined: 08 Jul 2012
Posts: 7683
Location: Northfield, MN


Back to top
PostPosted: 05/13/19 8:33 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

pilight wrote:
The popular notion seems to be that Danaerys "snapped" and burned the city on impulse.

And this is bad writing.

Yes, people "snap" in real life. Things can get to be too much. People do monstrous things. But just because it can happen in real life doesn't mean you should put it in your story.

In writing we call it "Assassinating your Character". If this were mid-story and there was time for her to come to terms with what she did, why she did it, and return to her true character, then sure...perhaps an argument could be made. But this is the end. There is not enough time to explore this sort of thing. They just decided she was going to have a "Mad Queen" moment, even though that isn't how the whole Targaryen thing works (they were born, not made great/mad), and that it went so utterly against her established Pathos of breaking chains and Ethos of not holding the powerless responsible for the actions of the powerful. All it does is irrevocably alter your character by either having her do something 1) out of her control (if she really did go insane) or 2) utterly against her character, without any time to explore, mitigate, or redeem herself. So why bother spending so much time creating such depth to her character in the first place if when it mattered the most, you were just going to throw it out the window?

Character snaps and does something terrible is a great place to start a novel/show.



_________________
↑↑↓↓←→←→BA
cthskzfn



Joined: 21 Nov 2004
Posts: 11825
Location: In a world where a dbag like Trump isn't potus.


Back to top
PostPosted: 05/13/19 9:00 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

What should have been done, given the same episodic constraints?



_________________
Silly, stupid white people might be waking up.
pilight



Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 59303
Location: Where the action is


Back to top
PostPosted: 05/13/19 9:31 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

cthskzfn wrote:
What should have been done, given the same episodic constraints?


First of all, Euron does not shoot Rhaegal down in “The Last of the Starks.” He still wipes out Dany’s fleet and captures Missandei, and Missandei still gets executed atop the wall of King’s Landing in front of Dany and Grey Worm and Tyrion. Dany is still hollowed-out and pushed to the edge by the loss of Missandei and the final breakdown of her trust in the people around her, but she enters the battle of King’s Landing with two dragons, and with Jon riding Rhaegal.

This avoids the silly, temporary attribute buffs both Euron and the ballistae needed in order to make Rhaegal’s death happen the way it did. This way, when Dany attacks King’s Landing and makes quick, short work of all the dozens and dozens of ballistae along the outer walls of the city, it makes better sense: We saw a ballista wound Drogon, so we know they’re dangerous, but we never saw ballistae make a pincushion out of a flying, moving dragon a mile away, with shots fired from the rolling deck of a moving boat, so there’s no reason to think they’re capable of doing anything like that, which is good, since that ought to be completely impossible.

So, Dany’s got two dragons; her on one, and Jon on the other. And just like in “The Bells,” she trashes the Golden Company and the Iron Fleet; she and Jon circle King’s Landing, wiping out the wall-mounted ballistae, and she blasts a huge hole in the wall of city for her army to pour through. It becomes shockingly apparent, right away, that for all of Cersei’s small-time victories in the lead-up to this final battle, there’s still nothing to match two full-grown dragons and she cannot possibly hold the capital.

The people of King’s Landing surrender, just like they did in “The Bells,” by ringing, uh, the bells. The Lannister soldiers drop their swords. Dany and Jon perch Drogon and Rhaegal on high points and look toward the Red Keep. Maybe they share a weary but guardedly affectionate glance. And then Euron skewers a stationary Rhaegal through the eye with a ballista heretofore hidden on one of the rooftops of King’s Landing.

Dany can only watch in shock and grief as one of her two remaining children—the loves of her life, the sources of her identity—whom she’d nurtured back from the brink after the Battle of Winterfell, topples to the streets dead, killed pointlessly and vindictively at what should have been the end of a battle she’d already won. His fall takes down and (as far as she can tell) kills the doofus she still kinda loves and relates to, the one person in all of Westeros who still unquestioningly supported her claim to the throne. And—oh shit, there are still bolts flying at her, from an untold number of ballistae still out there on the rooftops of King’s Landing, camouflaged on the rooftops of civilian buildings; she can’t even really tell where the bolts are coming from!

It’s where a wiser leader, one more suited to the awesome power she’s spent her life working to claim for herself, might withdraw, marshal her resources, and commit to some combination of a siege and a house-by-house clearing of the city by her infantry. But in her rage and pain and sorrow, and painfully out of reach of all the advisors who’ve helped her rein her in over the years, Dany reacts—not making a conscious, deliberate decision to do genocide to innocent people, but lashing out as a wounded dragon, as the thing she always has had inside of her, at both the ballistae and at the entire society that has taken so much from her—and just lays waste to King’s Landing.

Pushed beyond her breaking point and separated from the people who care about her, in the moment, Daenerys Targaryen fully becomes, finally and for all time, the Mother of Dragons—and in so doing not only categorically disqualifies herself from ever being accepted or loved as the ruler of the Seven Kingdoms, but also forsakes her humanity and destroys her own soul. From there, “The Bells” plays out the way it did—only this way, it’s tragic. It reaches back farther than just the previous handful of episodes to fulfill and resonate with what’s been happening to Dany over the course of the whole run of the show. It changes what came across last night as a frankly evil conscious choice into an uncontrollable firestorm of grief and fury. It leads to all the same breathtaking carnage “The Bells” delivered.



_________________
On Christmas Day, the Gingerbread Man said, ‘Ladyfingers, be my wife.’
justintyme



Joined: 08 Jul 2012
Posts: 7683
Location: Northfield, MN


Back to top
PostPosted: 05/13/19 9:35 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

cthskzfn wrote:
What should have been done, given the same episodic constraints?

That's a hard question to answer not being in the writer's room.

But I answered what I would have done for Jaime above, made it about the unborn child.

For Dany, why have her snap at all? Why push this sort of narrative, when you have already set up the idea that what she wants more than anything is to not be the Queen of Ashes. But we have already established that she makes poor decisions and has a reckless streak and can be both vengeful and ruthless. So have her go after Cersei even though the bells have rung. Have her bring the Red Keep to the ground. Have her lay waste to the vestiges of power in the city....

And then have it all go wrong.

Have the fire spread from the Red Keep out into the rest of Kings Landing, and have her watch helplessly as women and children die screaming in pain and terror as a result of her actions, along with those that were her true targets, even though it was not her intent. Perhaps there are even stores of wildfire still hidden without the city that add to the blaze making the destruction complete.

King's Landing lays a ruin, and the people believe that she did it intentionally.

She is a Queen of Ashes.



_________________
↑↑↓↓←→←→BA
justintyme



Joined: 08 Jul 2012
Posts: 7683
Location: Northfield, MN


Back to top
PostPosted: 05/13/19 9:47 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

pilight wrote:

Pushed beyond her breaking point and separated from the people who care about her, in the moment, Daenerys Targaryen fully becomes, finally and for all time, the Mother of Dragons—and in so doing not only categorically disqualifies herself from ever being accepted or loved as the ruler of the Seven Kingdoms, but also forsakes her humanity and destroys her own soul. From there, “The Bells” plays out the way it did—only this way, it’s tragic. It reaches back farther than just the previous handful of episodes to fulfill and resonate with what’s been happening to Dany over the course of the whole run of the show. It changes what came across last night as a frankly evil conscious choice into an uncontrollable firestorm of grief and fury. It leads to all the same breathtaking carnage “The Bells” delivered.

This is also a good way to go about it. While I prefer a more bittersweet ending than the tragic turn this is, I would have been far from upset from watching this.

If you were going to write a "she snaps" moment, this is how it needs to happen, in the moment and tying back to previous themes (the Mother of Dragons theme is strong, while a Mad Queen theme is not supported at all previous to this season).



_________________
↑↑↓↓←→←→BA
GlennMacGrady



Joined: 03 Jan 2005
Posts: 5673
Location: Heisenberg


Back to top
PostPosted: 05/13/19 10:17 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

cthskzfn wrote:
GlennMacGrady wrote:
Many critics have made points similar to JIT's, though not as eloquently. The problem behind all this bad writing is the compressed pace of the narrative. In the past two seasons there have not been enough episodes for rational plot or character development. Thus, we get unrealistic things like accelerated time travel and too-rapid (unearned) character changes.

But I'll just focus on who should get the Iron Throne.

No one.

First, the actual throne probably doesn't even exist anymore, buried under the rubble that was the Red Keep.

Second, no major character deserves it. Dany is leadership toast. She won't have the support of anyone except Grey Worm. Surely, she deserves to be be killed (likely by Arya) or at least sent back forever across the sea.

Jon is the only other one in the Targaryan line. However, he not only knows nothing and says nothing but recently does nothing, moral or otherwise. He used to be a leader of men in the Battle of the Bastards, but was basically a do-nothing in the fight against the Night King, in the air or on the ground, and was merely Dany's amoral lemming in the battle against Cersei. Moreover, he's a sort of dumbass, who has no ambition to be a monarch.

Who does that leave among the major characters? None is in the royal bloodlines. Tyrion might have a claim as the last remaining relative of the last ruler, Cersei, but he's become sort a bumbling decision-maker lately and a Lannister should not be acceptable to the populace.

Leave the throne physically gone and legally vacant. Abdicated forever.

Oh, I can think of a way for Arya to become Queen, but there's not enough time. After Dany and Jon get killed off or renounce the throne, there are no remaining Targaryans. That leaves the Baratheon line: Gendry could be made king. And then Arya could accept his marriage proposal, after which Gendry could be killed off somehow, leaving Arya as sole monarch. I won't bet on this, but anything seems possible in the new video game.



Sansa?


Maybe.

There do seem to be rules of succession in Westeros when there isn't an outright rebellion and overthrow of one family by another. So, if Dany is done away with and Jon is declared king by virtue of his Targaryan blood, what would happen if he immediately abdicates? Since there are no other Targaryans, maybe Sansa would succeed to the throne as Jon's eldest relative (cousin) in his Stark bloodline. She has matured, has a lot of experience, seems to be rational . . . and has always been, as Arya says, a Lady.
sambista



Joined: 25 Sep 2004
Posts: 16623
Location: way station of life


Back to top
PostPosted: 05/13/19 11:43 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

pilight wrote:
The popular notion seems to be that Danaerys "snapped" and burned the city on impulse.


the showrunners said as much in the aftershow, or whatever you call that thing hbo does after each episode.

it seems these opinions are falling between what was written by george r.r. martin and what was developed for hbo ahead of him. couldn't we have expected as much? i mean, did we expect the showrunners to match martin's brilliance, and have the story be fully realized for tv? we would have been ready to riot if hbo had said, "that's the end of the show, folks, because george hasn't finished writing and we can't sully his story. we'll get back to you in about three years."

c'mon, guys. can we just appreciate it for what it was? at some point, you gotta stop contemplating the rabbit hole. gene siskel and roger ebert used to debate this all the time, and sometimes they swapped positions, but the bottom line was that it was enough to acknowledge that you were entertained.

i'm not knocking the debate. but i'll defend the show against those who would diss it for things that were impossible to achieve.

so i ask you, were you entertained?



_________________
no justice, no peace.
J-Spoon



Joined: 31 Jan 2009
Posts: 5163



Back to top
PostPosted: 05/14/19 12:03 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

just pure speculation borrowing some ideas already posted

Dany still "Mad" kills Jon and sentences Tyrion to death. Instead of burning him her dragon eats him. Tyrion knowing this will happen conceals some kind of dragon poison on his person sacrificing himself for the people and Sansa.

Everyone turns on Dany including herself and without a dragon to protect her she is done in by Sansa, her own people or even kills herself in despair.

The unsullied and the Dothracki (sorry terrible spelling) go back home basically leaving the Starks to the Iron throne. Sansa leads to start with Bran and Arya by her side, Gendy comes back and he and Arya's baby ends up with the throne eventually.


sambista



Joined: 25 Sep 2004
Posts: 16623
Location: way station of life


Back to top
PostPosted: 05/14/19 1:31 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

J-Spoon wrote:
just pure speculation borrowing some ideas already posted

Dany still "Mad" kills Jon and sentences Tyrion to death. Instead of burning him her dragon eats him. Tyrion knowing this will happen conceals some kind of dragon poison on his person sacrificing himself for the people and Sansa.

Everyone turns on Dany including herself and without a dragon to protect her she is done in by Sansa, her own people or even kills herself in despair.

The unsullied and the Dothracki (sorry terrible spelling) go back home basically leaving the Starks to the Iron throne. Sansa leads to start with Bran and Arya by her side, Gendy comes back and he and Arya's baby ends up with the throne eventually.


i kinda like this. but how are the unsullied and dothraki gonna get back across the sea?!



_________________
no justice, no peace.
Michelle89



Joined: 17 Nov 2010
Posts: 15669
Location: Holland


Back to top
PostPosted: 05/14/19 4:23 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

pilight wrote:
cthskzfn wrote:
pilight wrote:
cthskzfn wrote:
Is it Dany laying King's Landing to waste rather than being the benevolent ruler she claimed to be and, generally, had been?


Daenerys Targaryen had a list of cruel behavior and war crimes before this episode that stretched a mile long. She happily watched her brother die, had people locked in a vault to suffer a slow death, burnt countless people alive, had people crucified and fed to her dragons because they were from the same class that owned slaves and/or ran the Sons of the Harpies when we never have any proof these people actually committed crimes or even took part in slavery, and wanted to have her dragons burn down the cities which returned to their old ways once she “freed” them. This is the person who talked about “breaking the wheel” and establishing a new fairer world… yet lived in a giant pyramid amid luxury while she tried to enforce a military occupation of a city she understood nothing about and had just up-ended society in which as a result descended into anarchy and deaths of countless civilians.

Why is it such a shock that this person who’s constantly talked as though she was personally betrayed because the people of Westeros wouldn’t bow to her, effectively a foreigner at the head of a foreign army, the moment she appeared and waiting to betray her again in favor of Jon would slaughter a city, when the likely thought process she has is that they deserve it when they could’ve surrendered months ago without her armies (and now friends) dying? They should’ve just understood she’s their “rightful” queen and would always win and surrendered, as though the common folk of Westeros have any power.


Did her brother abuse her?


I don't recall seeing any physical abuse


I think selling your 16 year old sister to a bunch of savages fully knowing that she will be raped etc. falls under abuse Laughing

If i remember correctly, he has hit her/attacked her. Tried to attack her later on when she was saved by a dorthraki.



_________________
"Sue Bird and Lauren Jackson were and are the dynamic duo. They're the one-two punch. They're all the clich�s possible to describe people that perfectly complement each other, who make each other better and also bring out the best in the team." �Karen Bryant
cthskzfn



Joined: 21 Nov 2004
Posts: 11825
Location: In a world where a dbag like Trump isn't potus.


Back to top
PostPosted: 05/14/19 9:36 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Why would Euron leave his ship after having already bagged a dragon from it, with astounding ease? For the same reason, why put scorpions on rooftops, when dozens (100s?) on the wall protected the perimeter from the single remaining dragon?

I think the death of Rheagal was an excellent plot stunner, seemed to change the odds for the coming Final War, and removed the silliness of having Jon as Dragon Cowboy, especially since he's rejected Danry's latest amorous advance. She's wouldn't let him ride her child to battlefield glory!

And other things.

I with Sambista.



_________________
Silly, stupid white people might be waking up.
pilight



Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 59303
Location: Where the action is


Back to top
PostPosted: 05/14/19 10:22 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

I had trouble suspending my disbelief over the death of Rhaegal. IRL, ballstae proved useless on ships. The motion of the waves and the strong sea winds made them so inaccurate even whalers didn't use them.



_________________
On Christmas Day, the Gingerbread Man said, ‘Ladyfingers, be my wife.’
cthskzfn



Joined: 21 Nov 2004
Posts: 11825
Location: In a world where a dbag like Trump isn't potus.


Back to top
PostPosted: 05/14/19 10:47 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

calm seas Laughing



_________________
Silly, stupid white people might be waking up.
GlennMacGrady



Joined: 03 Jan 2005
Posts: 5673
Location: Heisenberg


Back to top
PostPosted: 05/14/19 1:37 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

I had all kinds of difficulties suspending disbelief when it came to the dragons in combat.

It was hard to believe that the Night King could kill Viserion with one throw of an ice spear and that Euron could kill Rhaegon with a couple of shots of a scorpion crossbow from a ship.

However, if I did accept that belief, I then couldn't believe that Drogon could avoid hundreds of shots from scores of scorpions on the ships and battlements. Did Drogon and Dany have some super aerial maneuver technique? If they did, why didn't they use it to burn up Euron's fleet in the first encounter, substantially weakening Cersei's forces and resolve? For example, they could have flown in low from behind the fleet, forcing the scorpions to be turned around to be shot through the ships own sails.

Of course it's entertaining in a sense; however, the key dragon fights all seemed not only hokey, but inconsistently hokey. The dragons weren't even particularly effective in the Night King battle, which in addition had poor cinematography (if that's the right word in the CGI era), the battle being mostly indiscernible and confusing in the dark and fog. Yet, Drogon all by himself destroys a formerly unconquered castle (even by previous dragon attacks).

Drogon doesn't have to be killed to get rid of Dany. Arya is considered an ally and can get close to her in a meeting. I hope she uses a "face" to kill Dany. It would have been more believable to me if Arya had impersonated Bran in the encounter with the Night King and then killed him by springing out of the wheel chair, rather than magically appearing out of thin air onto his back. For example, Arya could kill Dany by impersonating Grey Worm, and then Jon, while trying to defend Dany from "Grey Worm", could stab Arya, probably the favorite character in the show. That would be an R.R. Martin stunner.

Jon, in sorrow, not only renounces the throne, but banishes himself to live north of the Wall with Tormund and the Wildlings and his neglected dire wolf. Tormund said in his goodbyes to Jon that Jon was "always a man of the north."

Sansa becomes Queen via the bloodline theory I posited above. If somehow Arya survives, she becomes Hand of the Queen. Bran becomes the head of Winterfell. The Starks rule all.

(Except for . . . SPOILER! . . .


Tony.)
cthskzfn



Joined: 21 Nov 2004
Posts: 11825
Location: In a world where a dbag like Trump isn't potus.


Back to top
PostPosted: 05/14/19 2:03 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Any sports fan (and portfolio holder) knows that "past performance does not predict future success". Very Happy

On their way to the south, after defeating The Dead, Dany and the Dragons, et al, were tired, tattered, somewhat satisfied with themselves, off their guard and ripe for a surprise attack.

Yes, the dragon should have simply attacked from behind- it was obvious at the time. But, so what.

Then, in the time between that fiasco and the Final War, Dany made adjustments, not unlike a coach who makes adjustments quarter to quarter, half to half, or after a defeat in prep for the next tilt with the same foe.

Yes, Dany as Vanderveer.

Steep angles, agile moves, attacking the wall-mounted scorps laterally- she essentially went for 30/20/10 or 4-4 w/ 4 grand slam while striking out 20, if you prefer.



_________________
Silly, stupid white people might be waking up.


Last edited by cthskzfn on 05/14/19 4:45 pm; edited 2 times in total
PUmatty



Joined: 10 Nov 2004
Posts: 14809
Location: Chicago


Back to top
PostPosted: 05/14/19 2:06 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Maybe it ends in an election, because democracy is better than monarchy?


pilight



Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 59303
Location: Where the action is


Back to top
PostPosted: 05/15/19 3:40 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Prediction: Bran wargs into Drogon and eats Danaerys



_________________
On Christmas Day, the Gingerbread Man said, ‘Ladyfingers, be my wife.’
GlennMacGrady



Joined: 03 Jan 2005
Posts: 5673
Location: Heisenberg


Back to top
PostPosted: 05/16/19 1:40 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

S8E5, The Bells, was the most watched episode in the history of GoT. However, it was the lowest rated episode in GoT history by 100 critics on Rotten Tomatoes, and season 8 is also by far the lowest rated season by both critics and audience on Rotten Tomatoes.

In addition, Thousands of Game of Thrones Fans Sign Petition Demanding Season 8 Remake:

Quote:
. . . thousands of fans have already thrown in the towel on the showrunners' version of Season 8 and are demanding HBO give someone else have a shot at bringing the series to a satisfying conclusion.

More than 46,000 people have now signed an unlikely, fantastical Change.org petition demanding a remake of the final season with someone else holding the keys to the adaptation of George R.R. Martin's still-unfinished A Song of Ice and Fire series.

"David Benioff and D.B. Weiss have proven themselves to be woefully incompetent writers when they have no source material (i.e. the books) to fall back on," the petition's originator wrote.


My favorite critic has been Erik Kain at Forbes. Here's his take on The Bells: The Five Biggest Problems With Last Night's 'Game Of Thrones' (Other Than Jaime's Hand)
sambista



Joined: 25 Sep 2004
Posts: 16623
Location: way station of life


Back to top
PostPosted: 05/16/19 8:55 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

y'know, people are so freakin spoiled and full of entitlement. no, you do not get a do-over. deal with it. stop watching. you have a choice.

it's entertainment, people. world's falling apart, and this is what you you took the time to do - sign a petition over the outcome of a tv show? what petitions have you signed to make the world a better place?

it's no wonder we're all so fucked, just marking time on a planet we never deserved.



_________________
no justice, no peace.
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index » Area 51 All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
Page 4 of 6

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB 2.0.17 © 2001- 2004 phpBB Group
phpBB Template by Vjacheslav Trushkin